Why are you voting for whoever for President?

[scfire86]

"Being out of line" is actually based on the feelings of the citizens as they are the ones paying the freight. And many of them are expressing that they are out of line.

Then that is when those citizens express their concern at the ballot box.

[txgp17]

So how much of your taxpayer funded salary do you contribute back to your employer? Since you claim to be so concerned about this ticking bomb.

Reading isn't your forté. NEITHER I NOR MY COWORKERS NEED TO CONTRIBUTE EXTRA MONEY TO THE NC RETIREMENT SYSTEM. IT IS SOLVENT. FULLY FUNDED. IT REQUIRES NO BAILOUT. THERE IS NO TIME BOMB IN THE NC RETIREMENT SYSTEM.

And what you fail to understand, or intentionally ignore, is that once the paycheck hits my bank account, it's no longer tax payer money. It's my money. I provide X amount of services for Y amount of compensation.

You're a conservative like Paul Ryan. You claim to care, while pocketing the money realizing that no one will hold you accountable.

Again, a delirious Obama fanboi criticizing a conservative on something financial related. Remind me again when was the last time Obama or the Democrat controlled Senate approved a budget.

[LaFireEducator]

So how much of your taxpayer funded salary do you contribute back to your employer? Since you claim to be so concerned about this ticking bomb.

You're a conservative like Paul Ryan. You claim to care, while pocketing the money realizing that no one will hold you accountable.

I guess that is your .. and the democratic solution. Have those currently working and paying contribute more to make up for those that do not contribute.

And yes, I have no issues raising taxes on the middle class (and that includes me) and poor. Reduce top rates on the rich as it's thier money .. they deserve to keep more of it. Elimniate or reduce earned income credits and mortagage deductions.

Rduce expenditures by shortening the amount of time folks can collect unemployment. Reduce programs to the poor. For many the "safety net" has become a way of life and that needs to change.

[scfire86]

Reading isn't your forté. NEITHER I NOR MY COWORKERS NEED TO CONTRIBUTE EXTRA MONEY TO THE NC RETIREMENT SYSTEM. IT IS SOLVENT. FULLY FUNDED. IT REQUIRES NO BAILOUT. THERE IS NO TIME BOMB IN THE NC RETIREMENT SYSTEM.

Could you post the link that shows that?

NC Pension Unfunded Liabilities

And what you fail to understand, or intentionally ignore, is that once the paycheck hits my bank account, it's no longer tax payer money. It's my money. I provide X amount of services for Y amount of compensation.

I agree. However it is still funded by the taxes derived from someone else.

Again, a delirious Obama fanboi criticizing a conservative on something financial related. Remind me again when was the last time Obama or the Democrat controlled Senate approved a budget.

So what? A budget is only a guideline. What matters is whether funds are appropriated. And that is happening. In case you haven't noticed, the government has not shut down.

[LaFireEducator]

Funny thing is the Fire & Police Retirement System here in LA is fully funded and solvent as well.

[scfire86]

I guess that is your .. and the democratic solution. Have those currently working and paying contribute more to make up for those that do not contribute.

What? This statement makes no sense given your faux concern. What is your alternative? A pay cut? How much of a pay cut are you willing to take to bring your compensation in line with the private sector? There is nothing stopping you from doing that now.

And yes, I have no issues raiasing taxes on the middle class and poor. Reduce top rates on the rich as it's thier money .. they deserve to keep more of it. Elimniate or reduce earned income credits and mortagage deductions.

Proven formulas for fiscal disaster. It is the middle class that drives the economy. It isn't tax breaks for the rich. Never has been, anywhere, or anytime.

Rduce expenditures by shortening the amount of time folks can collect unemployment. Reduce programs to the poor. For many the "safety net" has become a way of life and that needs to change.

Many conservatives in my locale say the same about public servants.

[LaFireEducator]

What? This statement makes no sense given your faux concern. What is your alternative? A pay cut? How much of a pay cut are you willing to take to bring your compensation in line with the private sector? There is nothing stopping you from doing that now.

Never said that salary was an issue. In fact, in most places the salary is fair given the work. It's the retirement formulas in many places and benefits that are out of wack. And if they were reduced, I would understand.


