Millionaires who don't work but earn money from investments only pay the following:

So, do you advocate property seizure, Mr. Marx?


Who said anything about property seizure. I didn't. If we're going to choose our taxes, we should choose them fairly.

Spiffy
I wonder if he realizes that dividends are the result of monies that have already been taxed once... maybe that's not good enough for the Libs.

I'm not sure what the solution is to poverty, if there is one, or if there needs to be; however, I can assure everyone here it sure as hell doesn't lie with the Federal Government. There is no entity less capable of spending your money in all the nation.

Call me selfish, but my wife and I already dish out a large percentage of our higher than average income to the Feds--to think of having more taxes taken out to further subsidize the poor makes my stomach turn. If they do, perhaps I can ask for government assistance to pay off our student loans and mortage. If I come off sounding like an ass I apologize, but I feel no responsibility whatsoever to those under the poverty line--we already give annually to three well-researched charities where we know our money is spent wisely.

That doesn't begin to address the additional money being yanked for Social Security--not a penny of which we'll ever see. If I ever felt like driving myself crazy I'd figure out how much long-term cash I'd make if I could put our SS 'contribution' into my IRA, money market, or further our 401k contributions with it.

Spiffy

Tell it to the majority of people that vote Republican - they have
no idea.

That's a massive assumption. I am a fiscal Conservative and only vote
Republican, because the only other choice is on the edge of socialism.
If the country is headed in the wrong direction, I'd rather have it do
it at 25MPH than 100.

Have you seen the curve of the national debt over the last 30 years? You're party (I vote for a variety) gave up on fiscal conservatism in the early 80's.

RaoulDuke

Property is theft.

Give me your computer, you thieving shiatbag!

begrudging the small tax breaks we have gotten recently is just silliness. They might have a positive effect on the economy but they certainly werent enough to fund any big social program.
If all the lefties want more and better social programs you might get many moderates and even conservatives on your side if you would be for any accountablilty in goverment.
The waste, fraud, abuse, duplication of effort, corporate subsidies, funds for foriegn powers, and farm subsidies are absolutely mind-boggling. But no one in either pary, and certainly not any left winger ever wants to seriously go after any of that crap.
So if you ask me do I want to give up my little tax break to help increase the size of a bueracracy that pretends to help the poor, well guess what, I say NO!.
I wish we could have an honest dialog on what levels of spending and taxation we are willing to go ahead with and then set some absolute limit. The the factions can fight each other for a slice of the pie.

Fortune--

I wonder if he realizes that dividends are the result of monies that have already been taxed once... maybe that's not good enough for the Libs.

I wonder if he realizes that is a GOP soundbite. My income is taxed, and then I get taxed when I buy something. I'm not whining "double taxation". Is there any tax a rich Republican doesn't like?

"Poverty" in America:




Poverty anywhere else:

/I see the error in my ways. The corporations already paid taxes, so we don't need dividend taxes. :)

Good old NAFTA... lets see if we can reach number one in poverty and adopt FTAA, woohoo!!

tforchsa
YES! We should shutdown that evil corporation GM and give their 400,000 employees equivalent paying jobs in the Gub'ment!

FredGarvin

'Well, they should just use that big tax break W gave them for insurance.

$300 will buy health insurance for a family of 4 for 10 years, right?'

Yeah... that shiathead! Giving me my own money, who does he think he is?

Bargirl 24:

Just my $.02, but I actually work in the third world and you can be extremely poor and malnourished and still not be skinny. All those starches. Rice is a staple, but not all that nutritious.

In my line of work, we call it "Hollywood poor." (Unless their stomachs are bloated, their arms look like sticks and flies are buzzing about, they're not REALLY poor). BS.

Hard work and education are the only way to escape poverty, IMHO. But if you're a child's illness away from going broke, it's a bit tough to climb the ladder.

One of the few forms of entertainment that poor people can afford is sex. As conservatives are quick to notice, poor people reproduce much more quickly than people who make some money.

It would stand to follow, then, that it might be a good idea to give these people jobs, health care, and some spending money so that they can do more than suck the nation's coffers dry. They might argue with us on the internet or catch a baseball game down at the stadium rather than fark.

But no; people who work at Wal Mart don't deserve living wages, we can't end the war on drugs, we shouldn't prevent corporations from shipping jobs overseas, we shouldn't offer free college education or technical training.

Instead, we should give the rich and their companies tax breaks.

Makes sense to me!

Truthfully, though, I WANT it to get bad. A LOT worse.

Maybe that's the only way we can get out of this...

Bush should win the election and the gap between rich and poor should widen even more.

Banks should assume more power...loans and credit should not even be CONSIDERED for those making less than 60K.

Whatever it takes to get people pissed enough to demand real change instead of this retarded cycle of comfort we've been sucked into...

The bottom line: We demand it--they'll give it to us.

Why?

Because at the VERY HEART of it, Those That Are Actually In Control FEAR rebellion.

