- Joined
- Mar 21, 2005
- Messages
- 25,893
- Reaction score
- 12,484
- Location
- New York, NY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
We should be paying 70%.
And I think most would disagree.
We should be paying 70%.
And I think most would disagree.
Can you point out where I mentioned "fairness"? My post was strictly limited to pointing out the flaws in yours and offering more useful data.
How does one become a Cajun?
You're a Mod ffs, stop feeding the troll.
I was refering to the "fair" I read throughout the string.
and YOU DID imply it was Unfair by using the old Mantra "the Richest 1%..... etc etc"
You are welcome however (in fact still need) to respond to this conondrum of WHO IS going to pay/pay more (pay at all even without Obamacare) since you are against these higher rates for the rich.
Again.. there is only ONE answer.. you conveniently wanted No part of.
-
Not in your defense you DID imply++ it was unfair/Gave (the old 1% pay..") routine.I don't think it's about fairness so much as it is about good policy.
Afraid NOT, entitlements, Debt service, (The Great Majority of the budget is NON-discretionary) and with even a meager national defense, that won't do it.Substantial budget cuts almost across the board and a simpler and more stratified tax system should do it.
I asked twice.All you had to do was ask.
Not in your defense you DID imply++ it was unfair/Gave (the old 1% pay..") routine.
Afarid NOT, entitlements, Debt service, (The Great Majority of the budget is NON-discretionary) and with even a meager national defense, that won't do it.
I asked twice.
You still can't say it.. "The rich DO have to pay more"
I know, hoss. It's up to the political process to determine if our money can be stolen and used to advance the general welfare.
They don't have a tyrannical grip on me.We know, hoss. That's how the health insurance cartel gained its tyrannical grip on us.
We should be paying 70%.
Not if it would undermine our form of government.
How do great concentrations of wealth make our form of government stronger?How the hell does it undermine our form of government?
How do great concentrations of wealth make our form of government stronger?
You made the argument that it makes our country weaker, I haven't yet made the argument that it makes it stronger. So defend yours first, and i will decide whether if I'm even gonna make an argument for concentrations of wealth.
What people don't understand is that the vast majority of rich people wouldn't be rich if it were not for their use of government services. They reap the most so they gotta give some back.
Link Here
Seems this poll finds that a majority no longer believe in equality. Or don't care as long as they get their way.
Of the rich that I know, a few extra percent paid out in taxes won't make a dent in their lifestyles. In fact, their spending tends to increase during hard times so their neighbors can keep their jobs. One has worked hard to keep from laying off employees, reducing everyone's hours rather than send someone home without a job. Another is spending money paying construction crews to renovate a building that he really doesn't need at this time.
I haven't heard any of them complaining about the new health bills. It is the middle class who are "struggling" to become rich who are complaining, and it probably won't affect them much at all.
It's like when congress duped us all on repealing the inheritance tax. It only affected the rich in the first place, but we were manipulated into thinking it was a good thing for all of us...
Being rich has its own problems, and I am pretty sure that I will never have those problems...:2razz:
Thomas Jefferson said so.You made the argument that it makes our country weaker, I haven't yet made the argument that it makes it stronger. So defend yours first, and i will decide whether if I'm even gonna make an argument for concentrations of wealth.
Just a few observations --- if they can do it to the rich, they can do it to the middle class. There's much more middle class in this country - so they (we) are the cash cow, not the rich. I suggest the rich are the red herring. See the tactic is, get everyone possible to support those scabby rich bastards and while the lower and middle class cheer - the government comes out and says, "well guys, we tapped the rich but it's not enough... we'll have to tap the middle class now - sorry".
Hitting up the rich is just the warm up show.
Too bad Republicans don't subscribe to that principle.We should not be leaving it to our grand kids to pay our expenses...
Too bad Republicans don't subscribe to that principle.