REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

The rich get richer and the rest get 'let them eat cake'

POSTED BY: 1KIKI
UPDATED: Thursday, January 6, 2011 15:50
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 5471
PAGE 1 of 3

Thursday, December 16, 2010 7:06 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101216/bs_nm/us_usa_economy_special

The U.S. government may have bailed out General Motors, the country's largest automaker, but it hasn't begun to tackle the broader problems that led to the city's implosion. Doing so, experts say, would require the kind of political will that has not been in great evidence in the country recently.

This is the point of the story where many Americans typically glaze over because they see Michigan as a long-standing financial basket case of a state thanks to the shrinking U.S. auto industry. But the problem is that the broad decline of the manufacturing sector that has been underway in this country for decades now may threaten not just the long-term health of the economy but also the living standards of all but the wealthiest Americans.

"The whole country is now seeing the story that Michigan has been living with for a long time," said Diane Swonk, chief economist at Mesirow Financial. "We have kicked the can so far down the road that now all we have is a cliff to fall off."

"The recession merely revealed a reality that has been with us for a long time. We faced a growing gap in education and skills that we tried to fill with debt and credit, which gave us the illusion of growth."

As U.S. manufacturing declined Congress and successive administrations focused instead on the financial sector (and service jobs) and relied on debt -- its own and that of the U.S. consumer -- to foster economic growth. (Or, the illusion thereof – debt-and-fraud fueled bubbles like S&L’s, dot coms, Enron, unregulated or poorly regulated commercial–personal banking giants, private lending agencies and real estate.)

By one estimate, since 2003 up to 20,000 manufacturing PLANTS (emphasis mine) have shut down.

But fixing America's education system for jobs of the future plus retraining unskilled workers would require bipartisan consensus, a long-term commitment by America's political class and funding to make it happen. (But that is not in the interests of international corporations. Low paid MANUFACTURING workers - like in China or Vietnam - NOT an expensive workforce or large-capital-investment innovative new manufacturing – are the fuel of capitalism. See the next quote from the article.)
Schiff (of Euro Pacific Capital and unsuccessful republican senate candidate) said he favors ending long-term unemployment benefits because he says they prevent Americans from taking low-paid jobs. (Emphasis mine. But wait – are these service jobs, or manufacturing jobs he’s focusing on? My sense is that he’s thinking of farm hobs and service jobs, NOT manufacturing jobs of the kind needed to turn the economic structure around, and not the path of education and innovation mentioned above.)

.

The consequences of what happened when, as Swonk says, credit in America went "from being a privilege to a right" are well documented. (HOWEVER, this was well supported by every administration, as consumer spending is over 80% of the US GDP. No one wanted to stop the juggling since everything would then crash.)





At the same time



http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/dec2010/pi20101215_516004
.htm

It's a Great Time to Be Rich
If the tax cuts become law, the next two years will be the best in living memory for many wealthy Americans to shield their income and fortunes

Under legislation approved by the U.S. Senate on Wednesday, Dec. 15, and now moving on to the House, savvy wealthy Americans would be able to capitalize on an environment in which their TAX RATES IN INCOME AND INVESTMENTS REMAIN AT HISTORIC LOWS. (emphasis mine) Also, new rules would make it possible to pass on fortunes to heirs with less fuss and lower taxes than all but a brief period of the past 80 years.

"The climate we'll have after this legislation is extremely favorable for wealthy families," says Jeffrey Cooper, a professor at Quinnipiac University School of Law and a former estate planner who has studied the history of U.S. tax law.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 17, 2010 3:33 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:



If the tax cuts become law, the next two years will be the best in living memory for many wealthy Americans to shield their income and fortunes



There will be no tax cuts. The tax rates will remain exactly as they are today, should the bill pass. The Bush tax cuts ALREADY ARE law. Passing the new bill won't cut anyone's taxes any further.

There will be no tax cuts.


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 17, 2010 6:13 AM

HKCAVALIER


Headline: U.S. to Cancel School

Reply: That's not true. Here in the U.S. it's summer time. There is no school. Extending summer vacation indefinitely has nothing to do with cancelling school. No one is cancelling school. Nothing to see here. Move along.

Headline: Mr. American Eagle Refuses to Pay Debt

Reply: That's not true. I am Mr. American Eagle and the American people gave me a sum of money some time ago with the understanding that I would be paying them back in the coming months. Ignoring that agreement and abolishing the debt has nothing to do with me refusing to pay anything. The money was GIVEN to me. Why should I "give back" something that was freely given to me? If you didn't want me to have the money, then why did you give it to me in the first place? You're not making sense.

