Prove it (or at least provide some evidence)!

[Wry Catcher]

I thought the essence of your argument was that the rich did not create jobs.

Whether or not taxes are raised crosses into two areas that I have a problem with and neither is connected with creating jobs:

1. If taxes are to be raised, then all people should bear the increase equally. The poor disproportionately receive the fruits of government tree and should have to pay tax for this. They do not. Where is their fair share?

If you raise the tax by 1% on the rich, then apply that 1% to the poor also and eliminate all credits, write offs, deductions and hide-aways for everyone. Obviously, 1% of a million beats 1% of $30,000.

If you owe 1%, then pay it.

2. When the government receives money, it wastes it. There is no accountability. No matter how much they get, they are still short of the amount that they spend. Unless and until there is some kind of accountability, there is no use in wasting more with this gang of blind and retarded economic leaders.

How's that 2009 budget coming along, Harry?

If the tax liability affects only a small percent of the population, then there is no real outcry when a tax is increased.

When Nixon implemented the Lottery as the mechanism for the draft, the riots ended because the affected population reduced from everyone to a small sliver. This is the same tactic AND it includes Class Warfare so it's perfect for public opinion driven politicians and therefore, Democrats.

"I thought the essence of your argument was that the rich did not create jobs." Wrong! I simply asked for evidence that the 1% were job creators. Seems the only examples are Gates and Jobs, both of whom created jobs as their ideas took hold and a huge market was established (allowing insider traders to share information on a can't miss making the wealthy richer).

 

[Wry Catcher]

Crook Alert! 52,000 Secret Bank Accounts of American Tax Evaders Hidden by UBS Gnomes of Zurich 8-16-11

Foreign Banks Recruit U.S. Tax Cheats by Jim Hightower on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent

Banks have been enabling wealthy tax cheats for many decades

The U.S. Strategy Against Banks Hiding Flight Capital Needs Help

Some links on foreign banks and cheats.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Crook Alert! 52,000 Secret Bank Accounts of American Tax Evaders Hidden by UBS Gnomes of Zurich 8-16-11

Foreign Banks Recruit U.S. Tax Cheats by Jim Hightower on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent

Banks have been enabling wealthy tax cheats for many decades

The U.S. Strategy Against Banks Hiding Flight Capital Needs Help

Some links on foreign banks and cheats.

so your implying that the ALL rich people are tax cheats?

Give me the proportion of tax cheats that are millionaires and compare that to the proportion of elected politicians that are tax cheats.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Crook Alert! 52,000 Secret Bank Accounts of American Tax Evaders Hidden by UBS Gnomes of Zurich 8-16-11

Foreign Banks Recruit U.S. Tax Cheats by Jim Hightower on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent

Banks have been enabling wealthy tax cheats for many decades

The U.S. Strategy Against Banks Hiding Flight Capital Needs Help

Some links on foreign banks and cheats.

so your implying that the ALL rich people are tax cheats?

Give me the proportion of tax cheats that are millionaires and compare that to the proportion of elected politicians that are tax cheats.

I didn't imply anything, you infered I believe that all rich people are tax cheats, I don't. I rarely if ever use the "all" word nor do I guess at proportions.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

1. Repealing the Bush Tax cuts and making Billionaires and Millionaires pay more in tax will kill jobs.

2, Millionaires and Billionaires create jobs (name them and describe the jobs)

3. Only the private sector creates jobs.

4. Shrinking government will jump start our economy (explain how adding thousands to the unemployment roles will benefit commerce, small business and the real estate market).

5. Gay & Lesbian Marriage threatens traditional marriage.

6. Citizens United v. FEC is good for America.

Needless to say, no one could come up with an answer to your challenge.

I recently read that a request to the GObP/Republicans for just one wealthy job creator's name went unanswered because John Boehner said he could not find one.

But, the pubs do love their lies and so do their voters.

 

[saveliberty]

Needless to say, no one could come up with an answer to your challenge.

I recently read that a request to the GObP/Republicans for just one wealthy job creator's name went unanswered because John Boehner said he could not find one.

But, the pubs do love their lies and so do their voters.

Try to hold that thought for just a minute and I'll respond. Its a tough request, but really really try.

 

[daveman]

Needless to say, no one could come up with an answer to your challenge.

That is, of course, a lie.

 

[saveliberty]

1. Repealing the Bush Tax cuts and making Billionaires and Millionaires pay more in tax will kill jobs.

2, Millionaires and Billionaires create jobs (name them and describe the jobs)

3. Only the private sector creates jobs.

4. Shrinking government will jump start our economy (explain how adding thousands to the unemployment roles will benefit commerce, small business and the real estate market).

5. Gay & Lesbian Marriage threatens traditional marriage.

6. Citizens United v. FEC is good for America.

1. Common sense really. It only takes a small percentage difference in income for a rich person to generate $50,000 in additional capital for job creation.

2. Google - 1,400 Michigan jobs in 2010.

3. Nice try. Actually the correct question is who creates the most new jbs and that would be small business owners.

4. Shrinking government shold reduce the budget and leave more money in the private sector to create jobs. Again, your question is worded as to create no real answer. It does make you right, just a poor constructor of helpful questions. The question should be, why continue unemployment benefits past a year? There are many jobs out there left unfilled. People just think they are worth more than the market is willing to pay.

5. I never said it threatens traditional marriage. I said marriage is a religious institution, not one of government. Dictating what religion accepts to a violation of the separation of these two powers. Civil unions are what government should consider, if the state voters choose. Many states have opted out.

6. I don't think corporations have a conscious thought process and are not true people, therefore they should not hold political opinions or fund campaigns.

 

[HoosierJoe]

1. the "bush tax cuts" were not only for the wealthy. Repealing them would screw the middle class.

So, since your first point is hopelessly ill informed, I saw no need to read the others.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Crook Alert! 52,000 Secret Bank Accounts of American Tax Evaders Hidden by UBS Gnomes of Zurich 8-16-11

Foreign Banks Recruit U.S. Tax Cheats by Jim Hightower on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent

Banks have been enabling wealthy tax cheats for many decades

The U.S. Strategy Against Banks Hiding Flight Capital Needs Help

Some links on foreign banks and cheats.

so your implying that the ALL rich people are tax cheats?

Give me the proportion of tax cheats that are millionaires and compare that to the proportion of elected politicians that are tax cheats.

I didn't imply anything, you infered I believe that all rich people are tax cheats, I don't. I rarely if ever use the "all" word nor do I guess at proportions.

No you just say "the rich"

As in "the rich" keep the majority of their assets in foreign banks. Which is nothing you can prove except for the small percentage that have been caught cheating on their taxes.

You just cannot accept the fact that people with money are an integral part of the economy because they provide the capital needed to create jobs.

 

[Skull Pilot]

1. Repealing the Bush Tax cuts and making Billionaires and Millionaires pay more in tax will kill jobs.

2, Millionaires and Billionaires create jobs (name them and describe the jobs)

3. Only the private sector creates jobs.

4. Shrinking government will jump start our economy (explain how adding thousands to the unemployment roles will benefit commerce, small business and the real estate market).

5. Gay & Lesbian Marriage threatens traditional marriage.

6. Citizens United v. FEC is good for America.

Needless to say, no one could come up with an answer to your challenge.

I recently read that a request to the GObP/Republicans for just one wealthy job creator's name went unanswered because John Boehner said he could not find one.

But, the pubs do love their lies and so do their voters.

excuse me but I have already answered the "rich don't crate jobs" statement.

Just because Wry does not want to acknowledge that I have debunked that statement does not mean it has not been answered.

 

[Wry Catcher]

so your implying that the ALL rich people are tax cheats?

Give me the proportion of tax cheats that are millionaires and compare that to the proportion of elected politicians that are tax cheats.

I didn't imply anything, you infered I believe that all rich people are tax cheats, I don't. I rarely if ever use the "all" word nor do I guess at proportions.

