Support NeoGAF

[Black Republican]

Obama sings again

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hhO1DnNKYbo#!

you know what this means right?








the whitest man on Earth Romney will attempt to sing again

 

[windowlurker]

evangelical, republican establishment, grand ol' party, dat classic Christian Conservative vote.

fuck man

 

[Brinbe]

Obama sings again

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hhO1DnNKYbo#!

ENTERTAINER IN CHIEFZ!11

But seriously, that was awesome. Bams just has that natural charisma. Compare that with Romney's 'loving everything' display from earlier, and it's unbelievable.

 

[windowlurker]

I was comparing that with Kim Jon II looking at stuff.

on par

 

[SouthernDragon]

Harry Reid Threatens Mass Recess Appointments because Senate Republicans are being dicks:



Doooooooooooo itttttttttt!

Ha ha, fuck yeah

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

Well guys I talked to the station manager today. I was going to originally have the show be at 12-1PM. However I didn't factor in that it would be too LOUD for anybody to hear the show (everyone's talking). So I can either do it 9-10am. Or we can prerecord and play the show at 2-3pm. Which do you guys prefer?

Any other inputs?

 

[Black Republican]

if Bob Mcdonnell signs this ultrasound bill, wow

 

[SouthernDragon]

Any other inputs?

While I have no real input since I'm not a regular anymore, putting in sprites made me glaze over your earlier post.

Just sayin.

 

[sc0la]

Corporate tax reform plan tomorrow:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/21/politics/obama-corporate-taxes/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

 

[Averon]

if Bob Mcdonnell signs this ultrasound bill, wow

He'll kill his chances of becoming a possible VP pick. The ads will write themselves. He'll bleed women support.

 

[Oblivion]

Corporate tax reform plan tomorrow:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/21/politics/obama-corporate-taxes/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

He best raise that bitch by 30 points AT LEAST.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Obama sings again

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...=hhO1DnNKYbo#!

That was a little high for him, he should have asked them to take it down half a step.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Corporate tax reform plan tomorrow:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/21/politics/obama-corporate-taxes/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

I'm very interested in this; it's being floated as a common ground bill, but Obama is in campaign mode. It can't cut too far in the GOP's direction. Regardless, Republicans will reject it because it will raise revenue, and remove corporate tax breaks. And is socialist and stuff.

And also, most importantly, because Obama supports it. Maybe if he rolled it out and declared it a terrible idea he'd get some GOP support.

 

[Suikoguy]

I'm very interested in this; it's being floated as a common ground bill, but Obama is in campaign mode. It can't cut too far in the GOP's direction. Regardless, Republicans will reject it because it will raise revenue, and remove corporate tax breaks. And is socialist and stuff.

And also, most importantly, because Obama supports it. Maybe if he rolled it out and declared it a terrible idea he'd get some GOP support.

I'd like to see loopholes (aka subsides) removed and the overall corporate tax rate reduced.
That probably won't happen. I also would like to see less flat rate corporate fees, and instead make it more graduated based on business size, especially depending on what the fee is for.

 

[GhaleonEB]

I'd like to see loopholes (aka subsides) removed and the overall corporate tax rate reduced.
That probably won't happen.

That's apparently the goal of the plan. Details matter, but I expect it will be blocked regardless. My hope is that we at least get the ball rolling, if not in this Congress then in the next.

 

[Oblivion]

I'd like to see loopholes (aka subsides) removed and the overall corporate tax rate reduced.

I hear this a lot, but I still don't get it. What the heck is the point of closing the loopholes if you lower the overall tax rates? One would think you'd cancel out any (or most) revenue gains by doing so.

 

[Suikoguy]

I hear this a lot, but I still don't get it. What the heck is the point of closing the loopholes if you lower the overall tax rates? One would think you'd cancel out any (or most) revenue gains by doing so.

We stop beating around the bush, and put the real tax rate upfront.
There are other side effects, including an increased likelihood of companies bringing money made overseas back into the US.