Let me tell you something about America. Here in this great country, debt isn't really debt if you can avoid ever paying it back. Then it's just a gift. If you tell me I owe anything, but Congress passes a law saying that I don't, then I will rightfully call you a thief and me and mine will run you out of Eagleville.

Headline: The Empiror is not Wearing Anything

Reply: Yes, he is. Congress passed a law saying as much. Silly, silly headline!

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 17, 2010 10:47 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Not that it needs mentioning, but the tax cut LAW was set to expire after ten years. Ergo, that LAW was a tax cut. It was to be in place no longer than the end of 2010.

They have now written a new LAW giving people tax cuts for two more years. When that runs out, unless they write another LAW to give people more tax cuts, they LEGALLY will run out.

Can you grasp that one, Raptor?


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 17, 2010 10:48 AM

STORYMARK


I think you meant Rappy.

Granted, they are hard to tell apart.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 17, 2010 11:03 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Yeah...sigh... more and more they've become one person to me. The only difference is that sometimes Raptor sounds more intelligent and less out in the stratosphere...which is probably why I mistake him for Wulf when he doesn't.

Same diff, in the end. Sadly deluded people who cling desperately to what they've been told, facts notwithstanding, and use buzz words and slurs because they have no argument.

No biggie.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 17, 2010 3:14 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:Not that it needs mentioning, but the tax cut LAW was set to expire after ten years. Ergo, that LAW was a tax cut. It was to be in place no longer than the end of 2010.

They have now written a new LAW giving people tax cuts for two more years. When that runs out, unless they write another LAW to give people more tax cuts, they LEGALLY will run out.

Can you grasp that one, Raptor?



There will be no tax cut. You can play the semantics gymnastics all you'd like, but you just first RAISE taxes, and have folks pay at that rate, before you can cut them, and claim taxes were 'cut'.

It's like Bart Simpson, telling his dad that he could take up cigarettes, then stop, there by reducing the amount of money he spent on cigarettes.

He never takes up smoking, never spends 1 dime on cigarettes, therefore, hasn't SAVED any money by NOT buying any more cigarettes.

Grasp THAT one, Niki ?


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, December 18, 2010 3:52 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


So you maintain that Bush never cut taxes, right?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 8:07 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

you just first RAISE taxes, and have folks pay at that rate, before you can cut them, and claim taxes were 'cut'.
Stupid statement. If taxes are raised, then lowered, it's "cutting" taxes. Otherwise there would be no such thing as a tax cut. Analogy fails; if you plant a tree then cut it down, you've "cut" down the tree. Even better, if you raise someone's pay--even to keep up with the cost of living, then decrease it, you've "cut" their pay.

"Raise" and "cut" mean exactly what they mean; doesn't mean if something is raised, then lowered, it's still a "cut".


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 8:16 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

So you maintain that Bush never cut taxes, right
Indeed, that is exactly what Rappy is saying!

Yanno, I have never seen anyone twist their mind into such knots as Rappy. It's prolly hard to tell, even for him... no, especially for him... what he's saying or thinking at any one time, and why.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 8:24 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


And yes, Bush DID raise taxes:
Quote:

...raised marginal income tax rates for Americans living abroad. (The bill also cut taxes for the wealthy and worsened long-term deficits.)

...raised the overall tax bill and marginal tax rates as well for some overseas Americans.

The bill also “tripled tax rates for teenagers with college savings funds.”

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/05/30/bush-raises-taxes-twice/
Quote:

When Bush signed the big corporate tax bill passed in 2004 by the Republican Congress, he approved 63 different tax increases with a single stroke of the pen.

Revenue provision B 8, for example -- "Disallowance of certain partnership loss transfers with partner loss limits for transfer of interest in electing investment partnerships"

http://articles.latimes.com/2004/oct/15/opinion/oe-chait15
Quote:

President Bush's 2004 budget proposed an increase of $5.9 billion in fees on taxpayers from just one year ago.

Specifically, President Bush's 2005 budget increased prescription "drug co-pays from $7 to $15 for many veterans." In 2002, the co-pay went from $2 to $7."

The Administration left a $9 billion hole in funding its own education bill. That unfunded mandate, along with "cuts in federal taxes and programs have shoved some of the tax burden down to states and municipalities" forcing them to "hike property taxes to pay for schools and other services." As one expert noted "county and city governments have been raising taxes" with "property tax collections rising more than 10%" last year alone. [Source: Christian Sci. Monitor, 2/2/04; PPI, 2003]

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/kfiles/b34039.html

What Bush did was cut revenue to the states with unfunded mandates--it looked like he was cutting taxes, but what it did was simply force states and municipalities to raise them to survive. Made HIM look good; cost the rest of us.

Yes, Bush raised taxes. He did it slyly, but he raised them...on everyone but the rich.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 8:31 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I think what we need to be on the lookout for is Obama's "tax reform". The last time anyone reformed taxes, it was Reagan, and what he wound up doing was... as usual,.. soaking the middle class by eliminating deductions which meant the most to them. Now they're talking about eliminating MORE middle-class deductions... specifically the non-taxable status of health insurance benefits and the mortgage deduction.

The only REAL tax reform would be to place corporations and people on the same footing. Corporations are taxed on their PROFITS (earnings, money left-over after expenses) while people are taxed on their gross income. Businesses get to depreciate their assets such as buildings and equipment, but people do not. Businesses get tax loopholes which people do not.

If we're going to give business the same rights as real people, we should give them the same friggin' tax burden. And if they knowingly kill people, the business should be sentenced to death.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 9:06 AM

KANEMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Not that it needs mentioning, but the tax cut LAW was set to expire after ten years. Ergo, that LAW was a tax cut. It was to be in place no longer than the end of 2010.

They have now written a new LAW giving people tax cuts for two more years. When that runs out, unless they write another LAW to give people more tax cuts, they LEGALLY will run out.

Can you grasp that one, Raptor?


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off







Sure, but you have the assumption the government owns our money and decides how much we keep. Okay. What is the baseline? 50% of everything and when we pay less it is a cut? 45%? what is this mandatory rate the Federal government gets to keep? Why is that okay with you? You can always pay more taxes if you want too, check the box and pay more....However something tells me you don't pay a dime in income takes...My guess is that you get an EIC credit

It is hilarious that those who pay nothing have no problem telling those that do to pay more...Fucking hilarious.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 9:12 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

The last time anyone reformed taxes, it was Reagan, and what he wound up doing was... as usual,.. soaking the middle class by eliminating deductions which meant the most to them
Quote:

Businesses get to depreciate their assets such as buildings and equipment, but people do not. Businesses get tax loopholes which people do not.

If we're going to give business the same rights as real people, we should give them the same friggin' tax burden. And if they knowingly kill people, the business should be sentenced to death.

What a lovely idea! And the new tax-cut extension, by the way, increases their depreciation abilities. One more for the Republicans (tho' it's been touted as one of the things we "got" in exchange for the tax-cut extension!).


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 9:20 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

It is hilarious that those who pay nothing have no problem telling those that do to pay more...Fucking hilarious.
I agree. Only that applies to corporations and the wealthy, who do pay less than the middle class and often pay... nothing. Yep, nothing.

So, what do you say to THAT?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 10:03 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Well, apparently nothing.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 10:11 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:

Quote:

you just first RAISE taxes, and have folks pay at that rate, before you can cut them, and claim taxes were 'cut'.
Stupid statement.



Nope. 100% completely true and accurate statement.

You're just being petty and fussy, because you know I'm right, and don't want to admit it.


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 10:14 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
So you maintain that Bush never cut taxes, right?



Never said that, and clearly, you've got something wrong w/ your brain.

So, you maintain that Obama never was elected President, right ?




" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 10:16 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:

It is hilarious that those who pay nothing have no problem telling those that do to pay more...Fucking hilarious.
I agree. Only that applies to corporations and the wealthy, who do pay less than the middle class and often pay... nothing. Yep, nothing.

So, what do you say to THAT?



You're beyond delusional.

The rich pay more than their fair share ( what ever the hell that's suppose to mean ). They pay the freight for most of the taxes paid in this country, and by more than they earn.


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 10:17 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


That's always ignored, isn't it?
Quote:

those who pay nothing have no problem telling those that do to pay more
applies directly to those who buy legislators to decrease their own taxes and give them more loopholes and deductions which don't apply to those who pay, or pay MORE, in taxes (i.e., the middle class).

Kind of a dichotomy, isn't it?

Interesting that the righties always consider everyone but the rich to be "the poor" who pay "nothing".[wuote]This year’s release of the Forbes list of the 400 wealthiest Americans comes at a time when taxes and tax rates are much in the news. That might get you to wondering, how heavy an income tax burden do the richest Americans really shoulder?

While tax returns are private, in recent years the Internal Revenue Service has published an annual study of the taxes paid on the 400 highest reported incomes.

Thanks to the 15% tax rate on long term capital gains, the 400 highest earners pay a lower effective federal income tax rate than ordinary rich folks. In 2007 (the last year the IRS has published data for) the 400 derived two thirds of their average adjusted gross income of $345 million from capital gains and paid an average effective rate of just 16.6%. Taxpayers earning $1 million to $5 million, who get more of their income from salary and other “ordinary” income taxed at a top 35% rate, paid an effective tax rate of 24%.

