• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What purpose did the tax cut for the wealthiest serve?

The tax cuts for the rich gave them more money to use on Wall Street speculating on goods and products, forcing up the prices on life essential needs like gas and food. Life essential needs should not subject to speculators, if we want to see the economy ref up put the money that these blood suckers are draining from the consumer back into the hands of the consumer
 
TurtleDude said:
People who can read and think free of emotion do. If you cannot afford more and more government you shouldn't want others to pay for it when you cannot
Click to expand...

How many times do I have to tell you before it sinks in, that I support reducing government, I have proposed cutting almost a half trillion a year from our deficit.
 
Catawba said:
How many times do I have to tell you before it sinks in, that I support reducing government, I have proposed cutting almost a half trillion a year from our deficit.
Click to expand...

remind us what you want to cut

this ought to be funny. You also want the rich to pay more and more taxes
 
RiverDad said:
I'm going on memory for this claim but I can back it up if I get challenged on it. For the US and Canada to equalize their MRI facilities to the same PER CAPITA level would require the US to rid itself of about 85% of its MRI machines.
Click to expand...

Uhhhh whats your point in this? Why would the US want to or have to equalize the MRI facilities even if we did have a public option?
 
TurtleDude said:
remind us what you want to cut

this ought to be funny. You also want the rich to pay more and more taxes
Click to expand...

Tell me one reason why the shouldnt?
How would it be bad for society?
What would happen?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Tell me one reason why the shouldnt?
How would it be bad for society?
What would happen?
Click to expand...

1) some rich would move assets off shore

2) its unfair to the rich-now I realize you don't care about individual rights as long as interfering with them is for the greater good

3) it causes everyone else to pretend that tax hikes on the rich will alleviate deficit problems so they continue to demand more spending

what would happen if most of the middle class started paying for what they use? It would not be bad for society and it would stop runaway government
 
TurtleDude said:
1) some rich would move assets off shore
Click to expand...
They ALREADY do this.....

2) its unfair to the rich-now I realize you don't care about individual rights as long as interfering with them is for the greater good
Click to expand...
Sooo the rich were severely oppressed from the late 1930's to the mid 80s? Their individual rights were being interfered? Im pretty sure that is not the case at all.

3) it causes everyone else to pretend that tax hikes on the rich will alleviate deficit problems so they continue to demand more spending
Click to expand...
I believe that is your prediction of the future not a factual statement at all...

what would happen if most of the middle class started paying for what they use? It would not be bad for society and it would stop runaway government
Click to expand...
Ummm we do........
I forgot to you the "middle class" is just a bunch of "free loaders" who want to hoard everything and live of these awful social programs...
 
why don't you pay for what you use DS and stop whining for others to fund your needs and existence?
 
TurtleDude said:
why don't you pay for what you use DS and stop whining for others to fund your needs and existence?
Click to expand...

You should take that up with an oil company or two that benefit handsomely from the tens of billions spent keeping the shipping lanes open and a reduced royalty rate on federal land.
 
TurtleDude said:
why don't you pay for what you use DS and stop whining for others to fund your needs and existence?
Click to expand...

:lamo
Great job! Really good way to think a post through and come back with some smart comments. When your down and out rely on personal attacks! Great job Turtle!
Turtle i do, i pay 1.) Income tax. 2.) Taxes on everything i purchase.
So by i wish the richest of the rich had a higher tax rate that means that i want "other to fund" my "needs and existence"? Im not connecting the dots...
 
TurtleDude said:
remind us what you want to cut

this ought to be funny. You also want the rich to pay more and more taxes
Click to expand...
I support cutting the largest government expenditure in half. The military. I also support closing all overseas bases with a few possible exceptions.
 
TurtleDude said:
remind us what you want to cut

this ought to be funny. You also want the rich to pay more and more taxes
Click to expand...

i support the libertarian approach. By cutting our most wasteful spending, the ME wars and and our overspending on the military, we can reduce the deficit by $350 billion and still would be spending 3 times as much as the next biggest military spender, China.

We can cut another $100 billion a year from the deficit by eliminating the tax cuts for the rich.

That totals $450 billion a year without creating hardship for those that have already suffered.
 
U.S. Socialist. said:
I support cutting the largest government expenditure in half. The military. I also support closing all overseas bases with a few possible exceptions.
Click to expand...

This issue is a libertarian test. It is what separates the honest libertarians from the faux libertarians. Those that pretend to be libertarians always get exposed by their hypocrisy if they support spending as much as the rest of the world combined on military.
 
U.S. Socialist. said:
I support cutting the largest government expenditure in half. The military. I also support closing all overseas bases with a few possible exceptions.
Click to expand...

