President Barack Obama/Vice-President Joe Biden Re-elected to 2nd Term Thread

[twa]

His trip through Iowa is primarily to express his (not Congress') dedication to the American people, who in Iowa are experiencing an extreme drought, while Congress decided not to vote on the Farm Bill and go home for vacation. He wants to let them know he's on their side.

maybe he should tell his buddy Harry to let the senate vote on the drought relief bill passed by the house then?

http://farmpolicy.com/2012/08/03/hou...ought-worsens/

[Corcaigh]

I agree which is why I keep bringing it up.

---------- Post added August-12th-2012 at 09:12 PM ----------



Sorry you are wrong. If you want to continue the discussion feel free but you do not understand the basics of dividend stocks which is why you keep posting vague nothingness.

Surprisingly you don't address any of my questions that actually matter(how does this effect the economy in a +EV way)[COLOR="Gold"]

This is funny. Vague nothingness.

For you to make claims that an increase in dividend tax will change value of stocks or their dividend policy, or significantly impact Joe Public, you have to explain or demonstrate the following:

(1) Much of corporate dividend policy is set by institutional pension funds which don't pay taxes on dividends received. You have to factor that into your calculation of whether any diminished future earnings impacting stock value. A change in the tax rate won't matter for an institutional investor. And even dividend stocks show capital appreciation in line with the general market, further limiting the sensitivity of their dividend policy on their value.

(2) What is the difference in value to a stock for the vast majority of investors whose tax rates are equal to, lower than, or slightly higher than the current dividend tax rate? It's impossible to know. You asked about the increase for a $100 investment. This is completely meaningless question as it depends on their individual tax situation and many other factors such as their investment mix. But what we do know is that if dividend tax rates return to an approach of treating it as regular income and aligning with your income tax bracket, a retired couple will only be taxed at a higher rate on their dividend income on that portion of their dividend income that exceeds $70k in taxable earnings.

(3) If your argument is true, there should be an abundance of evidence that lowering dividend tax rates almost a decade ago changed the behavior of the stock market in terms of dividend payouts AND the valuation of dividend stock. If, as you claim that the value of dividend stocks depends on how much an individual investor makes after tax, there should be clear jumps up in the price of dividend stocks relative to the stock market as a whole when the rates were lowered.

(4) You have ignored the point that lower tax rate of dividends relative to other income is an anomaly in the tax system. Millionaires pay a lower tax rate on their income than their employees. Billionaires pay a lower tax rate than nurses, firefighters and teachers. Personally I benefited from this anomaly but I think it is wrong.

(5) If dividend tax rates do impact stock value, why should tax policy favor dividend stocks? If what you claim is true, we would essentially be penalizing the value of stocks for those companies that want to invest their earnings rather than make dividend payouts. Is this fair?

[Hersh]

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012...l-program?lite

Foreign consulates, lawyers’ offices and advocacy organizations were abuzz with activity as the federal government on Wednesday began allowing certain young illegal immigrants who came to America as children to apply for the right to legally stay and work in the country.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services began accepting applications for consideration of “deferred action”— a two-year reprieve from any threat of deportation, with the possibility of renewal. The new Obama administration program, a radical and controversial change in immigration policy, was announced by Homeland Secretary Janet Napolitano in mid-June.

This is a pretty significant day. Not that anyone illegal can vote, but this makes it extremely unlikely that Romney will be able to close the gap in the Hispanic vote and they will be more motivated to vote for Obama now.

[Larry]

I do think this MIGHT be a significant idea. One that I'd like to see discussed.

But I'm more interested in "is this the right thing to do?" than I am in "which political party will benefit the most?"

[Rdskns2000]

The time has come for Obama to shake things up. He needs to get rid of Joe Biden.

Sarah Palin, says Hillary.


I say a hispanic woman- would do it. That would have record turnout among 2 groups that would overwhelm any votes Romney could get.

[War Paint]

The time has come for Obama to shake things up. He needs to get rid of Joe Biden.

Sarah Palin, says Hillary.


I say a hispanic woman- would do it. That would have record turnout among 2 groups that would overwhelm any votes Romney could get.

It's too late for that. It would come across as a desperation move at this point. If he wanted to get rid of Biden, he should've done it a year or so ago.

[Hersh]

It's too late for that. It would come across as a desperation move at this point. If he wanted to get rid of Biden, he should've done it a year or so ago.

Something we agree on completely. There is no reason for Obama to shake things up now. He's been ahead this entire time.

---------- Post added August-15th-2012 at 08:03 PM ----------

I do think this MIGHT be a significant idea. One that I'd like to see discussed.

But I'm more interested in "is this the right thing to do?" than I am in "which political party will benefit the most?"

I don't see why it isn't the right thing to do. For many of these kids, they don't know any country but the USA. Of course, I'm a supporter of the Dream Act as well.

The Dream Act is actually a pretty good example of the dysfunction of our government. Various versions have had bipartisan support but in 11 years they haven't managed to pass the bill.

[doctorshockalu]

1). Majority of dividend stocks already get double taxes.

2) Its pretty easy to see why. A company is worth X dollars on stock market with Y net revenue. Once you you add an increase in tax the stock with worth X * 0.95 and revenue is Y * 0.95.

