Rehnquist is dead...

[AlbqOwl]

And those who end off well-off, but cheat on their taxes? Are they heroes for not letting the Government take its share?

Anyone who cheats on their taxes is breaking the law. The well off generally don't cheat, and if they do, the odds are excellent that they'll get caught and will be prosecuted. What the well-off can do is to use the system to shelter their taxes and the more you raise taxes on the rich, the more they arrange their finances to shelter more of them. Bring the tax brackets down and allow the rich to pay a normal percentage like everybody else and voila! Much fewer tax shelters and more money put back into the economy.

The simple fact is, you can't raise taxes on the rich without hurting the poor.

My point is that taxes are only one aspect of the economy. If you consider only taxes without factoring in human behavior, you'll wind up with higher tax brackets and percentages, and a slower economy and less money coming into the government treasury.

 

[Busta]

I hope that there are allot of rich people who want big, fancy houses when my degree is finished, because then I'll get to build them.

 

[steen]

No it means you cut failed democratic giveaway programs........

Really? You obviously base your view of Government spending on the funds available. If there are less, spend less; if there are more, spend more.

Anything else would show a very illogical nad inconsistent argument that either is ignorant or dishonest. SO that wouldn't be the case with you, right?

 

[steen]

A surplus miens that the government has to much of our money.
A deficit miens that government spending needs to be cut.

Ah, so the goal is simply to limit government regardless of the cause. Yes, the hypocritical, anti-social mentality raises its ugly head again.

 

[SKILMATIC]

Why are we talking about money? We will never be in debt. The world owes us too much for that to happen. Thats a simply fact.

 

[steen]

What the well-off can do is to use the system to shelter their taxes and the more you raise taxes on the rich, the more they arrange their finances to shelter more of them. Bring the tax brackets down and allow the rich to pay a normal percentage like everybody else and voila! Much fewer tax shelters and more money put back into the economy.

What a lame excuse for the poor welll-off who just can't make themselves give back to the society that allowed them to make good money. So instead, they are "forced" to hide their money so they don't have to contribute their share. Yes, I sure see that you are worried about the plight of such dead-beat anti-social creep. Enron all over again, right?

The simple fact is, you can't raise taxes on the rich without hurting the poor.

OH, MY GOD! Woodoo economics. Hint, that stupid claim died with Reagan's idiotic policies and anti-social war on the poor.

ALl of that crap is merely the excuse of those who have to not help others. Yes, of course thta is anti-social.

My point is that taxes are only one aspect of the economy. If you consider only taxes without factoring in human behavior, you'll wind up with higher tax brackets and percentages, and a slower economy and less money coming into the government treasury.

Yeah. DUH!! But the right-wing idea of the Government having to thumbits nose at the poor and unfortunate, that is unacceptable.

 

[steen]

I hope that there are allot of rich people who want big, fancy houses when my degree is finished, because then I'll get to build them.

Silly silly you. They buy it prefab from Mexico, fill it with Italian Furniture and Japanese Electronics. You, you will be allowed to mow the lawn.

 

[Navy Pride]

Really? You obviously base your view of Government spending on the funds available. If there are less, spend less; if there are more, spend more.

Anything else would show a very illogical nad inconsistent argument that either is ignorant or dishonest. SO that wouldn't be the case with you, right?

Let me explain it to you one more time.........Now try and concentrate like a laser beam OK.........There will be a test.........

The government has no money of its own........If there are surpluses then it means the government has to much of our money...If there are deficits then the government like the rest of us needs to work on a budget and reduce unnecessary spending on failed liberal giveaway programs..........

 

[steen]

Let me explain it to you one more time.........Now try and concentrate like a laser beam OK.........There will be a test.........

The government has no money of its own........If there are surpluses then it means the government has to much of our money...If there are deficits then the government like the rest of us needs to work on a budget and reduce unnecessary spending on failed liberal giveaway programs..........

What utter nonsense. Either it is a demand issue or a supply issue. Anything else is leading to untenable imbalances. So either the issue is how much money is there, or the issue is how much need there is.

Any attempt at muddling the division is merely dishonest conservatism.

 

[Busta]

Ah, so the goal is simply to limit government regardless of the cause. Yes, the hypocritical, anti-social mentality raises its ugly head again.

I have no idea what you are talking about since you failed to articulate yourself.

 

[Busta]

Silly silly you. They buy it prefab from Mexico, fill it with Italian Furniture and Japanese Electronics. You, you will be allowed to mow the lawn.

Ya, right!
If I had 2 years experience, my own tools and a "rig", I could be building log cabins right now; I could be building the new housing track in Sturges; I could be building the movie theater extension across the street.....just to name a few...

 

[AlbqOwl]

What a lame excuse for the poor welll-off who just can't make themselves give back to the society that allowed them to make good money. So instead, they are "forced" to hide their money so they don't have to contribute their share. Yes, I sure see that you are worried about the plight of such dead-beat anti-social creep. Enron all over again, right?
OH, MY GOD! Woodoo economics. Hint, that stupid claim died with Reagan's idiotic policies and anti-social war on the poor.

ALl of that crap is merely the excuse of those who have to not help others. Yes, of course thta is anti-social.
Yeah. DUH!! But the right-wing idea of the Government having to thumbits nose at the poor and unfortunate, that is unacceptable.

Your argument here holds water if you show me how many poor people have ever offered you a job, how many poor people provided the seed money or backed the foundations that build libraries, hospitals, museums, zoos, etc.; how many poor people are building housing and buying commodities that will allow people like Busta to prosper and provide jobs and opportunities so that people who don't want to be poor don't have to stay that way. Show me the poor who are funding the shelters, manning the soup lines and thrift shops, and doing what they can to relieve the plight of those who find themselves among the poor.

Do you want everybody to be equally poor? Or do you want everybody to have the opportunity to become rich? That's the difference between those who wallow in class envy and those who see the possiibilities.

Otherwise I'll just pretend all the strawmen you built into your argument aren't really there.

 

[steen]

Ya, right!
If I had 2 years experience, my own tools and a "rig", I could be building log cabins right now; I could be building the new housing track in Sturges; I could be building the movie theater extension across the street.....just to name a few...

Well, Johnson Log Homes may be hiring?