Proven formulas for fiscal disaster. It is the middle class that drives the economy. It isn't tax breaks for the rich. Never has been, anywhere, or anytime.

So we just keep taking more and more of thier money? is that your idea. I guess the fact that the top 10% pays the VAST majority of all income taxes and 47% doesn't pay a dime (in fact most get more back than they pay) doesn't concern you?

I'm glad you're not accountant.


Many conservatives in my locale say the same about public servants.

Funny thing is there are places where public servants are overpaid. You may just happen to live in one of those areas.

As far as reducing programs for the poor and reducing unemployment, there comes a time when enough is enough and quite frankly, I'm sick and tired of paying for folks who have made poor choices and have nothing but excuses.

Unless we change the system it's going to destroy us.

You probably support the Apple Store employees on sterike in France because they aren't getting food vouchers to eat while at work and a 13th month of pay (for no work). last I knew the employer wasn't responsible for buying your lunch or paying you for a month that doesn't exist.

[scfire86]

Funny thing is there are places where public servants are overpaid. You may just happen to live in one of those areas.

How do you figure? The cost of living is a little higher here than in Banjo, LA where you live.

As far as reducing programs for the poor and reducing unemployment, there comes a time when enough is enough and quite frankly, I'm sick and tired of paying for folks who have made poor choices and have nothing but excuses.

Like which poor choices? Like going to college? Many of the recently unemployed are college grads who lost their jobs due to the financial meltdown.

Unless we change the system it's going to destroy us.

Moonbat paranoia. So how much of your taxpayer funded paycheck do you contribute back to your employer so that "we" are not destroyed? You seem to care so much, but seem uninterested in a personal solution.

You probably support the Apple Store employees on sterike in France because they aren't getting food vouchers to eat while at work and a 13th month of pay (for no work). last I knew the employer wasn't responsible for buying your lunch or paying you for a month that doesn't exist.

Didn't know anything about it. That's an issue between they and their employer. I'm not an Apple person so I really don't care. Please continue to make assumptions about what I think.

[scfire86]

Funny thing is the Fire & Police Retirement System here in LA is fully funded and solvent as well.

Could you post a link for that claim?

According to this report, the Louisiana Firefigher Retirement System shows an unfunded liability of $396,204,368 with a funding ratio of about 74%.

[LaFireEducator]

How do you figure? The cost of living is a little higher here than in Banjo, LA where you live.

And even adjusting for that there are public servants who are overpaid, though that is I beleive the exception and not the rule.


Like which poor choices? Like going to college? Many of the recently unemployed are college grads who lost their jobs due to the financial meltdown.

Poor choices ... Ummm let's think ...... Dropping out of high school, choosing to particiapate in criminal activties, having kids without being married. Most of the problem is the folks on welfare, not unemployment, though that is part of the issue. Bottom line is it's not my responsibility as a taxpayer to support an unemployed person for 96 weeks. It's not my responsibility to support somebody on welfare because THEY made poor choices. Call me cold, but it's simply not MY problem.

Moonbat paranoia. So how much of your taxpayer funded paycheck do you contribute back to your employer so that "we" are not destroyed? You seem to care so much, but seem uninterested in a personal solution.

Just stated I would be willing to pay more in taxes if that rates for the rich were reduced to spur groeth and investment, and those below me also paid more in taxes including completely reducing tax payments beyond those paid in in taxes. Reading comprehension issues, eh?

If you really belive the math that shows that the current expenditures are unsustainable and SIGNIFICANt decreases in expenditures and modification of SS and medicare is needed NOW is "moonbat paranoia, you have a real problem dude.


Didn't know anything about it. That's an issue between they and their employer. I'm not an Apple person so I really don't care. Please continue to make assumptions about what I think.

It just shows the magnitude of the entitlement culture in Europe that is creeping into this country that the Dems seem to support in ever increasing entitlement programs, especially to the poor.

[scfire86]

It just shows the magnitude of the entitlement culture in Europe that is creeping into this country that the Dems seem to support in ever increasing entitlement programs, especially to the poor.

Yeah. Cause the poor have it so easy. Spoken like someone who is truly clueless.