Edit: It also makes the US more attractive for existing companies, especially new companies. Where as it stands now, you have to either find a way to use a loophole or get yourself a favor put into the tax code, this by far benefits larger corporations.

 

[maximum360]

you know what this means right?








the whitest man on Earth Romney will attempt to sing again

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

 

[PhoenixDark]

I'm very interested in this; it's being floated as a common ground bill, but Obama is in campaign mode. It can't cut too far in the GOP's direction. Regardless, Republicans will reject it because it will raise revenue, and remove corporate tax breaks. And is socialist and stuff.

And also, most importantly, because Obama supports it. Maybe if he rolled it out and declared it a terrible idea he'd get some GOP support.

Obama proposes 15% corporate tax, republicans cry socialism and demand 10%

 

[Suikoguy]

Obama proposes 15% corporate tax, republicans cry socialism and demand 10%

This would seriously happen, haha.

 

[Puddles]

We stop beating around the bush, and put the real tax rate upfront.
There are other side effects, including an increased likelihood of companies bringing money made overseas back into the US.

Edit: It also makes the US more attractive for existing companies, especially new companies. Where as it stands now, you have to either find a way to use a loophole or get yourself a favor put into the tax code, this by far benefits larger corporations.

We also get rid of a talking point.

 

[Oblivion]

We stop beating around the bush, and put the real tax rate upfront.
There are other side effects, including an increased likelihood of companies bringing money made overseas back into the US.

Edit: It also makes the US more attractive for existing companies, especially new companies. Where as it stands now, you have to either find a way to use a loophole or get yourself a favor put into the tax code, this by far benefits larger corporations.

I'm all for doing policies that work, but what proof do we have that this WILL work in attracting those businesses, new and old?

 

[Suikoguy]

I'm all for doing policies that work, but what proof do we have that this WILL work in attracting those businesses, new and old?

I can't see it hurting matters, but I see your point.
The way I see it, people have to live somewhere, and taxing personal income works better than corporate taxes. Especially corporate taxes that, by their design, benefit companies that have the resources to jump through the hoops needed to pay less.

 

[TacticalFox88]

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/AUTO-visual-02.jpg

What an amazing graph. Once again GOP on the wrong side of history. If Michigan is anything but a slaughterhouse, then something is very wrong.

 

[AlteredBeast]

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/AUTO-visual-02.jpg

What an amazing graph. Once again GOP on the wrong side of history. If Michigan is anything but a slaughterhouse, then something is very wrong.

ugghh. I remember when I actually liked infographics and thought they were cute. Now they are just annoying.

The graphic misses the point of Mitt's article. But then there wouldn't be a reason to make the infographic in the first place. It could have been titled, "Private business should save Detroit through normal bankruptcy proceedings." and have entirely the same content as the original article. The article's name wasn't even chosen by Romney, either. Some enterprising NYT editor, it appears.

 

[PhoenixDark]

WASHINGTON - Laying down an election-year marker in the debate over taxes, the Obama administration is proposing to cut the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 28 percent, and to seek an even lower effective rate for manufacturers, a senior administration official says.

In turn, corporations would have to give up dozens of loopholes and subsidies that they now enjoy. Corporations with overseas operations would also face a minimum tax on their foreign earnings.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Wednesday was to detail aspects of President Barack Obama's proposed overhaul of the corporate tax system, a plan Obama broadly outlined in his State of the Union speech last month.

Chances of accomplishing such change in the tax system are slim in a year dominated mostly with presidential and congressional elections. But for Obama, the proposal is part of a larger tax plan that is central to his re-election strategy.

The corporate tax plan dovetails with Obama's call for raising taxes on millionaires and maintaining current rates on individuals making $200,000 or less.

The 35 percent nominal corporate tax rate is the highest in the world after Japan. But deductions, credits and exemptions allow many corporations to pay taxes at a much lower rate.

Under the framework proposed by the administration, the rate cuts, closed loopholes and the minimum tax on overseas earning would result in no increase to the deficit.

