+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: Lounge (/forum-564.html)
+---- Forum: The Kyra Memorial Spin Room (/forum-540.html)
+---- Thread: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... (/thread-311168.html)
Pages: 1 2
If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - WoodlandsOwl - 08-25-2008 09:06 PM
Things I have heard in the past three weeks from my Hillary Democrat Friends (And yes, I have friends and family who are misguided in their politics) is that their big beef with Obama, and the source of the static between Obama and Hillary is NOT the VP slot.... BUT the agreement that Obama would help Hillary retire her campaign debt, including the $11 million that Hillary loaned herself in the last part of the primaries.
During the meeting at Sen. Feinstein's home, this was a big part of the discussion.
Hillary would urge her delgates to support Obama if she had a role at the Convention and efforts were made by Obama to pay off her debt, through fundraisers with Obama, etc.
So far, nothing has happened.
If Obama had half a brain, he would write the check to Hillary TODAY or do whatever it takes to make Hillary happy...
Jesus H. Christ.. if Obama can't deal with Hillary and do the simple thing of paying her off, how can you trust him to handle real problems, such as Iran, Russia, Afghanistan, etc?
Because if he doesn't take care of Hillary its a 100% guarantee that somewhere. somehow, Hillary will screw him and do her best to cost him the election.
Nobody screws the Clintons.
Obama has over $50 million in the bank.. he can afford to pay Hillary off to get her out of the mess.
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - BeliefBlazer - 08-25-2008 09:22 PM
He's not allowed to donate any more than any other citizen. I suppose he could have held fundraisers with her but I think he seriously underestimated how many Clinton voters would abandon him.
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - jh - 08-26-2008 09:08 AM
WMD Owl Wrote:If Obama had half a brain, he would write the check to Hillary TODAY or do whatever it takes to make Hillary happy...I didn't think we were supposed to negotiate with terrorists.
Jesus H. Christ.. if Obama can't deal with Hillary and do the simple thing of paying her off, how can you trust him to handle real problems, such as Iran, Russia, Afghanistan, etc?
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - BGSUalum1987 - 08-26-2008 09:57 AM
If Obama (or anyone else, for that matter) paid me $11 million, everything would be hunky dory here, too.
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - Rebel - 08-26-2008 10:08 AM
BGSUalum1987 Wrote:If Obama (or anyone else, for that matter) paid me $11 million, everything would be hunky dory here, too.
Hell yeah. I'd even vote for Obama.
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - WoodlandsOwl - 08-26-2008 11:01 AM
Rebel Wrote:BGSUalum1987 Wrote:If Obama (or anyone else, for that matter) paid me $11 million, everything would be hunky dory here, too.
Hell yeah. I'd even vote for Obama.
Then he would tax you and just take it all back...
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - mlb - 08-26-2008 11:16 AM
Are you seriously saying someone should pay off another person's bad money management? Someone who couldn't run a campaign within the money they had collected?
Sounds an awful lot like bailing out companies that are poorly run, or giving welfare money to someone because they had another kid.
If I were Obama I'd tell her to take a hike, as it would be against my principals to pay off her debt in a campaign that I spent within my means.
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - BGSUalum1987 - 08-26-2008 11:46 AM
mlb Wrote:Are you seriously saying someone should pay off another person's bad money management?
You mean like the federal government mortgage bailout?
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - Hambone10 - 08-26-2008 12:00 PM
mlb Wrote:Are you seriously saying someone should pay off another person's bad money management? Someone who couldn't run a campaign within the money they had collected?
Sounds an awful lot like bailing out companies that are poorly run, or giving welfare money to someone because they had another kid.
If I were Obama I'd tell her to take a hike, as it would be against my principals to pay off her debt in a campaign that I spent within my means.
The argument is that many donors support Democratic candidates... and had Hillary won, they would have fulfilled pledges they made to her. Instead, they made additional pledges to Obama. When she ended her candidacy, she stopped getting those pledges fulfilled... and surely saved Obama $11mm in having to continue to deal with her (plus giving HIM those pledges).
I'm not sure I agree with it, but I see it. It's in the parties best interest to not have donors wait to see who the nominee is going to be before donating... Part of the 1970's era campaign finance bill..
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - Rebel - 08-26-2008 12:04 PM
WMD Owl Wrote:Rebel Wrote:BGSUalum1987 Wrote:If Obama (or anyone else, for that matter) paid me $11 million, everything would be hunky dory here, too.
Hell yeah. I'd even vote for Obama.
Then he would tax you and just take it all back...
He can't tax me when I'm living in Belize.
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - BGSUalum1987 - 08-26-2008 12:20 PM
Rebel Wrote:WMD Owl Wrote:Rebel Wrote:BGSUalum1987 Wrote:If Obama (or anyone else, for that matter) paid me $11 million, everything would be hunky dory here, too.
