Why I am Upset that Obama Won (Please be logical)

[President Von Schweetz]

Stubb0rn

I'm sorry about your family and all the trials you've faced. I'm sure there are many other families like you. But, I feel Obamacare is not a good idea for America. More people would rather take from other families then give, and that isn't right. I feel like a lot of people are going to take advantage of this plan and use it for personal gain. So they don't have to work. I think that's completely wrong.

Romney was going to create more jobs and so those people would get jobs. He was allow going to keep taxes the same for your small businesses. Remember, America thrives on small businesses. Obama is going to tax them out of their businesses to the point where they have nothing to give to their workers, causing all those people to lose a job.

I do understand that a lot of people do need this for health related issues and stuff, but I think for the main part its going to be taken advantage of. I just don't think Obama has enough of a business background to help get my country through this economic crisis.

Obamacare is purely for health insurance; it isn't welfare, it is only for healthcare-related issues. And Obama has lowered taxes on small businesses and on middle-class families numerous times, allowing them more spending money... o.o;

[Sen Natsu]

logan the god of candy

Steam Punk Adept

Synoxide

I bet none of you assholes on here own your own business and never have (or will at this point).
Well I do, and I understand his family's concerns and fears completely.
Bottom line: goodbye capitalism, hello socialism.

Because, you know, a Democrat HAS to be socialist..... We've already had 4 years without socialism taking over, we'll have 4 more years. Your sensationalism astounds me.

obama is a liberal democrat. liberalism these days refers to social liberalism which is socialist and liberal. obama is a socialist liberal democrat. we have had 4 years of a president trying to pass socialist laws.protip: americas's left is.the.world's right.

[Mitsuki Horenake]

Well, there are always both sides of the argument. You got yours: the one where business owners are forced to pay for the average person who's too lazy to work. Then you got the fact that most business owners are paying less in taxes than the average person (in order to build up said business, mind you) and most people aren't making businesses. It's the whole 15% < 35% debacle thing that's going on. The 99%. Half of them [maybe even more than that] are lazy bums that want to get paid for doing nothing, but let's not assume that all of them are, and some people are genuinely trying to find work but can't because of our screwed up economy because of all the guys who became so successful that now they basically run the world.

You know, stuff like that.

[Kiumaru]

logan the god of candy

obama is a liberal democrat. liberalism these days refers to social liberalism which is socialist and liberal. obama is a socialist liberal democrat. we have had 4 years of a president trying to pass socialist laws.

He's actually pretty center-left in terms of his views and is not really much of a socialist.

[TaIented]

Nomad Realta

That's the big problem I have with "Tax the rich." Somehow, small businesses started counting as "rich" and are ALSO getting taxed more. Obama denies this, but that doesn't mean it isn't true.

If it JUST taxed people who made nearly seven figures a year, I wouldn't mind. But small businesses ARE getting taxed more, and that's not good. The economy is run by the private sector, and bleeding an important part of that dry isn't going to help it.

we need more people who understand how small businesses work. Finally some decent people in the thread

[TaIented]

Kiumaru

logan the god of candy

obama is a liberal democrat. liberalism these days refers to social liberalism which is socialist and liberal. obama is a socialist liberal democrat. we have had 4 years of a president trying to pass socialist laws.

He's actually pretty center-left in terms of his views and is not really much of a socialist.

bull.

[Rosine Denaja]

Za The SITUASIAN

Rosine Denaja

Za The SITUASIAN

Clarion Raze

Za The SITUASIAN

Why is the government punishing those who work hard for their money and giving it to the poor who is too lazy to do absolutely anything and reap the benefits of the system simply because they do not want to work. Now that Obama is re-elected, me and my families way of life is threatened so moving to New Zealand will be much better for us. Sure it's going to cost money, but if we stay in America any longer we'll lose ALL of our money and be homeless. Our best option is to move out of the USA and live a better life there.

I heard this argument and thought it was pretty fair..What do you guys think..?

It sounds like a contradiction, to me. They are upset that their parents may lose their jobs, but at the same time hating on people who lost their jobs, and stating that those people just don't want to work. If their parents lost their jobs, would they be lumped into that category, too? If so, then the argument is valid. If not, it is just childish.