That means that many businesses that slip through loopholes or enjoy subsidies and pay an effective tax rate that is substantially less than the 35 percent corporate tax could end up paying more under Obama's plan. Others, however, would pay less while some would simply benefit from a more simplified system.

The official said the Obama plan aims to help U.S. businesses, especially manufacturers who face strong international competition. Obama's plan would lower the effective rate for manufacturers to 25 percent while emphasizing development of clean energy systems. The administration official spoke on condition of anonymity to describe what the administration will do.

The New York Times first reported details of the plan in its online edition early Wednesday.

Many members of both parties have said they favor overhauling the nation's individual and corporate tax systems, which they complain have rates that are too high and are riddled with too many deductions.

The corporate tax debate has made its way into the presidential contest. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has called for a 25 percent rate, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., would cut the corporate tax rate to 12.5 percent, and former Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., would exempt domestic manufacturers from the corporate tax and halve the top rate for other businesses.

While Obama has been promoting various aspects of his economic agenda in personal appearances and speeches, the decision to leave the corporate tax plan to the Treasury Department to unveil signaled its lower priority.

What's more, the administration's framework leaves much for Congress to decide — a deliberate move by the administration to encourage negotiations but which also doesn't subject the plan to detailed scrutiny.

Obama's plan is not as ambitious as a House Republican proposal that would lower the corporate rate to 25 percent.

Still, Obama has said corporate tax rates are too high and has proposed eliminating tax breaks for American companies that move jobs and profits overseas. He also has proposed giving tax breaks to U.S. manufacturers, to firms that return jobs to this country and to companies that relocate to some communities that have lost big employers.

Geithner told a House committee last week that the administration wants to create more incentives for corporations to invest in the United States.

"We want to bring down the rate, and we think we can, to a level that's closer to the average of that of our major competitors," Geithner told the House Ways and Means Committee.

White House economic adviser Gene Sperling has advocated a minimum tax on global profits. Currently many corporations do not invest overseas profits in the United States to avoid the 35 percent tax rate.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57382394/obama-to-propose-corporate-tax-rate-cut/

A sensible compromise position for the most part, which means republicans will surely dismiss it. Prediction: Boehner and the rest of GOP leadership will argue nothing can be done until complete, comprehensive tax reform is addressed.

 

[Clevinger]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57382394/obama-to-propose-corporate-tax-rate-cut/

A sensible compromise position for the most part, which means republicans will surely dismiss it. Prediction: Boehner and the rest of GOP leadership will argue nothing can be done until complete, comprehensive tax reform is addressed.

I'm guessing the compromise of this compromise will be cutting it down to 28 while keeping all the loopholes.

 

[Mortrialus]

Mock if old, but Mississippi lawmakers are making a second attempt at a life begins at conception amendment:

A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 3 OF THE MISSISSIPPI CONSTITUTION OF 1890, BY CREATING A NEW SECTION 32A TO PROVIDE THAT THE RIGHT TO LIFE IS THE PARAMOUNT AND MOST FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT OF A PERSON; TO PROVIDE THAT THE WORD "PERSON" APPLIES TO ALL HUMAN BEINGS FROM CONCEPTION TO NATURAL DEATH, WITH A CERTAIN EXCEPTION; TO SPECIFY CERTAIN ACTIVITIES THAT ARE NOT AFFECTED OR PROHIBITED BY THIS SECTION, INCLUDING CONTRACEPTION OR BIRTH CONTROL NOT KILLING A PERSON, IN VITRO FERTILIZATION OR OTHER METHODS OF REPRODUCTION, MEDICAL TREATMENT INTENDED TO PRESERVE LIFE, OR MISCARRIAGE; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.

http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2012/pdf/history/HC/HC0061.xml#addinfo

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsme...trying_again_for_a_personh.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

 

[Zzoram]

I'm guessing the compromise of this compromise will be cutting it down to 28 while keeping all the loopholes.

Cutting it to 28% and closing the biggest loop hole plus a few minor ones would be good.

