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

[Synthaholic]

"...don't claim that making money isn't profit."

It's like you're a cartoon character.

Maybe you should look up the definition of 'profit'.

Definition of PROFIT

1
: a valuable return : gain
2
: the excess of returns over expenditure in a transaction or series of transactions; especially : the excess of the selling price of goods over their cost
3
: net income usually for a given period of time​

I really gotta get me one of those leftist dictionaries. Apparently, it's just a ______________ after every word, so you can make up your own meaning.

You do know that non-profits make money, don't you?

Dumbass.

 

[Synthaholic]

Maybe the more adventuress Liberals could try working for a while without punching in. See how long it takes to sink in. I had a friend way back, we worked together, at a popular place in Santa Cruz, Ca., anyway, he liked to bury his pay checks like a squirrel and just let them rot. Drove the book keeper crazy, the boss loved him for it.

See daveman about that. He's the expert.


Oh, wait...I read that wrong. I thought you said 'punch in without working'.

 

[Synthaholic]

Six polls show most Americans favor letting the tax cuts for the rich expire:

The Plum Line - Dear Dems: You can win the argument over Bush tax cuts

It is all in how the question is asked. The day We as a whole stop respecting private property, We are all lost, we become the Property of the State. Greed is a Sin, so is Envy. When Justice loses it's impartiality, it also loses it's identity.

Ahh - so you support them building the mosque on their private property. Good!

 

[asterism]

How about we put taxes on the rich back just enough to pay for the wars that Bush never paid for?

How about we tax liberals for the costs of their unsustainable failed Utopian schemes?

Doesn't this tit4tat game get old? LOL!! How about we just put a war tax on everybody and get the debt paid off. Once the slate has been cleaned, we can shit can the IRS, and begin a donation only federal government where you accept responsibility for your own actions. From then on, you will know the cost of a loaf of bread and a jug of wine.

Why just a war tax? Why not an entitlement tax too? Which is larger, defense or entitlements?

 

[Exegete]

For supposed conservatives (or people fooled by the plutocrats).

If taxes on the rich continue to get lower and lower, and more and more wealth is accumulated in the hands of a few, how will you feel about the consequences?

This has been the trend since the Reagan years.

Suppose your boss calls you into his office and says, "We have saved millions upon millions from the tax breaks we've received over the years. So we have plenty of capital to implement our plan to move ALL our operations overseas. Before we lay you off, we would like you to train our overseas operators in China and India."

"What?"

"It's too bad you didn't support the Obama plan to raise taxes on the rich. At least you would have enough money to cushion the people's descent into abysmal poverty."

"What would you have said if Obama had succeeded in raising taxes on the rich?"

I would have said, "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. Whatever policy you support, we will maximize our personal profits, and lay you off. What do you think the Bush years were all about?"

So what choice do we have?

At least under Obama, some wealth might get down to the lower strata (that means, the rest of us 98 per cent, who don't earn over 250,000 a year). That means, the demand of the average person will increase, and small local businesses might have a chance to thrive.

It's a long shot. But, making the rich richer, and making the plutocrats the political rules of the entire system won't help in any way.

People must reign in the oligarchs, the plutocrats, and the super rich.

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."

If you lose your job due to Obama allowing the companies and rich people to get their taxes hiked, how will you feel? Or, what if you come to work after watching MSNBC applaud Obama no longer allowing tax breaks for the rich, and find out your best friend at work got laid off, because it turns out the Bush tax cuts allowed enough capital for that company to expand your division 6 years ago and hire both of you, but now they cant afford you both and one has to go?????

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.

 

[shintao]

How about we tax liberals for the costs of their unsustainable failed Utopian schemes?

Doesn't this tit4tat game get old? LOL!! How about we just put a war tax on everybody and get the debt paid off. Once the slate has been cleaned, we can shit can the IRS, and begin a donation only federal government where you accept responsibility for your own actions. From then on, you will know the cost of a loaf of bread and a jug of wine.

Why just a war tax? Why not an entitlement tax too? Which is larger, defense or entitlements?

Whatever it takes to clear the books Tax is ok by me. Defense is, about 53% of the budget, but with no IRS you won't be worrying about any of it. All Volunteer Government Party (AVGP)

 

[shintao]

At least under Obama, some wealth might get down to the lower strata

I think you are hoping. Obama has a trillion in his hand, and that wasn't given to the people who voted for him, it wasn't given to the moms with rug rats at their feet, it was given to the disabled soldier down at the park, or the senior sitting there playing checkers.

It went to richet cocksuckers in America, not 300 million people who could have spent it at the local level in their own communities to raise the standard of living, put people to work, help small businesses. fuck no! It went into less than ten thousand rich motherfuckers hands to buy toys with and go on vacations.

So really, spare me the Obama "might get," because you are kidding yourself my friend. There are some things he has done good for us on, like National Health Care, a few jobs, protecting the gulf, but he is a conservative at heart.

 

[JiggsCasey]

If the Bush tax cuts worked so well, why are we just coming out of a 2 year recession?

We're not coming out of it.

 

[Zander]

Eat the rich, just add salt...oops Obama's wife is making that illegal...ok, just add Salsa!!!

 

[drsmith1072]

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.

Way to be in denial but as i have been asking for months, who set them up to expire in the first place??
REPUBLICANS, so they are to blame for them expiring but notice how the disheonst partisan hacks try to hold the left accountable for something the right set up.

Why didn't they make them permanent to begin with??

For a couple of reasons. 1. So they could use them as a political tool in the future as they are now. 2. So they wouldn;t ahve to include the taxcuts in budget projection years that came after they were set to expire therefore palying tricks with budget numbers.

The thing is that the REPUBLICANS are to blame for the taxcuts expiring but I doubt that you will find a single honest right winger that will hold them accountable for it.

They share the blame, but Obama made some campaign promises that he can't keep. A tax increase is still a tax increase regardless of whether it's a pre-scheduled increase or not.

LOL so the taxcuts are due to expire because the right CHOSE to make them temporary and you still wish to blame the dems?? LOL now that is hilarious. BTW, What promises are you refering to??

 

[drsmith1072]

"not re-implementing those tax cuts is NOT a tax increase...it's just a refusal to continue your guy's idiocy."
As posted by Jillian....

When you go from paying one amount in taxes then the next day you pay more........Well that's a tax hike,a tax increase,call it what you will.Anyone who disputes whether this tax cut created jobs or not is a fair argument...but do you really think that increasing taxes will create jobs.

C'mon Libs you can't be that stupid...or can you?

Then blame the party who set them up to expire instead of making them permanent, which they could have done.

So yes, taxes will go up for the top few if obama has his way. However due to the fact that the cuts are expiring based on the mechanism that the right set up one could hardly refer to it as a tax hike in the purest sense of the phrase due to the fact that no legislation is being passed to enact the increase.

Republicans set it up that way so why don't you hold them accountable?

Ah. "The purest sense." The purest sense of whether there is in fact a tax hike is whether a higher rate of taxes has been paid before and after a certain event.

Obama did not say, "I won't raise taxes," he said, "your taxes will not go up, not one dime." Well I made less than $250K last year and my taxes went up.

The fact remains that no action needs to be taken for the tax rates to go up so how can you claim or argue that the dems are going to raise taxes?? The dems are NOT increasing taxes but they will go up based on how the republicans set them up. So blame them.

Funny but care to explain how your federal taxes went up?? If your state taxes went up then you need to hold your state accountable instead of trying to use obama as the scapegoat for everything.
I see that you are good at making claims but very light on the substance. I wonder why??

 

[drsmith1072]

Libs love to spend other peoples money....

Based on the history of the party so do republicans.

Based on the history of the party so do republicans.

I think it's safe to say that politicians love to waste taxpayers' money. Exceptions are few and far between.

While the sad part is that it does indeed come down to degrees of bad or worse, it is still indisputable that Democrats spend way way way more than Republicans when they are in control.

