politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles
Title: GOP presidential candidates' tax plans would benefit the rich
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/10/ ... esidential-candidates-tax.html
Published: Oct 26, 2011
Author: Steven Thomma
Post Date: 2011-10-26 22:59:28 by Skip Intro
Keywords: None
Views: 56714
Comments: 86
WASHINGTON — The Republican Party is catching flat-tax fever — and setting up an epic election-year fight with Democrats over whether wealthier Americans should pay higher taxes or get tax cuts. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney became the latest to punch the tax button Wednesday, telling a Virginia audience that he'll soon update his economic proposal to spell out ways to flatten the tax code. His vow came just a day after rival Rick Perry grabbed headlines and talk-show chatter with a proposal for an optional flat 20 percent tax on income. Both followed Herman Cain's pitch for a flat 9 percent income tax as part of his 9-9-9 plan, which helped him jump to the top tier of candidates for their party's 2012 nomination. Newt Gingrich and Michele Bachmann endorse a flat tax, too. The flat tax — so called because it offers one flat rate for taxpayers in all income groups while taking away many or all deductions — would simplify taxes. It also would almost certainly give big tax cuts to wealthy Americans. Republicans believe that cutting taxes, especially on the wealthy, helps to spur investment, economic growth and hiring. At the same time, most of the Republican candidates are proposing other changes that also would mean big tax cuts for high-income Americans, such as eliminating taxes on dividend income or capital gains, and eliminating the estate tax, called the death tax by Republicans. Their push comes at the same time that Democratic President Barack Obama is pushing to raise taxes on higher-income Americans. He's proposed raising taxes on those making more than $200,000 and has endorsed a push by Senate Democrats to raise taxes on incomes above $1 million. The debate comes as new data show that the very wealthiest Americans have greatly increased their share of U.S. income in recent decades. The richest 1 percent claimed 17 percent of American income in 2007, more than double their 8 percent share in 1979, according to a report this week from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. Protest over growing income inequality is also among the motive issues driving the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations around the country. Polls show that a solid majority of Americans favor raising taxes on the wealthy. But that's anathema in the Republican Party, where tax cuts, particularly for higher incomes, are popular. Seven in 10 Americans say that policies of Republicans in Congress favor the rich, according to a New York Times poll published Wednesday. There's little doubt the Republican presidential candidates' proposals would cut taxes on the wealthy. Most would eliminate taxes on all or some profits on investments. Most of those taxes now are paid by wealthier Americans. Most also would eliminate the estate tax, which applies only to estates of $7 million or more and is paid by about 3,270 families each year, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, a joint project of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, both respected center-left think tanks in Washington. "These are really wealthy families," said Roberton Williams, an analyst at the Tax Policy Center. A flat tax on income would take away some deductions but lower the rate. Perry, for example, would cut it to 20 percent. Gingrich would cut it to 15 percent. The wealthiest Americans now pay a 35 percent marginal rate on income above $379,950. A detailed analysis by the Tax Policy Center found that the Cain plan would mean an average tax cut of $455,000 for those with incomes above $1 million. Romney once criticized a flat tax proposal in 1996 as a boon to the rich, going so far as personally taking out newspaper ads in early primary states to rip the proposal from then-candidate Steve Forbes. "It's a tax cut for fat cats," Romney said then. When he unveiled his economic agenda this year, Romney said he would pursue a "long-term goal" of a "flatter, fairer, simpler structure." But he also said he wouldn't change any of the existing personal income tax rates. On Wednesday in Fairfax, Va., he said, "I'll lay out some additional ways to make the tax code more flat." While the Republican tax proposals would give tax cuts to the wealthy, the candidates have backed away from the appearance of raising taxes on lower-income Americans. Cain at first denied that his plan would raise taxes on poorer Americans, then changed it after the Tax Policy Center found that the 84 percent of taxpayers would pay more under Cain's plan. Gingrich notably would keep the Earned Income Tax Credit, which helps lower-income families offset their payroll taxes for Medicare and Social Security. "Preserving the EITC and Child Tax Credit are critical to ensure that the optional flat tax system does not unfairly target low-income Americans," Gingrich says in a website chart comparing his flat tax to Perry's. Romney points to his proposal to limit tax cuts on dividends and capital gains to incomes below $250,000. "My view is that a key to the tax policy is to reduce the tax burden on the people who have been hurt most by the Obama economy, and that's the middle class," he said Wednesday. Gingrich and others have noted, however, that the limit would mean little because people below that threshold pay few taxes on dividends and capital gains. And Perry would give all taxpayers the option of sticking with the current tax system, meaning no one would have to pay more than they would under today's rules. "That is the wise political move," said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, a pro-tax-cut group. "He doesn't say to low-income people, 'We're going to come to get you.'"
