Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yeah, well I want someone to pay my rent for me too. It's a necessity you can do for me. It's not YOUR money after all. My need grants me a valid claim on it. Besides, it's the governments. So if I can convince my congress critter to pass a law STEALING your money to pay my rent, it's all good.Ummmm...Maybe because it's their money?
Well, we do have a deficit that use some plugging. It sure seems like they can live more comfortably off three million dollars...
Otherwise, why bother taxing anyone at all?
And New jersey... and New York.
These leftists are clueless.... it's always "gimmee, gimmee, gimmee". Always with the class warfare claptrap.
That's the way...How about lawful excises, imposts, duties and user fees (i.e. the fuel tax) to pay for gubmint services?
Did you know that America ran just fine for over 150 years, with no direct taxes on incomes?
Letting people keep what's rightfully theirs isn't "giving" them anything, nincompoop.
Okay... hmmmmmmSure, only in your world is not raising taxes a tax cut. Taxing the shit outta 2% of the population will go along way towards reducing the debt. Nevermind the 120,000,000 paying $0 income taxes and that spending is approaching 30% of GDP.
More leftwing, classwarfare claptrap.
So the top 2% should get tax cuts and cost us 700 Billion?
Fiscal conservatism be damned? lol If you need your opinion on this, I can link you to fox.
Okay... hmmmmmmSure, only in your world is not raising taxes a tax cut. Taxing the shit outta 2% of the population will go along way towards reducing the debt. Nevermind the 120,000,000 paying $0 income taxes and that spending is approaching 30% of GDP.
More leftwing, classwarfare claptrap.
So the top 2% should get tax cuts and cost us 700 Billion?
Fiscal conservatism be damned? lol If you need your opinion on this, I can link you to fox.
Well, we could also always cut all overpayments to the bottom 60% of tax payers who get all their taxes back and THEN some. End the redistribution of wealth. Probably save us more than what you rake in off the rich.
Either way, someone's losing dough. Let's take it from those who don't deserve it. Sound good to you?
They only pay their fair share. Of course, that means they will end up getting back all their taxes if they are taxed and under the deductions. BUT, they won't get MORE.Okay... hmmmmmmSo the top 2% should get tax cuts and cost us 700 Billion?
Fiscal conservatism be damned? lol If you need your opinion on this, I can link you to fox.
Well, we could also always cut all overpayments to the bottom 60% of tax payers who get all their taxes back and THEN some. End the redistribution of wealth. Probably save us more than what you rake in off the rich.
Either way, someone's losing dough. Let's take it from those who don't deserve it. Sound good to you?
Indeed. Let us tax those social sponges that made poor life decisions and demand the rest of US pay for their mistakes... that are a TAX on the system...in their own right.
Tax the POOR. I like the sound of it.
Reagan and the two Bushes created 92% of the National Debt by lowering taxes for the rich.
Click on the link for more info...
ReaganBushDebt.org
Wow... citing a website dedicated to trashing Bush and Reagan?
Ok. Got it.
You're not too aware of supply side economics are you?Reagan and the two Bushes created 92% of the National Debt by lowering taxes for the rich.
Click on the link for more info...
ReaganBushDebt.org
Wow... citing a website dedicated to trashing Bush and Reagan?
Ok. Got it.
Glad you brought this up.
reaganbushdebt.org provides links to the U.S. Treasury website, so you can do the calculations yourself.
Reagan's own budget director David Stockman said the tax cuts were a "trojan horse" so they could lower taxes for the rich.
Tough titties.Well, we do have a deficit that use some plugging. It sure seems like they can live more comfortably off three million dollars...
Otherwise, why bother taxing anyone at all?
Try cutting and controlling spending.
So if we can't tax the rich because it's their money, where is a government supposed to get the taxes required to run it? The middle class? The lower class? But isn't that their money too?
Sure, only in your world is not raising taxes a tax cut. Taxing the shit outta 2% of the population will go along way towards reducing the debt. Nevermind the 120,000,000 paying $0 income taxes and that spending is approaching 30% of GDP.
More leftwing, classwarfare claptrap.
So the top 2% should get tax cuts and cost us 700 Billion?
Fiscal conservatism be damned? lol If you need your opinion on this, I can link you to fox.
Sure, only in your world is not raising taxes a tax cut. Taxing the shit outta 2% of the population will go along way towards reducing the debt. Nevermind the 120,000,000 paying $0 income taxes and that spending is approaching 30% of GDP.
More leftwing, classwarfare claptrap.
So the top 2% should get tax cuts and cost us 700 Billion?
Fiscal conservatism be damned? lol If you need your opinion on this, I can link you to fox.
So you'd prefer that the Top 2% leave the country with their money and we get zero of it and it costs us Trillions?
Anyone who is familiar with economics knows the Lafer curve. Anyone who knows about the lafer curve understands that higher taxes do not always lead to higher tax revenue. In fact at a certain point raising taxes decreases tax revenue.
It doesn't make sense to tax any portion of society disproportionately. Tax cuts for everyone is a good idea. It stimulates economic growth. More money in circulation means more taxes, even at lower rates, and will increase government revenue as well as the standard of living for the public.
There is a reason that the majority of economists and business people are Republican. People who understand the economy favor the right.
I don't mean that as a slam though. There are obviously other important factors to consider when voting (social, international...ect) but I think history clearly shows that Republicans (or rather conservative economic theory) are better at economics.
What? If the market tanks, that's one thing. But if government starts confiscating their money, they leave.So the top 2% should get tax cuts and cost us 700 Billion?
Fiscal conservatism be damned? lol If you need your opinion on this, I can link you to fox.
So you'd prefer that the Top 2% leave the country with their money and we get zero of it and it costs us Trillions?
Why didn't they all leave in 2000 then?
What? If the market tanks, that's one thing. But if government starts confiscating their money, they leave.So the top 2% should get tax cuts and cost us 700 Billion?
Fiscal conservatism be damned? lol If you need your opinion on this, I can link you to fox.
So you'd prefer that the Top 2% leave the country with their money and we get zero of it and it costs us Trillions?
Why didn't they all leave in 2000 then?
What? If the market tanks, that's one thing. But if government starts confiscating their money, they leave.So you'd prefer that the Top 2% leave the country with their money and we get zero of it and it costs us Trillions?
Why didn't they all leave in 2000 then?
Educate yourself.
Maryland's Mobile Millionaires - WSJ.com
oops. Why not do it on a NATIONAL scale! Yeah! What a great idea!
Capital, People, Labor, Resources are all mobile now. Unless you start imprisoning American Citizens and their bank accounts, you will never stop that, and then you might as well start changing the stationary to read "People's Republic of America" because that's what we'll be... another Soviet bloc style country with corrupt oligarchy at the top. An oligarchy, mind you, that you aren't a part of, so get ready to be buttfucked by the party.
Letting people keep what's rightfully theirs isn't "giving" them anything, nincompoop.
