JOE the PLUMBER

Joe the Plumber

Great move for McCain.	13.8%	[ 22 ]
Desperate move for McCain.	86.2%	[ 137 ]
Total Votes:			[ 159 ]

[Nillia]

What do you think of 'Joe the Plumber's' frequent mention in the debate last night? Please keep discussion civil.



I thought it was lulzy and desperate. McCain kept trying to use this guy to bolster himself, without acknowledging the fact that Joe would only be taxed by Obami if he's making over $250,000.

So lulzy, that I had to draw this. Click on it to be taken to a larger version. Also, below you can get the code for putting this in your signature. Either keep the link or give another form of credit. Thanks!

[url=http://www.gaiaonline.com/forum/extended-discussion/joe-the-plumber/t.44292525/][IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v149/Nillia/Moderndebatetacticssig.jpg[/IMG][/url]

[Sunegami]

I didn't get to watch the debate, as I was in class, but my boyfriend told me about it.

I thought it was hilarious. Plumbers make a lot of money! I did a little research, and plumbers make between $35k and $54k annually (various sources said different things, so I'm not 100% sure about the figures). Not enough to fall under Obama's taxation limit, but still more than "Joe Six-Pack" (whoever that is). Trying to compare them was seriously a stupid move.

[theRAINDROPS]

I think McCain's an idiot and if your country (assuming you live in the US) makes him president, it will just keep spiralling downhill.


Not saying we're doing any better...god damn Stephen Harper.

[Veggie Sushi]

Meet Joe the Plumber

Yeah, it got a little old, but it's true. Pulmbers make a lot of money, and he's planning on buying his buisness.

Here's the exchange that started all the fuss

[Einstein Speed]

Sunegami

I didn't get to watch the debate, as I was in class, but my boyfriend told me about it.

I thought it was hilarious. Plumbers make a lot of money! I did a little research, and plumbers make between $35k and $54k annually (various sources said different things, so I'm not 100% sure about the figures). Not enough to fall under Obama's taxation limit, but still more than "Joe Six-Pack" (whoever that is). Trying to compare them was seriously a stupid move.

Last I checked, my dad wasn't exactly rolling in the benjamins.

[Nonesuch Solo]

OT: Obami sounds like a cutesy name for him. Then my mind wandered from his wife calling him that to my list of "names I wouldn't want to call out during sex." Of course, I don't call out any names during sex, but there are some that are completely lulzworthy.

So I didn't have a chance to watch the debate since I was traveling (though my fiance may have got it on DVR), but I did go look up "Joe the Plumber" and Obama still sounds like a socialist. Obviously, he can't promise everybody more money, because no matter what, somebody somewhere on the ladder is going to have to LOSE money if he's promising financial gains or lower taxes for others. So his plan is to lower taxes for individuals and businesses with lower net worth and raise taxes for those who may have worked real hard to get higher profits? America has for a long time been a capitalistic society. This would be an interesting change.

The one thing I really disagree with in the interview I saw with "Joe" is that Obama thinks if you have lower taxes you're going to get to the $250k bracket quicker. That's assuming that people will spend the same amount of money even if they have more income. Bull honkey. People live within their means, very few people will take a tax break and say "Yay more money to save for the future" but rather "Yay now I might be able to afford something I've been putting off." If you've been "in need" of a tax cut, you've likely had a lower standard of living than you want. When people start making more money (or retaining more of their taxes) that means, y'know, "I could start eating more organic vegetables" or something.

It might boost the economy, but it's not gonna make the $250k bracket any closer to "that waitress over there who can barely make rent." His point that really does support his plan? More people will be able to hire Joe the Plumber. Or more people will eat out and leave tips for the waitress. xD

When the fiance gets done with work maybe we'll watch the debate.

[pixelcaster]

Veggie Sushi

Meet Joe the Plumber

Yeah, it got a little old, but it's true. Pulmbers make a lot of money, and he's planning on buying his buisness.

Here's the exchange that started all the fuss

That guy has a very valid point. It is pretty uncalled for that some suit in Washington wants to decide for you that you make too much money and should be penalized for it, when every one else that's "poorer" than you gets off scott free.

[Tactical Leg Sweep]

kitteacakes

Veggie Sushi

Meet Joe the Plumber

Yeah, it got a little old, but it's true. Pulmbers make a lot of money, and he's planning on buying his buisness.

Here's the exchange that started all the fuss

That guy has a very valid point. It is pretty uncalled for that some suit in Washington wants to decide for you that you make too much money and should be penalized for it, when every one else that's "poorer" than you gets off scott free.

So it's better that the RICHEST part of the country pays almost nothing so they keep getting richer while the burden falls on the shoulders of the middle class? ******** that. The upper class can start putting in their fair share. They ARE RICHER so therefore THEY SHOULD BE TAXED more as it is relative to their wealth. And who the ******** says the lower classes are getting "scott free"? When did anyone say we would stop being taxed? Our taxes wouldn't go up, which jesus, the middle class pays too much as it is. They SHOULDN'T go up. They should go up for the upper class which has been getting tax breaks for years.