 

[Suikoguy]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57382394/obama-to-propose-corporate-tax-rate-cut/

A sensible compromise position for the most part, which means republicans will surely dismiss it. Prediction: Boehner and the rest of GOP leadership will argue nothing can be done until complete, comprehensive tax reform is addressed.

That plan sounds pretty damn awesome.

 

[Mike M]

I'm guessing the compromise of this compromise will be cutting it down to 28 while keeping all the loopholes.

Yeah, I can't see getting any agreement on this. Lowering the statutory rate but eliminating loopholes that allow multimillion dollar companies to pay zero taxes/claim a tax credit = job killing tax hikes!

 

[ToxicAdam]

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/02/surprisingly-stable-cost-presidential-elections

 

[Mike M]

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/02/surprisingly-stable-cost-presidential-elections

Dat stimulus.

 

[Black Republican]

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/02/surprisingly-stable-cost-presidential-elections

i remember reading these boards during the 08 campaign before i joined, good times heh

 

[jamesinclair]

Dat stimulus.

Seriously. The post office, TV networks, radio etc must be orgasmic at the thought of the upcoming stimulus headed their way.


I wonder....

TV Network Mogul donates $10m to SuperPAC.
SuperPAC spends $10m on TV network.
???
Profit!

 

[The Librarian]

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/02/surprisingly-stable-cost-presidential-elections

This chart is confusing. The first bar only counts what Lincoln's campaign spent. What about the rest? Is it adding up the totals of the two campaigns since?

Also:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...gns-too-cheap/2012/02/20/gIQAB1aPPR_blog.html

 

[empty vessel]

Also:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...gns-too-cheap/2012/02/20/gIQAB1aPPR_blog.html

Somebody tell me if I've missed something, but this article seems misguided and, in at least one respect, wrong. The author says that "[o]ne notable point, though, is that the price of presidential campaigns has actually grown more slowly than inflation over the past century." Which is wrong. The chart posted takes inflation into account (by denominating all amounts in 2011 dollars). The author then goes on to talk about how campaign spending as a percent of GDP has not risen, which I think is what he meant when he talked about inflation (but which is not what inflation means). But I don't know why anybody would compare the size of an election campaign to the size of the overall economy as if that provides any useful information. Why would we expect campaign costs to increase just because the overall amount of trade in the economy has increased? It doesn't make sense. It would make more sense (though still not a whole lot) to compare cost per population (since at least conceivably one might spend more on a campaign if one has to reach more people, of course that would have to be "discounted" by technology which allows candidates to reach more people more cheaply).

This just seems like some guy who thinks he is supposed to divide any metric by GDP, even if there is no good reason to do so.

 

[sc0la]

I will preface this by saying I don't subscribe the 11 dimensional chess meme.

But I think the timing of the corporate tax proposal is coincidental with tonight's GOP debate just to see them to run away from what could be publicly popular policy live on TV.

 

[GhaleonEB]

I will preface this by saying I don't subscribe the 11 dimensional chess meme.

But I think the timing of the corporate tax proposal is coincidental with tonight's GOP debate just to see them to run away from what could be publicly popular policy live on TV.

And apparently, Romney is rolling out his new tax plan today, which is aimed at GOP primary voters. So we might have quite the contrast on display.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Kind of surprising they (Romney) are moving up the announcement to today. People thought he was going to release it on Friday at his big speech at Ford Field.

 

[markatisu]

ugghh. I remember when I actually liked infographics and thought they were cute. Now they are just annoying.

The graphic misses the point of Mitt's article. But then there wouldn't be a reason to make the infographic in the first place. It could have been titled, "Private business should save Detroit through normal bankruptcy proceedings." and have entirely the same content as the original article. The article's name wasn't even chosen by Romney, either. Some enterprising NYT editor, it appears.

What, you mean people should READ articles and not just assume things....what kind of witchcraft is this lol

Romney can spin it however he wants but he is not going to own this message, and who knows given enough chance to rebut it or talk it about he might say something even worse then that headline at this point.

