If the rich can afford to donate even more to politicians, they can afford to pay more in taxes, right? (gallon, Schumer)

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by firebrand4

so what happened when BUSH cut taxes and the economy IMPLODED and STILL hasnt recovered

Do you really think allowing people keeping their own money, caused the economy to implode?

Really? Did you say that with a straight face?

Welcome to the threads, you're going to provide me with lots of humor..

[Haakon]

Originally Posted by firebrand4

so what happened when BUSH cut taxes and the economy IMPLODED and STILL hasnt recovered

What happened when Bush cut taxes in 2001? The economy boomed.
What happened when Democrats gained control of the House and Senate in 2006 and went on a spending spree? The economy imploded in 2008.

What happened after OBAMA extended the "Bush" tax cuts in 2010 and Democrats lost control of the House? The economy started to recover (according to Democrats).

[freemkt]

Originally Posted by Haakon

What happened when Bush cut taxes in 2001? The economy boomed.
What happened when Democrats gained control of the House and Senate in 2006 and went on a spending spree? The economy imploded in 2008.

What happened after OBAMA extended the "Bush" tax cuts in 2010 and Democrats lost control of the House? The economy started to recover (according to Democrats).

Was that a good thing or a bad thing for a typical burger flipper?

[simetime]

Originally Posted by whogo

The problem is liberals do not want an informed voter.

Is this why Faux news is the number one "place for unbias reporting" eventhough they admitted that it was for entertainment purpose?

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by freemkt

Was that a good thing or a bad thing for a typical burger flipper?

Its always a good thing to have more jobs available and burger flippers have something to move onto.

Ooh you're still flipping burgers.. but somehow its Bushs fault

[phlinak]

Originally Posted by MaseMan

Kind of a theoretical question that must be asked in lieu of the Supreme Court's decision earlier this week. If the rich have so much money to give that they needed the high court to allow them to give even more money to political campaigns, they should be able to afford to pay higher taxes, right?

I like your thinking.

[kovert]

If the rich can afford to donate even more to politicians, they can afford to pay more in taxes, right?

If the politicians are already bought, what incentive would they have for paying taxes?

[Little-Acorn]

If the rich can afford to donate even more to politicians, they can afford to pay more in taxes, right?


Where do you get the idea that "Since he can afford it" is a good reason to charge him more in tax money?

[T-310]

Originally Posted by MaseMan

Not as much as you'd often think.

Still, can any of you actually answer the question in my OP?

Ok, I will answer.

No.

[Little-Acorn]

Originally Posted by MaseMan

Not as much as you'd often think.

Still, can any of you actually answer the question in my OP?

Of course he can "afford" it. But should he therefore be charged more in taxes? Of course not.