[Nonesuch Solo]

kitteacakes

Veggie Sushi

Meet Joe the Plumber

Yeah, it got a little old, but it's true. Pulmbers make a lot of money, and he's planning on buying his buisness.

Here's the exchange that started all the fuss

That guy has a very valid point. It is pretty uncalled for that some suit in Washington wants to decide for you that you make too much money and should be penalized for it, when every one else that's "poorer" than you gets off scott free.

It's very robin hood.

If you are high enough above the poverty line, you are some how obligated to give away a larger part of your income? Honestly, it doesn't affect me right now, I'm pretty much below the poverty line for at least five, maybe ten more years, but what sort of difference would it make for someone going from say $245k to $255k? I haven't seen the math, but is it possible that would actually mean a lower net income? Is this plan something that would only make breaking the $250k barrier would only be really worth it if you got up to say $275k?

I really need to find a better source on Obama's tax plan than Google.

[Nonesuch Solo]

I kill giants

kitteacakes

Veggie Sushi

Meet Joe the Plumber

Yeah, it got a little old, but it's true. Pulmbers make a lot of money, and he's planning on buying his buisness.

Here's the exchange that started all the fuss

That guy has a very valid point. It is pretty uncalled for that some suit in Washington wants to decide for you that you make too much money and should be penalized for it, when every one else that's "poorer" than you gets off scott free.

So it's better that the RICHEST part of the country pays almost nothing so they keep getting richer while the burden falls on the shoulders of the middle class? ******** that. The upper class can start putting in their fair share. They ARE RICHER so therefore THEY SHOULD BE TAXED more as it is relative to their wealth.

THEY earned the money. Why should they be forced to spend it on people who don't work as hard? That's the thought of capitalism. Even low-income people grumble about being taxed to help support someone living off welfare, or government disability checks. My future sister-in-law gets free money every month, all she has to do is occasionally try to kill herself because her family doesn't give her any additional free money and it'll be obvious she's still mentally ill and needs free government money! Sometimes, you pay money to support folks who give absolutely nothing back to society.

[Veggie Sushi]

I kill giants

kitteacakes

Veggie Sushi

Meet Joe the Plumber

Yeah, it got a little old, but it's true. Pulmbers make a lot of money, and he's planning on buying his buisness.

Here's the exchange that started all the fuss

That guy has a very valid point. It is pretty uncalled for that some suit in Washington wants to decide for you that you make too much money and should be penalized for it, when every one else that's "poorer" than you gets off scott free.

So it's better that the RICHEST part of the country pays almost nothing so they keep getting richer while the burden falls on the shoulders of the middle class? f**k that. The upper class can start putting in their fair share. They ARE RICHER so therefore THEY SHOULD BE TAXED more as it is relative to their wealth.

you know, other than the fact that the rich employ the rest of us so his tax plan would mean cutting jobs.

tax cuts for wealthy - more jobs created
tax hikes for wealthy - jobs lost

it's basic. (i know, not every wealthy person employs, and not every wealthy person who did get a cut would employ more people, but in a controlled environment, thats how it would look like)

But don't worry about that, because in Obama's plan, the government pays for everything *coughsocialismcough*

[pixelcaster]

Nonesuch Solo

kitteacakes

Veggie Sushi

Meet Joe the Plumber

Yeah, it got a little old, but it's true. Pulmbers make a lot of money, and he's planning on buying his buisness.

Here's the exchange that started all the fuss

That guy has a very valid point. It is pretty uncalled for that some suit in Washington wants to decide for you that you make too much money and should be penalized for it, when every one else that's "poorer" than you gets off scott free.

It's very robin hood.

If you are high enough above the poverty line, you are some how obligated to give away a larger part of your income? Honestly, it doesn't affect me right now, I'm pretty much below the poverty line for at least five, maybe ten more years, but what sort of difference would it make for someone going from say $245k to $255k? I haven't seen the math, but is it possible that would actually mean a lower net income? Is this plan something that would only make breaking the $250k barrier would only be really worth it if you got up to say $275k?

I really need to find a better source on Obama's tax plan than Google.

No, I agree that it makes sense that people who have a higher income should have higher tax rates. But I also agreed with "Joe Plumber" on the fact that he's sore about someone deciding how rich or how poor he should be considered for tax purposes. I'd be pissed too. Hell I was pissed when I wasn't eligible for FAFSA because my parents "made too much money".

Think of it this way - if you were rich, and you were getting taxed when no one else was, would that make you mad/bitter/upset?

If the richies are taxed, they're losing money - money that they would be spending at Saks Fifth Avenue if they had it. Money that they'd be spending that would stimulate the economy. Obama's tax plan just doesn't seem like it'd work to me. It may look good on paper, but so did Communism, and we know that doesn't work for everyone.

[Tactical Leg Sweep]

Nonesuch Solo

I kill giants

kitteacakes

Veggie Sushi

Meet Joe the Plumber

Yeah, it got a little old, but it's true. Pulmbers make a lot of money, and he's planning on buying his buisness.

