PDA

View Full Version : Those evil rich...



eg8r
04-30-2008, 01:06 PM
This is from Boortz and for all those not name Gayle have a look at who really pays the taxes...<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">DAMNED EVIL RICH PEOPLE

Don't liberals just love to holler about "tax cuts for the rich?" It doesn't matter what the facts are – people just love to hear that stuff <span style="color: #FF6666">(Boortz must have met gayle)</span>. In a country awash with achievement envy (a/k/a "wealth envy") people just love to hear that those who have accomplished more than they are going to be hammered for daring to excel.

Well ... not to burst your bubble <span style="color: #FF6666">(Listen closely gayle)</span>, but a report from the National Center for Policy Analysis shows that the tax burden has been increasing on the evil rich faster than their incomes have been going up.

Here's a quickie look at the figures since 1986.

The share of the income tax paid by the top 1 percent of income earners went from 25.8 percent to over 37 percent.
The percentage their total income that the top 1 percent of income earners paid from their income to the federal government rose from 18.3 percent to 19.6 percent. The percentage paid by the bottom fifth of income earners went from 0.4 percent to zero percent.
The income share of the top 1 percent rose from 11.3 percent to 19 percent while their share of income taxes rose from 26 to 37 percent. That's a 7.7 percent increase in income and a 11 percent increase in income taxes.
Clearly these evil rich people are getting away with murder. We need to really raise their taxes, don't we?

</div></div> So for those that are not part of the gayle sheep cult the rich are paying more and the poor paying continually less.

eg8r

LWW
04-30-2008, 06:04 PM
Absolutely true.

And not a single leftist willing to even debate it ... they instead prefer to bury their head up another body orifice and act like the truth doesn't exist.

LWW

hondo
04-30-2008, 09:51 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is from Boortz and for all those not name Gayle have a look at who really pays the taxes...<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">DAMNED EVIL RICH PEOPLE

Don't liberals just love to holler about "tax cuts for the rich?" It doesn't matter what the facts are – people just love to hear that stuff <span style="color: #FF6666">(Boortz must have met gayle)</span>. In a country awash with achievement envy (a/k/a "wealth envy") people just love to hear that those who have accomplished more than they are going to be hammered for daring to excel.

Well ... not to burst your bubble <span style="color: #FF6666">(Listen closely gayle)</span>, but a report from the National Center for Policy Analysis shows that the tax burden has been increasing on the evil rich faster than their incomes have been going up.

Here's a quickie look at the figures since 1986.

The share of the income tax paid by the top 1 percent of income earners went from 25.8 percent to over 37 percent.
The percentage their total income that the top 1 percent of income earners paid from their income to the federal government rose from 18.3 percent to 19.6 percent. The percentage paid by the bottom fifth of income earners went from 0.4 percent to zero percent.
The income share of the top 1 percent rose from 11.3 percent to 19 percent while their share of income taxes rose from 26 to 37 percent. That's a 7.7 percent increase in income and a 11 percent increase in income taxes.
Clearly these evil rich people are getting away with murder. We need to really raise their taxes, don't we?

</div></div> So for those that are not part of the gayle sheep cult the rich are paying more and the poor paying continually less.

eg8r </div></div>


Excellent post, Eg.
I'm starting to really feel sorry for those poor 1 per centers.
Maybe those of us on a fixed income and those working at
WalMart and the lucrative fast food businesses can all pitch
in and help them make up the difference.

I'm sure somebody making minimum wage on 30 hours a week with 2 kids and no insurance, sick leave, vacation time, or retirement can really feel their pain.

sack316
04-30-2008, 10:46 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I'm sure somebody making minimum wage on 30 hours a week with 2 kids and no insurance, sick leave, vacation time, or retirement can really feel their pain. </div></div>

I've got a better idea for improving society. How about that person working a 30 hour a week job for minimum wage, with two kids, no insurance, sick leave, vacation time, or retirement...oh, I don't know... maybe be a little more responsible and wait until they have bettered their lives before bringing in the financial burden of children onto everyone else that will pay for them. That would cure a lot of ills right there.

But then again, I suppose it's much easier to have more kids so you can get more assistance than it is to pull yourself up by your bootstraps and try to make it. Hell, I've had every up and down in my life... the one thing I was responsible with was not bringing a life into the world that I wasn't prepared to take care of. When I was really down and out, and sought assistance... I couldn't get it because I had no children and the little bit I did make excluded me. Oh well, I found a way. But it sure does irk me when I see folks come through my store pulling out their EBT food stamp card from a roll of hundred dollar bills as their kids are tearing sh*t up so they can pay for a load of junk food with my money. Yep, I feel real sorry for those people... and I see a lot more of it than you'd think goes on.

Sack

Qtec
05-01-2008, 03:58 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The analysis by the two professors showed that the top 10 percent of Americans collected 48.5 percent of all reported income in 2005.

That is an increase of more than 2 percentage points over the previous year and up from roughly 33 percent in the late 1970s. The peak for this group was 49.3 percent in 1928.

The top 1 percent received 21.8 percent of all reported income in 2005, up significantly from 19.8 percent the year before and more than double their share of income in 1980. The peak was in 1928, when the top 1 percent reported 23.9 percent of all income.

The top tenth of a percent and top one-hundredth of a percent recorded even bigger gains in 2005 over the previous year. Their incomes soared by about a fifth in one year, largely because of the rising stock market and increased business profits.

The top tenth of a percent reported an average income of $5.6 million, up $908,000, while the top one-hundredth of a percent had an average income of $25.7 million, up nearly $4.4 million in one year. </div></div>

Its also estimated the top 1% own between 30% and 38% of the total wealth.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">“The nation faces some very tough choices in coming years,” he said. “That such a large share of the income gains are going to the very top, at a minimum, raises serious questions about continuing to provide tax cuts averaging over $150,000 a year to people making more than a million dollars a year, while saying we do not have enough money” to provide health insurance to 47 million Americans and cutting education benefits. </div></div>

Yeah, its tough at the top.

