President Obama`s Address Live [Live Comments]

Submitted by: fancylad 6 years ago in

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


Join in on the live feed now. And don"t call him Barry.
There are 81 comments:
Male 309
"I am fascinated by the joblessness in our country. My company is ALWAYS and I mean always looking for full-time help and I can`t tell you how many people come in here and want to only work certain hours, certain days of the week, need every other Wednesday off, have to leave early every Tuesday and Friday, call in sick at least once a week, blah-dee-blah-blah. It`s insanity. There`s no work ethic anymore."

Endless unemployment benefits. love how the liberals say "but everybody wants a job". No they don`t. Nobody wants a job. What everybody wants is the MONEY from a job. If you`re just going to give them the money, why on earth would anybody want to do any work? They wouldn`t.
0
Reply
Male 309
"Our government didn`t come up with loopholes or tax havens or subsidies or credit default swaps. That`s all by design of wealthy, greedy douchebags that pay lobbyist to get their way and use our system for gain."

If you think a credit default swap is some kind of scam, then you understand absolutely zip about finance, and don`t deserve to be in this conversation.
0
Reply
Male 309
Hard work is only part of becoming successful. There`s also foresight, responsibility, ingenuity, intelligence, integrity, delayed gratification, perserverance, etc. But all that only matters in a profit AND LOSS system.
0
Reply
Male 526
Righties know that the majority of the rich actually earned their wealth, but think that the majority of the poor are lazy free-loaders.
Lefties know that the majority of the poor actually do work for their meager living, but think that the majority of the rich are greedy pricks that inherited their wealth or acquired it through other, less legal means.
Hopefully we`ll eventually realize that both sides have half the truth, and actually start getting some crap done.
0
Reply
Male 15,190
Bazza`s not doing badly, considering his disadvantages.
0
Reply
Male 39,619

@ M_Archer - Yes! Exactly! I knew you could be trained!
0
Reply
Male 525
@cheerios18: The only thing J.P. Morgan was guilty of was violating antitrust laws; but because they`re so subjective and vague, literally anyone can be guilty of them if the government doesn`t like you.

All those laws do is sacrifice great people to inferior people. J.P. Morgan was guilty of the antitrust laws i.e. he was guilty of being successful, better than his inferiors and not liked by the government.
0
Reply
Female 30
Ha XD Yeah M. Archer, J.P. Morgan was just a stand up guy, good, honest, working fellow. Not like he was infamous for making trusts or anything trivial like that.

20 bucks says archer`s a republican.
0
Reply
Male 525
@Madest: Teddy combated the abuses of big businesses? You mean like harassing J.P. Morgan, one of the greatest investment bankers who ever lived? Morgan created his wealth from nothing. He was incredibly successful; Roosevelt hated him for that and went out of his way to bully him despite the fact that the government requested Morgan`s help many times to fix the problems they created; Morgan fixed those problems while making money for himself in the process.

"corporate interests must be subordinate to national interests." i.e. you mean individual rights should be subjugated to might. What you preach is called collectivism: the theory that an individual comes second towards another cause (in your case, the nation).

@Gerry: By the same logic, I could say that you don`t have to give your money to the street mugger; you can die--it`s voluntary.
0
Reply
Male 39,619

M_Archer [quote]"I`m saying that the government should be funded by voluntary means" [/quote]
It is. You don`t have to pay taxes unless you want to.

You pay taxes because you want to pay them more than you want to go to jail....voluntary. :)
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Tax codes a wreck. But greed is the cause. Our government didn`t come up with loopholes or tax havens or subsidies or credit default swaps. That`s all by design of wealthy, greedy douchebags that pay lobbyist to get their way and use our system for gain.
We need another Theodore Roosevelt. He was the first man to use the office of the presidency to combat the abuses of big business. His celebrated "trust-busting" advanced the principle that corporate interests must be subordinate to national interests.
0
Reply
Male 546
The entire tax code is unfair. We have people that pay nothing but get money returned to them, (the tax code being used as welfare) to hide the welfare.
Not that I am against that, but I am against the covert ways politicians lie to us the normal citizen, and fool us. If we want to give them welfare, then let`s give it and call it what it is!