No you just say "the rich"

As in "the rich" keep the majority of their assets in foreign banks. Which is nothing you can prove except for the small percentage that have been caught cheating on their taxes.

You just cannot accept the fact that people with money are an integral part of the economy because they provide the capital needed to create jobs.

I do accept the fact that SOME people with money are an integral part of the economy; I do not believe rich people contribute to job creation anymore than the collective you and me. Putting money into a US bank is something we all do, twenty million American citizens with a one thousand dollars saved in local banks and credit unions create jobs under my theory and these same twenty million Americans with good jobs and affordable health care will create jobs by spending. Hence, providing greater income to the working person in our country is a proper policy if we hope for an economic recovery.

If the right really cared about a recovery and deficit spending/the debt they would support a modest increase in taxes for the very wealthy and targeted tax cuts to put more money into the economy; the Congress would vote themselves a salary and benefit take away, showing that all Americans must share the blame; pass a deficit surtax of 1% on the tax due all Americans and used to reduce the outstanding debt so less dollars go to interest payments. The Congress would cut the enormous budget of the DOD, reduce the size of the Federal Government by attrition, i.e., placing a higher freeze in effect and in doing so let friend and foe know that we are serious about getting our fiscal house in order.

Of course none of this will happen on Boehners watch. I hope the good people of Ohio's
8th District recognize that Boehner is inept and has no interest in an economic recovery until the GOP regains the White House.

 

[saveliberty]

You can't spend your way out of debt Wry. Throwing MORE money into the mix is a bad move.

 

[Dragon]

You can't spend your way out of debt Wry. Throwing MORE money into the mix is a bad move.

There's no need for the U.S. government to get out of debt. In fact, it would be disastrous if it did that.

The government can, on the other hand, spend its way into a stronger economy, which would increase tax revenues, which would lower the deficit. And lowering the deficit, unlike getting out of debt, is something the government should do in the long run.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I didn't imply anything, you infered I believe that all rich people are tax cheats, I don't. I rarely if ever use the "all" word nor do I guess at proportions.

No you just say "the rich"

As in "the rich" keep the majority of their assets in foreign banks. Which is nothing you can prove except for the small percentage that have been caught cheating on their taxes.

You just cannot accept the fact that people with money are an integral part of the economy because they provide the capital needed to create jobs.

I do accept the fact that SOME people with money are an integral part of the economy; I do not believe rich people contribute to job creation anymore than the collective you and me. Putting money into a US bank is something we all do, twenty million American citizens with a one thousand dollars saved in local banks and credit unions create jobs

The average American savings account has less than $500 in it.

under my theory and these same twenty million Americans with good jobs and affordable health care will create jobs by spending
Hence, providing greater income to the working person in our country is a proper policy if we hope for an economic recovery.

You have not proven that taxing the so called rich more will result in an increase in income to anyone but the government.

If the right really cared about a recovery and deficit spending/the debt they would support a modest increase in taxes for the very wealthy and targeted tax cuts to put more money into the economy; the Congress would vote themselves a salary and benefit take away, showing that all Americans must share the blame; pass a deficit surtax of 1% on the tax due all Americans and used to reduce the outstanding debt so less dollars go to interest payments. The Congress would cut the enormous budget of the DOD, reduce the size of the Federal Government by attrition, i.e., placing a higher freeze in effect and in doing so let friend and foe know that we are serious about getting our fiscal house in order.

The Dims don't and won't cut spending and don't think they will.

 

[Wry Catcher]

No you just say "the rich"

As in "the rich" keep the majority of their assets in foreign banks. Which is nothing you can prove except for the small percentage that have been caught cheating on their taxes.

You just cannot accept the fact that people with money are an integral part of the economy because they provide the capital needed to create jobs.

I do accept the fact that SOME people with money are an integral part of the economy; I do not believe rich people contribute to job creation anymore than the collective you and me. Putting money into a US bank is something we all do, twenty million American citizens with a one thousand dollars saved in local banks and credit unions create jobs

The average American savings account has less than $500 in it.

under my theory and these same twenty million Americans with good jobs and affordable health care will create jobs by spending
Hence, providing greater income to the working person in our country is a proper policy if we hope for an economic recovery.