Actually since that is only your OPINION it is highly disputable. But thanks for your OPINION.

 

[drsmith1072]

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.

Way to be in denial but as i have been asking for months, who set them up to expire in the first place??
REPUBLICANS, so they are to blame for them expiring but notice how the disheonst partisan hacks try to hold the left accountable for something the right set up.

Why didn't they make them permanent to begin with??

For a couple of reasons. 1. So they could use them as a political tool in the future as they are now. 2. So they wouldn;t ahve to include the taxcuts in budget projection years that came after they were set to expire therefore palying tricks with budget numbers.

The thing is that the REPUBLICANS are to blame for the taxcuts expiring but I doubt that you will find a single honest right winger that will hold them accountable for it.

They did not make the tax cuts permanent to because they didn't have the power to. Your argument is a twist on Catch-22.

Really?? Did they try to make them permanent?? Can you show where dems BLOCKED them from doing so?? Furthermore, is that the same reason that they didn't TRY to make them permanent the first time around too??

The right had the white house and both houses of congress and in the senate as they used fear to manipulate the masses. They only needed two democratic votes to pass anything and they got bill nelson and zell miller, who later spoke at the republican national convention. Furthermore, unlike the right who does vote as a block and tries to out anyone who differs from the whole as RiNOs, the left leaves room for dissenting opinions. At that time the right could get pretty much everything that they wanted to and usually did.
However, thanks for your spin.

That is hardly what any honest person would call a catch-22 but then we are talking about you. LOL

 

[Intense]

Way to be in denial but as i have been asking for months, who set them up to expire in the first place??
REPUBLICANS, so they are to blame for them expiring but notice how the disheonst partisan hacks try to hold the left accountable for something the right set up.

Why didn't they make them permanent to begin with??

For a couple of reasons. 1. So they could use them as a political tool in the future as they are now. 2. So they wouldn;t ahve to include the taxcuts in budget projection years that came after they were set to expire therefore palying tricks with budget numbers.

The thing is that the REPUBLICANS are to blame for the taxcuts expiring but I doubt that you will find a single honest right winger that will hold them accountable for it.

They share the blame, but Obama made some campaign promises that he can't keep. A tax increase is still a tax increase regardless of whether it's a pre-scheduled increase or not.

LOL so the taxcuts are due to expire because the right CHOSE to make them temporary and you still wish to blame the dems?? LOL now that is hilarious. BTW, What promises are you refering to??

Big choice, temporary or not at all. You are really credible.

 

[Intense]

Way to be in denial but as i have been asking for months, who set them up to expire in the first place??
REPUBLICANS, so they are to blame for them expiring but notice how the disheonst partisan hacks try to hold the left accountable for something the right set up.

Why didn't they make them permanent to begin with??

For a couple of reasons. 1. So they could use them as a political tool in the future as they are now. 2. So they wouldn;t ahve to include the taxcuts in budget projection years that came after they were set to expire therefore palying tricks with budget numbers.

The thing is that the REPUBLICANS are to blame for the taxcuts expiring but I doubt that you will find a single honest right winger that will hold them accountable for it.

They did not make the tax cuts permanent to because they didn't have the power to. Your argument is a twist on Catch-22.

Really?? Did they try to make them permanent?? Can you show where dems BLOCKED them from doing so?? Furthermore, is that the same reason that they didn't TRY to make them permanent the first time around too??

The right had the white house and both houses of congress and in the senate as they used fear to manipulate the masses. They only needed two democratic votes to pass anything and they got bill nelson and zell miller, who later spoke at the republican national convention. Furthermore, unlike the right who does vote as a block and tries to out anyone who differs from the whole as RiNOs, the left leaves room for dissenting opinions. At that time the right could get pretty much everything that they wanted to and usually did.
However, thanks for your spin.

That is hardly what any honest person would call a catch-22 but then we are talking about you. LOL

What kind of medications are you on. Talking with you is like a Twilight Zone episode.

 

[drsmith1072]

Way to be in denial but as i have been asking for months, who set them up to expire in the first place??
REPUBLICANS, so they are to blame for them expiring but notice how the disheonst partisan hacks try to hold the left accountable for something the right set up.