 

[speculawyer]

Mock if old, but Mississippi lawmakers are making a second attempt at a life begins at conception amendment:



http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2012/pdf/history/HC/HC0061.xml#addinfo

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsme...trying_again_for_a_personh.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

The law contradicts itself. If you are a 'person' after conception and the pill flushes out a fertiilzed egg, that is 'killing a person'.

TO PROVIDE THAT THE WORD "PERSON" APPLIES TO ALL HUMAN BEINGS FROM CONCEPTION TO NATURAL DEATH, WITH A CERTAIN EXCEPTION; TO SPECIFY CERTAIN ACTIVITIES THAT ARE NOT AFFECTED OR PROHIBITED BY THIS SECTION, INCLUDING CONTRACEPTION OR BIRTH CONTROL NOT KILLING A PERSON


BTW, Ron Paul came out approving of such 'killing a person', at least in cases of "honest rape".

 

[RustyNails]

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/02/surprisingly-stable-cost-presidential-elections

Man, what the hell happened in 1968.

 

[DasRaven]

Man, what the hell happened in 1968.

George Wallace, a real 3rd party candidate.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Debate thread for tonight.

 

[Marvie_3]

Man, what the hell happened in 1968.

Hawaii Five-O premiered and ad time was expensive as hell during it.

 

[ToxicAdam]

George Wallace, a real 3rd party candidate.

Not only that, but one of the most politically tulmultuous years in American History.

 

[Jackson50]

Does he have handlers? By all accounts he's running a pretty low-budget campaign, with few campaign professionals to speak of.

Right. Moreover, the few professionals he employs probably share his jaundiced, reactionary worldview. They genuinely believe his ideals are propelling his candidacy.

Manufacturing is certainly important to Michigan republicans. I think it's pretty clear Santorum has nothing to prove on social values, he's got that base shored up. So why is he continuing to talk to them instead of focusing on manufacturing in Michigan of all places?

It makes sense that he would be surrounded by incompetent handlers, but it's hard to believe anyone can be incompetent enough to focus entirely on social issues in the most important state (thus far) of the primary, where the economy sucks and a manufacturing platform would appeal to voters. Romney is rolling out a new tax plan sometime today for instance. Why hasn't Santorum rolled out more specifics on his manufacturing plan, or given it some catchy talking point name, etc

Even if manufacturing were important, I fail to see how Santorum can capitalize. He's not a populist. No corporate taxes on manufacturers? That's nearly as risible as Can's nine-nine-nine plan.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

Hmm, Santorum is on his way down IMO. The pundits are going after him HARD on his religious extremism. Once the conservative talking heads start going after you, it's probably all she wrote. Though, I suppose this instance may be different since the other choices they have are Romney, Newt, and Paul.

 

[GhaleonEB]

So glad to see how fast the CFPB is getting up and running.

Consumer watchdog launches overdraft inquiry

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is expected to launch an inquiry Wednesday into banks’ overdraft practices, which have been in regulatory crosshairs in recent years.

The bureau said it will look into whether banks are reordering customers’ debit-card charges to maximize overdraft fees. Reordering transactions can double or triple penalties, and the practice has been the target of several class-action lawsuits against the nation’s biggest banks.

“Overdraft practices have the capacity to inflict serious economic harm on the people who can least afford it,” CFPB Director Richard Cordray said in a statement. “We want to learn how consumers are affected, and how well they are able to anticipate and avoid paying penalty fees.”

....

One thing regulators left unaddressed, however, was the order that banks processed charges. That issue has been winding its way through the nation’s court system instead. In 2010, a California judge ordered Wells Fargo to return $203 million in overdraft fees to customers whose transactions were reordered. Chase, Bank of America and several other banks have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to settle a separate class-action lawsuit over the practice.

The CFPB said it is seeking information on how prevalent the practice remains and how it affects consumers. It is also concerned about a 2008 FDIC report that found that 9 percent of checking account customers made up about 84 percent of overdraft charges, suggesting that the fees were concentrated among low-income customers.​