Got news for you Billy Bob. There is a segment of the conservative movement that believes you're no different than those on welfare.

Where's the link proving your pension system is fully funded? I thought it at least possible you are in some magical pension funded where everything is well. You being a stickler for facts and all.

[LaFireEducator]

Yeah. Cause the poor have it so easy. Spoken like someone who is truly clueless.

I never said that the poor had it easy, but why should you and I support them? I work for everything i have, and so does some of the poor. However many of them are where they are because they don't want to work, quit school, got hung up in drugs or alcohol, got hung up in gangs and crime and decided that sex would be nice without taking precautuions. Choices. Poor choices. And now somehow I'm expected to take care of them because of those choices? Soory but that's not fair .. and now the Dems want the rich to pay even more so that we can maintain that lifestyle? Nope. Nope. Nope.

Got news for you Billy Bob. There is a segment of the conservative movement that believes you're no different than those on welfare.

No. They believe that there are elements of public compenation that are out of wack - benefits and retirement. And collective bargaining. And in many places they are right. There's nothing wrong with public sector employees poaying 20-40% of health care costs, just like the majority of the private sector. Same with 501K for recent and new employees instead of the current retirement system. Fact is as public sector employees we need to be willing to accept less as the current system just ain't working and will go broke.

Where's the link proving your pension system is fully funded? I thought it at least possible you are in some magical pension funded where everything is well. You being a stickler for facts and all.

Point is it will support anticipated retirees.

[scfire86]

Point is it will support anticipated retirees.

Which is not what you stated.

You stated:

Funny thing is the Fire & Police Retirement System here in LA is fully funded and solvent as well.

Which is significantly different. It will support anticipated retirees with greater investment returns in the future or greater contributions from either other the employee or employer.

As is usual, you're full of carp.

[txgp17]

Could you post the link that shows that?

NC State Treasure's Annual Report. And I re-emphasize that NC is one of only 7 states that maintains a AAA rating, while CA's is in the toilet, and the Federal Government's is actively slipping.

I agree. However it is still funded by the taxes derived from someone else.

I pay taxes too, so you see, I'm self-employed. I live here, I shop here, I pay taxes here (sales, ad valorem, etc.) That makes me a pretty brand loyal customer.

So what? A budget is only a guideline. What matters is whether funds are appropriated. And that is happening. In case you haven't noticed, the government has not shut down.

Who couldn't have noticed that the juggernaut of institutionalized bureaucratic coercion we call the Federal Government is going full speed ahead, driving up our National Debt to over $16,000,000,000,000.00?

Besides, if Obama was to pass a budget, he might have to adhere to it, and that would get in the way of spending our great-grand children's money, and advancing the Cloward–Piven strategy.

Notice the blatant lying Obama did during his Univision interview. They actually asked him some tough questions about his long list of failures. It's a said state of affairs that the English-speaking Obama-loving media here in America won't ask him questions like those.

[scfire86]

NC State Treasure's Annual Report. And I re-emphasize that NC is one of only 7 states that maintains a AAA rating, while CA's is in the toilet, and the Federal Government's is actively slipping.

Not what you stated. You stated your pension plan was:

......SOLVENT. FULLY FUNDED. IT REQUIRES NO BAILOUT. THERE IS NO TIME BOMB IN THE NC RETIREMENT SYSTEM.

You conveniently changed the subject. Your state's credit rating is nice. But is not important. CA is still the big dog in the US economy. NC is so far behind (about 10th, and a 5th of CA's ), we're in your rearview mirror getting ready to lap you.....again.

I pay taxes too, so you see, I'm self-employed. I live here, I shop here, I pay taxes here (sales, ad valorem, etc.) That makes me a pretty brand loyal customer.Who couldn't have noticed that the juggernaut of institutionalized bureaucratic coercion we call the Federal Government is going full speed ahead, driving up our National Debt to over $16,000,000,000,000.00?

Wow. Conservatives are concerned about debt. They said nothing when Bush doubled the national debt. BTW, the US has been in worse economic conditions where debt exceeded GDP. Guess what moonbat? We came back....roaring. It's not our first rodeo. These conditions are not new.