So when you hear BO talk about Warren Buffet paying less in taxes than his secretary. Notice the missing word, he doesn`t say less "income" taxes. Why would they mislead us so? To get what they want at any cost. For to them the ends justify the means.

I think all of us would like to pay our fair share of taxes don`t you? The politicians complicate "Fair".
0
Reply
Male 546
Let`s get the tax rate discussion straight. We all are on a graduated percentage for personal income tax. The rates range from 0% to 35% for people making about $380,000 a year and above. So make a million and pay 35%. Make 100 million pay 35% tax on your income.

The statement thrown out by politicians (that want to profit or gain an advantage with class warfare) aren`t exactly truthful. They make the statement, letting us all assume, they are speaking of Personal Income tax. When in fact they are comparing someone making 50,000 a year and his personal income tax rate of 25% - to a rich persons earning`s from Long Term Capital Gains that rate maxes out at 15%. So If you make a million and claim it for personal income tax you will pay 35%, but if you make the same million and claim it as Long Term Capital Gains, you pay 15%. Most rich people have investments in stocks, bonds, real estate that are all taxed as Capital Gains.

So let`s at least not be sheeple.
0
Reply
Male 525
Gerry, I`m sorry--I didn`t understand. So you`re for a flat tax then? I`m still confused; I was not aware low-income people payed a higher percentage on their income than rich people.

I`m saying that the government should be funded by voluntary means; how we make that transition would be a complicated legal process, but that`s ideally how it should be.
0
Reply
Male 39,619

@ M Archer: Again you jump to an unstated conclusion because you can`t defend your position. I did not, never have, and never will say to tax the rich more than other people.

Currently, they pay a lower percentage than others. Tax them the same, that`s my stand.

As for having, or not having, a right to say who pays how much in taxes.... What are you doing?

Revenuer....tax thyself!
0
Reply
Male 525
Madest, you managed to use ad hominem, argument from intimidation, argument from dismissal fallacies and came off as incredibly patronizing in under fifty words.

I`ll let that speak for itself.
0
Reply
Female 4,039
I wish he would stand up there and tell everyone to stop being such pussies and get real about their own personal situation and strive to better their own lives and circumstances.

But he`ll probably just toss out some more free sh*t because no one will settle for anything less than their dream job, and will continue to not help themselves and be more and more dependent.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
M Archer you`re clearly too naiive to understand the unfair tax structure that the wealthy have formed with paid lobbyists. Go enjoy your dual citizenship. Live in your oasis of free healthcare and criticize America`s tax structure. You have 1/2 that right anyway.
0
Reply
Male 525
@Gerry1of1: Double-standard much? Why is it ok for the upper class to deal with the heavy tax burden, but not the lower class? If your response is, "because they make more money", then you DO think we should penalize rich people for being successful.

But on a fundamental moral issue, it`s THEIR money; you have no right saying who should be paying what at what percentage.
0
Reply
Male 525
@Baalthazaq: "Equal opportunity?" Keep in mind, the root of money is man`s mind i.e. man cannot create wealth without his mind. Metaphysically, men are not equal: some are stronger, some are better looking, some are smarter. This is why your egalitarian argument fails (i.e. your "equalize opportunity" argument). By the same logic, airlines should be forced to let retarded pilots fly planes and universities should be forced to accept all students regardless of test scores.

You advocate defying nature and the Law of Causality by sacrificing the talent and ability of those who have it to those who don`t. You advocate a society where all men are forced into mediocrity-that disgusts me.

Also: "Their wealth is not being taken away"--what do you think taxes are? If Gerry1of1 is right, the rich pay 80% of the nation`s taxes; their money is being taken away. It used to be theirs--now it`s not. That`s "taking away."

0
Reply
Male 25,417
Well at least the post was done. Pity about time difference
0
Reply
Male 606
@oystah agreed..
0
Reply
Female 4,039
I am fascinated by the joblessness in our country. My company is ALWAYS and I mean always looking for full-time help and I can`t tell you how many people come in here and want to only work certain hours, certain days of the week, need every other Wednesday off, have to leave early every Tuesday and Friday, call in sick at least once a week, blah-dee-blah-blah. It`s insanity. There`s no work ethic anymore.
0
Reply
Male 382
Amen Gerry!
0
Reply
Male 20,830
I`m not too crazy about extending a person`s unemployment wage after X amount of months if they haven`t found a job. I know a couple of people who do the bare minimum on the job hunt because they know the unemployment checks are going to keep coming.