Also, I would have to know the exact financial situation to understand how valid their argument is.

If they were working hard enough, they wouldn't have gotten laid off. Simple as that.

Hmm, no it really isn't. It's cute that you haven't been in the work force yet and are calling actual workers who have suffered misfortune lazy.

You see. That is the difference between what you think and what you actually know. I've been around my mom and dad's business ever since I was a child; learning the ropes and the business decisions that must be made AND I am actually taking the steps needed to take over their business once both of my parents retire. What was it about me not knowing anything about the work force again? Right.

The vigorous bastion of family owned business that you intend to inherit and have the guiding hand of your own damn parents through lol. You don't know s**t about the work force.

[Bokee Gngr]

Za The SITUASIAN

Clarion Raze

Za The SITUASIAN

Why is the government punishing those who work hard for their money and giving it to the poor who is too lazy to do absolutely anything and reap the benefits of the system simply because they do not want to work. Now that Obama is re-elected, me and my families way of life is threatened so moving to New Zealand will be much better for us. Sure it's going to cost money, but if we stay in America any longer we'll lose ALL of our money and be homeless. Our best option is to move out of the USA and live a better life there.

I heard this argument and thought it was pretty fair..What do you guys think..?

It sounds like a contradiction, to me. They are upset that their parents may lose their jobs, but at the same time hating on people who lost their jobs, and stating that those people just don't want to work. If their parents lost their jobs, would they be lumped into that category, too? If so, then the argument is valid. If not, it is just childish.

Also, I would have to know the exact financial situation to understand how valid their argument is.

If they were working hard enough, they wouldn't have gotten laid off. Simple as that.

What I agree that there are A LOT of people who CAN work drawing a check because they choose not to work I don't think it is fair to lump everyone into that category. People can work their rears off and still get laid off.

[Kiumaru]

Stubb0rn

Kiumaru

logan the god of candy

obama is a liberal democrat. liberalism these days refers to social liberalism which is socialist and liberal. obama is a socialist liberal democrat. we have had 4 years of a president trying to pass socialist laws.

He's actually pretty center-left in terms of his views and is not really much of a socialist.

bull.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2012

[Rosine Denaja]

Stubb0rn

Kiumaru

logan the god of candy

obama is a liberal democrat. liberalism these days refers to social liberalism which is socialist and liberal. obama is a socialist liberal democrat. we have had 4 years of a president trying to pass socialist laws.

He's actually pretty center-left in terms of his views and is not really much of a socialist.

bull.

It's completely true. This is another reason you guys are losing btw.

[S.Lyger]

[Synoxide]

Kiumaru

Synoxide

You don't have to be a socialist to promote socialism. But I digress.
So you're saying that in your own sensationalistic views, Obamacare is NOT a socialistic program, for one fine example?

The Affordable Care Act isn't really socialist. It would be socialist had, for instance, he made the system single payer rather than have us buy insurance from insurance companies in the "free market".

You not thinking Obamacare is socialistic in the least says everything to me. Hell, people who actually support Obamacare are now even admitting it's a socialistic program. He made the system single payer? Oh god.

But staying on the business subject, what part of 'sealing from the rich and giving to the poor' isn't socialist? Place a special tax on the richest part of our country to bring up the poor? Is that not punishing success? I mean, capitalism is a founding root of our society. Not only that, but taxpayers paying for welfare AFTER Obama so gallantly destroyed Clinton's Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act? Jeez. All welfare does is keep the poor in a restricting hold; socialism.

[TaIented]

Kiumaru

Stubb0rn

Kiumaru

logan the god of candy

obama is a liberal democrat. liberalism these days refers to social liberalism which is socialist and liberal. obama is a socialist liberal democrat. we have had 4 years of a president trying to pass socialist laws.

He's actually pretty center-left in terms of his views and is not really much of a socialist.

bull.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2012

because you're going to believe everything on the internet. Plus, a lot has change since the beginning of september

[Synoxide]

S.Lyger