Besides, if Obama was to pass a budget, he might have to adhere to it, and that would get in the way of spending our great-grand children's money, and advancing the Cloward–Piven strategy.

Yawn!!! No president has ever governed to a budget. It's a great idea when they're passed, but adherence rarely occurs since no one knows what will happen during the course of that budget year.

Notice the blatant lying Obama did during his Univision interview. They actually asked him some tough questions about his long list of failures. It's a said state of affairs that the English-speaking Obama-loving media here in America won't ask him questions like those.

Why would you care? It's not like anything says will make you happy.

[LaFireEducator]

Why would you care? It's not like anything says will make you happy.


Wrong.

The words "I conceed" from Obama's lips would make me giddy like a schoolgirl.

[txgp17]

Revealed: Mitt Romney’s tax returns
Mitt Romney’s campaign released his 2011 tax information this afternoon, as well as a notarized letter from PriceWaterhouseCoopers attesting to Romney’s tax rates from 1990-2009.
Regarding the newly-filed 2011 Tax Return:

• In 2011, the Romneys paid $1,935,708 in taxes on $13,696,951 in mostly investment income.
• The Romneys’ effective tax rate for 2011 was 14.1%.
• The Romneys donated $4,020,772 to charity in 2011, amounting to nearly 30% of their income.
• The Romneys claimed a deduction for $2.25 million of those charitable contributions.

Regarding the PWC letter covering the Romneys’ tax filings over 20 years, from 1990 – 2009:

• In each year during the entire 20-year period, the Romneys owed both state and federal income taxes.
• Over the entire 20-year period, the average annual effective federal tax rate was 20.20%.
• Over the entire 20-year period, the lowest annual effective federal personal tax rate was 13.66%.
• Over the entire 20-year period, the Romneys gave to charity an average of 13.45% of their adjusted gross income.
• Over the entire 20-year period, the total federal and state taxes owed plus the total charitable donations deducted represented 38.49% of total AGI.
• During the 20-year period covered by the PWC letter, Gov. and Mrs. Romney paid 100% of the taxes that they owed.

Mitt Romney gave more than 13% of his income over 20 years to charity, and didn’t even always take the full tax deduction. If this isn’t it, can somebody please explain to me exactly what it is that a “fair share” is supposed to look like?

ETA - Romney's charitable giving rate is double what Obama's is. And he paid a higher rate than was required. Mitt Romney gave more to charity in an average day this year than Joe Biden has given in over a decade combined.

[txgp17]

You conveniently changed the subject.

I most decidedly did not. The retirement system is funded with the funds from employees and employers as prescribed by law. Money isn't kicked in from the general fund to keep it afloat.

Your state's credit rating is nice. But is not important.

Coming from an Obama fanbio, I would expect nothing less than a total disregard for a credit score. Besides, it's just other people's money.

CA is still the big dog in the US economy. NC is so far behind (about 10th, and a 5th of CA's ), we're in your rearview mirror getting ready to lap you.....again.

That's nice, but you're only measuring GDP. When Governor Screwball gets done raising state sales and income taxes this November, it won't do much to attract people from other states with lower tax rates.

Wow. Conservatives are concerned about debt. They said nothing when Bush doubled the national debt.

Yes, we did. You just refused to listen. Going in debt for a single event MIGHT be worth it. Going in debt for a never ending program that you can never adequately pay for, is suicidal.

BTW, the US has been in worse economic conditions where debt exceeded GDP. Guess what moonbat? We came back....roaring.

Oh, you mean like that time when similar policies kept us in a depression for 10 years? Or do you mean now where we have one of the the weakest economic recoveries on record?

It's not our first rodeo. These conditions are not new.

Yet ya'll still haven't learned.

Yawn!!! No president has ever governed to a budget.

To the penny, no. But they at least pass a budget and can try. This President's budget was so radical that even his own party runs from it like the plaque. He couldn't even get 5 people from his own party to vote for it.

The full extent of Obama’s failure as a president and America’s failure for having chosen and tolerated him becomes more horribly evident with each passing day. But El-Rushbo had the degrading farce formerly known as Hope & Change nicely summed up back in November 2010:

“Barack Obama’s presidency is graffiti on the walls of American history.”