The fear of no more unemployment checks after a certain amount of months is a good motivator to find a job.
0
Reply
Male 3,625
Right tedgp, and the fact that what Obama had suggested was almost identical to what Republicans have suggested before bears no weight.

sarcasm: Must be because Obama is such a genius. He figured it out all by himself. /sarcasm

No, Obama is the child playing games, because now if they try to block the very thing they suggested, they would be petty, show that Republicans don`t care about jobs and Obama will get elected. If they pass the very thing they suggested, Obama will get the credit because he`s the one who thought of it, it`ll be successful and people will remember it and he will get elected.

It`s a win/win situation for Democrats and a lose/lose for Republicans.
0
Reply
Male 39,619

@ tedgp - Republicans AND democrats. All of them are responsable for this mess. And their "give now quarter" mentality is making it worse.

Even in someone had a solution, the other party would not allow it to pass into law just because it`s "their idea".

Shoot them all.
0
Reply
Male 3,285
Did you know, the US economy would be stable at this time, if the republicans stopped their petty childish behaviour and let the government get on with running the country.
0
Reply
Female 2,761
I don`t agree with "You have less money so we are going to tax you more then these people who have more money"
0
Reply
Female 47
Just jumping way late to say that I really liked madest`s comment.
Nicely put sir.
0
Reply
Male 39,619

@ Kreaol - I do agree with the middle class being taxed.
I do not aggree with taxing the middle class 25% and the rich 10%.

Why do you think ubber-rich people should get special privelages with tax code?
0
Reply
Male 39,619

power outage in most of southern california.
Not only did I miss the presidents speach but
I missed Project Runway! awwwwwwwwwwww
0
Reply
Male 4,593
Obama had a boner during his entire speech.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
[quote]So since apparently all rich people are just lucky to be that way, equal opportunity doesn`t exist?[/quote]
-----------
Luck has a lot to do with success. Do you think Brad Pitt would be a leading man if he looked like you? Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and Paul Allen all happened to be born at just the right time for maximum return on their abilities. Same with the Ivy League educated millionaires that grew up in suburbia with relatives that could open doors for them along the way.
To discount "luck" in someones success you are saying that only the successful are skilled.
0
Reply
Male 1,810
1. U.S. has spent 10`s of billions on wars in the last 10 years. Was this necessary ? not all of it. Should have turned Iraq over to the U.N. after Saddam`s capture, and saved a pile of money. 2. Corporate America has created 10`s of millions of jobs in the last 15 years....in China. Very quietly the U.S. manufacturing sector has been gutted, to the benefit of the upper mngt of these companies and the detriment of the U.S. workers of these companies. Look no farther than Germany to see that it didnt have to happen that way at all. 3. Cheap/easy credit,housing bubble, mortgages traded on Wall Street, leading to the housing crash and subsequent bank bailouts have hurt millions of people. These are the three things that I feel have really hurt America, financially, and will continue to affect/handcuff whoever is running things going forward. Who pays what in taxes ?? Important, but really, tweaking the tax system to be fairer wont solve all the issues...
0
Reply
Male 52
Just as a thought, it wouldn`t surprise me if Obama is going to come back next week with a plan to cut spending and re-work the budget. Now that Republicans have a smear on their face for apparently "playing political games", he can come back with the republicans very own original budget plans and make them his own. Slightly tweaked of course, but just enough to attempt to get him re-elected and go back to his own plans.
0
Reply
Male 52
Also, in regards to "Tax-Loopholes": There is no such thing. You will hear "Tax-Loopholes" in the media left and right, but the Administration will never say "Loophole": They will call them "tax-breaks". The word loophole insinuates that companies/wealthy are doing something bad: They are not. The tax-breaks are made available, and the wealthy readily use them.