You have not proven that taxing the so called rich more will result in an increase in income to anyone but the government.

If the right really cared about a recovery and deficit spending/the debt they would support a modest increase in taxes for the very wealthy and targeted tax cuts to put more money into the economy; the Congress would vote themselves a salary and benefit take away, showing that all Americans must share the blame; pass a deficit surtax of 1% on the tax due all Americans and used to reduce the outstanding debt so less dollars go to interest payments. The Congress would cut the enormous budget of the DOD, reduce the size of the Federal Government by attrition, i.e., placing a higher freeze in effect and in doing so let friend and foe know that we are serious about getting our fiscal house in order.

The Dims don't and won't cut spending and don't think they will.

I haven't proved anything beyond the fact that I actually think about our nation's problems. Using the cliché (Democrats are tax and spenders) is one more example that you're ruled by emotion. Under George W. Bush we had a worse policy, don't tax and spend and spend and spend; and in his first six years in office his party held the majority in the House.

Why not list, point by point as I do, ideas you believe would hasten economic recovery? Of course what I would expect is "cut taxes, cuts spending, cut regulations" without detail or any suggestion that to do so would result in a positive outcome. Furthermore, not a hint of what might go wrong if such a policy were put into effect.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I do accept the fact that SOME people with money are an integral part of the economy; I do not believe rich people contribute to job creation anymore than the collective you and me. Putting money into a US bank is something we all do, twenty million American citizens with a one thousand dollars saved in local banks and credit unions create jobs

The average American savings account has less than $500 in it.




You have not proven that taxing the so called rich more will result in an increase in income to anyone but the government.

If the right really cared about a recovery and deficit spending/the debt they would support a modest increase in taxes for the very wealthy and targeted tax cuts to put more money into the economy; the Congress would vote themselves a salary and benefit take away, showing that all Americans must share the blame; pass a deficit surtax of 1% on the tax due all Americans and used to reduce the outstanding debt so less dollars go to interest payments. The Congress would cut the enormous budget of the DOD, reduce the size of the Federal Government by attrition, i.e., placing a higher freeze in effect and in doing so let friend and foe know that we are serious about getting our fiscal house in order.

The Dims don't and won't cut spending and don't think they will.

I haven't proved anything beyond the fact that I actually think about our nation's problems. Using the cliché (Democrats are tax and spenders) is one more example that you're ruled by emotion. Under George W. Bush we had a worse policy, don't tax and spend and spend and spend; and in his first six years in office his party held the majority in the House.

Why not list, point by point as I do, ideas you believe would hasten economic recovery? Of course what I would expect is "cut taxes, cuts spending, cut regulations" without detail or any suggestion that to do so would result in a positive outcome. Furthermore, not a hint of what might go wrong if such a policy were put into effect.

Hey If you ever bothered to pay attention, I have been just as critical of repugnantcans as I have of dimocrats.

BOTH parties have consistently grown the size, scope and cost of government and BOTH parties have consistently spent a higher percentage of GDP every year.

It is your love of the dimocratic dogma that drives you. I have absolutely no loyalty to any political party.

To think that allowing these corrupt politicians to take more money from the public will solve anything is beyond moronic. The only answer to our problems is to completely clean house in state and federal government.

You're all for regulating private citizens but it's time we regulated government.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The average American savings account has less than $500 in it.




You have not proven that taxing the so called rich more will result in an increase in income to anyone but the government.



The Dims don't and won't cut spending and don't think they will.

I haven't proved anything beyond the fact that I actually think about our nation's problems. Using the cliché (Democrats are tax and spenders) is one more example that you're ruled by emotion. Under George W. Bush we had a worse policy, don't tax and spend and spend and spend; and in his first six years in office his party held the majority in the House.