3) Same as above. Obvious to see why it would be valued less

4)I agree it's unfair. What I have been saying the whole time is that I don't believe this helps our economy at all. I've shown why I believe this.

5) Not disputing fairness. Been saying it targets the wrong crowd and hurts economy. Don't know what you are talking about.

[Spearfeather]

The time has come for Obama to shake things up. He needs to get rid of Joe Biden.

Should have never picked him in the first place.

Crazy Uncle Joe, at it again.

[twa]

the polls are not looking good for O and O'biden

even the youth are trending against them

[Larry]

Wondering if maybe there should be a separate thread for Obama's, well, whatever you want to call his orders dealing with illegal immigrants.

Maybe it would help if we could come up with a title? "Obamagration"?

I do think it's a topic that's worthy of discussion. (And not on how it affects the election. Or at least, not just on that aspect.)

Yahoo: Arizona governor: no public benefits for young immigrants

PHOENIX (Reuters) - Arizona Republican Governor Jan Brewer, in yet another clash with the White House, issued an order on Wednesday barring illegal immigrants who qualify for temporary legal status in the United States from receiving any state or local public benefits.

The action was a response to relaxed deportation rules issued by the Obama administration on Wednesday.

Brewer, whose state has been at the center of the country's immigration debate, issued an executive order denying state or local benefits to immigrants applying under the new federal immigration rules. The order would bar them from obtaining an Arizona driver's license or a state-issued identification card.

As many as 1.7 million people could qualify for the temporary federal program, which enables certain illegal immigrants to apply for work permits, Social Security cards and driver's licenses, according to the Pew Hispanic Center.

Applying for "deferred action for child arrivals" permits will shield some young illegal immigrants from being ousted from the United States for at least two years. In Arizona, officials said an estimated 80,000 illegal immigrants were eligible to apply.

To qualify, recipients must have been younger than 16 years old upon arrival; currently not older than 30; have lived in the country since June 15, 2007; and have no felony convictions.

I have to say, my mental image of Red States in general, and Arizona (who, IMO, seems to be trying really, really, hard to make sure that they are the most wingnut red state of them all) is really, really, negative.

But I don't see anything in this article that I can point at and say that this is terrible.

Frankly, I don't have a problem with immigrants, even legal ones (and I have to observe that we aren't talking about legal ones, here. We're talking about "illegal, but we've decided to kind of pretend that they're legal".) not qualifying for welfare, for example.

(Now, me, I think that the kinds of people that we're talking about, with this program, ought to be legal. But it's a fact that they aren't, right now.)

I'm certainly not a big fan of Arizona, or any of the numerous loony politicians in it. And I'm not going to be at all surprised if somebody, later, find some really despicable aspects of this law.

But I don't see any in this article.

[AsburySkinsFan]

It's pretty stupid, team Rmoney was spinning out of control for nearly a whole month and the Ryan pick is polling as low as Quayle, there is finally some real ground to hit Rmoney/Ryan on with policy, and all of the sudden Biden gives them just what they wanted. Somebody bind him and duct tape his mouth and throw him into a bunker until November.

I wonder if we might see Biden have "health issues" that require him to "focus on his family".

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Then there's this:

The umbrage industry is working overtime this week.

Mitt Romney, the Republicans’ presidential standard-bearer, is so outraged by President Obama’s attacks that he called the president a hater: “Mr. President, take your campaign of division and anger and hate back to Chicago and let us get about rebuilding and reuniting America.”

* * *

Forgive me, but I’m not prepared to join this walk down Great Umbrage Street just yet. Yes, it’s ugly out there. But is this worse than four years ago, when Obama was accused by the GOP vice presidential nominee of “palling around with terrorists”? Or eight years ago, when Democratic nominee John Kerry was accused of falsifying his Vietnam War record?

What’s different this time is that the Democrats are employing the same harsh tactics that have been used against them for so long, with so much success. They have ceased their traditional response of assuming the fetal position when attacked, and Obama’s campaign is giving as good as it gets — and then some.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...y.html?hpid=z2

I know some people will just say "Dana Milbank sucks," but how is anything we've seen so far worse than calling someone a war deserter or someone else a "pal of terrorists." Is Obama's campaign really worse than that so far? I don't think its close. Its almost like the saying of hitting back a bully.

[Kilmer17]

It's pretty stupid, team Rmoney was spinning out of control for nearly a whole month and the Ryan pick is polling as low as Quayle, there is finally some real ground to hit Rmoney/Ryan on with policy, and all of the sudden Biden gives them just what they wanted. Somebody bind him and duct tape his mouth and throw him into a bunker until November.

I wonder if we might see Biden have "health issues" that require him to "focus on his family".

I think it's refreshing to see someone on the left take him to task. Bravo.

Giuliani fired a shot across the bow the other day asking if (para) Biden would be fit to lead if something happened. Not sure if it will get traction. But I know the GOP is salivating thinking about a Ryan vs Biden debate. Remembering that even Sarah Palin did pretty good against him.

[Hersh]

the polls are not looking good for O and O'biden

even the youth are trending against them

What polls?