PDA

View Full Version : Did you agree with Romney's 47% remark?



FormerDemocrat
11-18-2012, 04:25 PM
For me I'm 19 I love politics and have a true passion for history I'm conservative.

But I would say yes and No

I would say yes when they are to lazy or don't care to get off there ass and go find work of any kind and feel like the government can take of them all there life.

And No becaause-> My Family is the 47% meaning there Middle Class they are not lazy my Dad works at home for guess who it a company Romney took a chance when others wouldn't Staples he makes 90,000 dollars every year and works hard.

My mom just went back to work after a year long battle with breast cancer.

And No because I'm disabled I'm on SS I would love to have a Job and be off of it I'm volunteering right now and hope to get a Job soon.

Also my Grandpa worked for GM all his career and saved enough to retire with very good savings in his bank and very carefull about his money.



So I have mixed views do you agree with him on it Yes or No and Why?

And excuse my spelling I was in special education my whole life and have a long struggle with it.

And sorry wasn't trying to tell you my life story lol.

Rockntractor
11-18-2012, 04:42 PM
Had it been meant for public consumption it would have been explained in better detail. as it was it was a stolen comment used out of context and was never worded for the public as it was stated.

m00
11-18-2012, 06:19 PM
Yes in spirit, no in actuality. It's true there are people for whom a message of self-reliance isn't appealing. But the 47% number was misused... as I understand it, the 47% number is simply people who don't pay income tax. Half of those are seniors, and it's not fair to paint them as moochers when they've worked their whole lives and paid into social security. According to Forbes...


In 2009, according to Internal Revenue Service studies, six of the 400 U.S. tax filers with the highest adjusted gross income (meaning AGI of at least $77 million) paid no U.S. income tax, while 19,551 U.S. households with income above $200,000 owed no U.S. or foreign income tax.

So yeah, at least some of those 47% are Republicans in high income brackets.

patriot45
11-18-2012, 06:57 PM
Dude, you are not in the 47% if dad makes 7,000.00 bucks a month working at home!!!

Starbuck
11-18-2012, 07:22 PM
The 47% was referring to an attitude, not a circumstance. My wife and I both draw Social Security. Anyone who calls us part of the 47% is going to have a serious fight on his hands.

Turns out Romney was wrong. The actual amount is proven to be 50.3%.

Retread
11-18-2012, 10:41 PM
Dude, you are not in the 47% if dad makes 7,000.00 bucks a month working at home!!!

You're assuming it's all legal and reported.

Starbuck
11-18-2012, 11:26 PM
...............And No because I'm disabled I'm on SS I would love to have a Job and be off of it I'm volunteering right now and hope to get a Job soon..............

Hold up now! Go slow. If you are permanently disabled, wouldn't you mess up your Social Security by getting a job? And once the system dumps you wouldn't it be tough to get back on if your job ends?

I've know people who simply cannot work; they are disabled through circumstances that have absolutely nothing to do with them, personally. Most people who cannot work wish they could. The 47% we are discussing either work and do not want to; or do not work and are not planning to work if they can get out of it.

SaintLouieWoman
11-19-2012, 12:37 AM
Hold up now! Go slow. If you are permanently disabled, wouldn't you tup your Social Security by getting a job? And once the system dumps you wouldn't it be tough to get back on if your job ends?

I've know people who simply cannot work; they are disabled through circumstances that have absolutely nothing to do with them, personally. Most people who cannot work wish they could. The 47% we are discussing either work and do not want to; or do not work and are not planning to work if they can get out of it.

The big problem with the system is the penalty if someone on SS disability tries to gradually get back into the job market. You have it exactly right. If they try to do a job and it proves to be impossible, they're then left with nothing. If anyone knows to the contrary, please reply. It's that old caught between a rock and a hard place.

A Former Democrat, be careful and try the volunteering and see how you do. If you were in special ed for years, is there a way to get additional help? I know there's that cliff after the age of 18 where you're sort of cut loose. In my opinion it would be best to have continuing educational help. That's a much better use of resources than providing all the lifelong support for people who don't have any intention of ever providing for themselves and have multi-generational dependencies on the government.

Help should be there for people who truly need it.

NJCardFan
11-19-2012, 01:50 AM
OK, this person is beginning to sound familiar. They call them-self "FormerDemocrat" and since they came here all they've done is start threads asking silly questions then abandoning the thread, not asking any follow up questions. Sort of CITM-esque who was the worst swoop-and-pooper here.