Q.......... link (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/business/29tax.html?ex=1332820800&en=fb472e72466c34c8&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss)

LWW
05-01-2008, 04:45 AM
So Q, it seems what you are angry about is that the top producers are STILL on top even after paying even more so you want to punish them with full knowledge that the people at the bottom are the one's who will bear the brunt of it.

More socialist bravo sierra which will further crush the poor ... but WTF, there job is to be a prop so you can claim you are fair and did something and they should go back to their poverty once their propaganda use has been fulfilled.

How about, just once, a liberal proposes something that would help lift the poor up ... as conservatives do ... instead of pulling the producers of society down?

What a novel concept.

LWW

hondo
05-01-2008, 06:12 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I'm sure somebody making minimum wage on 30 hours a week with 2 kids and no insurance, sick leave, vacation time, or retirement can really feel their pain. </div></div>

I've got a better idea for improving society. How about that person working a 30 hour a week job for minimum wage, with two kids, no insurance, sick leave, vacation time, or retirement...oh, I don't know... maybe be a little more responsible and wait until they have bettered their lives before bringing in the financial burden of children onto everyone else that will pay for them. That would cure a lot of ills right there.

But then again, I suppose it's much easier to have more kids so you can get more assistance than it is to pull yourself up by your bootstraps and try to make it. Hell, I've had every up and down in my life... the one thing I was responsible with was not bringing a life into the world that I wasn't prepared to take care of. When I was really down and out, and sought assistance... I couldn't get it because I had no children and the little bit I did make excluded me. Oh well, I found a way. But it sure does irk me when I see folks come through my store pulling out their EBT food stamp card from a roll of hundred dollar bills as their kids are tearing sh*t up so they can pay for a load of junk food with my money. Yep, I feel real sorry for those people... and I see a lot more of it than you'd think goes on.

Sack </div></div>


Typical Republican response. Of course it's not possible that the woman's husband left and took off to who knows where?
Or that the guy"s factory closed down and he's too proud to get government assisstance?
Or they were just 2 below average I.Q. people who both worked
and he died, leaving her nothing.
But you're right. They still should have known better.
Thank God those pathetic idiots aren't us, right, Sack?

eg8r
05-01-2008, 08:34 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its also estimated the top 1% own between 30% and 38% of the total wealth.</div></div> Strawman. Gayle likes to perpetuate the lie that the rich don't pay taxes. The truth is much different. I love it when you guys try and show actual dollar amounts, it is quite hilarious. I just wish you would not bold face make fun of those uneducated citizens who don't notice your scaremonger techniques.

eg8r

LWW
05-01-2008, 08:42 AM
When does the left NOT use strawman arguments?

Very rarely.

When the numbers are against them they argue the emotion.

When the emotions are against them they argue numbers.

When both are against them they fabricate something.

LWW

eg8r
05-01-2008, 08:45 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm starting to really feel sorry for those poor 1 per centers.
</div></div> All sarcasm aside the post is meant to show gayle's sheep that the rich actually DO pay the taxes in this country. I agree about your comment on the fixed income baggers and burger flippers. It is funny, you and Q have posts with an underlying desire to make everyone equal, yet you don't want everyone paying equal amounts of taxes. Even if the actual percent was equal that would not be good enough for you.

I am not referring to the occasional example of a person who lost a good paying job due to other circumstances, I am referring to the people who have made a career out of government assistance and minimum wage jobs. Anyone working minimum wage for 30 hours a week with 2 kids needs to really re-evaluate his situation. Why on God's green earth are you only working one job and only working 30 hours. If that is what is happening why not at a minimum get another job and work at it for 20 hours. The rest of us put in at least 50 hours a week why shouldn't the guy in your example?

eg8r

eg8r
05-01-2008, 08:51 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Typical Republican response.</div></div> And yours is the typical response to a Rep when you don't want to face the hard realities of life. Sack is giving you real world experience and you are too partisan to accept it. We have all heard the hard times Sack has gone through in life and I am sure he is not to sympathetic to the evil rich in this country but if anything, he comes across as being very honest about his situations in life and they have never sounded like he was living fat, rich and happy stepping on the little people in life. However because his posts would lead you to believe he has banded with the evil Republicans, you don't want to believe his real world experience because it does not fit your fantasy world.

eg8r

eb_in_nc
05-01-2008, 08:57 AM
[quote=eg8r]<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I am not referring to the occasional example of a person who lost a good paying job due to other circumstances, I am referring to the people who have made a career out of government assistance and minimum wage jobs. Anyone working minimum wage for 30 hours a week with 2 kids needs to really re-evaluate his situation. Why on God's green earth are you only working one job and only working 30 hours. If that is what is happening why not at a minimum get another job and work at it for 20 hours. The rest of us put in at least 50 hours a week why shouldn't the guy in your example? eg8r </div></div>

Because the guy in the example wants to suck off of social services for the balance of his income. If he worked 50 hrs/wk he would not qualify.

Nice graphic picture: Seeing the unemployed pregnant woman at the federal socialized hospital giving birth to her 7th child (at no cost to her), while receiving her $5,000 check for having her baby. Nice..

sack316
05-01-2008, 10:03 AM
Of course I'm not saying it's not possible that some of those situations occured in which people actually needed help. And when life hands someone a raw deal, I do actually feel it is everyone's responsibility to help as needed. And the fact is that I was one of those people at one time or another in my life, as well I have been on the other end doing my part (been working and paying taxes since I was 16). I've never been well off, but I've been comfortable at some points. I've also had some other points where I've had to beg, borrow, steal, and con to pay for rent and food. When I tried to get help, I couldn't because even though my income at the time was low, I didn't have kids and thus the scale for me to qualify was considerably tougher. Did I whine about it? No, I kept on and kept working to make it and even managed to get back into college as I worked my low paying job in hopes of bettering my position and standing in life in the future. That, to me, is how it should be done (again, yet another rare occurence where I probably did something the right way). But, there are a plethora of other people who would have used that same situation and manipulated the system to gain what assistance they could. That's what I'm saying is wrong.

As I said before, I see people pulling their food stamp cards out of a roll of hundred dollar bills. I KNOW people who brag about their government checks, and how they can't wait until their kid pops out so it can increase by a few hundred bucks. Those same people talked about how the government was paying their medical bills during pregnancy (that's good) as they told the story holding their shopping bag from the Gap (that's bad). I know people who make a decent living that still somehow manage to use government assistance. I know people that cash their government checks and bring them straight to the poolhall to gamble with... not because they are addicts, mind you, because they can afford it. I could go on and on, but you (hopefully) get the idea of what I'm saying.

At the same time, I know people who have busted their humps to make a life on their own. A girl I've talked about before lived a drug addicted life with an abusive drug addicted husband and their two kids. She chose to join the military at a great sacrifice to herself in order to get her life straight and make a decent future for her and her two kids and leave the hubby to his coke life. She could have taken an easier way out, but she didn't. I know older women who have lost their husbands to cancer and were left with nothing but debt. They busted their humps and took jobs at wal-mart or whereever to find a way. The point is, that those willing to TRY can usually find a way. I don't say that as an absolute certainty, there are exceptions of course... but generally speaking those that try---do.

As eg8r eluded too, I've seen it... hell I've lived it. "Thank god those pathetic idiots aren't us...", I can't speak for you Hondo but I've been one of those pathetic idiots. But I do indeed thank God that I am not one of the pathetic idiots that is so pathetic that I don't even try because I know there is always a way to live off of the hard work of others. I don't feel my response is a typical republican response, I feel it should be a typical taxpaying american response... one from someone who does feel there are those in need who very badly need the help, and by all means should get it... but is also realistic enough to know there are a ton of people who are getting help that don't need it at all. I could be wrong here, but it seems you'll be more than happy to complain about big oil (for example) taking dollars out of our pockets (and rightly so), while at the same time turning a blind eye to those who steal from us in other fashions.

So to clarify, I indeed actually do think those that need it should be able to get help. But I do NOT think it should be used as a crutch and a means for one to not have to attempt to better their lives by making their own way just because they can. Gayle deservedly gets a higher level of credibility from the likes of you and wolfie in other topics because of her deep research, experience, and people she knows... because she gains a further level of understanding on some things via sources other than just what she reads in the paper or sees in the news. Well in this particular situation, I am that person that has seen in real life what I am talking about. I assure you I am not just spitting out something I saw on TV, I'm simply telling my story from my life... and if you choose to dismiss that simply because of where my party affiliation would lie, or because my response seemed "too republican", then you would be being just as blind and partisan as you guys have accused others of being in a number of other threads.

Sack

Deeman3
05-01-2008, 10:13 AM
We should be able, some how, to make real humanitarian decisions that reward those in ture need and not those who will just hose us, both on the welfare side and the government/Business side!

eg8r
05-01-2008, 12:46 PM
I completely agree. It would be nice if those intending on screwing us were easier to identify but even if we were to use those identifiers we would be accused of stereotyping. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif

eg8r

LWW
05-01-2008, 12:47 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We should be able, some how, to make real humanitarian decisions that reward those in ture need and not those who will just hose us, both on the welfare side and the government/Business side! </div></div>
Pre LBJ that was the ay welfare worked.

If the welfare worker came by and saw kids with crappy diapers and a houseful of drunks the kids were taken away and the deadbeats got nothing.

Post LBJ welfare went from a societal benefit to an "ENTITLEMENT" under the law.

Words mean things, and changing 1 word has wreaked havoc upon society.

LWW

SKennedy
05-01-2008, 02:20 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm starting to really feel sorry for those poor 1 per centers.
</div></div> All sarcasm aside the post is meant to show gayle's sheep that the rich actually DO pay the taxes in this country. I agree about your comment on the fixed income baggers and burger flippers. It is funny, you and Q have posts with an underlying desire to make everyone equal, yet you don't want everyone paying equal amounts of taxes. Even if the actual percent was equal that would not be good enough for you.

I am not referring to the occasional example of a person who lost a good paying job due to other circumstances, I am referring to the people who have made a career out of government assistance and minimum wage jobs. Anyone working minimum wage for 30 hours a week with 2 kids needs to really re-evaluate his situation. Why on God's green earth are you only working one job and only working 30 hours. If that is what is happening why not at a minimum get another job and work at it for 20 hours. The rest of us put in at least 50 hours a week why shouldn't the guy in your example?

eg8r </div></div>

Both sides have made good points! Things aren't always just black and white. There is gray as well.
The top don't generally mind paying their taxes. They do mind the rhetoric about them not paying their "fair" share of taxes after getting rich off the backs of the poor downtrodden unwashed masses. And yes, there are folks out there who are actually trying who do need help! It's a hard thing to do to try and separate the bums and undeserving from those in need and are deserving....and the entity least qualified or reliable to try to attempt such a feat is the government....regardless of whether it's controlled by the left or right!

And to fault the top 1% of the rich for simply being rich? Why is that? Take their money, divide it evenly among the "unwashed masses", and in 10 years or less it will be back in the hands of the top 1%. Not because of the government, but in spite of the government and their restrictions on free trade. It's not the drug user getting rich off the drug deal! And the typical welfare recipient won't get rich or any long-term benefit either.

wolfdancer
05-01-2008, 03:01 PM
and in 10 years or less it will be back in the hands of the top 1%.
That reminds of of something that I wanted to add to the prison population post....
even before the legendary Melvin Beli....San Francisco had Jake Erlich as criminal Attorney for the very rich. His claim was that in an era where the death penalty was invoked for a capitol offense, he had never had a client sent "to the gallows"
His modest fee was.....everything that they owned.
his reasoning was, if he got them off, they knew how to make money, and would shortly be wealthy again....if he lost...well, they wouldn't need money where they were going.

SKennedy
05-01-2008, 03:04 PM
Years ago there was some type of study done on this subject. Don't know how valid the study was or how they could prove it or not, but it does have merit with respect to credibility.

wolfdancer
05-01-2008, 03:27 PM
Any figures to show how much the avg income of the bottom fifth went up?
I'd guess that despite a rising COL...their wages went down.
Increasing the tax burden on the super rich, doesn't really affect their standard of living much.....but an increase for the bottom folks would impact their disposable income.....
and the proof...our $600 rebate incentive....which is supposed to revitalize the economy..according to the noted economist GWB.
If $600 can do all that....wonder what a $600 tax increase would do?
where is this $600 coming from?, how will it affect our national debt?...well,Good thing we aren't really paying for this war...it's courtesy of our Chinese friends....
While some folks worry about the plight of America's poor...you always seem to worry more about the unjust tax penalties of the super rich.....I can only surmise that you must be planning to join them soon...and my advice....read your Bible:
Deuteronomy 8:18
I'll also be joining soon as my lottery ticket hits

eg8r
05-01-2008, 03:53 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Any figures to show how much the avg income of the bottom fifth went up?
</div></div> I am sure there are figures to show the avg income of the bottom fifth. Not sure what it matters when the intent is to show the rich are paying the vast majority of taxes and gayle likes to ignore this and perpetuate her story about the tax free rich.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but an increase for the bottom folks would impact their disposable income.....
</div></div> The bottom folks pay 0%, there is no one saying that is going to change any time soon.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">where is this $600 coming from?, </div></div> It is mostly coming from the rich. Why is this so hard for you to figure out. The bottom folks don't pay any in and they are getting rebates, the top pay it all in and they are not getting any rebates.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">how will it affect our national debt?...</div></div>Time will tell.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">you always seem to worry more about the unjust tax penalties of the super rich</div></div>Another mis-observation on your part. I don't remember ever saying they are unjustly taxed. My point is to disprove the myths of gayle about how much tax they actually pay.

The last thing I will be doing anytime soon is taking biblical advice from you. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'll also be joining soon as my lottery ticket hits </div></div>LOL, the lottery is the tax on the poor. You keep paying in your money.

eg8r

nAz
05-01-2008, 03:54 PM
Jack the only remedy is
1.to cut spending across the board not drastically mind you people need lots of help out there especially with the economy is shitty shape...
2. raise taxes to help pay down the debt.
3. Get out of Iraq asap and start saving that money were blowing over there to help every American over here.
4.Cut Corporate welfare ASAP! ($12 Billion a year to the oil companies.)
sound simple enough but im sure it wont happen anytime soon

eg8r
05-01-2008, 03:59 PM
I am fine with your 4 ideas but before any tax increases there needs to be significant proof that the actual spending cuts are true cuts (not cuts in future additional spending). I would suggest dropping any additional funding sent to the Dept of Education and any funding going to the arts. Then an explanation of exactly where the additional tax revenue will go.

eg8r

hondo
05-01-2008, 04:37 PM
I honestly don't think we are disagreeing.
I just wanted to point out to you that everybody's circumstances are different and should be treated that way.
And that it is difficult for poor, hard-working people to sympathise with those who don't have to make a choice between putting gas in their car to get to their job at Subway, or putting food on the table, or buying medicine that they need, or keeping their gas and electric on.
You had it rough; I had it rough. Both of us got a degree. Not evetbody is capable of doing that.

I keep reading posts about how compassionate the conservatives are and how much more they give than liberals.
i sure don't see it in their responses other than spouting statistics that make them feel good about themselves, all the while raising hell about taxes.

pooltchr
05-01-2008, 06:07 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I completely agree. It would be nice if those intending on screwing us were easier to identify but even if we were to use those identifiers we would be accused of stereotyping. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif

eg8r </div></div>

The fault lies with the lawmakers who design these programs. Since their number one concern is to stay in office, the "assistance" programs are drafted to apply to the greatest number of potential voters. The more people they can include, the greater voter base they can build. Not to mention, the bigger they can make the programs, the more money it takes to run them, and the more people they can hire. Government employees make up a huge percentage of the workforce, yet they do nothing to generate income. They just take it from the private sector. Imagine how long you would keep your job if nothing you did aided in producing revenue for your employer!
Steve

Qtec
05-02-2008, 08:00 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its also estimated the top 1% own between 30% and 38% of the total wealth.</div></div> Strawman. Gayle likes to perpetuate the lie that the rich don't pay taxes. The truth is much different. I love it when you guys try and show actual dollar amounts, it is quite hilarious. I just wish you would not bold face make fun of those uneducated citizens who don't notice your scaremonger techniques.

eg8r

</div></div>

Its not a strawman, its a fact. Notice your paste makes no mention of the reason that the rich pay 50% of all income taxes is because they make the most money!
Gayle has never said the rich don't pay taxes, thats your strawman. She may have said they don't pay enough or that the taxes cuts they got were way out of proportion, etc etc but she never said they don't pay taxes .