I am not saying that tax-breaks are bad or good, I am just saying that everyone inherently calls out the rich for using something that was provided to them. It does not matter if they came from Bush or Obama.
0
Reply
Male 52
@Baalthazaq - Considering that rich people do not even make up 6% (if I am correct in saying so) of the population, some of the "rich" people we have today came from poor/middle class and got the same education and treatment everyone else in the USA got.

@Gerry1of1 - Ludicrous. If you don`t agree with the middle-class being taxed, why should the rich be taxed any different?

To give an example of a rich person: One of the heads in my company started off as a Cashier. In 7-10 years time, he became one of the 3 heads of a fortune 500 company! Because he was smart and worked his way up, should he be taxed a heck lot more then the cashier that never moves beyond being a cashier?
0
Reply
Male 98
@Baalthazaq
So since apparently all rich people are just lucky to be that way, equal opportunity doesn`t exist? Or at least it doesn`t exist in the way you think it should? It`s people like you that fuel the fire of class warfare.

"The situation you have now is not "anti-rich"."

Literally everything you said before this is anti-rich. Just because I have to work harder than someone else does not make them better or different. It just means I had to work harder.
0
Reply
Male 4,546
Also: "Are rich people somehow less entitled to their money?"

It is easier to make money if you have money.
It is easier to have an education if your parents have money.
You incur less debts to get work if you have money.

You have advantages that poorer people do not have, through luck, not entitlement.

Once we have equal opportunity, then you can talk about equal taxation. Without equal opportunity, you have a situation where net worth continuously migrates north, and your society fails and folds.

The situation you have now is not "anti-rich". Their wealth is not being taken away.

You want less redistribution? Awesome.
Then you should 180 on that argument of yours.
0
Reply
Male 4,546
"Everyone should pay 18%. Period."

Sure. On all income, not just salaries.
That includes dividends (15% currently)
That includes corporations (You complain about the 50% of poorest Americans paying no tax, but don`t about 60% of corporations paying no tax).
That includes closing tax loopholes.

If your economic policies are based around the idea that we need to make people want to be rich, you are not familiar enough with the human race.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Didn`t watch it, at this point I`m so fed up with his lies that listening to more of them is just like inviting a ball-peen hammer to the forehead.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
Everyone should pay 18%. Period.
0
Reply
Male 39,619

@ M Archer - I agree we should not penalize rich people for being successful.
But when 6% of the population owns 95% of the wealth they should pay 95% of the tax. Currently they pay 80%. The middle class has to make up the differance with a heavy tax burden.

Waren Buffet pays less in tax than his housekeeper, percentage wise.
0
Reply
Male 3,625
I agree with intrigid that M_Archer has this one.

But I think we can all agree that loopholes need to be closed.

And I don`t think that there would be too many people to argue that those elected to Congress should have term limits and that they should "work for the king of Prussia"; which basically means that those elected do their job for their fellow citizens and that these elected positions aren`t meant to be permanent jobs. (That would also include cutting politicians` salaries) But who am I kidding? No politician would willingly cut his career and salary.
0
Reply
Male 663
>Nonsense. Why does the guy who works on wall street that received bonus money with our tax dollars pay less of a percentage than the guy who makes $50k a year? <<


Why is it the guys fault that the idiots in government forcibly took my money, tax, and gave it to his bosses? Why should I now fall for the line from the "idiots" in government that it will all work out if they forcibly take his money and give it to yet someone else.

How long will you stay on this merry-go-round. Get some sense and get off. ;)
0
Reply
Male 914
M Archer has this one right. I used to have the same attitudes as madest, but then I really started getting interested in economics and I realized that there`s one certain group of people that consistently makes corrects predictions and understands how things work: The free-market capitalists.

I`m one of the most liberal people you`ll ever meet, but I will say this: Left-wing economics is complete nonsense - basically religious in nature. This is ironic considering that religion and irrationality is usually the domain of the cons. Left-wing economics is well intentioned, altruistic, and compassionate, but it`s just so damned misguided and idealistic.