I sort of figured you want to cut the military-which is actually a proper governmental function, while not mentioning anything about the billions of constitutionally dubious income redistribution programs and governmental regulation of private industry
 
Catawba said:
This issue is a libertarian test. It is what separates the honest libertarians from the faux libertarians. Those that pretend to be libertarians always get exposed by their hypocrisy if they support spending as much as the rest of the world combined on military.
Click to expand...

real libertarians would note that the Social Security Ponzi scheme is unconstitutional and stuff like the department of education, the EPA etc are unconstitutional pursuant to the tenth amendment. Sure, we spend too much on the military and our bases in areas that no longer are subjected to a realistic threat with the collapse of the iron curtain need to be severely downsized, if not closed. But the domestic nonsense that limits our global competitive ability as well as feeding the entitlement addictions of millions need to be sliced as well
 
TurtleDude said:
real libertarians would note that the Social Security Ponzi scheme is unconstitutional and stuff like the department of education, the EPA etc are unconstitutional pursuant to the tenth amendment. Sure, we spend too much on the military and our bases in areas that no longer are subjected to a realistic threat with the collapse of the iron curtain need to be severely downsized, if not closed. But the domestic nonsense that limits our global competitive ability as well as feeding the entitlement addictions of millions need to be sliced as well
Click to expand...

What the ------ does social security have to do with the topic of this thread? Let me remind you that the topic of the thread is What purpose did the tax cut for the wealthiest serve? Did you use your tax cut to shore up SS? Did you invest your tax cut in the largest ponzi scheme ever Wall Street? SS helps keep food on the table and people in their homes, Wall Street is just a legalized way for the rich to steal from the poor
 
EarlzP said:
What the ------ does social security have to do with the topic of this thread? Let me remind you that the topic of the thread is What purpose did the tax cut for the wealthiest serve? Did you use your tax cut to shore up SS? Did you invest your tax cut in the largest ponzi scheme ever Wall Street? SS helps keep food on the table and people in their homes, Wall Street is just a legalized way for the rich to steal from the poor
Click to expand...

the purpose of the tax cut was Bush fulfilling one of his campaign promises to overturn the dem imposed massive tax hike on those who pay taxes. It also had the effect of helping an economy which had been damaged by the clinton dot com bubble burst and 9-11. The other impact was that it caused the rich bashers to have conniptions but their dear leader felt the tax normalization of Bush was so good he extended them
 
TurtleDude said:
the purpose of the tax cut was Bush fulfilling one of his campaign promises to overturn the dem imposed massive tax hike on those who pay taxes. It also had the effect of helping an economy which had been damaged by the clinton dot com bubble burst and 9-11. The other impact was that it caused the rich bashers to have conniptions but their dear leader felt the tax normalization of Bush was so good he extended them
Click to expand...

Do you think that every one just buys your BS?

Domestic policy of the George W. Bush administration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

President Bush won passage for two major tax cuts during his term in office: The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003. Collectively, they became known, analyzed, and debated as the "Bush tax cuts".
Click to expand...

Bush took care of his buddies while raiding the SS fund
 
TurtleDude said:
his buddies being tax payers? why did your dear leader continue the Bush tax rates? and how does your Wiki cite disprove what I said?

are you upset tax payers received tax cuts?
Click to expand...

This is what you said

the purpose of the tax cut was Bush fulfilling one of his campaign promises to overturn the dem imposed massive tax hike on those who pay taxes
Click to expand...

President Obama used the tax extension to try to negotiate with the republicans on health care, it was a mistake to negotiate with the republicans he should have jammed the health care package through.The 2010 elections would have turned out much better for the democrats, the debt ceiling debacle would never have occured, instead of heading for a 2nd recession our economy would have continued it's slow recovery
 
EarlzP said:
This is what you said



President Obama used the tax extension to try to negotiate with the republicans on health care, it was a mistake to negotiate with the republicans he should have jammed the health care package through.The 2010 elections would have turned out much better for the democrats, the debt ceiling debacle would never have occured, instead of heading for a 2nd recession our economy would have continued it's slow recovery
Click to expand...

totally non responsive
 
TurtleDude said:
totally non responsive
Click to expand...

I have noticed you have a problem with any one who does not agree with your baloney but this is even a new tactic for you, is this the republicans newest word game? I noticed that Perry has decided to be not only deceptive but also evasive when answering questions
 
TurtleDude so can you answer what purpose did the tax cuts for the wealthy serve?
 
Иосиф Сталин;1059708935 said:
What purpose did the tax cut for the wealthiest serve?
Click to expand...

I just can't bring myself to cry about the government being given less money, regardless of who it is who got to keep their income, rich, poor, or otherwise.
 
Jerry said:
I just can't bring myself to cry about the government being given less money, regardless of who it is who got to keep their income, rich, poor, or otherwise.
Click to expand...

Well, we know that the tax cut for the rich, when considered in aggregate, went heavily to the non-wealthy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom