? For liberals: If taxes go up on rich, how will you feel about consequences?

[daveman]

Then you would be wrong. The only reason they sunset after 10 years is because that is the rule when using reconciliation. It was the condition that Regressives had to abide by in order to pass the tax cuts with a 51-50 majority.

Gosh, you're stupid. He asked, "did you or did you not attribute the sunsetting of Bush's tax cuts...", and I responded, "I think I did."

He was asking what I did, not why the sunset was put into place.

Do you even bother reading before you post?

the point is: you were wrong. The sunsetting had nothing to do with what you said it did.

And what did I say it had to do with?

 

[Intense]

I think we should pass a law that Progressives not be allowed to buy anything discounted or on sale until they figure out the relationship between value and flow. Alway's take take, take, never giving back, never giving an inch. The concept that government gets a cut every time money changes hands is not enough. It is and alway's has been about control with these parasites. The parasite ends up getting bigger than it's host, and still wants more.

 

[rightwinger]

I think we should pass a law that Progressives not be allowed to buy anything discounted or on sale until they figure out the relationship between value and flow. Alway's take take, take, never giving back, never giving an inch. The concept that government gets a cut every time money changes hands is not enough. It is and alway's has been about control with these parasites. The parasite ends up getting bigger than it's host, and still wants more.

How naive.....

You don't think Conservative governments take a cut every time money changes hands?

They just spend it on different things

 

[JBeukema]

So, basically, if taxes go up a lil' bit and remain far below what they were during our gilded age, somehow that'll trigger the Apocalypse, the economy that these low tax and interest rates and other fiscal policies have built up will become undone, and the rivers will turn to blood?


I'm skeptical

 

[Intense]

I think we should pass a law that Progressives not be allowed to buy anything discounted or on sale until they figure out the relationship between value and flow. Alway's take take, take, never giving back, never giving an inch. The concept that government gets a cut every time money changes hands is not enough. It is and alway's has been about control with these parasites. The parasite ends up getting bigger than it's host, and still wants more.

How naive.....

You don't think Conservative governments take a cut every time money changes hands?

They just spend it on different things

Yes I do. That was not my point. They just don't complain as much as your crowd, and they satisfy easier. Your crowd will never have enough.

 

[Intense]

So, basically, if taxes go up a lil' bit and remain far below what they were during our gilded age, somehow that'll trigger the Apocalypse, the economy that these low tax and interest rates and other fiscal policies have built up will become undone, and the rivers will turn to blood?


I'm skeptical

My point is that Taxes fall under the jurisdiction of the consent of the governed, be they big or little. When Government takes and then selectively redistribute with little or no reason, they effect market's and competition. They show favor here and disfavor there, hurting by design and incompetence. We have to survive the dictates of Agencies and Divisions that are not accountable to us in any way anymore. It is abuse.

 

[The T]

I think we should pass a law that Progressives not be allowed to buy anything discounted or on sale until they figure out the relationship between value and flow. Alway's take take, take, never giving back, never giving an inch. The concept that government gets a cut every time money changes hands is not enough. It is and alway's has been about control with these parasites. The parasite ends up getting bigger than it's host, and still wants more.

How naive.....

You don't think Conservative governments take a cut every time money changes hands?

They just spend it on different things

Something that they need to be held accountable for no matter HOW it's spent. Thus? NO EXCUSE.

 

[shintao]

The Bush tax cuts. If they expire, massive tax hikes on rich people and rich companies will ensue.

Liberals: If you are at work in January, for a wealthy company or wealthy boss, and you the Bush cuts to expire as Obama wants, how will you feel if you get called into the office and told:


"Since Washington let the tax cuts expire, we can't afford the staff your division as is. 40% of you will be laid off. It will be a randomly selected group. You'll know within 2 weeks."

The tax isn't about corporations, it is about individuals, the top 20% or so.

Never forget, as much as you lefties hate the rich and hate corporations, they provide the jobs in this country. If you want a good paying, stable job, most likely it's gonna be working for a rich person or company. Thats reality, and I'm thankful for the rich who have employed me and don't want their taxes to go up, because the more money they send to Washington DC, the less money they send to their employees.

Yes, corporations should pack their douche bags and move overseas. We need small business fire-ups to put this nation to work again. You have forgotten that corps just pass the taxes to consumers. It is the rich individual who doesn't have that option, and the person you want to protect.