In the worst of times, what we really need is to get rid of all of these ineffective gimmicks and return to simple economics. We need an end to government manipulation of markets.
0
Reply
Male 15,510
Wut, did I miss this?
0
Reply
Male 234
But more importantly I wanted your view on ideas in the video. I think we can both agree some things are very good.
EX:
Lowering corporate taxes while closing tax loopholes
Cutting regulations that interfere with creating businesses
Providing tax cuts for those creating jobs
0
Reply
Male 234
@Archer I never said expand the government, I want to see government cut wasteful spending as well. But can you honestly say that is ok for corporations to legally be allowed double Irish arrangements (google if you don`t understand) then your nuts.
Also if you propose to eliminate all feral taxes (i think that is what your saying), then how do you propose we pay for the FCA, homeland security, border security, the FDA, etc.
While libertarian ideals are great in theory, government regulations have brought us things like food control, clean water and air, and safer drugs. Without these programs corporations could lie, cut corners, and provide the cheapest products that may not be safe.

As for the tax comments, I guess no one will convince you if Warren Buffet asking the govt. to inc. his 17% in income taxes nothing will.
0
Reply
Male 525
@grindinblade: It`s not an issue of "cost of living" or "who`s better off"--it`s a matter of rights i.e. do you have the right to tell the government to forcibly take money from successful people just because they`re successful? I say no.

Government and corporations are both corrupt? So...you want to expand the corrupt government bigger to fight the corrupt corporations? Wouldn`t that just exacerbate the problem? I think the best solution, if indeed both are corrupt, is to have a complete separation of economics and the state and the government has no control over individual rights.

I don`t even think a flat tax is good--I just think a flat tax would be a single step towards the transition to a society where the government is voluntarily funded.

@Madest: It took me a while for your most recent comment to sink in. That`s a pretty big claim; surely you have a cite?
0
Reply
Male 234
@M Archer, 80% of economists agree that a flat tax rate is not sustainable in a modern economy. Let`s say you set a flat tax rate of 20%, for a person making 20,000/yr they will be left with 16,000. However someone making 1 mil, is still left with 800k. It is important to consider that there is a minimal cost of living, and if we inc. tax those who barely meet it they will have no money to spend.
Also I think we can paint both the rich and government corrupt given the loopholes that businesses basically bought by supplying campaign funds. So know they can declare any losses in the united states to get tax returns, but at the same time attribute income to foreign held shells that allow them to collect on patents w/o paying taxes (until it is brought to the US). When the economy falters they want the tax rates dropped before they bring money in (yea that isn`t corrupt :\ )

0
Reply
Male 525
@Madest: You got me there; because as we all know, all voting Americans live in the United States and a Canadian has never had dual citizenship and has never EVER become of legal voting age just in time for a federal election.

Seriously, are we playing the "liar, liar, pants on fire" game now? Because I can do that too--watch:

Madest, you`re a liberal puppet and you are telling people lies to get more of your statist policies pushed through congress.

And YOU call ME a child.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Oh sure. Wall Street didn`t use their wealth to lobby congress and change rules that allowed them to gamble with our money. There was no hanky panky behind credit default swaps. It`s all lies from the libs.. We know...
0
Reply
Male 2,085
Actually Madest, government intervention was the direct cause of the housing bubble. You sound like a typical democrat.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
"Government intervention didn`t cause the housing bubble and collapse of the worlds economic system."

Yes sir. Yes it did. It was the dumb assed CRA`s "Every man deserves a home, regardless if they can pay for it" poo that got 750 billion in homes foreclosed on.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
M Archer, You`re a Canadian child. Terrence or Phillip?
0
Reply
Male 525
@Madest: You`re using a common tactic that statists have been using for decades: cripple the economy with severe regulations and not let the economy fix itself--when the economy inevitably fails, cry that capitalism is to blame and more controls are needed.

Banks cannot gamble with money they don`t have. After 9/11, the Federal Reserve dropped interest rates very low to ENCOURAGE banks to spend. Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac encouraged banks to spend more on subprime houses--the government bullied banks into making bad loans and provided a safety net for them to fall on.

Every economic crisis in history has been created, or only made possible by government regulations.

