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.
Poll: Why do conservatives ask such STUPID questions? Why do they show time and again how much they cannot grasp simple topics? Why is it that if somebody has a different view than a conservative, they must be promoting something bad?
I should go back and quantify how many of my posts have been corrections to conservative stupidity and ignorance. It would be a high percentage. Do they ever learn or do they just keep reproducing inferior brains?
NO, liberals don't want to punish rich people. If that was true, would it not be logical to ask "Did Bush want to reward them when he gave them a $1.5T tax cut in 2001 and 2003"? I think that is a more appropriate question and the answer would be YES. Now, when liberals suggest that the rich pay a higher percentage LIKE THEY USED TO, conservatives claim this because they hate rich people (false), they love taxes (false), they want to punish rich people (false), or, insert silly argument here (false).
However, the richest 1%, the biggest corporations, the "elites" DO need to be reigned in. Like in so many previous places in history, the richest have abused the rest. The facts clearly show they have erased the middle class.
A flat tax on everyone would destroy the economy right now, in my opinion. It's a worthy goal, but its implementation needs to be coordinated slowly and precisely. Removing loopholes should be one of the first steps. If hard work is to be rewarded, then income derived from labor should be taxed fairly and flatly while income derived from all other sources should be taxed in an increasingly graduated fashion with no true upper bound since there is no upper bound on income.
Never forget this...."Socialism is for the people, not the socialists."
The very same wealthy lib/progressives that are screaming for the "rich" to pay more, have yet to set the example by stroking a check to the US Treasury.
obama even said, in his own words, that he has "hundreds of thousands of dollars that he doesn't need".
Raising the top tax bracket by 4%-5% I won't consider "punishment"; the rich would still be doing very well, much better than the average person.
The anti-war movement was not about pandering; the base sincercely cared about it and was opposed to the war. The Democrat politicians were using it but the liberal base and the political leaders are too different groups. The anti-war movement lost its point after the military started withdrawing from Iraq; that's why it weakened.
It doesn't matter what you consider, it's not your money to worry about therefore it doesn't matter what you think or feel about raising a tax bracket.
The anti-war movement was 100% pandering, the proof is pretty easy to see. The minute Obama was elected the anti-war *******s instantly slipped into the dark and weren't heard again. Why isn't Cindy Sheehan sleeping outside the White House? Why isn't Code Pink attacking Obama on his pro war, pro assassination policies? Why isn't Moveon.org spending millions to have Obama defeated?
Because it had nothing to do with war in the first place and liberals are apparently fine killing innocent people if the President is a Democrat, that's why.
i hear many people say that the flat tax plan makes it so that the rich don't pay their share. how do they come to this conclusion? for example if you took Perry's plan at face value (not much to it since it fits on a post card) then EVERYONE would pay the same %. Seems fair to me.
There is a problem with "making the rich pay". The problem would be if this plan came to full fruition....what are we to do with all that extra money? Would we send checks to every citizen ....Put the money in liberal programs that would employ thousands upon thousands of early childhood educators who baby sit children who's own parents can not afford to raise them selves?
Before you start re-distributing wealth you had better have a plan that de-slaves the population instead of continuing to enslave the populace. Those that demand that the rich pay really do not have a plan that would ensure progress in the area concerning the improvement in the quality of life. What would more money do for those supposedly in need - would it free them? I doubt it! Those demanding more money have no idea of how to be free and happy..They are conditioned beyound redemption.
1. the reason he would cut taxes for the successful investors is because they are pumping money in the economy 2. the 20 percent flat tax Perry proposes is optional, meaning that low and middle income taxpayers whose current tax rates are less than 20 percent can remain in their current brackets 3. looks like the government will have to find another way to make the money for the difference (ie. bonds and tarrifs)
Investors are NOT pumping money into the economy. If that were true the market would sustain and continue to rally on their "fundamentals" rather than insinuating the market is unstable.
The flat tax is options...therefore it's NOT A FLAT TAX. It's just the creation of 7th level of taxes and a default tax cut for those of a certain level income derivation.
Bonds...don't let me ever read about you complaining about debt. Tarrifs...so you want trade wars in this difficult economic times?
whats wrong with a tarrif? maybe if usa made goods were similar price as the cheap china goods. then people might buy more american made products. better yet. make the union stop complaining about their low pay. i know people who make $22 an hour driving in a bolt into ford trucks. tell me how that helps the economy????
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.