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-19) not displayed.
.
.
.
#20. To: Capitalist Eric (#19)
(Edited)
Another term for which you underscore your ignorance, Junior. An example of "circular logic" in this very one sided discussion would be: The wealthy should pay more in taxes because they already do. It is a conclusion - "should pay more" that is based upon it's own supposition "they do pay more". I am advocating the same reasoning that Smith and Jefferson themselves advocated, i.e. the wealthy benefit more and should thus pay more. It is a conlusion - pay more - deduced from an observation - benefit more. "Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise..."
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Wrong again. Your position is that wealthy people should pay more, because it's unfair for them to have so much money. Circular logic. "Junior" kicks ass again. Wanna' go for another whupping, dummy?
DUMMY DwarF: ...I'm eating a meatball... "Whenver the dwarf sees something negative about a Democrat, he tries to change the topic of the thread to something else. Usually a personal attack, followed by mutterings about correct 'grammar' 'spelling' whatever. Anything he can think of to avoid a discussion about a Democrat screwing up or looking bad. It's a decade long pattern." --Badeye observation-- So if the "RICH" do have to pay more taxes where do you think they are going to get the money to offset the extra taxes they are paying???? Especially when the "RICH" typically own all of the companies/corporations that produce almost all the products the rest of us use....... Think real hard.... Come on apply a little juice to that lightbulb above your head..... Need a hint???? Ahhhhh there you go...... now you get it..... it will come from your wallet and mine not theirs!!!!
"CHANGE" you can step in..... Even if that were my position, Junior, which it is not, that would still not be circular reasoning, It would be underwhelming reasoning yet still not circular. Again, Junior, circular reasoning requires that the supposition be the support for the conclusion, e.g. "Since it's unfair that some people are wealthy it's unfair that they don't pay more in taxes." That has never been my belief let alone my position. My position is that he who benefits the most should pay the most. I don't believe that it's unfair that some people earn/make/inherit more than others. Nor have I ever stated so, Junior. You have an infantile view of the world. If you can't distort grey into black or white then you misrepresent it so that you can. There are times when it is fine and dandy to cut taxes and reduce spending. There are times when it is not. There are times when it's okay to target cuts to specific areas and times when you need to ramp up public spending. The problem is, you are wholly incapable of having anything remotely akin to a constructive discussion regarding when and what is appropriate fiscal policy. In a few words, Junior, you're a pedantic little snot who can't tell his dick from his thumb.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
How is an individual millionaire paying more on his dividends and interest or 5 cents more per dollar on his second million and up going to come out of my wallet?