Rockntractor
11-19-2012, 02:24 AM
OK, this person is beginning to sound familiar. They call them-self "FormerDemocrat" and since they came here all they've done is start threads asking silly questions then abandoning the thread, not asking any follow up questions. Sort of CITM-esque who was the worst swoop-and-pooper here.

It isn't CITM, CITM posts now as ASquareDealer. Former has his own IP and I guess being 19 years old he just has a lot of questions. I'll take him at face value as to who he says he is unless he proves himself to be something else.

southernlady
11-19-2012, 11:11 AM
Hold up now! Go slow. If you are permanently disabled, wouldn't you mess up your Social Security by getting a job?

Yes, and no...

First, let me explain that my husband and I both fall in that 47% as quoted (NOT as meant). I have been on SSDI for almost 12 years. My husband was medically retired and put on a mix of SSDI & LTD. Since his LTD is non-taxable by the state and the federal government, what we make with JUST SSDI falls below the cutoff to pay at all.

We would prefer to work but life didn't deal us that hand...we got this hand instead.

We recently worked early election here in TN. We actually made a goodly sum so we made a trip to the social security office and asked about the effect that income would have.

How it breaks down is MOST (NOT ALL as it depends on the type of disability you have/receive) people getting SS can work up to $1010 without it being considered Substantial Gainful Activity. SS publication is here (http://www.ssa.gov/pubs/10029.html#a0=10).

IF you break thru that, they look at the number of months involved. Can not do 9 months in a row and still get SSDI, but one month won't affect your benefits.

So while we did make more than the limit for one month, it was a very short time/part time job.

Liz

noonwitch
11-19-2012, 12:57 PM
I've spent my entire adult life working for the state government, which means I'm probably part of Romney's 47%.

If being an active employee makes that not the case, I will be part of the 47% in 6 years, 11 months, if I retire and start collecting my government pension at that point.

Molon Labe
11-19-2012, 01:18 PM
The government makes it very difficult for people to get aid and still be productive citizens. It's almost like it's an either/or. I know plenty of people who would like to do something, but would completely lose their welfare. I remember when I was struggling and first married, I applied for food stamps for a transitional period to help my family while my wife and I were in college and working and raising a family at the same time. I made too much money.

Permanently disabled shouldn't mean people can't do certain work like answering phones and other jobs.

Still, I believe that there are far too many who suck off the system. I believe the reason so many can do so is directly related to my first statement.

NJCardFan
11-20-2012, 01:34 AM
It isn't CITM, CITM posts now as ASquareDealer. Former has his own IP and I guess being 19 years old he just has a lot of questions. I'll take him at face value as to who he says he is unless he proves himself to be something else.

You know me, Rock. I can spot a poser a mile away and the sock puppet smell in this one is pretty strong.

Rockntractor
11-20-2012, 02:18 AM
You know me, Rock. I can spot a poser a mile away and the sock puppet smell in this one is pretty strong.

I thought the same and checked out IP's immediately, it wouldn't surprise me if he was a former member but I don't know which one. This makes things more interesting.:smile-new:

FlaGator
11-20-2012, 08:58 AM
You know me, Rock. I can spot a poser a mile away and the sock puppet smell in this one is pretty strong.

I agree, something is not quite right here and the questions being asked seem like set ups looking for answers to confirm certain liberal stereotypes of conservatives.

Lager
11-20-2012, 11:44 AM
The 47% percent remark is vague. It has some elements of truth to it; most people who pay little taxes already aren't going to get excited by tax cuts, but it doesn't get to the reality of why more people vote for liberal policies.
Many people are raised in traditional democratic families and vote the way their parents did. Many union members who receive no government benefits still believe democrats stand for their rights more so than republicans.

Liberals spent much time and effort demonizing big business and the private sector. Obama had plenty of time and money to define the republican party before they even decided on a candidate. When the party nominated a candidate with a background such as Romney's, most of the dem's work was done for them. All those efforts spent informing undecided Americans that republicans only care about the rich began to bear fruit, especially because republicans never effectively countered that argument!

Once you negatively attack business and the private sector, the next step is to convince voters that government is the only entity that cares about, or can do anything about their welfare. If you actually get people to believe that the private sector is only concerned with profits and money and that the government is "charitable", many people who have some wealth and don't need government hand outs will still support big government policies because they want to be seen as caring about the less fortunate. Unfortunately many never look deeply enough into the issue to see the contradictions.

Rockntractor
11-20-2012, 11:52 AM
He has a question in the form of a thread that establishes our age (Kennedy question), one that sums up posters attitudes toward welfare, one that gives attitude toward illegal immigration, one for presidential voting record.

I have a feeling we just completed a government survey.