Here's the exchange that started all the fuss

That guy has a very valid point. It is pretty uncalled for that some suit in Washington wants to decide for you that you make too much money and should be penalized for it, when every one else that's "poorer" than you gets off scott free.

So it's better that the RICHEST part of the country pays almost nothing so they keep getting richer while the burden falls on the shoulders of the middle class? ******** that. The upper class can start putting in their fair share. They ARE RICHER so therefore THEY SHOULD BE TAXED more as it is relative to their wealth.

THEY earned the money. Why should they be forced to spend it on people who don't work as hard? That's the thought of capitalism. Even low-income people grumble about being taxed to help support someone living off welfare, or government disability checks. My future sister-in-law gets free money every month, all she has to do is occasionally try to kill herself because her family doesn't give her any additional free money and it'll be obvious she's still mentally ill and needs free government money! Sometimes, you pay money to support folks who give absolutely nothing back to society.

What a ******** mentality. "People who don't work as hard". Yeah, all those firefighters and police officers and paramedics and teachers and construction workers and nurses. They clearly don't work hard.

And I EARNED my money too. And I probably ******** worked harder for it than some CEO sitting on his a** in an office. So WHY SHOULD I have to bare the burden of the country's taxes? So that same assholes can keep getting richer? I'm paying for their mistresses and 8 balls and Cadillac because THEY'RE getting tax breaks and I'm picking up the ******** slack.

The upper class should pay more because it is relative to their wealth. That is basic math. ******** trickle down bullshit.

[pixelcaster]

I kill giants

Nonesuch Solo

I kill giants

kitteacakes

Veggie Sushi

Meet Joe the Plumber

Yeah, it got a little old, but it's true. Pulmbers make a lot of money, and he's planning on buying his buisness.

Here's the exchange that started all the fuss

That guy has a very valid point. It is pretty uncalled for that some suit in Washington wants to decide for you that you make too much money and should be penalized for it, when every one else that's "poorer" than you gets off scott free.

So it's better that the RICHEST part of the country pays almost nothing so they keep getting richer while the burden falls on the shoulders of the middle class? f**k that. The upper class can start putting in their fair share. They ARE RICHER so therefore THEY SHOULD BE TAXED more as it is relative to their wealth.

THEY earned the money. Why should they be forced to spend it on people who don't work as hard? That's the thought of capitalism. Even low-income people grumble about being taxed to help support someone living off welfare, or government disability checks. My future sister-in-law gets free money every month, all she has to do is occasionally try to kill herself because her family doesn't give her any additional free money and it'll be obvious she's still mentally ill and needs free government money! Sometimes, you pay money to support folks who give absolutely nothing back to society.

What a ******** mentality. "People who don't work as hard". Yeah, all those firefighters and police officers and paramedics and teachers and construction workers and nurses. They clearly don't work hard.

And I EARNED my money too. And I probably ******** worked harder for it than some CEO sitting on his a** in an office. So WHY SHOULD I have to bare the burden of the country's taxes? So that same assholes can keep getting richer? I'm paying for their mistresses and 8 balls and Cadillac because THEY'RE getting tax breaks and I'm picking up the ******** slack.

The upper class should pay more because it is relative to their wealth. That is basic math. f**k trickle down bullshit.

The many corporate scandals are proof enough that CEOs don't work hard...

[Tactical Leg Sweep]

Veggie Sushi

I kill giants

kitteacakes

Veggie Sushi

Meet Joe the Plumber

Yeah, it got a little old, but it's true. Pulmbers make a lot of money, and he's planning on buying his buisness.

Here's the exchange that started all the fuss

That guy has a very valid point. It is pretty uncalled for that some suit in Washington wants to decide for you that you make too much money and should be penalized for it, when every one else that's "poorer" than you gets off scott free.

So it's better that the RICHEST part of the country pays almost nothing so they keep getting richer while the burden falls on the shoulders of the middle class? f**k that. The upper class can start putting in their fair share. They ARE RICHER so therefore THEY SHOULD BE TAXED more as it is relative to their wealth.

you know, other than the fact that the rich employ the rest of us so his tax plan would mean cutting jobs.

tax cuts for wealthy - more jobs created
tax hikes for wealthy - jobs lost

it's basic. (i know, not every wealthy person employs, and not every wealthy person who did get a cut would employ more people, but in a controlled environment, thats how it would look like)

But don't worry about that, because in Obama's plan, the government pays for everything *coughsocialismcough*

Yeah, that makes sense. Yep. Worked in the 80's, Yay reaganomics. Oh wait.

******** your trickle down bullshit. Sure has WORKED GREAT FOR US the last eight years too! Oh wait, unemployment has been crazy. See, trickle down is bullshit because the wealthy do what with their money? They ******** hoarde it. They're frugal. They CUT jobs to watch their paychecks get fatter.

But don't worry. Under McCain will take care of all the little guys. Yeah, he understands me and the poorer classes. Totally. With his fifteen ******** houses. Yeah he totally understands what it's like to not be able to put gas in my tank. He understand what it's like for me as a future firefighter to be making 60k a year while he sucks off his rich buddies and gets richer.