Q

LWW
05-02-2008, 09:52 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its also estimated the top 1% own between 30% and 38% of the total wealth.</div></div> Strawman. Gayle likes to perpetuate the lie that the rich don't pay taxes. The truth is much different. I love it when you guys try and show actual dollar amounts, it is quite hilarious. I just wish you would not bold face make fun of those uneducated citizens who don't notice your scaremonger techniques.

eg8r

</div></div>

Its not a strawman, its a fact. Notice your paste makes no mention of the reason that the rich pay 50% of all income taxes is because they make the most money!
Gayle has never said the rich don't pay taxes, thats your strawman. She may have said they don't pay enough or that the taxes cuts they got were way out of proportion, etc etc but she never said they don't pay taxes .

Q

</div></div>
And the evidence is that AFTER the tax cuts they pay more in both percentage of income AND total dollars, meanwhile the bottom earners AFTER the tax cuts pay LESS in both percentage of income AND total dollars.

The whole anti tax cut is leftists willing to maim themselves and their political goals in some perverse delusion that it is somehow fair.

Either that or they are just, willingly or not, ignorant of the facts.

LWW

pooltchr
05-02-2008, 07:58 PM
[quote=Qtec She may have said they don't pay enough or that the taxes cuts they got were way out of proportion,
Q

[/quote]

How much of a tax cut should the government give to those people who already don't pay any taxes????????????
Steve

Qtec
05-03-2008, 08:41 AM
How can you justify BORROWING billions - putting the whole country into trillions of $ of debt- in order to give money to those who don't need it?
Have you any idea what the interest is on 9 trillion dollars?

GW has lived in a fantasy land where if you need money you just print it.
Is it any wonder that the value of the $ has dropped by 25% under the GW admin?



Q

pooltchr
05-03-2008, 02:58 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How can you justify BORROWING billions - putting the whole country into trillions of $ of debt- in order to give money to those who don't need it?
Have you any idea what the interest is on 9 trillion dollars?

GW has lived in a fantasy land where if you need money you just print it.
Is it any wonder that the value of the $ has dropped by 25% under the GW admin?



Q </div></div>
You don't pay attention very well, do you? When have I ever justified borrowing any money, or for that matter, when have I ever supported this administration's fiscal policies?
Steve

LWW
05-03-2008, 05:15 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How can you justify BORROWING billions - putting the whole country into trillions of $ of debt- in order to give money to those who don't need it?
Have you any idea what the interest is on 9 trillion dollars?

GW has lived in a fantasy land where if you need money you just print it.
Is it any wonder that the value of the $ has dropped by 25% under the GW admin?



Q </div></div>
You don't pay attention very well, do you? When have I ever justified borrowing any money, or for that matter, when have I ever supported this administration's fiscal policies?
Steve </div></div>
You have to understand the mindset of the far left.

If you hated of Bush is less than 100% you are a Bushie.

If you disagree with Bush only 99.99999999999999% of the time you are a Bushie.

If you think Bush has ever done 1 single thing right you are a Bushie.

LWW

hondo
05-03-2008, 05:57 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How can you justify BORROWING billions - putting the whole country into trillions of $ of debt- in order to give money to those who don't need it?
Have you any idea what the interest is on 9 trillion dollars?

GW has lived in a fantasy land where if you need money you just print it.
Is it any wonder that the value of the $ has dropped by 25% under the GW admin?



Q </div></div>
You don't pay attention very well, do you? When have I ever justified borrowing any money, or for that matter, when have I ever supported this administration's fiscal policies?
Steve </div></div>


Never and never.
That's the trouble with using 2nd person. It's so vague.

Qtec
05-03-2008, 08:49 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=Qtec She may have said they don't pay enough or that the taxes cuts they got were way out of proportion,
Q

</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How much of a tax cut should the government give to those people who already don't pay any taxes????????????
Steve </div></div>

Everybody pays taxes.
When I was in NY there were asking $9 for a pack of cigs! In China you can get a cartoon of cigs for less. I reckon the tax per pack must have been about $7. ie, I paid tax and I don't even live there.

Q.....where's my rebate? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

pooltchr
05-04-2008, 06:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=Qtec She may have said they don't pay enough or that the taxes cuts they got were way out of proportion,
Q

</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How much of a tax cut should the government give to those people who already don't pay any taxes????????????
Steve </div></div>

Everybody pays taxes.
When I was in NY there were asking $9 for a pack of cigs! In China you can get a cartoon of cigs for less. I reckon the tax per pack must have been about $7. ie, I paid tax and I don't even live there.

Q.....where's my rebate? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif </div></div>

There is a difference between a voluntary and an involuntary tax. If you decide a pack of cigs is worth $9 to you, and you choose to buy them, that is your choice. If you make $40,000 a year at a job, and the government takes $11,200 and you don't have any say in the matter, that is involuntary. You didn't have to pay the cigarette tax, you chose to do so. You don't get to choose when it comes to income tax. They just take it from you. By the way, what is the tax rate in your country???