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
More lies. From HERE: As of January, 2010, our existing national debt- NET of projected tax receipts over the next 50 years- is $200 TRILLION. This includes: Social Security ($17,500,000,000,000.00, $17.5 trillion) You get the idea. We're bankrupt, because government made SPENDING promises it could not hope to actually fulfill. Instead, they promised goodies in return for votes. Someone had a quote about this: "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship." --ALEXANDER FRASER TYTLER, LORD WOODHOUSELEE-- Oh, BTW, according to this NPR report, actual debt now stands at $211 Trillion, as of August 6, 2011. You think that by soaking the rich, it will change ANYTHING? Think again. As the Kitco article I linked to above states: ...If the government decides to expropriate (steal) or commandeer (e.g., force into Treasuries) America’s private wealth in order to buy survival time, such a measure will be designed to destroy the common citizens, not the elite. Insiders will be given advance warning about any such plan, and will be able to transfer their money offshore or into financial vehicles immune from harm. Assuming that the elite moves its money to safety, there would then be $120,000,000,000,000.00 ($120 trillion) in American debt and liabilities supported by only $32,000,000,000,000.00 ($32 trillion) in private net worth, for a deficit of $88,000,000,000,000.00 ($88 trillion). In that case, each American would owe $285,714.29 to balance the country’s books. (Remember to multiply this amount by every person in your household, including any infant children.) ...If the common people suspect that something diabolical was in the works, a portion of the $32 trillion in non-elite wealth could be evacuated as well prior to a government expropriation and/or currency devaluation, resulting in less money for the government to steal. What these statistics mean is that it is absolutely impossible for the government to fund its debt and deficits, even if it steals all of the nation’s private wealth. Therefore, the government’s only solutions are either formal bankruptcy (outright debt repudiation and the dismantling of bankrupt government programs) or unprecedented American monetary inflation and debt monetization. If the government chooses to inflate its way out of this fiscal catastrophe, the United States dollar will essentially become worthless. You want to keep believing the bullshit about "soak the rich," then fine, you go ahead and swallow those lies. But at the end of the day, they're just lies, and you KNOW it. So don't give me your sh!t about how you give a crap about the little people, and what "fair" is all about... Because you're not about that... You're all about YOU.
DUMMY DwarF: ...I'm eating a meatball... "Whenver the dwarf sees something negative about a Democrat, he tries to change the topic of the thread to something else. Usually a personal attack, followed by mutterings about correct 'grammar' 'spelling' whatever. Anything he can think of to avoid a discussion about a Democrat screwing up or looking bad. It's a decade long pattern." --Badeye observation-- Wow... Your position is quite clear: reality is whatever YOU say it is. Must be comforting, to be so intellectually lazy as to buy into that crap. Bottom line? You're delusional. But then again, it's a common leftist trait.
DUMMY DwarF: ...I'm eating a meatball... "Whenver the dwarf sees something negative about a Democrat, he tries to change the topic of the thread to something else. Usually a personal attack, followed by mutterings about correct 'grammar' 'spelling' whatever. Anything he can think of to avoid a discussion about a Democrat screwing up or looking bad. It's a decade long pattern." --Badeye observation-- Chuckles...your position is pretty clear...you just got your ass kicked and now you're flailing about... And thanks for validating my statement that you are wholly incapable of having a constructive discussion. CHECKMATE [SNICKER]
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
I stated that this nation has a debt problem and that most of it has been run up under GOP Presidents. Both statements were true.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
I provide data- with links- so you can educate yourself. You, in return, blow hot air out of your @ss, and then...? You declare victory. ((((eyeball roll*)))) Thanks for the laugh.
DUMMY DwarF: ...I'm eating a meatball... "Whenver the dwarf sees something negative about a Democrat, he tries to change the topic of the thread to something else. Usually a personal attack, followed by mutterings about correct 'grammar' 'spelling' whatever. Anything he can think of to avoid a discussion about a Democrat screwing up or looking bad. It's a decade long pattern." --Badeye observation-- Your data SUPPORTS my statement that the US has a debt problem, Junior. Oddly, you called that a lie.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
If a guy already has a couple million dollars, what make you think he gives a shit about anything in your wallet? Get OVER yourself, loser... Nobody cares about you, your wallet, your ideology or your LIFE.