Why not list, point by point as I do, ideas you believe would hasten economic recovery? Of course what I would expect is "cut taxes, cuts spending, cut regulations" without detail or any suggestion that to do so would result in a positive outcome. Furthermore, not a hint of what might go wrong if such a policy were put into effect.

Hey If you ever bothered to pay attention, I have been just as critical of repugnantcans as I have of dimocrats.

BOTH parties have consistently grown the size, scope and cost of government and BOTH parties have consistently spent a higher percentage of GDP every year.

It is your love of the dimocratic dogma that drives you. I have absolutely no loyalty to any political party.

To think that allowing these corrupt politicians to take more money from the public will solve anything is beyond moronic. The only answer to our problems is to completely clean house in state and federal government.

You're all for regulating private citizens but it's time we regulated government.

Laws, death and taxes are the only certainty in this life; private citizens are regulated by all governments but the fact remains you and I live in, "a new nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal".

Government is regulated by law. It's called the Constitution of the United States and provides protection to all citizens. Politicians have been corrpupted, but not by tax money. The only way to completely clean house in state and federal government is to get the money out of politics.

Five members of the Supreme Court voted to make the influence of money on our elections a matter of free speech; CU v. FEC remains a wrong headed decision which has created Super PACs able to spend unlimited funds from unkown sources to influence voters.

 

[Full-Auto]

I haven't proved anything beyond the fact that I actually think about our nation's problems. Using the cliché (Democrats are tax and spenders) is one more example that you're ruled by emotion. Under George W. Bush we had a worse policy, don't tax and spend and spend and spend; and in his first six years in office his party held the majority in the House.

Why not list, point by point as I do, ideas you believe would hasten economic recovery? Of course what I would expect is "cut taxes, cuts spending, cut regulations" without detail or any suggestion that to do so would result in a positive outcome. Furthermore, not a hint of what might go wrong if such a policy were put into effect.

Hey If you ever bothered to pay attention, I have been just as critical of repugnantcans as I have of dimocrats.

BOTH parties have consistently grown the size, scope and cost of government and BOTH parties have consistently spent a higher percentage of GDP every year.

It is your love of the dimocratic dogma that drives you. I have absolutely no loyalty to any political party.

To think that allowing these corrupt politicians to take more money from the public will solve anything is beyond moronic. The only answer to our problems is to completely clean house in state and federal government.

You're all for regulating private citizens but it's time we regulated government.

Laws, death and taxes are the only certainty in this life; private citizens are regulated by all governments but the fact remains you and I live in, "a new nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal".

Government is regulated by law. It's called the Constitution of the United States and provides protection to all citizens. Politicians have been corrpupted, but not by tax money. The only way to completely clean house in state and federal government is to get the money out of politics.

Five members of the Supreme Court voted to make the influence of money on our elections a matter of free speech; CU v. FEC remains a wrong headed decision which has created Super PACs able to spend unlimited funds from unkown sources to influence voters.

Right or Left, The SC is a big government entity.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Hey If you ever bothered to pay attention, I have been just as critical of repugnantcans as I have of dimocrats.

BOTH parties have consistently grown the size, scope and cost of government and BOTH parties have consistently spent a higher percentage of GDP every year.

It is your love of the dimocratic dogma that drives you. I have absolutely no loyalty to any political party.

To think that allowing these corrupt politicians to take more money from the public will solve anything is beyond moronic. The only answer to our problems is to completely clean house in state and federal government.

You're all for regulating private citizens but it's time we regulated government.

Laws, death and taxes are the only certainty in this life; private citizens are regulated by all governments but the fact remains you and I live in, "a new nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal".

Government is regulated by law. It's called the Constitution of the United States and provides protection to all citizens. Politicians have been corrpupted, but not by tax money. The only way to completely clean house in state and federal government is to get the money out of politics.

Five members of the Supreme Court voted to make the influence of money on our elections a matter of free speech; CU v. FEC remains a wrong headed decision which has created Super PACs able to spend unlimited funds from unkown sources to influence voters.

Right or Left, The SC is a big government entity.

What's your point?