Hell yeah. I'd even vote for Obama.
Then he would tax you and just take it all back...
He can't tax me when I'm living in Belize.
:ncaabbs:
You got that right. That money would be offshore in a heartbeat ... just like me!
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - I45owl - 08-27-2008 08:44 AM
BamaBlazer Wrote:He's not allowed to donate any more than any other citizen. I suppose he could have held fundraisers with her but I think he seriously underestimated how many Clinton voters would abandon him.
I don't think that's true. I think there's a loophole that allows politicians to bribe each other within the ethics laws (you know, the ones they wrote). Also, I think that limit only applies if they accept public funding, and according to wikipedia, Obama, Clinton, and McCain all declined public finance.
Frankly, Presidential campaign finance law is undecipherable for me.
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - Hambone10 - 08-27-2008 09:50 AM
I don't think McCain opted out of public finance. In fact, I'm pretty sure of it.
As far as paying her $11mm... there are all sorts of rules about WHAT the money can go for. Its a matter of shifting "DNC" funds to "campaign staff expenses" or something.
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - Owl 69/70/75 - 08-27-2008 11:21 AM
Rebel Wrote:WMD Owl Wrote:He can't tax me when I'm living in Belize.Rebel Wrote:Then he would tax you and just take it all back...BGSUalum1987 Wrote:If Obama (or anyone else, for that matter) paid me $11 million, everything would be hunky dory here, too.Hell yeah. I'd even vote for Obama.
Actually he can. He may not be able to enforce the tax, unless you happen to come back to the US to visit.
But unlike the citizens of every other country in the world (at least I beleive every country, and if not every then the exceptions are few), US citizens are taxed on worldwide income. The one possible exception might be countries with whom we have a tax treaty. I am researching this matter pretty diligently at present, as I may well be making a personal move in the near future.
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - Owl 69/70/75 - 08-27-2008 11:22 AM
Rebel Wrote:BGSUalum1987 Wrote:If Obama (or anyone else, for that matter) paid me $11 million, everything would be hunky dory here, too.
Hell yeah. I'd even vote for Obama.
I wouldn't, unless he agreed to change some of his proposed policies. I have a choking price, but it's more than that.
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - jh - 08-27-2008 04:15 PM
Hambone10 Wrote:I don't think McCain opted out of public finance. In fact, I'm pretty sure of it.
If I remeber correctly, he did opt out, after first opting in but not taking any money. There were some questions about whether or not a loan he secured during his opt in time put him in violation of the FEC regulations now that he has opted out (I believe it had to do with whether or not he used the promise of federal funding as collateral), but since there currently aren't enough members on the FEC to form a quorum, the issue won't be settled until after the election.
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - burden - 08-27-2008 04:31 PM
I really think many of the Hilary voters are going to McCain because they just are not comfortable with Obama. Not because the are bitter that Clinton lost. While Obama and Clinton are similar on issues from a strategic view how they will proceed tactically are quite different. If you make $50,000 or more per year you will see that difference in your pocketbook. Clinton will go in that direction but not nearly as far. The other reason is Michelle's comment that she is proud of America for only the first time in her life. This is an intelligent, educated woman, not a bitter poor person. I think that speaks volumes for where Obama stands. I think that scares Clinton voters also.
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - perunapower - 08-27-2008 05:15 PM
burden Wrote:I really think many of the Hilary voters are going to McCain because they just are not comfortable with Obama. Not because the are bitter that Clinton lost. While Obama and Clinton are similar on issues from a strategic view how they will proceed tactically are quite different. If you make $50,000 or more per year you will see that difference in your pocketbook. Clinton will go in that direction but not nearly as far. The other reason is Michelle's comment that she is proud of America for only the first time in her life. This is an intelligent, educated woman, not a bitter poor person. I think that speaks volumes for where Obama stands. I think that scares Clinton voters also.
Do you have any justification for that $50,000 figure or did you just make it up? Every time I've heard Obama talk about increasing taxes, the figure has been 5 times that amount.
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - Owl 69/70/75 - 08-28-2008 06:59 AM
perunapower Wrote:Do you have any justification for that $50,000 figure or did you just make it up? Every time I've heard Obama talk about increasing taxes, the figure has been 5 times that amount.
I don't know where the $50,000 came from, but the idea that Obama's tax increases will reach way below the stated target income levels is right conceptually for several reasons.
