Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-07-2010, 02:56 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,132,497 times
Reputation: 4269

Advertisements

Claire McCaskill said exactly that and the link I have here comes from her web site so there is a good chance she will take this one down anytime.

While she was talking about how can Republicans say they aren't against the middle class with a straight face Chuck Schumer is standing behind her with a terrific grin on his face.

The woman really wants people to believe that the Republicans were trying to take the middle class off the old tax rates but to leave the, as the Dems call them, "rich" on the rates. It is so hard to believe they can find enough stupid people to believe them to get any good out of acting like this.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdcDj...eature=channel
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-07-2010, 03:04 PM
 
10,545 posts, read 13,538,031 times
Reputation: 2823
"Give more money to millionaires?" That tells you all you need to know about the arrogance of government. It's not your money to give, Claire.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 03:07 PM
Status: "Ephesians 6:12" (set 14 days ago)
 
44,987 posts, read 26,141,048 times
Reputation: 24730
I didn't hear where the good senator mentioned the spending of her party at all, but she did use the term "middle class" over and over.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 03:10 PM
 
8 posts, read 4,609 times
Reputation: 10
She's gonna get blown away in her next election. Missour. is too right leaning for this radical.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 03:13 PM
 
3,117 posts, read 4,568,187 times
Reputation: 2880
So to her:

Tax cuts for middle class completely unpaid for = good policy. Tax cuts for the most successful unpaid for = a crime

Unpaid unemployment benefits for the lower class completely unpaid for = good policy

70% of Americans too stupid to itemize = obviously the tax structure is just for the successful

Then she lambasts dividends and capital gains. Dividends are the primary means of income for 80 year old retired grandmothers, not the super wealthy. So I guess she's against granny?

Then she talks about "leveling the playing field" which basically translates to "I'm about reaching into the pockets of those who have a lot and giving it to those who do not, even though those who do not have done nothing to earn it".

Then she goes off on the typical "GOP is for raising taxes on the 'embattled' middle class". I see now that Obama and the Democrats are going to use the old "repeat a lie enough times and stupid people will start to believe it" strategy on this one.

Advocates a bit of violence. Go reach for your pitchforks. Yeah! The successful people are evil because they became successful! How dare they!

I do like how she follows this up by trying to bring the Tea Party into her whackjob little fold. She really believes she's going to sway the Tea Party to her advocacy of INCREASING TAXES??? Seriously, not 5 sentences previously, she was talking about how taxes need to be raised to some, and then she tells the tea party "we're for cutting taxes!"

Good grief.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 03:15 PM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
17,531 posts, read 24,598,622 times
Reputation: 9975
So what ever happened to the Tea Party?
Where is the outrage?
Obama wants to borrow $70 Billion from China and Iran and GIVE IT AWAY!
I guess they were just against spending when Dick Armey supplied the busses
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 03:19 PM
 
6,034 posts, read 10,647,887 times
Reputation: 3989
I'm middle class, and I see no reason to make the wealthy pay more than their share. They earned their money, they should be able to keep the same percentage of it as I keep of my money. Tax the rich enough, and pretty soon you won't have any rich people to tax. I think the beer allegory says it quite well (sorry I do not know who should get the attribution for this...I read it years ago, and don't know where it originally came from):


Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until on day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. "Drinks for the ten now cost just $80."

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

So, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before, and the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "But he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"
"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill. And that, boys and girls, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

Last edited by Mercury Cougar; 12-07-2010 at 03:27 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 03:20 PM
 
10,545 posts, read 13,538,031 times
Reputation: 2823
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boompa View Post
So what ever happened to the Tea Party?
Where is the outrage?
Obama wants to borrow $70 Billion from China and Iran and GIVE IT AWAY!
I guess they were just against spending when Dick Armey supplied the busses
Letting people keep their money at the same rate they already keep it is not new spending, and it's not the government giving money away. It's the government taking less than they want. The borrowing comes in because of all the additional spending which the tea party would like to see cut. I'm sure you know that though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 05:25 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 36,906,291 times
Reputation: 15038
Well as that renown socialist Adam Smith once said:
"The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. . . . The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. . . . It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."
"Wealth of Nations” (1776)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 05:31 PM
 
9,848 posts, read 8,249,943 times
Reputation: 3296
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy View Post
Claire McCaskill said exactly that and the link I have here comes from her web site so there is a good chance she will take this one down anytime.

While she was talking about how can Republicans say they aren't against the middle class with a straight face Chuck Schumer is standing behind her with a terrific grin on his face.

The woman really wants people to believe that the Republicans were trying to take the middle class off the old tax rates but to leave the, as the Dems call them, "rich" on the rates. It is so hard to believe they can find enough stupid people to believe them to get any good out of acting like this.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdcDj...eature=channel
The wealthier people who are the top 1% probably at this point pay 80% of the payroll taxes.
They really believe it is productive to get the top 1% paying 90%?

Sounds retarded to me.

It was learned under Reagan that with a top rate of 28% (which is 7%) lower than it is now, you'd get doubled income into the treasury.
Problem then as it is now is if you get a new dollar into the basket, the Democrats will increase spending by $2.

People someday have to throw all the non-fiscal conservatives out of the Democrat party and the lesser ones in the Republican party as well.

There isn't enough OTHER PEOPLE'S money in the world to pay for anything to the levels these jokers want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:46 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top