It’s not just the lower capital gains rate that gives the uber rich an edge. As top tax rates inevitably rise, their ability to control when they recognize income will set them even further apart from the merely well paid. “People that have investments have choices that people that have salaries don’t have,’’ observes Robert Gordon, president of Twenty-First Securities, a New York firm specializing in tax-efficient strategies for the wealthy.

As Columbia Law School Professor Michael Graetz, a former Treasury official and leading authority on the tax system points out, if capital gains rates rise too high, the rich can delay selling assets, thus cutting federal tax revenues. That’s one reason he expects that while all rates will rise, the top capital gains levy will remain significantly lower than the top rate on salary.

Still, even if they find the gains rates inconveniently high, there are times that rich folks do want to diversify their portfolios or raise some cash to, say, buy a sports franchise. (What’s the point of being a billionaire if you can’t move beyond fantasy football to micromanaging a real team?)

http://blogs.forbes.com/janetnovack/2010/09/23/the-very-rich-are-diffe
rent-they-pay-a-lower-tax-rate
/
Quote:

No Taxes for Owners, Only Workers

Bush's 'ownership society' means that someone is going to have to pay the taxes that rich people are no longer paying. And that someone is low-wage workers.

Tax cuts are shifting more of the burden of taxes to middle-class and working-class households.

This is important because the Bush team is counting on buying millions of votes with their tax cuts. Most people know that the biggest chunk of the tax cut goes to the rich and the super rich: about a quarter of the 2001-2003 tax cuts went to just 1 percent of taxpayers. These are people with an average income of more than a million dollars a year.

But there are many people who think: who cares if they give away billions to rich people who don't need it, so long as I can get a few hundred dollars in the deal? But they are mistaken.

What they don't understand is that someone is going to have to pay those taxes that rich people are no longer paying. And that someone is them.

The Bush team's tax policy seems deliberately designed to shift the burden of taxes from the richest taxpayers to those who are, in their estimation, lower down on the food chain.

Getting rid of the estate – that is, inheritance – tax benefited less than two percent of taxpayers; about half of them got a windfall averaging $3.4 million. Reducing capital gains taxes is another giveaway to the rich, enabling billionaires to pay a lower marginal tax rate on their income from stock sales than that what a nurse or truck driver pays on their wages. And then there is the tax cut on stock dividends: many people thought that they would get at least something from this, since they own at least some stock in their retirement accounts. But they were tricked here too: if you have a retirement account, your income from dividends will be taxed when you withdraw the money for retirement. Only those who own stocks outside of retirement accounts – overwhelmingly very rich people – got a break.

The real purpose of the Bush team's tax policy was to rewrite the tax code to create, as Mr. Bush calls it, "an ownership society": one in which owners do not pay taxes, but workers do.

http://www.alternet.org/story/19951/

Would be nice if the cry of "the rich pay the majority of taxes" as a reason we shouldn't let their tax cuts expire would always be refuted by the fact that:

1. The rich have far more ways to avoid paying their fair share, and many of them pay LESS taxes than those earning less;

2. Tax cuts for the rich increase the deficit, requiring higher state and local taxes, which put the burden on everyone else; and

3. The rich earn disproportionate amount of money, in comparison to what the rest of the country's workers earn.

Claiming "the rich pay the biggest share" is disingenuous and simplistic. In point of fact, they pay LESS than their "fair share".

So there are facts and figures; rather than calling names and making silly statements, prove them wrong, if you can. You can't.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 10:21 AM

KANEMAN


I leave it to the man....Can't argue with this.




NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 10:28 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

those who pay nothing have no problem telling those that do to pay more


Because that is EXACTLY what the Left wants. The upper 1% to pay all the taxes, and everyone else to pay next to no taxes.

It all comes down to simple numbers, and the Dems are quick to play the class warfare card. They know there are far, FAR more lower and middle class voters than there are rich voters, so the Left basically tells the rich folks to f-off, sit down and shut up.


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 11:06 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Your responses have nothing to do with facts and figures, they are merely statements of your own beliefs and biases. Ergo, they are irrelevant to any serious debate.

Since only the responses to posted facts and figures, with cites, are irrelevant, there's no point in responding. In other words: Bored now, on to better things.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 11:54 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Since the bottom 98% have seen their "wealth" increase by less than 3% in the last decade, while the top 2% have seen their wealth INCREASE by over 250% in that same time period, I'd say it's clear who isn't paying "their fair share".

This Space For Rent!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 1:41 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

The rich pay more than their fair share ( what ever the hell that's suppose to mean ). They pay the freight for most of the taxes paid in this country, and by more than they earn.
The rich pay more than their fair share ( what ever the hell that's suppose to mean ). They pay the freight for most of the taxes paid in this country, and by more than they earn.