Bobbyrx
05-04-2008, 10:00 AM
from http://www.state.gov/p/inl/rls/fs/2230.htm
"A majority of the world’s supply of ecstasy is produced in clandestine laboratories in the Netherlands. As a center of the international chemical industry, the Netherlands is an attractive location for criminals to obtain the precursor chemicals used to manufacture ecstasy and other synthetic drugs, and the country’s modern transportation infrastructure and busy ocean ports offer ideal transit routes for traffickers moving the illicit drugs"

Mayube some of that tax money should go to clean up their own house instead of telling us how to clean up ours.......

nAz
05-04-2008, 10:25 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bobbyrx</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Mayube some of that tax money should go to clean up their own house instead of telling us how to clean up ours....... </div></div>

some times i fall into that mind set too, why do other countries or rather their citizens like to tell us what to do... but then i remember that U.S. policies effect the entire world so in some sense they do have the right to speak out. I would think the Chinese,Venezuelans and Iranians feel the same way about us when we tell them what they should do.

wolfdancer
05-04-2008, 10:32 AM
Hey, i thoughts dey was the "Filthy rich"

Qtec
05-05-2008, 04:52 AM
Maybe if you had READ the thread you would KNOW that I,m not telling anybody 'how to clean up their affairs'.
Steve says some people don't pay taxes. I say they do.
Q

Qtec
05-05-2008, 05:28 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=Qtec She may have said they don't pay enough or that the taxes cuts they got were way out of proportion,
Q

</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How much of a tax cut should the government give to those people who already don't pay any taxes????????????
Steve </div></div>

Everybody pays taxes.
When I was in NY there were asking $9 for a pack of cigs! In China you can get a cartoon of cigs for less. I reckon the tax per pack must have been about $7. ie, I paid tax and I don't even live there.

Q.....where's my rebate? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif </div></div>

There is a difference between a voluntary and an involuntary tax. If you decide a pack of cigs is worth $9 to you, and you choose to buy them, that is your choice. If you make $40,000 a year at a job, and the government takes $11,200 and you don't have any say in the matter, that is involuntary. You didn't have to pay the cigarette tax, you chose to do so. You don't get to choose when it comes to income tax. They just take it from you. By the way, what is the tax rate in your country??? </div></div>


Are you saying people willingly pay $7 tax on cigs? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Look, when you get your paycheck, your hard earned cash, its up to you what you want to spend it on , right? We can both agree on that point.
So, lets say you decide you want a cig and off you go to buy some. The pack of cigs actually costs $2 BUT because the Govt slaps %350 tax on top, to get your $2 cigs you have to pay the Govt $7. ie, if you want the cigs you have no choice but to pay the tax and its obviously involuntary. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

If you earn money, you pay tax.
If you buy something, you pay tax.
Tax is tax.
If there is a tax rebate, everyone should get something.

Q

Over here EVERYBODY pays income tax, even if you are unemployed.
How much do we pay?
Too much! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif
Its about a third.



Q

Bobbyrx
05-05-2008, 07:25 AM
Sorry, point taken.....however I don't get your example about cigs. You don't HAVE to buy them. Now if you had used gas or food as an example then I would agree.

Gayle in MD
05-05-2008, 08:15 AM
And you are right, but then one must take into account that Steve thinks our current oil prices are market driven! LMAO. Steve, condescending as he is, apparently does not keep up with current events, at all.

When Exon's representative testified, under oath, before the Senate Committee, he admitted the price has nothing to do with market fundamentals, but is being driven by energy traders, otherwise, it would be in the $55.00 range instead of the $120.00 range of a month ago. Actions by the Bush administration, some taken in secret, and the "Enron" loopholes are never written about by those brilliant lay economists, like Steve, who whine about taxes, but don't even answer questions about how a nation pays off nine trillion dollars of debt, wages an illegal war, militarily unwinnable, that costs 12 billion a month, (Much more than that, in actual dollars) without raising taxes.

When Republicans get into office the charts prove that the money goes to the top ten percent, and government graphs from the census show that the top ten percent expand their wealth, while the middle class and poor lose ground.

Thirty Billion to bail out corporate top feeders who have exploited American consumers are the norm when Republicans are in the While House, and absolutely nothing is accomplished to address the emergency of global warming, oil dependency, on going deferred taxes for the rich, all in all, we've lost eight valuable years, thanks to Republicans and George Bush.

Steve, doesn't realize that hedge funders, and predatory lenders don't produce a damned thing. That's part of our problem. Our manufacturing segment has been lost to those who move money around for a profit, and steal from America in the process.

Why should we give tax advantages to corporations who send our jobs overseas? Why should they be able to live here, and not pay corporate taxes as long as they don't bring the money back here? If that isn't a good example of a tax policy that hurts America while providing tax cuts for the rich, I don't know what is!

Anyone who thinks the rich pay their fair share of income taxes has got to be totally NUTS!

Gayle in Md.

eg8r
05-05-2008, 02:28 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Look, when you get your paycheck, your hard earned cash, its up to you what you want to spend it on , right? </div></div>No, you are not completely right. When you get your check the government has already decided what you will spend a certain percentage of it on. That is called income tax which is at the root of this discussion (of which sales tax has nothing to do with it).

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you earn money, you pay tax.
If you buy something, you pay tax.
Tax is tax.
If there is a tax rebate, everyone should get something.</div></div>LOL, you really don't have any idea what you are talking about. LOL, no problem though your queen sheep is happy with your replies.

eg8r

eg8r
05-05-2008, 02:30 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Steve says some people don't pay taxes. I say they do.</div></div> And in doing so it makes you look like a fool. When Steve makes that statement it is clear to everyone except you that he is referring to income tax which of course there is a large group that does not pay and a very small group that pays it all.

eg8r

eg8r
05-05-2008, 02:32 PM
After reading this last post of yours it is clear you just like to hear yourself speak. You spent one sentence on the subject of which all you said was, q you are right. You spent the rest of the time mouthing off about everything that has nothing to do with the subject. Long live the queen sheep.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone who thinks the rich pay their fair share of income taxes has got to be totally NUTS!</div></div> AGAIN WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO EXPLAIN YOUR DEFINITION OF FAIR? ALSO WHEN HAS ANYONE ON THE BOARD MADE THE STATEMENT THAT THEY BELIEVE THE RICH DO/DO NOT PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE? You sure do like to perpetuate this myth don't you. Your sheep will continue following it though so what do you care.

eg8r

pooltchr
05-05-2008, 06:03 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And you are right, but then one must take into account that Steve thinks our current oil prices are market driven! LMAO.
Gayle in Md.