 

[shintao]

A look at corporate tax rates that the rightys want to protect, that tell us corporations are paying to much. I don't think they have a clue.

 

[JBeukema]

Here's an idea: let's go back to what we were doing back when we were a superpower....

 

[daveman]

Here's an idea: let's go back to what we were doing back when we were a superpower....

Oh, good Gaea NO!! America must be brought down to third-world nation status to atone for her past sins!

/leftist mode

 

[JBeukema]

As a [center-]leftist, in am offended by your lumping us all in with those moonbats.

 

[Charles_Main]

The fact is Liberals do not believe there will be any conequences their dilluted ideas tell them the rich contribute nothing and sit around hoarding their money making no contribution to the Economy at all. They also believe that the Rich when Democrats say it does not include the VAST majority of Small businesses in this country. Who if they want to keep significant amounts of cash on hand (a wise business practice) are forced to show on their Tax returns a larger than actual Income each year and pay high taxes on it. Robbing them of the Profit they need to reinvest and grow their company and hire more workers.

The plain fact is Liberals think the Rich only take and never give, and produce nothing. Nothing could be further from the truth but 90 plus years of Liberal Propaganda and revisionist History in our schools has convinced them all of it.

 

[JBeukema]

you're thinking of Progressives and democratic socialists, not Liberals

 

[The T]

you're thinking of Progressives and democratic socialists, not Liberals

What is Liberty but Liberalism in true form?

Sound about right?

With that said? That liberty comes with responsibility not to tread upon another when exercising it.

So in short? I do belive I agree with you.

 

[MikeK]

The Bush tax cuts. If they expire, massive tax hikes on rich people and rich companies will ensue.

Liberals: If you are at work in January, for a wealthy company or wealthy boss, and you the Bush cuts to expire as Obama wants, how will you feel if you get called into the office and told:


"Since Washington let the tax cuts expire, we can't afford the staff your division as is. 40% of you will be laid off. It will be a randomly selected group. You'll know within 2 weeks."

You have created a delusional hypothesis which reflects your basic misunderstanding of the facts and reveals how thoroughly indoctrinated you are with corporatist propaganda (compliments of Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, et al).

Profits occur after expenses. Corporate profits that taxed, not expenses. The only thing taxes do is reduce profit retention. Expenses remain the same. So there is no reason to diminish the work force because of a tax increase. To do so would further diminish profits because of diminished production.

What you have suggested is analogous to a working person whose income tax has been increased deciding to work less hours to compensate for the reduction in net wages.

Also, keep in mind that in spite of the existing corporate tax rate, which is 35%, the effectiveness of creating accounting is such that no significant corporation paid more than 15% tax since the Bush rate took effect. And some major corporations, such as Exxon/Mobil, paid zero tax last year. That's zero tax on upwards of forty billion dollars in profit.

You should also understand that the Bush tax cuts have cost our government over two trillion dollars in internal revenue.

 

[MikeK]

I'm really sick of the term "Bush tax cuts". From this point forward I will refer to it as "Obama tax increases". It's his economy now.

That's called deceptive reasoning. But if it makes you feel better, keep doing it. It doesn't change anything.

 

[MikeK]

I think you'll see more and more companies headed overseas.
You probably will anyway.murka is a piss poor place to try to run a business.

That situation is easy to correct by simply imposing tariffs on them, which is what we should be doing to every turncoat American corporation which has betrayed the nation that gave it life and nourished its growth. Those corporations should be forced to come back and if they refuse they should be starved to death -- which the American consumer market is easily capable of doing.

If they wish to be foreign corporations, let them. And let them die as such.

 

[MikeK]

Oh I understand that the "world is complex" and unlike the elitists on this board, I do not pretend to be an expert on every subject.

What I do understand is that my taxes are going up next year. Increase. Under Obama. I'm tired of people trying to re-write the dictionary.

Do you earn over $250,000 a year? If so, don't expect too much sympathy, either here or elsewhere.

 

[daveman]

As a [center-]leftist, in am offended by your lumping us all in with those moonbats.

In my view of the spectrum, there's no such thing as a center-leftist. I'd say you're a center-liberal.

Claiming to be a center-leftist would be like claiming to be a moderate Stalinist.