It would be hard to put it much better.

[scfire86]

I most decidedly did not. The retirement system is funded with the funds from employees and employers as prescribed by law. Money isn't kicked in from the general fund to keep it afloat.

Not what you stated. You stated the pension was fully funded. Which isn't true and only proves you don't what that term means.

Coming from an Obama fanbio, I would expect nothing less than a total disregard for a credit score. Besides, it's just other people's money.

Especially since those were the same ratings agencies that gave CDS's and securitized mortgages the same risk value as T-Bills. They are the same ratings agencies that were giving AAA ratings to firms like Enron, Global Crossing, Tyco, Bear Stearns, and Lehman Brothers right up until the time they went bellyup. When drug up for congressional review of the fiscal crisis, their CEO's stated their ratings are only recommendations and not a true picture of fiscal health. One of the many reasons I discard them.

That's nice, but you're only measuring GDP. When Governor Screwball gets done raising state sales and income taxes this November, it won't do much to attract people from other states with lower tax rates.

I hope you get more expats from CA. Good luck. We'll manage.

Yes, we did. You just refused to listen. Going in debt for a single event MIGHT be worth it. Going in debt for a never ending program that you can never adequately pay for, is suicidal.

Please post all your writings on this topic that were critical of Bush when he passed Medicare Part D and put two shooting wars on the national credit card after lowering taxes. You should have no problem posting any of your protests since you like to show links. I'll save you the time. You never said a word about Bush's profligate spending.

Oh, you mean like that time when similar policies kept us in a depression for 10 years? Or do you mean now where we have one of the the weakest economic recoveries on record?

Actually that isn't true. FDR's policies (assuming you are discussing the New Deal) led to significant economic growth (compared to what he inherited) by the end of his first term. Non-farm employment was cut in half by the end of 1936. Or you could also be discussing Reagan. He used massive deficits (for the time) to get the US out of a recessionary period. But since you like actually read a book, I'm sure you knew that Reagan tripled the national debt in eight years. And conservatives (like they did with Bush) said nothing. In Reagan's case, they canonize an individual who wouldn't get support from their party given today's purity test that is demanded.

Yet ya'll still haven't learned.

Conservatives have yet to put forth an alternative plan that has been proven to work.

To the penny, no. But they at least pass a budget and can try. This President's budget was so radical that even his own party runs from it like the plaque. He couldn't even get 5 people from his own party to vote for it.

You mean like the way GOP congressional reps and Romney are running from Ryan's Medicare reform?

The full extent of Obama’s failure as a president and America’s failure for having chosen and tolerated him becomes more horribly evident with each passing day. But El-Rushbo had the degrading farce formerly known as Hope & Change nicely summed up back in November 2010:It would be hard to put it much better.

Great. Quoting Limbaugh. It all makes sense. If I ever need advice on drug abuse, illegal drug purchasing, getting divorced, or avoiding the draft, he'll be my go-to guy. Nice to know you get your political perspectives from an entertainer. That would be like me getting political perspectives from Jon Stewart. Who is at least funny with ratings that Limbaugh could only dream about.

[txgp17]

Not what you stated. You stated the pension was fully funded. Which isn't true and only proves you don't what that term means.

Funny, the link you offered said it did, "A Pew Center for the State's report on pensions shows that as of 2008, North Carolina's pension system was fully funded, according to reasonable actuarial standards." Granted, the stock market hit of 08 put a dent in it, but it's steadily coming back, far faster than President Downgrade's unemployment numbers.

A generally accepted measure of the soundness of any retirement system is to relate the total assets to the total accrued liabilities. This determines the funded ratio or percentage of the System. But I'm sure you'll invent another goal line to measure it by based on "opportunity cost estimates" or some other hocus-pokus that would get any CPA's professional license revoked.

I hope you get more expats from CA. Good luck. We'll manage.

You'll get the expats from Mexico, looking for hand outs paid for by other people. CA can't print money like the Fed can, but that doesn't stop Governor Brown from spending it.

Please post all your writings on this topic that were critical of Bush when he passed Medicare Part D and put two shooting wars on the national credit card after lowering taxes.