DUMMY DwarF: ...I'm eating a meatball... "Whenver the dwarf sees something negative about a Democrat, he tries to change the topic of the thread to something else. Usually a personal attack, followed by mutterings about correct 'grammar' 'spelling' whatever. Anything he can think of to avoid a discussion about a Democrat screwing up or looking bad. It's a decade long pattern." --Badeye observation-- Oooooooooooh, very GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!! You actually GOT that part. I'm IMPRESSED... [NOT.] Your point was that it was due to tax cuts. The data I posted, demonstrated that you LIED. AGAIN. AS USUAL. DUMMY DwarF: ...I'm eating a meatball... "Whenver the dwarf sees something negative about a Democrat, he tries to change the topic of the thread to something else. Usually a personal attack, followed by mutterings about correct 'grammar' 'spelling' whatever. Anything he can think of to avoid a discussion about a Democrat screwing up or looking bad. It's a decade long pattern." --Badeye observation-- That is but one part of the greater equation, Junior. It isn't the sole factor nor did I represent it as such. Nor did I present my argument as anything more than what exists as present value. But thanks for proving my point how you have to distort an argument to make a point. No, I'm calling YOU a liar. A) You're not giving me any new information. I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
What makes you *think* I give a shit about what they give a shit about? So, thanks for jumping in and making no sense. Get OVER yourself, loser... Nobody cares about you, your wallet, your ideology or your LIFE. I was responding to a post the point of which being the fallacious reasoning that if we tax a millionaire we are taxing ourselves. Who cares about whom or what was never part of the equation, Junior.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Bullshit. It isn't due to the tax cuts AT ALL. The data I posted makes that VERY clear. And all your lies won't change that FACT. I post data, you blow hot air out your ass. And all your lies don't change THAT fact. LOL. You lie, and when I call you on it, you lie by saying you didn't lie then, but since you're lying NOW, what makes you think anything you say means diddley- shit? Oh, and BTW, you're already done, asshole. I took you in three, several hours ago. But keep deluding yourself. It's what you're BEST at.
DUMMY DwarF: ...I'm eating a meatball... "Whenver the dwarf sees something negative about a Democrat, he tries to change the topic of the thread to something else. Usually a personal attack, followed by mutterings about correct 'grammar' 'spelling' whatever. Anything he can think of to avoid a discussion about a Democrat screwing up or looking bad. It's a decade long pattern." --Badeye observation-- I'd like to know why it's fair for someone making $106,800 per year to pay the same amount in SS taxes as someone else who makes $25,000,000.
***SIGH*** It's real simple, Junior. If you take in less than you spend then you have to make up the difference somehow. The government does it by borrowing money. Do you know what borrowed money is called when it is owed? It's called DEBT. When you REDUCE your income, that is already at a shortfall, you have to borrow even MORE money to make up the shortfall. This is called EVEN MORE DEBT. For you to actually BELIEVE that you can cut the rate of revenue growth, at times to a point negative to the previous year, while continuing to increase the level of spending to a point GREATER than the previous year, and that this dynamic has no impact on the level of debt is so far into sublime levels of insanity, so far from the realm of reality and just so eaten up with the Boofers illogical that whatever it is that makes you so obtusely stupid as this is such that you just cannot be cured.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
It's not and the cap should be removed and capital gains and interest and dividend income should not be excluded if it exceeds wages or salary.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Sometimes a picture is worth 100 posts.
"Especially when the "RICH" typically own all of the companies/corporations that produce almost all the products the rest of us use"....... So you think the businessmen "WON'T" raise the price of goods to make up for what the government takes from them in taxes???? Or you don't think they will outsource that business overseas that produces those products..... causing people here to loose their job which also effects your wallet..... cause the government is going to hit you up for more taxes to pay for those peoples unemployment benefits and food stamps!!!! Raising taxes is only a temporary increase in revenue, until people figure out how to get around paying those extra taxes.... if that means sending their money out of the country then so be it..... and who looses in that scenario???? HINT: not the "RICH"!!!!! You want more revenue then let the private sector create more jobs!!! More people working equals more revenue, 2nd grade math......
"CHANGE" you can step in..... Great graphic, thanks greatly.
Do you *think* a businessman will LOWER his price if he gets a 10% tax CUT? You really are brainwashed. Raising taxes is only a temporary increase in revenue, Bullshit. until people figure out how to get around paying those extra taxes.... If that's true, and I doubt that it is, it's underscoring how the tax system is rigged/skewed toward subsidizing the extremely wealthy. You want more revenue then let the private sector create more jobs!!! The "private sector" created jobs in the mid part of the last decade and revenue growth lagged. Feel free to explain why...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Quit coveting what others have. If you want more out of life you shouldn't be on the internet 24/7. What kind of worker spends all his time on the internet arguing politics? Not a very good worker.
lmao
Proxy IP's are amusing.....lmao
Quit making stupid statements. Let's see who wins. If you want more out of life you shouldn't be on the internet 24/7. This isn't my website. Nor am I on the internet 24/7. You have me confused with that titan of industry and perennial GOP Small [chuckles] Bidnessman of the Year - Boofer "TitsUp" Uglypuss. What kind of worker spends all [of] his time on the internet arguing politics? Apparently all kinds of workers. Do you want me to do a survey for you? Not a very good worker. Speak for yourself. I've generated about $12K in revenue since 6AM. You?
