Joe the plumber

Michelle Malkin said it best for Dems... If you can't beat 'em, smear 'em!

Joe the Plumber has redefined this race. Should McCain pull off the upset of all upsets in political history, and actually win this election, Joe the Plumber will be talked about for centuries. It's about more than the personality of Joe the Plumber, it's about more than who Joe is, or his actual circumstances, but liberal pinheads can't see that now.

Joe puts a face on The Issue... the defining issue of this campaign. Pundits keep telling us, the economy plays in the favor of Obama, but I don't think this is necessarily true. While the economy might play in favor of 'change' it doesn't mean people want change for the worse. Raising taxes in tough economic times, even on 'the rich' is not a change for the better. 'Joe the Plumber' has allowed McCain to pull the mask off Liberal Socialism, and expose it for the fraud it is. If he can now parlay this message into a Reaganesque message of optimism and hope for the future of America, he can win this election.
 
Dixie said:
Michelle Malkin said it best for Dems... If you can't beat 'em, smear 'em!

Joe the Plumber has redefined this race. Should McCain pull off the upset of all upsets in political history, and actually win this election, Joe the Plumber will be talked about for centuries. It's about more than the personality of Joe the Plumber, it's about more than who Joe is, or his actual circumstances, but liberal pinheads can't see that now.

Joe puts a face on The Issue... the defining issue of this campaign. Pundits keep telling us, the economy plays in the favor of Obama, but I don't think this is necessarily true. While the economy might play in favor of 'change' it doesn't mean people want change for the worse. Raising taxes in tough economic times, even on 'the rich' is not a change for the better. 'Joe the Plumber' has allowed McCain to pull the mask off Liberal Socialism, and expose it for the fraud it is. If he can now parlay this message into a Reaganesque message of optimism and hope for the future of America, he can win this election.
Click to expand...

I don;t think it is resonating with anyone but kool aid drinking Palin lovers. Basically everything the guy said is untrue. The guy also would receive tax cuts under Obama. I think normal non trailer park living Americans understand this.
 
Dixie said:
Michelle Malkin said it best for Dems... If you can't beat 'em, smear 'em!

Joe the Plumber has redefined this race. Should McCain pull off the upset of all upsets in political history, and actually win this election, Joe the Plumber will be talked about for centuries. It's about more than the personality of Joe the Plumber, it's about more than who Joe is, or his actual circumstances, but liberal pinheads can't see that now.

Joe puts a face on The Issue... the defining issue of this campaign. Pundits keep telling us, the economy plays in the favor of Obama, but I don't think this is necessarily true. While the economy might play in favor of 'change' it doesn't mean people want change for the worse. Raising taxes in tough economic times, even on 'the rich' is not a change for the better. 'Joe the Plumber' has allowed McCain to pull the mask off Liberal Socialism, and expose it for the fraud it is. If he can now parlay this message into a Reaganesque message of optimism and hope for the future of America, he can win this election.
Click to expand...

Only if you misrepresent it. A guy like Joe actually makes a lot more under Obama's tax plan than he does under McCain's. If he was how he was 1st portrayed - making $250K, trying to buy a $280K business, he's still better off. McCain's campaign is dishonestly trying to parlay that kind of income into "average," and trying to mislead Americans into thinking that everyone is going to get taxed under Obama. It's just not true.

Oh - and funny that Malkin is the one talking about "smears." I mean, good lord...
 
Onceler said:
Only if you misrepresent it.
Click to expand...
A valid comment.

If he was how he was 1st portrayed
Click to expand...
A very valid comment, since what he said, and how it was later "portrayed", are completely different. Unsurprisingly, the truth is far more favporable to Joe than the desperate liberals are trying to make people think.

Joe doesn't make $250K/year. He never said he did. He works for a small plumbing company, and that company takes in around $250K-$270K. He's considering buying the business. If he does, that would put him in the $250K bracket that Obama wants to raise taxes on. And if Obama's plans go through, Joe will then see an increase in his taxes.

Of course, the real issue that came out of that whole exchange between Obama and Joe, was Obama's statement that he wanted to tax Joe's business more, to pay for the tax cuts for others... followed by a flat admission that he wanted government to "spread the wealth around". Whether some guy in Ohio has a license or not.

By admitting that his governmental policy amounted to socialism, Obama might have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, as extreme leftists so frequently do (see Hillary's publishing her govt health care plan in a book in 1993, resulting in Democrats getting kicked out of majorities in every part of government for the first time in generations).
 
You guys are missing the point. This isn't about Joe himself. You are finding all these juicy morsels of info about Joe, trying to discredit him, trying to turn him into an illusion... but it's not about Joe, it's about policy.

