The whining...The whining

This is the typical RW horseshit about how we just can't do without the wealthy because gosh darn, they create the jobs.

BULLSHIT>

What creates jobs is consumer demand. All the wealthy do is take an undue percentage of the proceeds for value they are not really adding.

America was a much better place when the Rich Assholes paid a 93% top Marginal Rate.

How does encouraging someone to have faith in their own abilities and strive to succeed equate to kissing anybody's ass?
How do you figure consumer demand creates jobs without an operations, a facility or products?

.

again, dumbass, there wouldn't be a facility, etc, if there wasn't consumer demand.

But you keep kissing the asses of the wealthy, and they will "Trickle down" on you some day.

So someone wanting a product gives a person a job ... Who signs the paycheck?
What makes you think I have to kiss anyone's ass?

So now you are trying to suggest that the consumer's desire for products ...
they never developed and don't know exist ...
is what causes a bunch of people to call each other up ....
decide to meet at the park ...
where they will cobble sticks and rocks together ...
and produce a vacuum cleaner.

Brilliant ... Absolutely brilliant, and I bet they get wealthy doing that.

.
 
Last edited:
Sure it is, if you are making too much because you are taking more than your fair share.

Should also point out that 4000 in 1963 would be about 30K now. Between sales taxes, income taxes, SS and Medicare, state taxes, property taxes, 22% is about what most people are paying at that level.

You see, you whackadoodles like to ignore the fact that while the Income Tax impacts the rich, the other taxes impact the middle class and poor.

I'd be all for one tax, with the 1963 Percentages... That would be reasonable and fair.

Earning money is not taking money.

and that 22% was just federal income taxes if you want to add all the other taxes in the rate is higher. Much higher.

Then just make it one income tax with the 1963 graduations. Done.

What you don't get is that most of those "middle class" taxes didn't exist in 1963. The went up when money stopped coming from the Feds to pay for those "Trickle down" tax cuts for the rich.

And, no, when United Health Care pays its CEO 100 million dollars, he isn't "earning" that money, he's taking it from the people who paid for health insurance in good conscience with the expectation they'd get treatment when they got sick.

Oh, which company is now cancelling all the health care plans because they don't comply with the ACA's minimum requirements? United Health.

So now you want to abolish all state income taxes as well as social security taxes?

And if the company thinks the guy is worth whatever they pay him that's the company's business not yours. You don't have to do business with that company. In fact no one does.

If you want to talk about people who don't earn their money then look at your beloved politicians.
 
[

So now you want to abolish all state income taxes as well as social security taxes?

And if the company thinks the guy is worth whatever they pay him that's the company's business not yours. You don't have to do business with that company. In fact no one does.

If you want to talk about people who don't earn their money then look at your beloved politicians.

I'd have happily fired Cigna (which paid Ed Hanaway 83 million dollars) if I could have.

Most of us don't have much of a choice as to which insurance carrier we get. That's the point.

And letting them collect 9 figure salaries if they cut health care to people is pretty much a recipe for disaster.
 
[

So someone wanting a product gives a person a job ... Who signs the paycheck?
What makes you think I have to kiss anyone's ass?

So now you are trying to suggest that the consumer's desire for products ...
they never developed and don't know exist ...
is what causes a bunch of people to call each other up ....
decide to meet at the park ...
where they will cobble sticks and rocks together ...
and produce a vacuum cleaner.

Brilliant ... Absolutely brilliant, and I bet they get wealthy doing that.

.

again, quite worshipping the greedy. Greed isn't a virtue, and poverty isn't a character flaw.

The fucked-up mentality of trailer-Park Republicans, right on display above.
 
What about all those people making 0 to 4000 a year having to fork over 22%? You'd be raising taxes on the poor.

And it is never reasonable to take more than half of anyone's money for taxes.

Sure it is, if you are making too much because you are taking more than your fair share.

Should also point out that 4000 in 1963 would be about 30K now. Between sales taxes, income taxes, SS and Medicare, state taxes, property taxes, 22% is about what most people are paying at that level.

You see, you whackadoodles like to ignore the fact that while the Income Tax impacts the rich, the other taxes impact the middle class and poor.

I'd be all for one tax, with the 1963 Percentages... That would be reasonable and fair.

Earning money is not taking money.

and that 22% was just federal income taxes if you want to add all the other taxes in the rate is higher. Much higher.

Joey will not be happy until the tax rate on "the rich" (anyone who makes more than him) is at least 99%.
 
[

So now you want to abolish all state income taxes as well as social security taxes?

And if the company thinks the guy is worth whatever they pay him that's the company's business not yours. You don't have to do business with that company. In fact no one does.

If you want to talk about people who don't earn their money then look at your beloved politicians.

I'd have happily fired Cigna (which paid Ed Hanaway 83 million dollars) if I could have.

Most of us don't have much of a choice as to which insurance carrier we get. That's the point.

And letting them collect 9 figure salaries if they cut health care to people is pretty much a recipe for disaster.
Of course you have a choice. You do not have to use the insurance supplied by your employer
 
[

So now you want to abolish all state income taxes as well as social security taxes?

And if the company thinks the guy is worth whatever they pay him that's the company's business not yours. You don't have to do business with that company. In fact no one does.

If you want to talk about people who don't earn their money then look at your beloved politicians.

I'd have happily fired Cigna (which paid Ed Hanaway 83 million dollars) if I could have.

Most of us don't have much of a choice as to which insurance carrier we get. That's the point.

And letting them collect 9 figure salaries if they cut health care to people is pretty much a recipe for disaster.
Of course you have a choice. You do not have to use the insurance supplied by your employer

Uh, yeah, actually I kind of do. Because he isn't going to pay me the difference of what he pays the insurance company and what I could negotiate on my own.