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Irony of the Day...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
I think I cracked the code using the secret Boofer decoder ring I got after I keyed my thousandth Hummer; he thinks he's Mao.
...with better hair...barely...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
A couple of weeks ago he said he was a Farmer. I wonder if he isn't taking those Facebook games just a little too seriously.
When the people are afraid, that's when the greatest long term money is made.~~~~Clark Howard
Boofer said that he was a farmer?
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Yup.
When the people are afraid, that's when the greatest long term money is made.~~~~Clark Howard
Actually, maybe is has discovered a way to actually make money while he works toward his millionth lame post served milestone. You could be seriously underestimating the man.
Chuckles...what's next? "Fireman"? Un' Boofer Da Firemun!!!
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
You could be seriously underestimating the man. I thought maybe has was learning how to buy and take care of fake chickens.
When the people are afraid, that's when the greatest long term money is made.~~~~Clark Howard
It's real simple, Junior. If you take in less than you spend then you have to make up the difference somehow. The government does it by borrowing money. Indeed. AND, they make promises they can't keep. One need only look at Social Security- a Ponzi-scheme writ large- to see that. Of course, the scheme is ending sooner, because government fat-cats stole the money to fund their pet-projects. Either way, it makes no nevermind. The government IS going to cut spending, one way or another. They're also going to utterly default, one way or the other. The debt is so gargantuan, that it can never be repaid. As the data I linked to shows, you could tax every living soul in the USA 100% of their income, AND confiscate all wealth, and we'll still be bankrupt. Not just broke, but BANKRUPT. You choose to believe the propaganda. Fine, DO that. I really don't GAS. Wow... NOTHING gets by you, does it? ((((eyeball roll*)))) Wow... talk about a bunch of gibbering bullshit. LOL. You claim to be a "broker," but you don't SHIT about economics... Talk about irony!!! So let's cut the crap. 1. Revenue IS decreasing. Real GDP is decreasing (in blue), not increasing, as the government propaganda (in red) suggests: 2. REAL inflation (in blue) is getting bad. You'd notice this if you do your own grocery shopping. Government propaganda is in red: 3. REAL U.S. debt is ~$211 Trillion dollars. Since current GDP is ~$15 Trillion, this means every dollar is already spent for the next 14 years. 4. You think the government can wave the magic Keynesian wand, and simply print away the debt to nothingness. Can you say "Zimbabwe?" How 'bout "Weimar?" Oooh, I know... how about "Hungary?" This idiotic assumption is based on the foolish belief that everyone will simply accept paper dollars forever. DON'T try to bullshit me on economics, boy... You might be able to fool the other stupid leftists, but I know better. Keynes is dead. His crank philosophies are dead. And because the most of the worlds' financial systems are modeled on the American (Keynesian, central-bank) systems, they're all dead, too. The result (just showing "on-book" debts) is below: DUMMY DwarF: ...I'm eating a meatball... "Whenver the dwarf sees something negative about a Democrat, he tries to change the topic of the thread to something else. Usually a personal attack, followed by mutterings about correct 'grammar' 'spelling' whatever. Anything he can think of to avoid a discussion about a Democrat screwing up or looking bad. It's a decade long pattern." --Badeye observation-- You just claimed above that tax cuts had nothing to do with increasing levels of debt. You are one highly confused individual, Junior. Thus, you'd make a PERFECT economist. And stuff those charts. You've been asked several times to defend the methodology and you refused.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
They don't. It's about SPENDING, asshole. TOO MUCH SPENDING. TOO MANY PROMISES. TOO MANY SCAMS BY PARASITES LIKE YOU. If that's what it takes, for you to be satisfied with your delusions, than have a happy. Whatever... LOL. I've provided you links to all the information you need. If you're too lazy to read, how is that my problem? Really, though, you're not interested in proofs. You're a broker, which means you're interested in promoting the status quo. As a broker, your livelihood depends on the sheeple believing the propaganda that the MSM and Helicopter-Ben put out... You need people to buy your bullshit, because that's what lines your pockets. You made a real mistake, making it clear what exactly you do... The truth is, you're shilling for the same old corruption, even though you pretend to be against it... How utterly pathetic you are... despite your claims, you're nothing more than a common thief. Feh.