</div></div>

Your ignorance knows no bounds. I am quite aware of what drives the price of a barrel of oil. You, on the other hand, still haven't been able to display any indication that you can comprehend the difference between profit and profit margins.
Oil prices are being driven by the futures market. Profit margins are measured in percentages. Profits are measured in dollars. The higher price of oil caused by the futures traders cause the oil companies to increase the price of gasoline in order to continue to make a profit. Those increases are necessary in order to maintain their margins. If they didn't do that, they would be losing money, and would end up out of business, or bankrupt. And every person in the country who has a retirement account with money invested in the market would take the hit....you included, I suspect.
Sometimes I think you argue just for the sake of arguement.
Steve

Qtec
05-05-2008, 07:49 PM
"Oil supply to the market is enough and high oil prices are not due to a shortage of crude but rather it is because of the decrease in the dollar's value, shortage of refinery capacity and some political tensions in the world," OPEC Secretary-General Abdullah al-Badri was quoted as saying by Iran's official IRNA news agency.

Believe it or not, in April 2001 the price was $16 a barrel.

If there is more oil being produced than can be refined, the price of crude should really go down, not skyrocket.

When GW was threatening to invade Iraq the Saudis, Russia and the OPEC countries in particular were totally against it. Since the invasion, NOT A PEEP has been heard from those countries. Why?

Simple, a deal was done.
The US is paying them off by maintaining artificially a ridiculous price of crude. The oil producers like OPEC and Russia are now making almost 8 times more from their sales.
They are laughing all the way to the bank.


Q

Qtec
05-05-2008, 08:21 PM
I used smoking because its an extreme example of excessive taxation.
Sure, you don't have to buy them but if you do and you smoke a pack a day, you end up paying $2,400 in tax per year!
All I am saying is everyone pays tax. The Govt makes no distinction between income tax $ and sales $ etc when its collecting the cash, its all revenue and it all goes into one huge pot.

Q

Qtec
05-05-2008, 08:32 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Steve says some people don't pay taxes. I say they do.</div></div> And in doing so it makes you look like a fool. When Steve makes that statement it is clear to everyone except you that he is referring to income tax which of course there is a large group that does not pay and a very small group that pays it all.

eg8r </div></div>

Steve, <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There is a difference between a voluntary and an involuntary tax. </div></div>

Q, <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> ie, if you want the cigs you have no choice but to pay the tax and its obviously involuntary.</div></div>

Coincidence?

Q

sack316
05-05-2008, 11:48 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

"Oil supply to the market is enough and high oil prices are not due to a shortage of crude but rather it is because of the decrease in the dollar's value, shortage of refinery capacity and some political tensions in the world," OPEC Secretary-General Abdullah al-Badri was quoted as saying by Iran's official IRNA news agency.

Believe it or not, in April 2001 the price was $16 a barrel.

If there is more oil being produced than can be refined, the price of crude should really go down, not skyrocket.

When GW was threatening to invade Iraq the Saudis, Russia and the OPEC countries in particular were totally against it. Since the invasion, NOT A PEEP has been heard from those countries. Why?

Simple, a deal was done.
The US is paying them off by maintaining artificially a ridiculous price of crude. The oil producers like OPEC and Russia are now making almost 8 times more from their sales.
They are laughing all the way to the bank.


Q </div></div>

hmmm, makes me wonder. $16 a barrell in 2001, has gone up by about 7.5 times that amount. Retail price in that time ranged roughly anywhere between $1 and $2 a gallon... comparatively speaking the current price doesn't sound as bad now... or rather we may have been gouged even worse then.

Eh, I'll whine and complain... but it still beats walking.

Sack

pooltchr
05-06-2008, 04:18 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">


Believe it or not, in April 2001 the price was $16 a barrel.

Q </div></div>

Wow! That's up about 8 times the price for a barrel of oil. Yet the price of gasoline over that same period has only doubled! Doesn't look like the driving public is absorbing all the price increase to me.
Steve

eg8r
05-06-2008, 05:37 AM
This is after you brought up the sales tax issue.

eg8r

eg8r
05-06-2008, 05:42 AM
Since she does not know the difference between profit and profit margin she either changes the subject (refer to this last post of hers about price) or uses the two words interchangeably. It is funny to see her squirm and try to sound knowledgable but in the end it is just a facade hiding ignorance. At first it would not been a big deal if she just admitted it but now after about 10 posts from her on the subject she still is changing the subject and making fun of you. LOL, what a riot.

eg8r

LWW
05-06-2008, 05:49 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

"Oil supply to the market is enough and high oil prices are not due to a shortage of crude but rather it is because of the decrease in the dollar's value, shortage of refinery capacity and some political tensions in the world," OPEC Secretary-General Abdullah al-Badri was quoted as saying by Iran's official IRNA news agency.

Believe it or not, in April 2001 the price was $16 a barrel.

If there is more oil being produced than can be refined, the price of crude should really go down, not skyrocket.

When GW was threatening to invade Iraq the Saudis, Russia and the OPEC countries in particular were totally against it. Since the invasion, NOT A PEEP has been heard from those countries. Why?

Simple, a deal was done.
The US is paying them off by maintaining artificially a ridiculous price of crude. The oil producers like OPEC and Russia are now making almost 8 times more from their sales.
They are laughing all the way to the bank.


Q </div></div>
Evidence?