I blame Bush, Communists, trial lawyers, Nader, Kerry, Big Business, tap shoes, Oil, foreigners, Foreigner, Kathie Lee-Gifford, the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man, Satan, and the Easter Bunny.

But mostly individuals who for some reason act in unison only to screw up.

tforchsa
Hey douche. Do you even know what dividends are? Sales taxes != double taxation.

So if American corporations' earnings growth equalled pop growth
plus inflation plus a few extra percentage points more (say 6-7%)
you'd be OK with that?

Well, I'm not sure what being "OK with that" might mean. A consistent
GDP growth rate of 6-7% would be quite good. There's a lot more to
the economy than the 7,000 or so public corporations.

Nice job GOP. Once again, your guy has farked shiat up. That makes 5 in a row now eh?


Way to go.

OMIGOD!!! almost half the people have *below average* income!!!!

Have no fear! America is turning the corner!

Turning the corner on the way to the unemployment office that is...

finiamh

Hear that sucking sound?

And remember, this is in no way related to the fact that our population is growing not due to births but due to immigration (both legal and illegal). Considering the average immigrant is dead-ass broke when they come here is this info any surprise?

Alert level to ORANGE in 3 ... 2 ... 1 (based on new information from 1999).

tforchsa

Millionaires who don't work but earn money from investments only pay the following:

dividend income tax: zero, eliminated by Bush

capital gains tax: 15%, equivalent to the lowest income tax bracket paid by poor workers

gain on sale of home: zero

I actually agree with this.

However, in a choice between giving the government more money/power, and giving the government less money/power I say opt for the latter every time. They'll end up with more than you want them to have anyway.

BlindMan

FredGarvin

'Well, they should just use that big tax break W gave them for insurance.

$300 will buy health insurance for a family of 4 for 10 years, right?'

Yeah... that shiathead! Giving me my own money, who does he think he is?

Dubya didn't give you shiat. He just piled on a ton of debt in your name and gave you half back. Now you're paying interest on the other half. Would you feel like you got a big ol raise if you took out a cash advance on your credit card?

2004-08-26 06:56:15 PM stpickrell

Spiffy
Now, you've got to prove that "socialism" (which you prolly define as anything less capitalist than Ayn Rand) is ruination.

Yes, tell that to Ingvar Kamprad, the CEO of Ikea, who momentarily was wealthier than Bill Gates despite living in the most heavily taxed social-welfare state on the planet. Oh, the pain, the pain.

Scrotar
Wouldn't giving poor people condoms be alot cheaper?

Have you seen the curve of the national debt over the last 30 years?
You're party (I vote for a variety) gave up on fiscal conservatism in
the early 80's.

No argument there. Reagan started the new centrist Republican party.
They have to right idea on cutting taxes and regulation but don't want
to make the political hazardous spending cuts. How many political
attach commercials are about "He voted against a bill to fund
insert emotional subject", and they work.

BizarroBarjockey

Nice job GOP. Once again, your guy has farked shiat up. That makes 5 in a row now eh?

Way to go.

Good thinking genius.

Since the president controls every aspect of the economy directly, your attribution of blame is highly relevant. Bush should have been pushing the big 'ECONOMY BETTER' button in the oval office, but instead he was pushing the 'ECONOMY WORSE' button!

No such thing as a business cycle. No such thing as private enterprise. Global capital markets? psshhht! It's all the president and the president alone.

OralB:

Yeah buddy, that the standard business model today [high-risk low-return profits]. WTF are you talking about? Do you hate free trade?

I am saying that a corporation that is making low returns is not in a position to hire, especially if those low returns are high risk. Consider this farkers: if a corporation is expected to be happy with $1M profit per year for its $50M business, it could simply close shop and invest the money.

sitesmithscott - pretty much what I said in an earlier post

Wouldn't giving poor people condoms be alot cheaper?

...maybe giving the better educations would as there is an inverse relationship between education and birthrate. Higher education leads to lower birthrates. Higher education also results in higher salaries and generally more taxes paid to get the next person out of poverty. That's called the "social contract" and it's what got the baby boomers where they are today, despite the fact that they want to pretend they did it all themselves. Oh, you built your high school and university with your bare hands, eh? Riiight.

OralB

Dubya didn't give you shiat. He just piled on a ton of debt in your name and gave you half back. Now you're paying interest on the other half. Would you feel like you got a big ol raise if you took out a cash advance on your credit card?

No he didn't GIVE me anything, he took less of my money. Do I have a problem with that - no. Make government as cash starved as you can, and it will eventually spend less.

PS: When you fight a war, you incur debts.
PPS: Kerry supported the war too, so unless you are voting Nader - please have this nice glass of STFU

lmacker

OMIGOD!!! almost half the people have *below average* income!!!!

OMIGOD!!! This guy doesn't understand averages.

I'm pretty sure you'll find the vast majority of people have *below average* income. Idiot.