You really are beyond delusional. So here's a fact which I'm sure you will ignore, like you do so many...

Study says most corporations pay no U.S. income taxes

Quote:

Most U.S. and foreign corporations doing business in the United States avoid paying any federal income taxes, despite trillions of dollars worth of sales, a government study released on Tuesday said.

The Government Accountability Office said 72 percent of all foreign corporations and about 57 percent of U.S. companies doing business in the United States paid no federal income taxes for at least one year between 1998 and 2005.

More than half of foreign companies and about 42 percent of U.S. companies paid no U.S. income taxes for two or more years in that period, the report said.

Including ExxonMobil and GE. This is from the business magazine
www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1249465620080812

And, to reiterate Niki's point, which you totally ignored
Quote:

Thanks to the 15% tax rate on long term capital gains, the 400 highest earners pay a lower effective federal income tax rate than ordinary rich folks. In 2007 (the last year the IRS has published data for) the 400 derived two thirds of their average adjusted gross income of $345 million from capital gains and paid an average effective rate of just 16.6%. Taxpayers earning $1 million to $5 million, who get more of their income from salary and other “ordinary” income taxed at a top 35% rate, paid an effective tax rate of 24%.
You can totally ignore these facts... you usually do. But you're still a turd.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 1:50 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Since the bottom 98% have seen their "wealth" increase by less than 3% in the last decade, while the top 2% have seen their wealth INCREASE by over 250% in that same time period, I'd say it's clear who isn't paying "their fair share".



We don't ( yet ) have tax on wealth.

But I'm sure you and Barry 'spread the wealth' Obama would love to change all that too.




" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 19, 2010 3:10 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


By the way, Warren Buffet issued a challenge to the Forbes 400, betting a million dollars that his office staff pay a higher tax rate than any of them. That was in 2007. To date, that prize has gone unclaimed.

Corporations do not pay income taxes. The SCOTUS *says* they are individuals, and have the same free speech rights as people, but they don't have the same responsibilities to pay their taxes.

Many of the ultra-rich pay 15% or less in taxes, because their "income" isn't labeled as such. The working class have no such advantages.

This Space For Rent!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 20, 2010 5:27 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


urgh. Too much reality for rappy.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 21, 2010 8:11 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


All that needs saying about this "debate" (which it isn't, as in a debate one side refutes the other side's points by providing points of their own), is
Quote:

You can totally ignore these facts
When one chooses to ignore facts and respond merely with flat statements having nothing to do with the topic, there IS no "other side".

To refute what the facts which have been presented there need to be facts and figures provided. Otherwise, it's just blowing smoke up your ass. Sig is right, to nobody's surprise; it's easier for the "mentally lazy" to go right on believing what they want than to think...or learn.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 21, 2010 8:16 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
urgh. Too much reality for rappy.



You seem to have a problem w/ your brain being missing.


Quote:

The Government Accountability Office said 72 percent of all foreign corporations and about 57 percent of U.S. companies doing business in the United States paid no federal income taxes for at least one year between 1998 and 2005.


So ? What's that have to do w/anything ? You make it seem as if they pay NO taxes, what so ever. Fact is, the US has the 2nd highest tax rate for corporations in the industrial world. Behind Japan, if I recall correctly. These red herrings the Left loves to toss out, these lengthy diatribes and lectures on how little we are taxed are complete and total con games.

You can't TAX this nation into prosperity. That's the flaw you on the Left simply refuse to acknowledge and get through your skulls.

Taxing Warren Buffett or Bill Gates more won't give you or anyone you know 1 god damn thing more.

The REAL issue is out of control Gov't spending.

But you're too god damn hung up on proving ME wrong, hating Bush or what ever the hell has you bent out of shape at the moment to even THINK.

It really does get annoying.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 21, 2010 11:24 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

57 percent of U.S. companies doing business in the United States paid no federal income taxes
is perfectly valid. It illustrates how, despite what the tax RATES indicate, there are ways even companies which make humongous profits can get away with paying no taxes at all.

You just made the argument for us:
Quote:

the US has the 2nd highest tax rate for corporations in the industrial world
That merely PROVES that, whatever the tax "rates" are supposed to be, the fact is that many corporations DIDN'T PAY any taxes at all. How do you rationalize those two facts?

What the "rates" are has nothing to do with what some actually PAY. I'm not sure why you can't grasp that, unless you don't want to.

There is no "con game" involved in showing that despite the claims that the rich pay high taxes, the facts are that they have so many ways of AVOIDING that tax "rate", that in reality they pay nothing like that. Quoting tax rates is irrelevant when people actually PAY less than the prescribed rate.

