Then you are willfully ignoring or not willing to accept a differing presentation.Quote:
Originally Posted by tmleadr03
Printable View
Then you are willfully ignoring or not willing to accept a differing presentation.Quote:
Originally Posted by tmleadr03
Here read some of this. It has facts too.
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesam...er/wealth.html
And some of this. This has pay roll taxes at 36%. Which shows how hard the middle class and working class are being hit. So I was off by 5% but my number was pre crash. The GOP talking points leave out pay roll taxes... why? Because it proves they are full of crap.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/brief...rs/revenue.cfm
Nynco, you are proving that you are left leaning here (notice I didn't call you a libtard to spare your fragile sensibilities). Domhoffs work is the manifesto of all "progressives" and has consistently been referred to as fringe and highly controversial (and not just by the right mind you). You will see him quoted time and again by libertarians and leftists constantly. Also note that everything on that page is just updates since his original work in the 60's, and not really fresh insight. He is a self professed "progressive" which is the new fancy term for extreme liberal.Quote:
Originally Posted by nynco
Another leftist organization. Both the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institutions are well known liberal organizations and the two organizations teamed together to create the Tax Policy Center. It is essentially a 100% liberal Clinton inspired think tank.Quote:
Originally Posted by nynco
All that you have proven here is that leftist organizations support your numbers. I'm not here to say that right is RIGHT, but saying that you are not a liberal while quoting liberal articles and research is not moving to sway others to your side, particularly those of us who are moderate or conservative.
And before you go and get your panties all in a wad, I'm not here citing to you Fox News, Rush Limbaugh or even Wikipedia for that matter - I know better than to try to prove my point by citing sources that are right leaning or user contributed (Wiki). When you cite left leaning sources it doesn't prove your point.
Do his numbers lie? No.... they are straight from the federal agencies. You just don't want to agree with his solutions. That still does not make the numbers wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger
Clinton was a corporate whore. He was not a liberal. People need to stop looking at party identity. Would a liberal push NAFTA, GATT, China Free Trade or deregulation of the media (Telcom 96)? Hell No...... but if the corporate whores who own our politicians want those things they get them. So they send the guy with a D after his name to sell it. Why? Because it throws his base for a loop and they have no one to vote for because the Republican would do the same. There is no liberal anything in this nation nor conservative in our politics. The game is rigged there is only corporate oligarchy and you know I am right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger
So basicly you will only listen to facts if it comes from your side....Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger
You are determined, I'll give you that :).
Come on, you're a smart guy - not naive enough to think that whatever side of the fence you are on is not going to put a spin on number that don't make sense to most people. Give me any set of numbers that confuse the average bear and I could spin it any way I want.Quote:
Originally Posted by nynco
No, I don't know you are right. I'll agree that we have some messes in this country and where capitalism is king there is going to capitalists behind the scenes.Quote:
Originally Posted by nynco
Well, sadly, you don't comprehend my statements. I did say that I would not cite sources from "my side" because it does nothing to prove the point. You did just that. My point is that your point is NOT valid just because you cite like minded sources. Period. I've read many economists, I understand the numbers to a large extent and, sure, many of the numbers you cite are correct but many have been twisted to serve the cause of the author. I don't agree with a great number of things on "my side" so I'll seek out differing opinions from YOUR side then I'll find information from an unbiased middle if they are there to help me weigh the BS and dig into the facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by nynco
So you are being a pundit, pure and simple. When someone calls your bluff on your sources you attack rather than dig deeper and find the facts outside your like minded source pool to help convince others that you are correct. You have proven your point, I get it. I've read your sources and it proves exactly what you are saying, according to THEM. Now find me unbiased or even rightist sources to back it up and we can talk about changing minds. Don't show me one side of the story, give them both to me and let me decide. Maybe I'll change my mind and move to your side, but not until I see both sides.
Do you have a mirror near by?Quote:
Originally Posted by nynco
Do you? Because encase I am mistaken, I am on a conservative board populated by gun people and I too am a gun rights advocate. So.... I guess I am not listening to or agreeing with both sides on different issues at all am I?[Beer]Quote:
Originally Posted by tmleadr03
Now Ranger, if you want me to dig deeper and you disagree, tell me why, prove your case. Just saying I am wrong and attacking the source is not a way of proving anything.
I'm not the one proselytizing, you are. Saying things are just such a way and citing leftist sources as the gospel of proof. As you say: "I am on a conservative board populated by gun people and I too am a gun rights advocate." Why do I need to provide proof that already supports the beliefs of the majority? If I go to some progressive board then I fully expect that I would have to city my source and prove my point but here I really don't. Not all agree with me (or you) but enough do that I'm not spending the day compiling sources and numbers for the one guy I'm arguing with!Quote:
Originally Posted by nynco
Frankly there is far too much that I would have to do in order to get you seated on my side of things, convincing you of this one thing is a drop in the bucket. So, I really don't want to convince you of MY position, I'm more interested in debunking yours :).
I'm not picking sides, although I think we all know my stance, but by perpetually repeating yourself, nynco, it is evoking a response and it's almost as if someone needs to say it....
MY DADDY CAN BEAT UP YOUR DADDY!
This pissing contest seems to have no end, so someone please put their dick away!