.com.unity Forums - OT: US President (US Dom Players only)

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)

- Dominions 3: The Awakening (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=138)

- - OT: US President (US Dom Players only) (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=41082)

Re: OT: US President (US Dom Players only)

Quote:

Originally Posted by thejeff (Post 650329)

The only evidence backing this whole argument is an elementary school equivalent registration form his stepfather filled out. Because of that, which has no legal significance other than registering him for school, we must conclude that he legally changed his name and citizenship.

And as other's have said, his birth certificate is available. He can't produce the other documents requested since they don't exist. He never changed his citizenship or his name, so he can't produce documentation showing he changed back. Easier just to have the case dismissed.

IS not the only thing backing him up - there were 2 other documents, and an interview with the principle of his school, plus a kenyan birth certificate.

I don't expect any candidate to produce name change things etc.
But I think every candidate should be able to prove they are a natural born U.S citizen.

Re: OT: US President (US Dom Players only)

Quote:

Originally Posted by thejeff (Post 650351)

Good point, we've got chris arguing we can't tax the rich more because "Top 5% of earners pay 50% of the taxes in the U.S.", which is close enough to true. He neglects to mention they also bring in roughly 50% of the income. And probably a far larger percentage of actual assets.
On the other hand NTJedi claims there's no point in raising taxes on the rich since they just find loopholes and never pay taxes anyway.
I'm not quite sure how to reconcile those arguments. The facts of the first one seem to check out, and don't seem that unfair with a little bit of context. In fact, it suggests that the top 5% are barely paying their fair share ("Fair" is a fuzzy word in this context. In one sense it would be "fair" for the top 5% to pay 5% of the taxes.)
The US seemed to do quite well in 50s & 60s with top marginal tax rates up in the 90% range. What has accompanied the lowering of those rates since then is a massive transfer of wealth upwards. The top few percent control a much larger percentage of the countries wealth than at any time since the Roaring Twenties. I would like to see that reversed.

Here are some other figures for you:

Barry has proposed 1 trillion in new spending.

This is roughly: 16% of the US economy - additional spending.
Our current budget is roughly .. 2 trillion dollars. He proposes to increase govt spending 1 trillion dollars?

How is transfering 1 trillion dollars each year from the private economy to nonproductive government use.. a good thing? I mean sure, if he's giving it to you.. you're all in favor of it... but if you are looking out for the goose as a whole (you know the goose that lays the golden eggs) how is it a good thing?

We borrow roughly..$450 billion a year.. and he wants 1 trillion in additional spending. And this is on top of a financial crises where we are going to have to spend BILLIONS more in bailouts.

and this is a good idea?

How is it a good idea to increase the % of people not paying taxes from 38% to 48%.

Also an interesting statistic.. how is it possible to give a tax break to 95% of taxpayers - when 38% don't pay taxes?

Its financial insanity. As de Toqueville said.. democracy works until people realize they can vote themselves a pay raise.

Re: OT: US President (US Dom Players only)

I think either someone is feeding you total bull**** interpretations of stated "plans", or you are reading something wrong.

Otherwise, he would be the first Democratic president in I don't know how long, to actually increase the deficit.

That's right, for all of the Republican blustering about Democrats spending on this or that, it is well documented that over the last century, every economic indicator is better under a Democrat, than under a Republican.

What do our presidents "increase", in the economy?

Democrats =
GDP
Taxes
Social Programs
Public Works (important, increases jobs while building infrastructure)

Republicans =
Inflation
Unemployment
Deficit
Spending (where? pork?)

For your dining pleasure - http://www.slate.com/id/2199810/

Re: OT: US President (US Dom Players only)

Quote:

Also an interesting statistic.. how is it possible to give a tax break to 95% of taxpayers - when 38% don't pay taxes?

I may be misunderstanding the question here, but aren't you not a taxpayer if you don't pay taxes? That being the case, I don't see a conflict with these numbers are they are completely unrelated.

Also, please address konming's posted birth certificates and why we should give any credence to unsubstantiated rumors spread about a candidate in a presidential election?

Re: OT: US President (US Dom Players only)

Obama won!!!!

As a resident of virginia, whoop!

Seriously though, that was a very, very nice speech by mccain.

Re: OT: US President (US Dom Players only)

It was.

I could kind of sense McCain turning back into the guy he was before this race made him so unpleasant. The SNL QVC bit was a sweet bit of self-deprecating humor too.

Re: OT: US President (US Dom Players only)

Even though I voted for McCain, I can still respect the moment this is in History. I can still hope that Obama presides as the man he presented himself as rather than the man his past would indicate. The US has survived bad presidents, I hope Obama is not one of these, but even if he is we can survive, quite possibly even thrive.

Re: OT: US President (US Dom Players only)

Yeah, seriously, what was with McCain? Wanting to win like that. That Bastard!

What so much of the media, and many Obama supporters (not entirely sure why I establish a difference), wanted McCain to do was behave like Bob Dole and essentially concede gracefully. When it turned out he was in it to win (and appeared to have a shot before the Lehman Brother's collapse) that was just him negatively campaigning. Negative campaigning has become a way of life (chiefly because it works). Both sides used it extensively, one side got blamed. Since this campaign was about Senator Obama, McCain had to be a bit more direct, but that was all.

For the debate regarding fiscal policy and economics above, Slate isn't exactly something I would bring into a debate as a source... it's like me using the Bible to "prove" the Christian God exists. Not exactly unbiased.

Re: OT: US President (US Dom Players only)

Oh, and the last Democratic President to increase the deficit was Bill Clinton. The one before that was Jimmy Carter.

Re: OT: US President (US Dom Players only)

Woo Hoo! Obama is president.