LWW

eg8r
05-06-2008, 05:58 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When GW was threatening to invade Iraq the Saudis, Russia and the OPEC countries in particular were totally against it. Since the invasion, NOT A PEEP has been heard from those countries. Why?</div></div> Why should they continue beating a dead horse. They have more sense than the Dems in this country.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Simple, a deal was done.
The US is paying them off by maintaining artificially a ridiculous price of crude. </div></div>You do love your conspiracy theories.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
05-06-2008, 07:15 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Simple, a deal was done.
The US is paying them off by maintaining artificially a ridiculous price of crude. The oil producers like OPEC and Russia are now making almost 8 times more from their sales.
They are laughing all the way to the bank.

</div></div>
Absolutely! I don't suppose we'll ever read a single post from our insulting fellow posters that will give your premise due credit.

They can't acknowledge the truth in what you're saying because it would require them to acknowledge the total corruption of the entire Bush/Cheney/Rice, personal wealth campaign, paid for with the blood of middle class American kids, the Bush/Cheney Oil cabal, and its decades old dirty dealing with the Saudis and others in the Middle East.

There are a few here whose "Ignorance knows no bounds" to quote one of our more reckless citizens who is fine leaving Bush's legacy of debt for his kids and grand kids to pay, as long as his own wallet isn't affected, but wouldn't you think that the well publicized "Secret Meetings" which Cheney fought so hard to keep deep sixed, hidden away from public scrutiny, would give some of these brilliant self-proclaimed economists from the right a clue about what is really going on with the oil prices?

The condescention abounds, yet no relationship between big oil in the White House is ever mentioned.

We're being gouged left and right, plain and simple, by the same bunch of fascists that pay off news reporters, install fake white house correspondents, launch fake wars for oil, torture innocent people in order to glue together fake intel that can be used to justify this insane illegal war, and censor scientific studies on global warming.

The rest of us, according to our resident geniuses remain in a state where our "ignorance knows no bounds." A Bush supporter of amazing intellect, whose only fear is that he might just have to be taxed something extra by the government to pay down the debt that his candidate of choice has dumped on this country, instead of leaving it all for his own kids and grand kids to pay.

In my world, ignorance is believing that a country like ours can launch exhorbitantly expensive, un-necessary wars, cut taxes, and run up unprecedented debt, without devastating economic results. When their only candidate is out there preaching to the sheep about keeping Bush's tax cuts permanent, and they're buying it, Dean's book, "Without Conscience" takes on greater meaning!

Gayle in Md.

eg8r
05-06-2008, 08:38 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Absolutely! I don't suppose we'll ever read a single post from our insulting fellow posters that will give your premise due credit.</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In my world, ignorance is believing that a country like ours can launch exhorbitantly expensive, un-necessary wars, cut taxes, and run up unprecedented debt, without devastating economic results. </div></div> Any chance you are going to give us the definition of "fair" in your world with respect to the taxes the rich pay?

eg8r

Deeman3
05-06-2008, 12:11 PM
It all comes down to the fact that democrats want to take more of my money that I earned for my family and give to others. No justification of who gets it beyond being needy.

Now, there is vastly stupid government waste in both welfare for companies, National Public Radio, Studies on the mating habits of the fruit fly but not one word from the candidates of stopping corruption, spending for real need or any other accountability other than "give me more of your money, after all it is for the greater good, my election."

Thank-you Hillary and John but no thanks for the gas tax holiday. Aside from a presumptive nominee and a second place runner on one side, what authority, plan or way do you have to implement this? How will it ever be done this summer, unless it is another despicable cheap political play. Probably not!

By the way, if this is so urgent, please let us know the senate bill number you have introduced on it's behalf.

sack316
05-06-2008, 12:30 PM
Deeman, doesn't matter if they even present it as a bill or not. I don't see how it would ever pass either way, by congress or Bush. A gas tax holiday is all buzz for fodder in an attempt to gain popularity at the moment. Economists know what it will do, it was looked at before years ago as a possibility and passed on. I'll do without my extra 30 cents per day so I can still have a decent road to drive on and hopefully a bridge to cross that won't collapse (which is the funding that will be lacking if it comes out of the tax funding). If it is a tax paid for my the oil companies, we would be foolish to think that they would actually "chip in" to help without just raising the base price and pocketing the extra money over the summer.

I dunno, this is one thing where I actually respect Obama, for taking the unpopular yet more realistic stance. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate a candidate who wants to actually try to give me some kind of financal break... but I don't want an immediate short term break if it would be more costly in the long run.

Sack

Bobbyrx
05-06-2008, 01:47 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Evidence?
LWW</div></div>


Why are you being such a buzz kill? Evidence....you're just so..so.......mean spirited!

eg8r
05-06-2008, 03:24 PM
I agree with you and Obama. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif The tax holiday is just a dumb political move by Congress to trick the constituents into believe the politicians are actually trying to do something.

eg8r

LWW
05-06-2008, 05:41 PM
It's the only thing I know of which shuts Q up for a bit.

LWW

Qtec
05-08-2008, 02:33 AM
Can I prove there was a deal done? Not yet /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif but just look at the known facts. A few years ago $100 was unthinkable. I remember reading an op-ed when the guy predicted $100 a barrel and got hammered for it. Crazy they said. Now its $120............

This is good for the US because other countries have to spend their $ reserves for oil at 8x the normal price.
The oil producers, despite the fall in the $, are more than compensated by the high oil price. Everybody is happy.



If you look at the history, oil has been manipulated from day 1 of the Iraq invasion.

Put it this way, if it was a Dem Pres in power , you would be attacking him for allowing the Saudis/OPEC to make the US pay through the nose for oil when the US took out a threat to them ie did them a favour. Where is their gratitude?



Q

Gayle in MD
05-08-2008, 07:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where is their gratitude?

</div></div>
Burried by the side of the road, waiting to blow up our troops. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/mad.gif