Every time someone provides proof that your wacko litmus tests doesn't support your cockamamie ideas, you backpedal and move the goal line. You're original statement (firehouse.com/forums/t124576-4/#post1341335) was: "They (conservatives) said nothing when Bush doubled the national debt."

And now you move the goal line by demanding that it must come from me, and it must be about Medicare Part D or Iraq/Afghanistan Wars, and it must be on this site. I wasn't active on this site during that time frame, and my first ever post here was on 4/10/2008 (firehouse.com/forums/t74946/#post941882), nearly 5 years after the Medicare D bill was introduced. BTW, Medicare D would have never made it to Bush's desk without Democrat votes, the GOP did not have a filibuster proof majority. The same cannot be said about the Obamacare.

You should have no problem posting any of your protests since you like to show links. I'll save you the time. You never said a word about Bush's profligate spending.

Oh really? We've been down this road before of me proving that you're a liar about criticism of GWBush (firehouse.com/forums/t104416-18/#post1044490), but we can go down it again, since you're glutton for punishment.

Bush has vetoed almost zero spending bills since he's been in office.

Yeah Bush cut taxes, but he failed to reduce spending. Where do you think that leads to?

And...

His reluctance to write the word VETO can account for most.

And...

For the record, giving bailout money, during this present recession, was started under GWB's administration.
“I’ve abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system.” Bush once said in a CNN interview in December of 2008.

You're memory of conservatives criticizing Bush is no better than you knowledge of fiscal years, or your memory of who had a majority in the 103rd Congress. (firehouse.com/forums/t110672/#post1098877)

Actually that isn't true. FDR's policies (assuming you are discussing the New Deal) led to significant economic growth (compared to what he inherited) by the end of his first term. Non-farm employment was cut in half by the end of 1936.

So his policies only took 7 years to work? That's not something you should be bragging about. The duration of The Great Depression is all the proof you need. At no other time in history did the Federal Government expand & interfere more than it did then, and no other depression in American history has lasted as long.

Reagan tripled the national debt in eight years. And conservatives (like they did with Bush) said nothing.

Said nothing, you mean like this:

• “Conservatives Criticize Bush on Spending” Date Published: December 6, 2003
• MYTH BUSTED: Conservatives did oppose Bush
• Conservatives criticize Bush's spending, anti-terrorism law

And while we're at it, I wrote that Bush's budget deficits would pale in comparison to President Downgrades. (firehouse.com/forums/t110001-7/#post1090391)
Liberals hate it when we're right.

Conservatives have yet to put forth an alternative plan that has been proven to work.

It's called the free market, but I wouldn't expect a Marxist like you to know anything about it.

Great. Quoting Limbaugh. It all makes sense. If I ever need advice on drug abuse, illegal drug purchasing, getting divorced, or avoiding the draft, he'll be my go-to guy.

The Obama fanboi criticizing someone for drug use. Wow. Let us all know when the Choom Gang reunion is.

Nice to know you get your political perspectives from an entertainer. That would be like me getting political perspectives from Jon Stewart. Who is at least funny with ratings that Limbaugh could only dream about.

The English language lacks words to describe how utterly false that is. Limbaugh has about 10 times as many listeners as Stewart has viewers. On Forbes most powerful celebrities list, he's #19. Where did Stewart rank? He didn't make the list, not even an honorable mention. (forbes.com/celebrities/list/) And last year Limbaugh made about 4 times the amount of money that Stewart did. If Limbaugh truly was a joke, liberals wouldn't spend so much time attacking him.

The best soundbite:
GM is alive, bin Laden is dead.

And Ambassador Stevens is dead too.

All you're capable of is spreading lies and misquoting conservatives, like when you allege that the Iraq War was sold to Americans as not going to cost any taxpayer dollars.(firehouse.com/forums/t110147-5/#post1094204) Or when you said $3 Trillion was the cost of the Iraq War. (firehouse.com/forums/t107553/#post1048417)

Your posts here are nothing short of Weapons Grade Stupidity. You should really look into expanding your income by writing fiction novels. Your writings here could account for the first few installments of a series.

This has been yet another rebuttal of the lying liberal marxist slumlord brought to you by a simple southern boy from NC.