Obama's advice for mid term elections - drag Repubs through the mud

[saganista]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

You think you can fool people, but that's not going to fly here on C-D as long as some of us are willing to tell the truth and expose your lies.

Oh, give it a rest. We've been around this block before, and you're nothing but stuck in your little CATO/Mises litter box. Mr. Huffy is all hot air.

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

Here are the percentages of individual tax revenue paid compared to the percentages of income earned. It is NOT the same curve all along the income scale...

See what I mean? The point is over income taxes paid versus wealth owned, but you apparently haven't managed to keep even that much straight. And why are you still pulling data from the Tax Foundation? They use IRS data, just like me. Why not move up and play with the big boys?

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

Wow... what a concept... they actually have to pay into a system they use. Imagine that. Equal treatment under the law. Is that an unknown concept to Dems?

Yeah, equal. The low income folks are of course getting screwed again, and this is just on income tax. We allow the bottom 50% to hold all of 2.8% of the wealth, then we make them pay 3.3% of the income taxes, and further sock it to them with payroll and excise taxes. Some equal treatment expert you are...

..........Tax......Wealth
.........Share.....Share
Top 1%....36.9......32.7
Top 5%....57.1......57.2
Top 10%...68.0......69.8
Top 50%...96.7......97.2
0 > 50%....3.3.......2.8

Note: These are Fed data which for definitional
reasons will differ slightly from IRS data.

And since you've had an additional six months or whatever to think about it, have you managed to come up with any explanation at all as to why taxing people according to an annual income share is preferable on equity grounds to taxing people according to their wealth share? Given the futile nature of your attempts to deal with that question last time, I would doubt it. And of course, don't forget to take marginal utility theory into account in your answer, should you at last attempt to provide one.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by saganista

Oh, give it a rest. We've been around this block before, and you're nothing but stuck in your little CATO/Mises litter box. Mr. Huffy is all hot air.

In other words, you admit you're lying. Wealth is not income. Get a clue.

See what I mean? The point is over income taxes paid versus wealth owned, but you apparently haven't managed to keep even that much straight. And why are you still pulling data from the Tax Foundation? They use IRS data, just like me. Why not move up and play with the big boys?

You're still confused, aren't you? Again, really s-l-o-w this time... wealth is not income. We have an income tax, not a wealth tax. I know it's very hard for you to understand, but please try.

I eliminated the rest of your rambling because you're still confusing wealth and income.

And since you've had an additional six months or whatever to think about it, have you managed to come up with any explanation at all as to why taxing people according to an annual income share is preferable on equity grounds to taxing people according to their wealth share? Given the futile nature of your attempts to deal with that question last time, I would doubt it. And of course, don't forget to take marginal utility theory into account in your answer, should you at last attempt to provide one.

You STILL don't get it... The tax code taxes income, not wealth. Why? Because wealth has been accumulated over time from income that has already been taxed, or will be taxed when withdrawn from tax-deferred investments. What about that do you not understand?

[harborlady]

Originally Posted by roysoldboy

I don't mind being called racist because I voted against Obama by voting for McCain, but I do take exception to that hateful, irrational, ignorant crap because I don't agree with you.

Roys I've never accused people who voted for McCain are racist. What I'm talking about are idiots at fox and friends deciding to make a mockery of ron paul without ever hearing the man out. He was badly mistreated by R's. So was McCain, not just by the Coulter types, but by the GOP themselves in 2000 primary! Good grief!!! That was morally repugnant!

Had they called him out on merits of argument it would be one thing, but when they're a tabloid steering committee deciding to engage personal attacks by putting a clown hat on Ron Paul--- you should be kicking their a$$ or turning off that channel. Why aren't you?

Hateful irrational ignorant crap= McCain supporters attacking reporters in an airport because they were upset with Katie Couric asking a softball question. Palin did it to herself. McCain supporters did it to themselves as well. It's always someone else's fault with your side. The mirror of accountability shouldn't scare you if you're a true conservative. The problem is conservatives aren't in the republican party anymore.

McCain apologized for letting republicans down by losing the election. As far as I'm concerned, the whole lot of you weren't worthy of him. He might not be perfect, but at least he's a statesman. Something conservatives should reclaim sooner than not because this knuckle dragging behavior & low ball tactics disrupting my government makes them unfit for office. I'm not voting R again until the new age neos are shown the door.