I don't believe anyone has said they believe taxing the rich FAIRLY will give anyone else "more". We've been arguing that

a) The rich don't pay what the tax rate for them says they should;

b) Very few rich receiving by FAR the vast majority of the income, while being able to avoid paying what they are supposed to, in an economy isn't healthy;

c) Tax dodges, subsidies, incentives, etc., have created a society in which the rich continue to get richer through no "work" of their own, while the rest of the populace's earnings lag more and more behind, despite them putting forth far more actual labor.

You want to refute #1, show facts and figures on exactly how much people earning billions ACTUALLY pay, not what percentage or what their tax rate supposedly is.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 21, 2010 5:59 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
urgh. Too much reality for rappy.



You seem to have a problem w/ your brain being missing.


Quote:

The Government Accountability Office said 72 percent of all foreign corporations and about 57 percent of U.S. companies doing business in the United States paid no federal income taxes for at least one year between 1998 and 2005.


So ? What's that have to do w/anything ? You make it seem as if they pay NO taxes, what so ever. Fact is, the US has the 2nd highest tax rate for corporations in the industrial world. Behind Japan, if I recall correctly. These red herrings the Left loves to toss out, these lengthy diatribes and lectures on how little we are taxed are complete and total con games.



Can you show us any corporation that actually PAYS that "2nd highest tax rate for corporations"? ExxonMobil didn't pay a dime in corporate income taxes, despite posting the largest profits ever recorded by any corporation, so your red herrings about how high the corporate taxes are in the U.S. are just pure bullshit.

Quote:


You can't TAX this nation into prosperity. That's the flaw you on the Left simply refuse to acknowledge and get through your skulls.



You can't tax-CUT this nation into prosperity, either.

Quote:


Taxing Warren Buffett or Bill Gates more won't give you or anyone you know 1 god damn thing more.



Or them 1 god damn thing less. Maybe we should try it and see.

Quote:


The REAL issue is out of control Gov't spending.



Which you had no issue with at all while the Republicans were in charge.

But go ahead - show us all where you'll but $1.5 trillion out of the federal budget next year. Be specific. I'll wait.


This Space For Rent!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 21, 2010 7:42 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

So ? What's that have to do w/anything ? You make it seem as if they pay NO taxes, what so ever. Fact is, the US has the 2nd highest tax rate for corporations in the industrial world. Behind Japan, if I recall correctly. These red herrings the Left loves to toss out, these lengthy diatribes and lectures on how little we are taxed are complete and total con games.
Do we even live in the same world? Read the same words?

The NOMINAL tax rates are high. But really... they're no higher than what I pay. But I pay on my AGI (adjusted gross income) from which I can deduct only a few limited things (charitable contributions, real estate taxes, mortgage interest.) I ALSO pay sales tax on all my non-food items.

A business, however, gets to deduct everything... rent, wages, gas, water, electricity, internet and phone connections, dividends, research expenses, interest on loans... They don't pay sales on the materials that they buy (OEM exemption). And unlike me, they get to depreciate their large purchases too.

So although the RATES are high, business pays
on a much lower basis. And because of various loopholes, many businesses pay nothing. All in all. the effective income tax rate (across all businesses) is 14%.

Quote:

But of the 275 Fortune 500 companies that made a profit each year from 2001 to 2003 and for which adequate information to draw conclusions is publicly available, only a small proportion paid federal income taxes anywhere near that statutory 35 percent tax rate. The vast majority paid considerably less.

In fact, in 2002 and 2003, the average effective tax rate for all of these 275 companies was less than half the statutory 35 percent rate. Over the 2001-2003 period, effective tax rates ranged from a low of -59.6 percent for Pepco Holdings to a high of 34.5 percent for CVS.

Over the three-year period, the average effective rate for all 275 companies dropped by a fifth, from 21.4 percent in 2001 to 17.2 percent in 2002-2003.

Eighty-two of the 275 companies, almost a third of the total, paid zero or less in federal income taxes in at least one year from 2001 to 2003. In the years they paid no income tax, these companies earned $102 billion in pretax U.S. profits. But instead of paying $35.6 billion in income taxes as the statutory 35 percent corporate tax rate seems to require, these companies generated so many excess tax breaks that they received outright tax rebate checks from the U.S. Treasury, totaling $12.6 billion. These companies' "negative tax rates" meant that they made more after taxes than before taxes in those no-tax years.

Twenty-eight corporations enjoyed negative federal income tax rates over the entire 2001-2003 period. These companies, whose pretax U.S. profits totaled $44.9 billion over the three years, included, among others: Pepco Holdings (-59.6 percent tax rate), Prudential Financial (-46.2 percent), ITT Industries (-22.3 percent), Boeing (-18.8 percent), Unisys (-16.0 percent), Fluor (-9.2 percent) and CSX (-7.5 percent), the company previously headed by current Secretary of the Treasury John Snow.