Why didn't they make them permanent to begin with??

For a couple of reasons. 1. So they could use them as a political tool in the future as they are now. 2. So they wouldn;t ahve to include the taxcuts in budget projection years that came after they were set to expire therefore palying tricks with budget numbers.

The thing is that the REPUBLICANS are to blame for the taxcuts expiring but I doubt that you will find a single honest right winger that will hold them accountable for it.

They did not make the tax cuts permanent to because they didn't have the power to. Your argument is a twist on Catch-22.

yep the obstructionist Dems in congress at the time would not have allowed them to be permanent.

Really?? Prove it?? What legisaltion to make the taxcuts permanent did the left block?? Show us the proof of the filibuster.

 

[drsmith1072]

Six polls show most Americans favor letting the tax cuts for the rich expire:

The Plum Line - Dear Dems: You can win the argument over Bush tax cuts

It is all in how the question is asked. The day We as a whole stop respecting private property, We are all lost, we become the Property of the State. Greed is a Sin, so is Envy. When Justice loses it's impartiality, it also loses it's identity.

So in other words ALL polls are invalid. So how do we define the will of the people since "It is all in how the question is asked."? LOL

It's funny how the right clings to polls when they agree witht heir point of view but makes lames excuses on why they shouldn't be trusted when the polls disagree with their point of view. LOL

Anyone else remember all of that "will of the people" bs the right was spewing when the healthcare bill was passed?? LOL

 

[Intense]

Six polls show most Americans favor letting the tax cuts for the rich expire:

The Plum Line - Dear Dems: You can win the argument over Bush tax cuts

It is all in how the question is asked. The day We as a whole stop respecting private property, We are all lost, we become the Property of the State. Greed is a Sin, so is Envy. When Justice loses it's impartiality, it also loses it's identity.

So in other words ALL polls are invalid. So how do we define the will of the people since "It is all in how the question is asked."? LOL

It's funny how the right clings to polls when they agree witht heir point of view but makes lames excuses on why they shouldn't be trusted when the polls disagree with their point of view. LOL

Anyone else remember all of that "will of the people" bs the right was spewing when the healthcare bill was passed?? LOL

Earth to Smith..... Earth to Smith..... Show me where I even Post Poll results. ...... As Hell freezes over.

Polls are manipulative, not all, but many. They are generally tailored to the needs and wants of those that pay for them. Some want truth, some want power or control. Your perspective is pretty good for that of a 9 year old.

Just ignore the damage your Health Care Bill is doing. Remember to blame us. That has always worked in the past. I know how offensive the will of the people is to your breed. That is your problem, not mine. It is the foundation of the Republic, as hard that is for you to digest. We The People pity Smith.

 

[Intense]

They did not make the tax cuts permanent to because they didn't have the power to. Your argument is a twist on Catch-22.

yep the obstructionist Dems in congress at the time would not have allowed them to be permanent.

Really?? Prove it?? What legisaltion to make the taxcuts permanent did the left block?? Show us the proof of the filibuster.

To what end. What do fact's matter to you. Do I sit here changing Smith's diapers? Do I prepare for the day, so that I can earn my way????? Tough choice..... Was I put here to give Smith a free education that he will just exploit and misconstrue? Maybe, You should work on your own foundation, start over, there is too much rot, in what you have already laid. Next thing Smith will be claiming that Democrats lower taxes and Conservatives represent Big Government.

 

[drsmith1072]

Face it Carbonated...You are trumped.

You cannot talk your way out of what you profess. You're painted into a corner and afraid to tread on that pretty painted surface you just laid out.

I'm done with you. You are a failure in your rhetoric. Admit it.

WOW, talk about delusional. You have done nothing to counter anything he said even as you barely responded to his posts and yet inspite of your failure you declare victory when you have NONE.

Your debating style is bascially making a statement of your OPINION that does NOTHING to counter what was said as you declare "you failed" and pretend that you made a valid point.