Drew Dowdell

Obama's tax plan is mostly neutral though slightly negative. McCain's is VERY negative. McCain will be a fiscal conservative out of necessity... there won't be anything left to spend.

but... but... She's a good mother with strong family values, has foreign relations experience, loves moose and polar bears!* *as long as you look past her drug snorting, knocked up kids, huband with a DWI, the moose burgers in her freezer, her action against protecting the endangered polar bears, and that the sum total of her foreign experience includes being able to see Russia from her back porch.

I want to test drive a Cobalt SS and an HHR SS, just for the hell of it.

yeah, I heard BMW was planning on axing it's long time best selling 1-series RWD sedan after sales have dropped off. oh.... wait.....

ZOMG! It's front propeller drive and has a b-pillar! Look at that ugly overhang! :yuck: (kidding)

Did you know that Obama is a Muslim and he took the oath of office on a Koran and that his baptist minister hates America for making Obama wear a flag lapel pin on his ancestral African clothes given to him when he was in a Muslim school in Indonesia holding McCain as a POW by drawing a cross in the sand on Christmas Eve while Osama Bin Laden was watching and clinging to his religion and guns?

Fixed. and yes, it was me. Carter started an alternative energy push back in '77 and '78. He had solar panel installed on the roof of the Whitehouse. Reagan promptly had them removed. There wouldn't have been a second Iraq war because there wouldn't have been a first one. There wouldn't have been a 9-11. There wouldn't have been our war in Afghanistan. The power of Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Venezuela, Russia, would have all been wiped out.

Your sarcasm detector is very broken. I detest Sarah Evita Palin

What kind of range do these things get?

Welcome to March 2003.

So? They were probably asking for it anyway.

mince away.

Got this in my email:

if you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.... in alaska... that I was for before I was against.... you can see Russia from it....mind the lipstick.

There is a difference between a one time rebate and on going tax cuts. The same top 1% have broken all records on wealth retained. They are paying more taxes because they are so much more wealthy relative to the lower classes. Yet another Rich get Richer, Poor get poorer. Sure, you can mince words. Gramm was not the cause.... Gramm's bill <along with the S&L stuff> was the cause. There isn't just one cause though. You're right, completely irrelevant.

Oh neat! Something else Gramm had his fingers in. I'll be happy for an economic upturn either way... and I'll assess the evidence when the time comes. I feel certain, however, that McCain's plan as it currently stands will not help the economy. The economy will likely bottom out this december-january and then bounce along the bottom for the following 12 months regardless of who is in office.... where it goes after that is anyone's guess.

1. It initially passed the senate on party lines. When it did pass both houses after Dems added a bunch of protections, it was Veto proof. Clinton couldn't have vetoed it even if he wanted to. 2. Would you say the same thing if say... Angelo Mozilo were Obama's Chairman of the FHA? 3. I was referring to the tax cuts just post 9-11, not the rebates in May of 2008. The May 2008 rebate was too minuscule to matter. So redo your assessment.

We're having a Long Island Ice Tea drinking party.... everytime McCain tells a lie I have to take a drink.... . man I'm going to be wasted. </joking....sorta>

Well I don't have a specific percentage in mind because I don't have a legion of economists working for me. Mostly I'm concerned with lowering the taxes on the tax brackets that spend the most as a collective. The net difference would have to be made up by those higher up the scale. I would likely want 50% as the highest ceiling for any tax on anyone, but lower than that if budget allows. Money always flows upward anyway.

BTW.... Pick the elitist!

So McCain wanted to bring back regulation 4 years after Gramm-Leach? I'm not pinning the blame on McCain... the blame lies with Gramm.... however, Gramm is McCain's economic policy adviser. Has the stimulus packages worked? No. Retail is down. Auto industry is down. Housing is down. The stimulus went to the people who didn't need it. You're a wealthy business man. You just got your post 9-11 tax cuts. Why would you use your tax cut to hire more people when you can't actually sell more product? Lease yourself a new company S-class and write the extra cost off your taxes. Country first..... but it doesn't say which country. Germany perhaps?

Supposedly, most people spent their rebate on gasoline, household bills, and porn.....but in my case, I'm talking about an ongoing reduction in taxes for the middle class.

I think you need to go a bit further back in history. That Bloomberg article is political hackery that ignores financial history prior to 2001. NONE of this would have been possible without the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act.

I know you're against any government handouts of any form, but where I'm going with this is, if the government is going to hand out $700,000,000,000 to keep the economy going. It would be better off handing it to the middle class. That money would "create" a demand that would trickle up through the economy. People could pay their mortgages. Investment banks wouldn't need bailing out.

Absolutely, positively, completely, utterly incorrect. 1st the cancer was well established and metastasized by 2005. 2nd McCain proposing regulation on Fannie and Freddie at that point is like him suggesting a new lock on the chicken coupe after he let the foxes in to have dinner. 3rd Fannie and Freddie aren't the cause, merely the symptom.