In 2003 alone, 46 companies paid zero or less in federal income taxes. These 46 companies told their shareholders they earned U.S. pretax profits in 2003 of $42.6 billion, yet they received tax rebates totaling $5.4 billion. Almost as many companies, 42, paid no tax in 2002, reporting $43.5 billion in pretax profits, yet receiving $4.9 billion in tax rebates. From 2001 to 2003, the number of no-tax companies jumped from 33 to 46, an increase of 40 percent.

In 2001, the Treasury paid corporations $40 billion in tax refunds, a third more than the 1998-2000 average.

Then in 2002 and 2003, after the law was changed to expand tax subsidies and make it easier for corporations to carry back excess tax breaks to earlier years, corporate tax refunds skyrocketed to an average of $63 billion a year - more than double the 1998-2000 average.

Corporations are now paying the lowest levels of taxes in the post-World War II era. In fiscal 2002 and 2003, federal corporate incomes taxes dropped to their lowest sustained level as a share of the economy since World War II. Only a single year during the early Reagan administration was lower.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 22, 2010 8:06 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Thanx for the quote, Sig, it illustrates exactly what we've been trying to get through. Won't do any good, of course, since Rap ran away from the discussion, as usual once proven wrong, and presents facts and figures neither he nor any of his ilk will bother even reading. But it's illuminating for the rest of us.

I'm trying to come here less, and the less I come, when I do I am struck yet again by the fact that Rap, Whozit and Kane offer nothing but generalizations and opinions, and keep offering the same no matter what is shown them which refutes their beliefs. More and more I see it is a waste of time to even respond to their parrotted talking points; it's never a debate, it's only a conversation where one side presents reality and the other just repeats the erroneous opinions they cling to. Me, I'm going to try to "respond" to their claims merely by refuting them ONCE, then ignoring their efforts to repeat their disproven claims and trigger responses with personal attacks. I hope I can keep remembering to do that, because anything else is merely pissing into the wind.

Several of us have made the same points repeatedly in this thread, and proven them with facts and figures. Yet the only reaction is to repeat falsehoods or run away. Why bother trying beyond the initial argument which shows them wrong?


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 22, 2010 9:20 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:


Several of us have made the same points repeatedly in this thread, and proven them with facts and figures. Yet the only reaction is to repeat falsehoods or run away. Why bother trying beyond the initial argument which shows them wrong?




I know I'm never going to change Rappy's mind, or KKKaney's. If I keep bringing the facts and figures to the argument (which is what it IS, since it damn sure isn't a debate), it's for the casual observer who may have stumbled in. If you walk into an argument and hear one side lay out a case, and the other side just goes, "Nyuh-UH!", you might get the impression that the second side is out of their depth. When you hear the first side KEEP bringing facts and evidence, and KEEP making cogent points, and the second side offers NOTHING but more repetitions of "Nyuh-UH!", then you've removed all doubt that they have anything relevant to say on the matter.

Time and again, Rappy has claimed that he could slay us all with his wealth of knowledge and debating "skilz", and time and again we've watched as he basically pulls down his pants, yells "Pee-pee-face!" and runs away. I think it's pretty easy to see the depth of his convictions, the breadth of his knowledge, and the soundness of his arguments.



This Space For Rent!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 22, 2010 9:37 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


You misunderstood, Mike. My question was why KEEP ON trying to provide facts, etc., within the same thread? Once stated, we know there will be no viable comeback; they'll do nothing but hurl stupid insults and say "I'm right, neener neener", so yes, stating the facts is everything you said it is...but so many of go on trying to state the same things over and over, sometimes in different ways, when it goes nowhere.

I do the same thing as you and others; I present the other side, and try to show facts as to why I believe as I do. But all too often I'VE been triggered into repeating myself, so when I saw it from a bit of time away, I realized what a waste it is. There are never valid points from them, so once refuted, there is no further need to play their game, it seems to me.

I've never said "don't refute what they say", and I think every time they try it, refutation is good. But why keep on conversing with them when all you get from that point on is nonsense? That's my point.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 22, 2010 12:35 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Unfortunately, you have to refute what they say at every single instance, lest they misconstrue the one time you DON'T as you agreeing with their "facts". Remember, Bush's sixteen famous words about yellowcake in the State of the Union speech were stricken from the speech nearly a dozen times. They only needed to get through once to change the course of the nation. They got through because one of the speechwriters got sick of telling his superiors that they couldn't put that in there, because it was categorically untrue, and provably so, but they kept putting it in the speech, and he finally gave up and said "fuck it".