When your candidate speaks of raising taxes on "the rich" he is talking about raising taxes on hard working people like Joe, who would like to realize 'The American Dream' someday, and own their own business. Or better yet, hard working people like Joe, who have realized their dream, who have worked hard to build a $250k per year business, and who will suffer under an Obama tax proposal. It has more to do with the policy of raising taxes to the detriment of citizens trying to scratch and claw their way out of the middle class.

Obama has proposed over a trillion dollars in new spending, and has yet to be specific about any budget cuts, which means he is going to have to tax the hell out of someone. The Top 5% don't earn enough to pay for what he has promised, even if you tax them at 100%, so how is he going to do what he has promised? Not to mention the fact, that every time we have ever raised the taxes on the upper percentile, we have effectively decreased the amount of revenue in taxes, because there is less incentive to profit.

No one, including Joe, is going to be 'better off' under Obama's plan. In fact, Joe will probably be unemployed because his company will have to lay off workers to compensate for the increased taxes they will have to pay. If he is able to keep his job, he will have to charge us more to do it, because the tax money has to be generated somewhere. Remember, no matter how much you want to believe it, corporations do not pay tax. Any increase in their tax rates, is offset by layoffs, or increased price to the consumer.
 
"Joe doesn't make $250K/year. He never said he did. He works for a small plumbing company, and that company takes in around $250K-$270K. He's considering buying the business. If he does, that would put him in the $250K bracket that Obama wants to raise taxes on. And if Obama's plans go through, Joe will then see an increase in his taxes. "

Just shows that criticism of Obama's plans only come from ignorance. If the business is making $270K, yes, he'll see a small increase - on the additional $20K over $250K. But that will be offset in a big way by Obama's other proposals to help small businesses, with healthcare, training & tax INCENTIVES for creating new jobs.

You guys need to read more, and knee jerk less...
 
Onceler said:
"Joe doesn't make $250K/year. He never said he did. He works for a small plumbing company, and that company takes in around $250K-$270K. He's considering buying the business. If he does, that would put him in the $250K bracket that Obama wants to raise taxes on. And if Obama's plans go through, Joe will then see an increase in his taxes. "

Just shows that criticism of Obama's plans only come from ignorance. If the business is making $270K, yes, he'll see a small increase - on the additional $20K over $250K. But that will be offset in a big way by Obama's other proposals to help small businesses, with healthcare, training & tax INCENTIVES for creating new jobs.

You guys need to read more, and knee jerk less...
Click to expand...

LMAO... So Obama is going to only tax money over the $250k threshold, and anything less than $250k is not taxed? Is that his plan? And how is Obama going to give us all of this shit without paying for it? You are the one living in delusion here, if you think it is possible to provide all of these things at no cost. Obama is filling your head full of absolute nonsense, he is banking on the fact that you are so stupid, you will believe he can do the impossible. He can't pay for health care and training, AND give 'tax incentives', he will have to tax the living fuck out of everyone making above $250k, and that will mean, no new jobs, no new training, no new growth.

This is a classic case of wanting to have your cake and eat it too. You think it's possible for us to have all of these things we can't afford to pay for, you think that some modest increase on the richest of the rich, will pay for it all, but you are an idiot, a fool! It will NOT pay for a fraction of this stuff, in fact, it will result in REDUCED TAX REVENUE!
 
Dixie said:
LMAO... So Obama is going to only tax money over the $250k threshold, and anything less than $250k is not taxed? Is that his plan?
Click to expand...

Are you retarded? Or are you being serious?

Dixie said:
he will have to tax the living fuck out of everyone making above $250k, and that will mean, no new jobs, no new training, no new growth.
Click to expand...

Yeah, just like in the 90s. Those were terrible times. Obama's just raising the tax rates for people making over 1/4 million to the levels they were being taxed in the 90s.

Dixie said:
it will result in REDUCED TAX REVENUE!
Click to expand...

Actually, Obama's plan is going to produce more revenue than McCains.

McCain would lower revenue by $600 billion while Obama would raise revenue by $600 billion over the next decade. McCain's spending would increase the national debt by $5 trillion and Obama’s by $3.5 trillion in 2018.

From Tax Policy Center.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=411750

You're wrong about everything.
 
Last edited:
"Are you retarded? Or are you being serious?"

Both, unfortunately.

Dixie also thinks the Tax Policy Center is a whacked out leftie subsidiary of Daily Kos...
 
McCain would lower revenue by $600 billion while Obama would raise revenue by $600 billion over the next decade. McCain's spending would increase the national debt by $5 trillion and Obama’s by $3.5 trillion in 2018.
Click to expand...

This is complete unfounded bullshit. It's why liberals are so inept when it comes to the economy, you simply don't understand it is not a net sum gain. IF all things remained the same, you could rationalize an increase in rate of tax, would generate more money, but things NEVER remain the same! Increasing the tax burden has a dramatic effect on the amounts of investment capital and incomes made by 'the rich' and this results (ALWAYS) in reduced tax revenues. Raise the taxes, reduce the overall revenues... lower the taxes, increase the overall revenues... this has been the case every time over the last century, I don't care what you misconstrued from the Tax Policy Center.

Let us also not forget, Obama planned to raise capital gains taxes, this was a large chunk of the money he planned to use, despite the fact it would have also resulted in less overall revenue. For all intents and purposes, 'capital gains' are gone for the next 10 years. The recent market crash has seen to that. Losses in cap gains can be averaged over the next 10 years, according to current US tax code, so unless Obama plans to completely rewrite the tax laws, there will be no capital gains to speak of in the next decade.
 
Dixie said:
This is complete unfounded bullshit. It's why liberals are so inept when it comes to the economy, you simply don't understand it is not a net sum gain. IF all things remained the same, you could rationalize an increase in rate of tax, would generate more money, but things NEVER remain the same! Increasing the tax burden has a dramatic effect on the amounts of investment capital and incomes made by 'the rich' and this results (ALWAYS) in reduced tax revenues. Raise the taxes, reduce the overall revenues... lower the taxes, increase the overall revenues... this has been the case every time over the last century, I don't care what you misconstrued from the Tax Policy Center.
Click to expand...

No, it has not been. The total income tax collected from the ultra-rich in the 80's increased by a pitiful amount compared to the total income tax collected from the same bracket in the 70's.
 
First off if the business makes 270k after expenses and payroll then the business owner would have to be real dolt to take ALL that home. If the Business is not an LLC then the business owner is a real dumb ass. Buy a new truck for the owner to drive in the name of the business and it is no longer taxable. THere are all sorts of creative ways to keep from paying taxes on 250k+ and still reap the benefits of making that much money.
 
#1... dude lives in a trailer... does anyone know someone making 250 K living in a trailer???
i sure don't

what's this that he's a liar?? i haven't been following as of late.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Show me where the numbers from the Tax Policy Center were wrong or, as you would say, STFU!!
Click to expand...

Well, I can't show you a projection is wrong. First of all, I don't see where the Tax Policy Center made the projection that McCain would lower revenue by $600 billion while Obama would raise revenue by $600 billion over the next decade. I kind of think they didn't really make such a projection, and you just inserted that in there with the projection of how much both candidates proposals would increase the national debt. I also reject their projection on this, because no one really knows how much either candidate will increase the national debt, there are too many variables. I would venture to say, the candidate proposing to fund nationalized health care, would probably increase the debt more. Just a guess.
 
uscitizen said:
"net sum gain"

Huh ?
Click to expand...

Yes, 'net sum gain' means that all statistics remain constant, nothing changes. The presumption that the same number of 'rich folk' will earn the same amount of income, and the net gain over time will be consistent only with the cost of living and inflation. By that standard, it is logical that increasing their rate of taxation would produce greater revenue, but it doesn't factor in human behavior. It doesn't figure how many 'rich folk' will simply pack it in, and not bother making more money, not go to the trouble of investing in stuff, and will take any earnings out of the American economy by moving operations overseas.

If you research the history of 'marginal rate' tax increases from the past century, you will find, every time we have raised it, we generated less tax revenue, and every time we have lowered it, we have increased tax revenue. This is a fact that can not be disputed, go do the research if you don't believe it. The reason is, when you lower marginal tax rates, you encourage investment and spending by the 'rich folk' and this results in even more money being made, which results in even more taxes being paid, even though the rate of tax is lower.
 
Blackflag said:
Joe the plumber is short for Sam the trailer trash tax dodger
Click to expand...

You (and Robdawg) are making the mistake of thinking this is about Joe personally. In fact, he could be Nancy the Beautician, Jake the Construction Worker, or Marvin the Comic Book Collector. This is not about Joe's personal circumstances, it is about Americans. Hard working normal Americans, who strive for the American Dream, and hope to one day succeed in business.

Furthermore, it is about this class warfare notion promoted by the left, the constant attacks on 'the rich' and desire to take their money and 'spread it around', which is not 'American' at all, it is a totally Socialist concept. It goes against everything we stand for as Americans, and Joe the Plumber puts a face on it.

It's okay, you can attack Joe all you like, this is not about Joe. It is about Americans and the American way of life. Something you Socialists know little about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top