1. If you look at Obama's taxing and spending proposals, the tax changes don't produce enough revenues to support the spending changes, let alone close the deficit. Shutting down Iraq completely provides some savings, but not nearly enough to close the gap. Moreover, the Iraq effect isn't nearly as big as even the raw numbers would suggest because a significant portion of what is now considered Iraq spending (soldiers' salaries, meals, equipment maintenance) wouldn't go away entirely if we brought them home, although some declines (reservists' salaries) would occur. In short, his numbers don't add up. Is he going to tell some special interest to whom he pandered with the promise of a special program that Christmas isn't coming after all, or is he going to redefine the "rich" down to a lower level of income? If the latter, how low? Probably not $50,000; but to get the revenue he needs it's going to be a lot less than five times $50,000. Run the numbers, and two times $50,000 is more realistic.
2. The Obama proposal, like all proposals to tax the "rich," has one fatally flawed assumption. It assumes that those "rich" will respond by saying, "OK, my taxes went up, I'll just live on less." What they do say is, "Obama is raising taxes, where can I put my money to escape them?" What makes this more peverse is that the truly rich can do this and live off their assets, which do not constitute taxable income to them. The people who can't are those that are just getting ahead, who are still trying to pay for their house and their kids' college education and maybe retire a few student loans. Michelle Obama herself admitted this when she talked during the primary campaign about how hard it was for Barack and her to make ends meet and pay off their student loans when they were trying to live on what then would have been abut $250,000 in Chicago. Funny how that same number means "rich" when Barack is talking about other peoples' incomes, but "poor" when Michelle talks about themselves. The tax rate increases will fall short of the projected revenues, because the assumptions regarding investment income won't happen because current levels and types of investment will change in response to tax changes. You see this with capital gains--raise the rates, tax revenues decrease; lower the rates, tax revenues increase--that's the historic pattern.
3. Moving investments away from things that get taxed inevitably means that fewer jobs get created. There's just no other possible result. Those people making $50,000 are right in the crosshairs on this one. The good news is your taxes are lower; the bad news is you don't have a job. Doesn't sound like a win to me. This also means that nationwide taxable income is less, so overall tax revenues are less, so you have to cancel spending programs that were promised to special interests, or you have to redefine "rich" down to a lower level.
4. Consider the case of your doctor. He finds out that tax rates are going up on people in his income bracket. He can go home and tell his wife, "Taxes are going up, so we need to live on less." Or he can fire a nurse. Or he can raise what he charges you when you go to see him. That doesn't really affect you directly, because your insurance pays it. Or maybe insurance just pays up to a certain amount, and you have to pay the rest, so it does affect you. And the insurance company spreads that cost out over everyone, and gets it back in premiums, so in the end everybody pays your doctor's tax increase. And that includes lots of people making less than $50,000. So your doc has three options. One of them has the "rich" paying more taxes. The other two take it out on people in the $50,000 range. Which one do you think he picks?
5. We are in a battle for world economic supremacy. In a world where a single weapon can devastate a huge city, the great powers of the future will be great economic powers rather than great military powers. Having the strongest military in the world is still prudent, as long as we can do so, but it doesn't guarantee success or prosperity. The best thing we can do to make life better for those making $50,000 a year, indeed for everyone, is to win the economic battle. Perot understood this, but I don't think any presidential candidate since has. We are not in a closed system, where the only consideration is taking money from our "rich" to pay our "poor." If we try to take too much from the "rich" they'll choose to be rich elsewhere. If we raise taxes on corporations, and Ireland lowers them, then some corporations are going to locate in Ireland rather than here. If we raise taxes on capital gains and Germany eliminates taxes on capital gains, then some people are going to invest in Germany rather than here. That means Ireland and Germany also get jobs and export sales that we don't, and we get to import things from Ireland and Germany. The same doesn't exactly apply to high income individuals because the US has this policy of taxing on worldwide income, but they can find ways to get income sheltered through offshore corporations. Won't happen in every case, of course, but if it happens in enough cases to cost us 1 or 2 percent growth each year, that will hurt big time over the years.
RE: If Obama paid Hillary $11 million, everything would be "hunky dory".... - Hambone10 - 08-28-2008 09:12 AM
Well said 69... agree 100%. As usual, you are much more considered and articulate than I
jh Wrote:Hambone10 Wrote:I don't think McCain opted out of public finance. In fact, I'm pretty sure of it.
If I remeber correctly, he did opt out, after first opting in but not taking any money. There were some questions about whether or not a loan he secured during his opt in time put him in violation of the FEC regulations now that he has opted out (I believe it had to do with whether or not he used the promise of federal funding as collateral), but since there currently aren't enough members on the FEC to form a quorum, the issue won't be settled until after the election.
I've read articles recently talking about how McCain has more money to spend because he's about to get $80mm in public funds while Obama won't. Implying that McCain (like ALL rich men) is going to buy the election. Nothing is said about the fact that Obama has already spent more than twice what McCain has, and can raise and spend more than the $80mm McCain can spend. I recall the issue you are describing... but I also recall that Obama initially said he would opt in... as did McCain... and then Obama opted out saying the rules were somehow unfair.