In fact, as much as you wingnuts whine about "Socialism", the fact is, a private insurance company is every bit as socialistic as a government program. Either you are paying for someone else, or someone else is paying for you.
 
I'd have happily fired Cigna (which paid Ed Hanaway 83 million dollars) if I could have.

Most of us don't have much of a choice as to which insurance carrier we get. That's the point.

And letting them collect 9 figure salaries if they cut health care to people is pretty much a recipe for disaster.
Of course you have a choice. You do not have to use the insurance supplied by your employer

Uh, yeah, actually I kind of do. Because he isn't going to pay me the difference of what he pays the insurance company and what I could negotiate on my own.

He doesn't have to. He offers a benefit. if you don't like the company he chooses then you are free to use another company or find an employer who uses an insurance company you approve of.

In fact, as much as you wingnuts whine about "Socialism", the fact is, a private insurance company is every bit as socialistic as a government program. Either you are paying for someone else, or someone else is paying for you.

I have yet to mention socialism in any post.

And no one pays for my insurance but me. I had a great plan that met all my needs now I have to pay for all kinds of shit I'll never need or use.
 
[

So someone wanting a product gives a person a job ... Who signs the paycheck?
What makes you think I have to kiss anyone's ass?

So now you are trying to suggest that the consumer's desire for products ...
they never developed and don't know exist ...
is what causes a bunch of people to call each other up ....
decide to meet at the park ...
where they will cobble sticks and rocks together ...
and produce a vacuum cleaner.

Brilliant ... Absolutely brilliant, and I bet they get wealthy doing that.

.

again, quite worshipping the greedy. Greed isn't a virtue, and poverty isn't a character flaw.

The fucked-up mentality of trailer-Park Republicans, right on display above.

What part do you disagree with?
Is it consumer demand's ability to produce products out of thin air?
Is it the idea you think I need to kiss someone's ass?
What part is greedy ... And what part makes you think I believe poverty is a character flaw?

There are a few questions that I imagine you will do as usual and not answer.
You don't have any answers ... Just empty rhetoric and endless diatribe.

.
 
[

So someone wanting a product gives a person a job ... Who signs the paycheck?
What makes you think I have to kiss anyone's ass?

So now you are trying to suggest that the consumer's desire for products ...
they never developed and don't know exist ...
is what causes a bunch of people to call each other up ....
decide to meet at the park ...
where they will cobble sticks and rocks together ...
and produce a vacuum cleaner.

Brilliant ... Absolutely brilliant, and I bet they get wealthy doing that.

.

again, quite worshipping the greedy. Greed isn't a virtue, and poverty isn't a character flaw.

The fucked-up mentality of trailer-Park Republicans, right on display above.

What part do you disagree with?
Is it consumer demand's ability to produce products out of thin air?
Is it the idea you think I need to kiss someone's ass?
What part is greedy ... And what part makes you think I believe poverty is a character flaw?

There are a few questions that I imagine you will do as usual and not answer.
You don't have any answers ... Just empty rhetoric and endless diatribe.

.

No, I'm not wasting my time on your sycophancy...

You can keep worshipping the rich. I refuse to.
 
again, quite worshipping the greedy. Greed isn't a virtue, and poverty isn't a character flaw.

The fucked-up mentality of trailer-Park Republicans, right on display above.

What part do you disagree with?
Is it consumer demand's ability to produce products out of thin air?
Is it the idea you think I need to kiss someone's ass?
What part is greedy ... And what part makes you think I believe poverty is a character flaw?

There are a few questions that I imagine you will do as usual and not answer.
You don't have any answers ... Just empty rhetoric and endless diatribe.

.

No, I'm not wasting my time on your sycophancy...

You can keep worshipping the rich. I refuse to.

As I said ... You won't answer because you have nothing.

You cannot address a single issue with anything other than rhetoric, diatribes, rants or platitudes ... To a nauseating end.
The same old crap in response to points you don't address ... With only the slightest semblance of any recognition you even read what the poster you are responding to wrote.

Your idea of discussion or debate is foolish, malicious, disingenuous and overly seasoned with maniacal outburst ... As well as the fact you have the tact and trustworthiness of a rabid dog.
 
Honey, you don't have any issues.

All you repeat are the liberTardian points about how we need the "Freedom" to be abused by the wealthy.

And thus you are easily dismissed as nothing.

So cling to your bible and your gun and pray to your plutocratic overlords...
 
Honey, you don't have any issues.

All you repeat are the liberTardian points about how we need the "Freedom" to be abused by the wealthy.

And thus you are easily dismissed as nothing.

So cling to your bible and your gun and pray to your plutocratic overlords...

Libertarian whatever or Plutocratic Overlords and other rhetoric that doesn't address anything I have either asked or posted ... Just more of your crap.
Not to mention it is pretty hard for you to dismiss anyone ... You don't ever address what has been posted in an forthright manner ... and were never here involved in the discussion to start with.
I don't repeat anything someone else says ... Or the ideas supported by any party affiliation.
If you would read the arguments posted ... And if you had the ability to understand the context enough to address the points or answer the questions ... Then you would know that.

Instead ... You would rather stick your head in the sand and act like you have a clue what you are talking about ... Perfect cannon fodder though and probably why you make a great Liberal.

.
 
"It did sound a little wet, there didn't it? Right at the end! Oooh! Heh-heh-heh. Let's have a smell all right? Hmmm, wafting, wafting.. Ooh, everyone likes their own brand, don't they? Oh, this is magic! Alright, analysis. Smells like carrots in throw-up! Ooh, that could gag a maggot! I smell like hot sick ass on a dead carcass! Even stink would say that stinks! You know when you go into an apartment building and you smell the other people's cooking on each floor and you go "What are they cookin'?" That, plus crap!" - Fat Bastard
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top