CokedUpWerewolf

I blame Bush, Communists, trial lawyers, Nader, Kerry, Big Business, tap shoes, Oil, foreigners, Foreigner, Kathie Lee-Gifford, the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man, Satan, and the Easter Bunny.

But mostly individuals who for some reason act in unison only to screw up.

Coked up or no... I'm voting for you for president.

If this thread proves one thing, it's why I'll never sign up for TotalFark.

CheekyMunky - "Yeah, well, uh, but, um, you know, it's just that OH MY GOD LOOK A TERRORIST!!!"

That would make a wonderful T-shirt. Instant Classic.

FortuneCookie - It wouldn't help the economy as much, and the idea would likely meet resistance from the same folks who didn't want to give them decent paying jobs and health insurance to begin with.

As for immigration, who was it that gave them amnesty, so that they could continue to work for peanuts and save corporations millions of dollars? Anything to prevent companies from paying Americans a decent wage, I guess.

R. Kelly might as well have invented trickle down economics.

BlindMan wrote:

No he didn't GIVE me anything, he took less of my money. Do I have a problem with that - no. Make government as cash starved as you can, and it will eventually spend less.
__________________________________________________

Not true in the slightest. They just continue running up the deficit which is going to come back to haunt us later while we continue to pay interest on it now.
_____________________________________________________
He also wrote:

PS: When you fight a war, you incur debts.
_____________________________________________________

No shiat. Thats why no president in history has ever cut taxes during wartime. Oh, I meant until Bush Jr., that is.

Oh, you built your high school and university with your bare hands?
Non-sequitor.

Besides, equusdc, I don't recall signing that particular contract.

My social contract looks kinda like this:
Social Contract

BlindMan

No he didn't GIVE me anything, he took less of my money. Do I have a problem with that - no. Make government as cash starved as you can, and it will eventually spend less.

Sorry to break it to you but you're going to have to pay it back. With interest.

I know you like the guy because he has an (R) behind his name but back in the old day the (R) meant they spent less. Now it seems that some people have coopted the (R) to make a tidy profit. And you're paying for it. With interest.

Generally the census data is released later in the year, mid-septemberish.
The Bush administration had the data released early because most politicians are on vacation this time of year, and therefore many political reporters are as well. This info gets buried a little bit further back in the paper than it normally would as a result. Also, they didn;t want this data coming out right after the RNC when Bush is hoping to raise momentum.

This is typical Bush policy. They have a habit of releasing bad news late on Fridays so it gets buried (asides from the fact that they immediately raise the terror threat right after as well).

Why is it that I get banned regularly for calling people idiots, but idiots are allowed to post here with their idiotic bullshiat regularly?

Approximately 35.8 million people lived below the poverty line in 2003, or about 12.5 percent of the population, according to the bureau. That was up from 34.5 million, or 12.1 percent in 2002.



Since when is 12.5 percent "most"?

A fraction of the country is not "most", and compared to the rest of the world, 12.5% seems like damn near nothing. In fact, you could probably count for about half of the increase just by factoring in illegal immigration.

Would someone please tell me why every single person, regardless of talent or skills, deserves "decent paying jobs"? Why can't people get paid the fair market value for the skills they provide to their employer?

whidbey

'Truthfully, though, I WANT it to get bad. A LOT worse.

Maybe that's the only way we can get out of this...

Bush should win the election and the gap between rich and poor should widen even more.

Banks should assume more power...loans and credit should not even be CONSIDERED for those making less than 60K.'

Yeah, because banks make money off of the poor and middle class by not giving them enough credit, not by giving them too much credit at exhorbitant rates.

'Whatever it takes to get people pissed enough to demand real change instead of this retarded cycle of comfort we've been sucked into...

The bottom line: We demand it--they'll give it to us.'

Who are THEY? Those pesky illuminati again?

'And I would have taken over the global monetary system too, were it not for those meddling kids!'

Who are WE for that matter. I'm in finance and many of my friends are investment bankers. We must have missed the day where they give you the secret keys to the evil headquarters... as it stands we're just trying to make our BMW payments like the next man (yeah I said BMW, I graduated at the top of my class and worked 80 hours a week for years - suck it).

'Why?

Because at the VERY HEART of it, Those That Are Actually In Control FEAR rebellion.'

Oh shiat! Wait... no... it's just Curiously Capitalized Words! Not that scary after all. What are you rebelling against, James Dean Jr., and what are you proposing as an alternative?

Do most people like your alternative, because otherwise it sounds like you're trying to overthrow a democracy for a totalitarian state...

Part of the problem is that right now, the Repubs control both the congress and the white house. If you actually believe that Kerry is going to spend more money than Bush if he's elected, you're insane. Anything Kerry wants to spend has to be approved by congress. Anything Bush wants to spend will get rubber stamped. So anyone who is truly conservative (fiscally) should vote for gridlock, not for the open wallet policies of GWB.