If the Republicans don`t get a decent nominee that opposes Obama on principle, I might consider not voting and let Obama win; I`d rather Obama and the socialists get the blame for the mess rather than the Republicans or the Tea Party Movement.
0
Reply
Male 50
boring...where are the boobies?!? next!
0
Reply
Male 59
The poor don`t pay taxes. They either get money back, or pay nothing in because of their Poverty level.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Government intervention didn`t cause the housing bubble and collapse of the worlds economic system. Greedy rich people did. It was our money they needed to cover their losses from their gambling. Time they paid their fair share. I`d soak them but I`m not the president.
0
Reply
Male 525
Madest, you want to fix a problem caused by government intervention with MORE government intervention? How does that make sense?

And your last sentence sounds very communist to me. I`m pretty sure most rich people created their wealth using their own minds and voluntary trade with others. Secondly, double-standard much? Why do you paint all rich people as corrupt, when the government is pure and sweet?

@junkaroo: Please read my comment again, pop a Ritalin, and then respond to what I actually posted. Attacking straw-men will get you nowhere.
0
Reply
Male 234
"Why should the rich be taxed more? Are rich people somehow less entitled to their money? What gives you the right to punish people just for being successful?"
PUNISH eh? So paying taxes that keep a country running is a punishment huh... HMMMMMMM

So what you`re saying is, the poor deserve more punishment than the rich. Classy (warfare).

Checkmate, go home.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Nonsense. Why does the guy who works on wall street that received bonus money with our tax dollars pay less of a percentage than the guy who makes $50k a year? Why should the rich be allowed to spend billions on lobbyists so they can pay less in taxes? They`ve rigged the system to enjoy the riches of our labor and paid mouthpieces to make stupid people feel sorry for them.
0
Reply
Male 52
You can tax the rich all you want: We`ll just end up all being poor. The general populous will never perform any form of entrepreneurship, and "re-distributing the wealth" will simply remove the riches capability of providing that.
0
Reply
Male 525
@madest: Why should the rich be taxed more? Are rich people somehow less entitled to their money? What gives you the right to punish people just for being successful?
0
Reply
Male 1,084
Link to where you can watch it now (not live) >[url]http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/...
0
Reply
Male 373
Everything will be paid for?? Only 60% of the *current* budget is paid for. How do you add $450 billion in spending to a bill we already can`t pay and claim that the addition is "paid for"?
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Repairing our infrastructure creates jobs. The people who have jobs spend money which creates even more jobs. We seem to have plenty of money to bomb people into submission 1/2 way around the world. I think this will be money well spent. That bridge collapse a couple years ago should have been a wake-up call. I also agree with taxing the rich. Screw those robber barons.
0
Reply
Male 2,440
Employment doesn`t create wealth; Production does.

Milton Friedman recalled traveling to an Asian country in the 1960s and visiting a worksite where a new canal was being built. He was shocked to see that, instead of modern tractors and earth movers, the workers had shovels. He asked why there were so few machines. The government bureaucrat explained: "You don`t understand. This is a jobs program." To which Milton replied: "Oh, I thought you were trying to build a canal. If it`s jobs you want, then you should give these workers spoons, not shovels."

Obama is doing the same old sh*t: Provide jobs and rack up more debt for future generations. Sorry, Barry. I ain`t buyin` it.
0
Reply
Female 3,598
hmm... sounded like a bunch of lies to me, i would have great respect for a man or woman that ran on a sustainable platform, he or she would definitely have my vote just for being honest...
0
Reply
Male 25
Barry, Barry, Barry
0
Reply
Male 749
He says everything in the bill would be paid for. Yes, by our great grandchildren.
0
Reply
Male 3,625
This seemed like a "Oh crud, elections are soon. I better lie my ass off so I can elected for another 4 years." kind of speech.
0
Reply
Female 446
Meh. Barry does not impress me.
0
Reply
Male 208
Seemed like congress was clapping right on cue
0
Reply
Male 447
Inb4 retardedness.
0
Reply
Male 525
I think the "don`t call him Barry" comment is hilarious. Nice one, Fancy.
0
Reply
Male 1,284
all lies??
0
Reply
Male 79
"pass this bill now"
it sounds like this is going to solve all our problems but lucky for us americans we will still screw it up
0
Reply
Male 20,830
Link: President Obama`s Address Live [Live Comments] [Rate Link] - Join in on the live feed now. And don`t call him Barry.
0
Reply