DUMMY DwarF: ...I'm eating a meatball... "Whenver the dwarf sees something negative about a Democrat, he tries to change the topic of the thread to something else. Usually a personal attack, followed by mutterings about correct 'grammar' 'spelling' whatever. Anything he can think of to avoid a discussion about a Democrat screwing up or looking bad. It's a decade long pattern." --Badeye observation-- Ping to 57.
DUMMY DwarF: ...I'm eating a meatball... "Whenver the dwarf sees something negative about a Democrat, he tries to change the topic of the thread to something else. Usually a personal attack, followed by mutterings about correct 'grammar' 'spelling' whatever. Anything he can think of to avoid a discussion about a Democrat screwing up or looking bad. It's a decade long pattern." --Badeye observation-- Chuckles... HELP CECIL HELP!!! [snicker] PS: You forgot to PING Boofer...I took care of that for you...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
You have NO CLUE what I do. NONE. ZIP. NADA. Your mind cannot fathom in any way shape or form what it is that I do.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Comments (61 - 86) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestCircular logic...
#21. To: war (#20)
Another term for which you underscore your ignorance, Junior.
Capitalist Eric: Foreplay before the president's staff? 
#22. To: All (#0)
My dogs have created more shovel ready jobs than the self appointed Messiah!!! Slap the shit out of a Leftard today, it won't help but at least you will feel better!!!!
#23. To: Capitalist Eric (#21)
Your position is that wealthy people should pay more, because it's unfair for them to have so much money.
#24. To: CZ82 (#22)
#25. To: war (#14)
This nation has a debt problem, Junior, and a good portion of it can be laid at the feet of tax cuts which never paid for themselves
Medicare Part A ($36,700,000,000,000.00, $36.7 trillion)
Medicare Part B ($37,000,000,000,000.00, $37 trillion)
Medicare Part D ($15,600,000,000,000 underfunded, $15.6 trillion)
Government and military pensions ($2,000,000,000,000, $2 trillion),
etc.According to the Federal Reserve’s most recent report on wealth, America’s private net worth was $53.4 trillion as of September, 2009. But at the same time, America’s debt and unfunded liabilities totaled at least $120,000,000,000,000.00 ($120 trillion), or 225% of the citizens’ net worth. Even if the government expropriated every dollar of private wealth in the nation, it would still have a deficit of $66,600,000,000,000.00 ($66.6 trillion), equal to $214,286.00 for every man, woman and child in America and roughly 500% of GDP. If the government does not directly seize the nation’s private wealth, then it will require $389,610 from each and every citizen to balance the country’s books. State, county and municipal debts and deficits are additional, already elephantine in many states (e.g., California, Illinois, New Jersey and New York) and growing at an alarming rate nationwide. In addition to the federal government, dozens of states are already bankrupt and sinking deeper into the morass every day.
Capitalist Eric: Foreplay before the president's staff?
#26. To: war (#23)
Even if that were my position, Junior, which it is not, that would still not be circular reasoning, It would be underwhelming reasoning yet still not circular.
Capitalist Eric: Foreplay before the president's staff?
#27. To: Capitalist Eric (#26)
(Edited)
#28. To: Capitalist Eric (#25)
More lies.
#29. To: war (#28)
Capitalist Eric: Foreplay before the president's staff?
#30. To: Capitalist Eric (#29)
#31. To: war, CZ82 (#24)
How is an individual millionaire paying more on his dividends and interest or 5 cents more per dollar on his second million and up going to come out of my wallet?
Capitalist Eric: Foreplay before the president's staff?
#32. To: war (#30)
Your data SUPPORTS my statement that the US has a debt problem, Junior.
Oddly, you called that a lie.
No, I'm calling YOU a liar.
Capitalist Eric: Foreplay before the president's staff?
#33. To: Capitalist Eric (#32)
Your point was that it was due to tax cuts.
B) You just conceded that I did not lie.
C) CHECKMATE
#34. To: Capitalist Eric (#31)
If a guy already has a couple million dollars, what make you think he gives a shit about anything in your wallet?
#35. To: war (#33)
(Edited)
It isn't the sole factor nor did I represent it as such.
But thanks for proving my point how you have to distort an argument to make a point.
A) You're not giving me any new information. B) You just conceded that I did not lie. C) CHECKMATE
Capitalist Eric: Foreplay before the president's staff?
#36. To: war (#12)
Why should someone who makes $25,000 a year be taxed the same as someone making $25,000,000? There is NO fairness in that whatsoever.
#37. To: Capitalist Eric (#35)
(Edited)
#38. To: Skip Intro (#36)
#39. To: NewsJunky (#1)
Of course the Republican party is all about the the 1%. I don't know how anyone can deny it.
#40. To: war (#24)
How is an individual millionaire paying more on his dividends and interest or 5 cents more per dollar on his second million and up going to come out of my wallet?
My dogs have created more shovel ready jobs than the self appointed Messiah!!! Slap the shit out of a Leftard today, it won't help but at least you will feel better!!!!
#41. To: Skip Intro (#39)
#42. To: CZ82 (#40)
So you think the businessmen "WON'T" raise the price of goods to make up for what the government takes from them in taxes????
#43. To: war (#42)
#44. To: A K A Stone (#43)
#45. To: A K A Stone (#43)
(Edited)
Quit coveting what others have.
#46. To: Badeye (#44)
lmao
#47. To: war (#46)
Imao..... 'I Mao.'
#48. To: Ferret Mike (#47)
#49. To: Ferret Mike (#47)
(Edited)
I think I cracked the code using the secret Boofer decoder ring I got after I keyed my thousandth Hummer; he thinks he's Mao.
#50. To: mininggold (#49)
#51. To: war (#50)
#52. To: mininggold (#49)
"A couple of weeks ago he said he was a Farmer. I wonder if he isn't taking those Facebook games just a little too seriously."
#53. To: mininggold (#51)
(Edited)
#54. To: Ferret Mike (#52)
Actually, maybe is has discovered a way to actually make money while he works toward his millionth lame post served milestone.
#55. To: war (#37)
***SIGH***
Do you know what borrowed money is called when it is owed? It's called DEBT. When you REDUCE your income, that is already at a shortfall, you have to borrow even MORE money to make up the shortfall. This is called EVEN MORE DEBT.
For you to actually BELIEVE that you can cut the rate of revenue growth, at times to a point negative to the previous year, while continuing to increase the level of spending to a point GREATER than the previous year, and that this dynamic has no impact on the level of debt is so far into sublime levels of insanity, so far from the realm of reality and just so eaten up with the Boofers illogical that whatever it is that makes you so obtusely stupid as this is such that you just cannot be cured.
Capitalist Eric: Foreplay before the president's staff?
#56. To: Capitalist Eric (#55)
Indeed.
#57. To: war (#56)
You just claimed above that tax cuts had nothing to do with increasing levels of debt.
You are one highly confused individual, Junior.
And stuff those charts. You've been asked several times to defend the methodology and you refused.
Capitalist Eric: Foreplay before the president's staff?
#58. To: All, A K A Stone, Murron, Mad Dog, jwpegler, hondo68, sneakypete, Happy Quanzaa, Get Outta Dodge!, CZ82, jwpegler, Rudgear, liberator (#57)
Capitalist Eric: Foreplay before the president's staff?
#59. To: Capitalist Eric, Badeye (#58)
All, A K A Stone, Murron, Mad Dog, jwpegler, hondo68, sneakypete, Happy Quanzaa, Get Outta Dodge!, CZ82, jwpegler, Rudgear, liberator
#60. To: Capitalist Eric (#57)
You made a real mistake, making it clear what exactly you do...
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]