Look how well that worked out for us.

This Space For Rent!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 22, 2010 12:42 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


You're still not getting it, at least I think you're not. I said yes, we should put forth the facts in EVERY THREAD where they make the claims, but to keep repeating ourselves over and over in the thread is a waste of time. The opinions and misinformation will have been corrected, for me that's all that needs doing.

Which is not to say I don't get so frustrated I do it myself, I'm just going to try not to. All it does is encourage them to keep going and gives them the excuse for more personal attacks. Bah.

Maybe for me "see above" would be sufficient...


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 22, 2010 1:57 PM

FREMDFIRMA



See, Mikey is, in a way, actually politer than me about it, once you understand the difference in rationale and intent.

He'll argue with em, debate the point - I wanna get in their pointy little heads and break stuff, break THEM, and I am unashamed of it, given what they'd do to anyone who isn't just like them given half a chance, and the fact that I've kinda devoted all that I am to making damn sure they never get one.

Which might somewhat answer as to why so often they refuse to acknowledge, much less respond to, my arguments as opposed to Mikeys.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 22, 2010 3:02 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


You're not bringing 'facts and figures' You're only bringing the cherry picked bits you want folks to see, and ignoring the rest.

I haven't the time, the patience nor the inclination to bother chasing down all the red herrings and dead end conversations.

You morons are the epitome of wrasslin' with pigs in slop.

Before too long, there's no telling the difference between us, only you guys love being covered in the stuff. I don't.



" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 22, 2010 4:05 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

You're not bringing 'facts and figures' You're only bringing the cherry picked bits you want folks to see, and ignoring the rest.
The rest? The rest of WHAT??? Why don't you bring that "rest" to the table, son? 'Cause I sure ain't seen none of it here.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 23, 2010 4:08 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Well, Rappy- last call to set the record straight. Please being us those facts and figures and anything else you feel we have ignored... preferably something rooted in reality and not just a Wulfie-style slew of buzzwords. Be prepared to explain and discuss.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 23, 2010 8:52 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Well, Rappy- last call to set the record straight. Please being us those facts and figures and anything else you feel we have ignored... preferably something rooted in reality and not just a Wulfie-style slew of buzzwords. Be prepared to explain and discuss.




And...


crickets.


What a surprise.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 24, 2010 4:33 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


This discussion has taken place countless times.

I'll not waste my time w/ another version.


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 24, 2010 5:52 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Well, in another thread you said:

Quote:

It's a moot point. You erroneously think that that the 'rich' don't pay most of the taxes in this country.

www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=46823
To which I replied
Quote:

Rappy- that's not what I think. Never said it. My point, however, was that the rich (and corporations) don't even pay as much BY PERCENTAGE as the middle class. Got it now? I mean, if you're going to argue with me, at least respond to what I said, not to some misunderstanding.
So, let's take the discussion in a new direction: Is that fair? Should the rich (and corporations) pay less by percentage than the middle class? That's a simple question with a yes or no answer.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 24, 2010 9:07 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Hell no, it's not even remotely close.




" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 24, 2010 10:41 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Every time I step away for a day or more, when I come back I see from a more objective view just how absurd this place is. I see how people put up threads to discuss things, and, well, you know what happens. I see the same cries, opinins, personal attacks and fallacious statements with no backup by the same people, over and over.

It's no wonder people are driven from here. I will miss Geezer, tho' we disagreed on almost everything, and I'm finding it easier and easier to stay away myself, when coming here just reminds me how the sickos among us cling to the same tactics and fuck up the discussions, then use name-calling to reject any cry they back up their ridiculous claims.

It's truly a real shame. This place could be so damned cool...but that's wishful thinking... The snarks don't bother me in the slightest anymore, they're just a jarring reminder that realistic debate/discussion literally CAN NOT take place here.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 24, 2010 10:49 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Hell no, it's not even remotely close.
Not even remotely close to being fair? Or not even remotely close to being fact?

Let me re-phrase the question: ASSUMING THAT IT IS TRUE that the very wealthy and corporations pay less tax by percentage than the middle class, would it be fair? Just asking for your opinion, not for your agreement.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 24, 2010 11:40 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Very well-posed question, and very on point. I wish you could get a decent answer...I fear you won't.

It's easy to bitch about the rich being over taxed if you use the GENERAL figures; but when you get down to the ACTUAL figures showing they get taxed less than most of the rest of us, I think it gets too far away from the belief some have too much invested in for them to respond honestly. Wait and see...


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 24, 2010 9:01 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


It's not a trick question Rappy.

Well, actually it is. It's very specific, and very simple. Which is why it scares you.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL