hey conservatives.....u like the tax cut your going to get? [Archive]

phixion

05-03-2003, 03:11 PM

ok, this is the worst idea this President has ever come up with! i thought the whole iraq thing was bad (still looking for those WMDs) but this makes that decision look great. y are we about to give the wealthiest 1% a tax cut? didnt we learn from the last tax cut? i mean i loved my new car-stereo.....but this is just crazy.

the trickle down theory does not work.....and i dont know why republicans dont understand this. if u want to stimulate an economy u need a middle class........thats it. the wealthy wont do it. the greatest indicator to whether or not an economy is strong is the size of the middle class. and under this president the middle class is shrinking.........thats not good. but hey before we make poor schools stronger, lets help the rich get richer.

i swear to God this President is gonna take us back to the 80's....and how i remember crack in the 80's........

<IMG SRC="http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/philex/phixion.gif">
"smoking weed, smoking weed doing coke, drinking beers
drinking beers, beers, beersrolling fatties, smoking bluntswho smokes the blunts?we smoke the blunts." -Jay

Gvac

05-03-2003, 03:29 PM

Why are we going to give the wealthy a tax break? Because this is America, and everyone is supposed to be treated fairly. EVERYONE WHO PAYS TAXES IS GETTING A TAX CUT, and surprise surprise, the "wealthy" pay the majority of taxes in this country.

As far as a tax cut not stimulating the economy, I beg to differ. Go back and reexamine the '80's and you'll see that Reagan's tax cuts pulled us out of one of the worst recessions in recent memory. In fact, Reagan was the last Republican to get the endorsement of the contstruction unions when he ran for re-election because they were finally working again thanks to the "rich" deciding to start building again.

As far as your cry that we need a "middle class", where in the world does a middle class come from? Is it created by the government through excessively taxing the successful people? The majority of middle class people are those who are employed by those damn rich people.

Insanity.

http://gvac.50megs.com/images/militarysalute.jpg

The Jays

05-03-2003, 03:44 PM

... somewhere in this thread, I predict a liberal vs conservative argum--- oh, it's already started....

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif

TheMojoPin

05-03-2003, 04:47 PM

Do *I* get $300? I remember last time I didn't, and yet I was barely scraping by...I'm in the 30-40k a year bracket this time around...do I qualify?

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

travis151

05-03-2003, 07:08 PM

Mojo I did recieve my $300 check at the time I made 34,000 a year. I did find otu some people who made more then me did not recieve a check I believe its because those who did not take out the most taxes as possible. You do get some choice on how much will be taken out of your check but you have to declare how much to your employer.

Red Sox=More Better

Se7en

05-03-2003, 07:09 PM

I'd just like to say that this thread is every bit of a bad idea as the "Clinton was an awful president" thread.

But let's see if any of my liberal friends here agree with me this time.

Hey, what do I know though, the Clinton thread lasted at least 4 pages.

<img border="0" src="http://se7enrfnet.homestead.com/files/captainamerica.jpg" width="300" height="100">

"By the laws of this very government - whether they want to accept it or not - every American is complicit in the darkness that this country spreads across the rest of the world - simply by paying taxes." -- Inali Redpath
"That's terrorist double-talk and I, for one, am SICK of listening to it." -- Captain America

"We have become too civilised to grasp the obvious. For the truth is very simple. To survive you often have to fight, and to fight you have to dirty yourself. War is evil, and it is often the lesser evil."
---George Orwell

TheMojoPin

05-03-2003, 08:05 PM

But let's see if any of my liberal friends here agree with me this time.

I'm with you, my friend, but damn if I don't want me a nice $300 check!

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

high fly

05-04-2003, 12:51 PM

The 300 you got was added on by the Democrats to Dumbya's tax cuts.
Those tax cuts were supposed to provide a quick stimulus to the economy .
What many are forgetting is that these tax cuts drive up the deficit.
The government then borrows more money, so we then have to pay it all back, [i]WITH INTEREST!
That interest over 10 years or so is a motherfucker, especially when you consider that us regular folk will have to pay a bigger percentage of it.

" and they ask me why I drink"

LiquidCourage

05-04-2003, 01:00 PM

Boo hoo, tax cuts for the rich!

People like you make me want to vomit.
Get out of my sight, scumbag.

high fly

05-04-2003, 01:06 PM

So what, you don't mind subsidizing this welfare for the rich program?
If you were familiar with the rules of debate, then you would know that namecalling is the same thing as raising the white flag, throwing in the towel, admitting defeat....
Can't handle the points, huh?

" and they ask me why I drink"

high fly

05-04-2003, 01:23 PM

Oh yeah, Dumbya's first round of tax cuts put 100 m-m-m-million dollars into Bush and his cabinet's pockets, with Cheney being the big winner with 40 mil.

" and they ask me why I drink"

Death Metal Moe

05-04-2003, 01:58 PM

Looking at the history of our economy, I see more and more that it does indeed go in waves.

Most recently, the strong 80's were followed by the recession of the early 90's. Then the tech stocks and all the other things in the mid to late 90's were great until the last 2 fiscal quarters of Clinton's term, and now we're in a slow down not near the recession of the early 90's.

In my personal opinion, I agree with the economists I've heard that our economy is ready for a HUGE upturn. It is just dependent on the next moves of Bush.

I have to admit that this war victory will mean NOTHING in a few months if we're all still unemployed. He needs to deal with this problem, and giving the people who pay almost all the taxes in the country will create more jobs by allowing them to spend more in their businesses and in our economy.

I have faith in Bush, and unless he does something REALLY stupid, I'll vote for him and the rest of the column on election day.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>

<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>


666%

TheMojoPin

05-04-2003, 02:06 PM

Most recently, the strong 80's were followed by the recession of the early 90's. Then the tech stocks and all the other things in the mid to late 90's were great until the last 2 fiscal quarters of Clinton's term, and now we're in a slow down not near the recession of the early 90's.

In my personal opinion, I agree with the economists I've heard that our economy is ready for a HUGE upturn. It is just dependent on the next moves of Bush.

I'm very curious to see what will cuase the upswing, and whether it will be as big or bigger then the one in the 90's. The 90's had the sudden explosion of the tech/'net industry to shoot things along to levels we hadn't even dreamed of...what does anyone think might help the bump along this time?

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

LiquidCourage

05-04-2003, 03:31 PM

I still don't understand this whole thing about "the great economy of the 90s."

Being taxed more than ever in American history isn't exactly a good thing.

FiveB247

05-04-2003, 04:13 PM

The economy is determined by how business's, corporations and the stocks profit. Not simply by the level of the average person or living.

The Tech stock explosion was a joke. It's virtually an empty investment with no long standing pursuit or gains. It's all short term gain. For the minority that actually are long term (microsoft, etc), there are hundreds of priceline's and yahoo's. They are the same level gambling as buying IPO's with initial explosion of profit..but obviously come back down to reality. What's unhealthy about these type of investments is that it hurts companies as well as gives Investment companies more reason to pursue short term profiting over long term growth. It ends up making the economy unstable for the long term instead of making it stable with long term continued growth.

http://www.waste.uk.com/gfx/bear.gif

Death Metal Moe

05-04-2003, 04:31 PM

I'm very curious to see what will cuase the upswing, and whether it will be as big or bigger then the one in the 90's.

In my opinion it won't be, just because this recent ecinomic slowdown wasn't as big as the one in the early 90's.

It's like a Ying to a Yang. It's like pulling someone on a swing back and letting go.

But since I never took an ecinomics course, why the fuck are you listening to me?

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>

<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>


666%

TheMojoPin

05-04-2003, 06:23 PM

I still don't understand this whole thing about "the great economy of the 90s."

There's a shocker.

"I breathe air."

"That oxygen is one punk ass BITCH."

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

Death Metal Moe

05-04-2003, 06:28 PM

Who pissed in your Corn Flakes this morning Kev?

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>

<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>


666%

TheMojoPin

05-04-2003, 06:32 PM

I was out of milk. FUCK THE WORLD!!!

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

phixion

05-05-2003, 06:04 AM

I still don't understand this whole thing about "the great economy of the 90s."

Being taxed more than ever in American history isn't exactly a good thing.

i dont think america minds if its taxed to shit, as long as theyre employed, and our money is being put to good use. at least i know i dont.

<IMG SRC="http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/philex/phixion.gif">
"smoking weed, smoking weed doing coke, drinking beers
drinking beers, beers, beersrolling fatties, smoking bluntswho smokes the blunts?we smoke the blunts." -Jay

A.J.

05-05-2003, 06:12 AM

hey conservatives.....u like the tax cut your going to get?

Yes.

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/ajdcsig.jpg">

A Skidmark production.

http://www.internerd.com/frink.retired/frinkv.2/stuff/littlepc.gif

LiquidCourage

05-05-2003, 02:22 PM

i dont think america minds if its taxed to shit, as long as theyre employed, and our money is being put to good use.

Which isn't happening at all.
We're being taxed to shit and have nothing to show for it.

Death Metal Moe

05-05-2003, 02:51 PM

i dont think america minds if its taxed to shit, as
long as theyre employed, and our money is being put to
good use. at least i know i dont.

If you like, I can hold our wallet for you too man. That
way I can give you what I feel you deserve of your money,
and then I can spend the rest on what I feel is a good
idea.

You know, since you don't feel you can decide what your
money should go towards.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>

<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>


666%

phixion

05-05-2003, 04:10 PM

If you like, I can hold our wallet for you too man. That
way I can give you what I feel you deserve of your money,
and then I can spend the rest on what I feel is a good
idea.

You know, since you don't feel you can decide what your
money should go towards.

ok ill give 10% of my paycheck every week if u make sure i never have to drive over a pothole ever again.

<IMG SRC="http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/philex/phixion.gif">
"smoking weed, smoking weed doing coke, drinking beers
drinking beers, beers, beersrolling fatties, smoking bluntswho smokes the blunts?we smoke the blunts." -Jay

The Jays

05-05-2003, 04:16 PM

...or you can ask to cut some programs that are useless and have that money go towards the potholes...

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif

Death Metal Moe

05-05-2003, 04:16 PM

Seriously phinox. You want to give Hillary and Uncle Ted
MORE of your money? Hows about you give them the
extra they wanted from me and let me know how it turns
out.

I don't understand how ANYONE thinks allowing the
government to take even more of our money from us will
jumpstart the economy. It defies logic.

And they're oh so good at spending it, on both sides of the
asile in Congress. Not to just take shots at the Libs. ALL of
them need to get their grubbly little meat fists off my
cash.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>

<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>


666%

phixion

05-05-2003, 04:25 PM

I don't understand how ANYONE thinks allowing the
government to take even more of our money from us will
jumpstart the economy. It defies logic.

well this is the way i see it....if the gov't has money (and they use it right) theyll put that dough into construction. especially construction of schools. that would employ hundreds at each site over a short term period, then the schools would then employ about a hundred ppl long term. this would also ease class sizes and allow following generations a better chance at life. also construction of hospitals would also b helpful.

im for anything that alleviates the short term unemplyment rate, that would also employ ppl over long term.

and im not totally for taxing, unless your rich. i dont see why those that can afford the taxing get huge refunds. i dont see how that would stimulate the economy. we need to increase spending as citizens. we need to buy more crap so more companys will hire. and i dont see the rich buying a shitload of cereal like the middle class might.

cuz if the rich did maybe Post would hire more employees.

<IMG SRC="http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/philex/phixion.gif">
"smoking weed, smoking weed doing coke, drinking beers
drinking beers, beers, beersrolling fatties, smoking bluntswho smokes the blunts?we smoke the blunts." -Jay

The Jays

05-05-2003, 04:52 PM

... ok.. here's where I need your definition of rich... and please include a dollar amount...

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif

The Jays

05-05-2003, 04:57 PM

unless your rich. i dont see why those that can afford the taxing get huge refunds. i dont see how that would stimulate the economy.

... do rich people just get to certain dollar amount and then start hording all their money? Someone fill Michael Jackson in on that, he was dropping like 4 mill in one store when he was supposed to be saving dat shit!!!!!!!

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif

phixion

05-05-2003, 05:08 PM

... ok.. here's where I need your definition of rich... and please include a dollar amount...

id say anyone who makes more than a mill a year.

and im not speaking for entertainers cuz they dont represent the wealthy community. but i doubt the rich would buy mass market products. i see them spending money on frivolous things that wouldnt stimulate the economy.

<IMG SRC="http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/philex/phixion.gif">
"smoking weed, smoking weed doing coke, drinking beers
drinking beers, beers, beersrolling fatties, smoking bluntswho smokes the blunts?we smoke the blunts." -Jay

The Jays

05-05-2003, 05:17 PM

id say anyone who makes more than a mill a year.

.... wow, you need to really come to a consensus with the Democratic party.... cuz they think if you make 50,000 a year, you are rich, and must be taxed to death....

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif

phixion

05-05-2003, 05:21 PM

.... wow, you need to really come to a consensus with the Democratic party.... cuz they think if you make 50,000 a year, you are rich, and must be taxed to death....

well thats crazy talk to me..... cuz my pop makes more than that, but with 3 kids, tuition, mortgage, and all of other lifes expenses its not that much.

but i would like to add that i think that parents paying for their childs tuition should have that tuition money as tax deductible

<IMG SRC="http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/philex/phixion.gif">
"smoking weed, smoking weed doing coke, drinking beers
drinking beers, beers, beersrolling fatties, smoking bluntswho smokes the blunts?we smoke the blunts." -Jay

The Jays

05-05-2003, 05:26 PM

... well when you decide to bitch about the conservatives fighting for a tax cut, and jump on the side of the liberals for fighting against tax cut for the rich, you best understand what constitutes "rich" in the minds of the politicians....

... and I agree with you on the tax deduction for tution toward parents who send their kids to private schools.... my parents had to pay double time because they wanted me to go to private school....

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif

HBox

05-05-2003, 05:42 PM

cuz they think if you make 50,000 a year, you are rich, and must be taxed to death....

Where did you hear that?

The Jays

05-05-2003, 05:50 PM

... I was bending down to tie my shoe one day, and I seen this piece of paper being blown in the wind, and it stopped right next to my shoe. It had something written on it, so I picked it up and read it. It said " The Democrats think that if you make $50,000 a year, you are rich."

I shed a single solitary tear at this, and went along my way...

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif

TheMojoPin

05-05-2003, 05:58 PM

WHERE'S MY GODDAMN CHECK?!?!

I like paying taxes. I'm such a weirdo.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

The Jays

05-05-2003, 06:09 PM

... I will now provide my source to back up my information....

http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/IBe3Pn1azxI2H4V_hUfhaciqVjBxk-6nYiMmZ942hLcormxJ7N2f1r2GuTE9PutU3Jm6aZyWmZ_htG-_/dems.gif

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif

TheMojoPin

05-05-2003, 06:10 PM

Hot damn, I'll be rich by 26...

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

The Jays

05-05-2003, 06:12 PM

... hmm, upon further inspection of my source, it seems that it was a plaster tablet blowing in the wind that happened to land by my shoe..... but either way, FUCKING SECONDARY SOURCE, BIATCHES!

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif

phixion

05-06-2003, 07:05 AM

but i thought bush wanted the wealthiest 1% to get the biggest tax break.......

and thats bullshit. it seems like a stupid idea.

<IMG SRC="http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/philex/phixion.gif">
"smoking weed, smoking weed doing coke, drinking beers
drinking beers, beers, beersrolling fatties, smoking bluntswho smokes the blunts?we smoke the blunts." -Jay

high fly

05-06-2003, 08:06 AM

The scheme is this:first they give tax cuts to those who need them least.
Then the deficit goes up and the government has to borrow even more money to cover it.
The money the government borrows has to be paid back with interest, by the way, by the taxpayers, but the share that the rich pay is less, thanks to their tax cuts.
It's a reverse Robin Hood scheme.
Somehow the Republicans don't like the idea of those with 40% of the money paying 40% of the taxes.

" and they ask me why I drink"

Death Metal Moe

05-06-2003, 01:46 PM

and im not totally for taxing, unless your rich. i dont see why those that can afford the taxing get huge refunds. i dont see how that would stimulate the economy.

You've bought into this "Class Warefare" mentality that I hear the Left spread. Do you think that ALL "rich" people just got their cash with no work? Do you think just because someone has a lot, they HAVE to give you more?

I sure hope NOT, because as an American, I hope that you dream of being well off one day, as I do. The American dream is to work hard for your chance at a better life.

And if and when I reach that dream, I DO NOT want Uncle Sam reaching into my pocket just because someone decides I don't deserve my money. Or that my money would be better redestributed to wacky social experiment programs or our welfare state.

Also, just to let you all know I've been hearing about the NYC tax hikes. It seems that a singel preson in NYC making 100,000 is considered rich, or a couple making 500,000. That's CRAZY when you take into account all the EXTRA expenses in NYC. ANd that's NOT taking into accoun all the extra cash people will have to dump into bus fare, property and all the other hikes in other services.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>

<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>


666%

TheMojoPin

05-06-2003, 01:52 PM

I don't understand the complications. What's wrong with a set rate that everyone pays, no matter how much they make? Is that what a "flat tax" is? Y'know, everyone pays 15% across the board or something...

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

Death Metal Moe

05-06-2003, 02:09 PM

It would be more fair.

I remember Forbes bringing this up a few years ago when he was trying to run for the Republican nomination, and really hoped he got it put on the agenda for the party, but it never went anywhere.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>

<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>


666%

Drudge Jr.

05-06-2003, 02:11 PM

it seems to me (and correct me if i'm wrong) that conservatives believe giving a tax-cut to the top 1% is ok, because they pay something like 50% of the taxes.
unfortunatly what people dont understand about people who are this rich, is that they are wealth addicts. no one needs that much money for themselves. and although i am against taxes in theory, in this enviroment they are necessary (unless you believe in thatcher/reaganomics), and bush's tax cut (which is driven by the theory the more cut the better) will be very detrimental to this country's poor and elderly.

[center]
<img src="http://drudgejr.JNIV.net/drugde.gif">
thanks to the ghost of jim morrison for making my sig

Se7en

05-06-2003, 02:21 PM

unfortunatly what people dont understand about people who are this rich, is that they are wealth addicts. no one needs that much money for themselves.

Who decides this? You?

Now this is one of the problems I have with philosophies such as socialism, which calls for a redistribution of wealth. What gives you or anyone the right to decide how best to spend the money of the rich?

The belief that the rich in some way owe those who are below them on the socioeconomic ladder is a moral or ethical determination, not a legal one (yet, thank God). But not everyone shares the same morals / ethics. I mean, part of ideal that the country was founded on was that citizens would be allowed the opportunity to become as successful as they possibly can in their chosen profession.

I mean, most people would agree that the rich should help those less fortunate.

But when you have the government making a decision that they MUST DO SO, that is to say, legally compelling them to do so, then you're getting into very dangerous waters.

<img border="0" src="http://se7enrfnet.homestead.com/files/captainamerica.jpg" width="300" height="100">

"By the laws of this very government - whether they want to accept it or not - every American is complicit in the darkness that this country spreads across the rest of the world - simply by paying taxes." -- Inali Redpath
"That's terrorist double-talk and I, for one, am SICK of listening to it." -- Captain America

"We have become too civilised to grasp the obvious. For the truth is very simple. To survive you often have to fight, and to fight you have to dirty yourself. War is evil, and it is often the lesser evil."
---George Orwell

HBox

05-06-2003, 03:26 PM

Y'know, everyone pays 15% across the board or something...

That would equate to a huge tax cut (of over 50%) for the top wage earners and a tax incrase for those already living in poverty. So, of course a guy like Steve Forbes would love it.

And fair my ass. Maybe if every person would be guaranteed a fair, living wage for their work, then that might be fair. But we are far from that. I'm not for giving lazy, do-nothings a free ride. But I am for making sure every person who works can get a wage that they can live on. We aren't there yet, far from it.

Drudge Jr.

05-06-2003, 04:38 PM

i agree with you se7en, in that the government should not make ethical decisions for people. but unfortunatly we do live in a country with a government and economic system that, not only will not assure everyone a living wage who is willing to work for it, but also guarantees there will be those who cannot recieve a living wage no matter how hard they work. and again, many of the wealthiest people in this country are wealth addicts, who are dangerous to the united states and to the world. in the situation this country is in the government cannot afford (for the welfare of citizens) to cut the taxes of the filthy rich.

i mean, and i know this is off topic, but can anyone here really say that the wealthy in this country arent addicted to wealth? look at the actions of CEOs and corporations, consistently acting in the interest of their own wealth, while laying off hundreds of thousands, stealing their money, crushing unions, destroying the enviroment, and buying politicians (those who arent already among them) so it all stays legal. i just dont see how they should get away without being taxed for godsake.

[center]
<img src="http://drudgejr.JNIV.net/drugde.gif">
thanks to the ghost of jim morrison for making my sig

This message was edited by Drudge Jr. on 5-6-03 @ 8:50 PM

Dewey

05-06-2003, 08:21 PM

Maybe this way of putting it will help. Medieval serfs had to consign one-third of their crops to the noble on whose land they lived. By paying 40-50% of our income in taxes, as the average American does (once you count income taxes, sales taxes, "fees" for cable, telephone, auto licensing and registration, etc.), we are far worse off than they!

It is simply outrageous that everyone has to save money when times are tough, except the government. By giving the government more and more of our money, we are in essence giving them more and more power over us, and more and more ability to control our lives.

The constitutional amendment permitting the income tax was passed as a "soak the rich" scheme, and look where that has landed us.

Ask not for whom the tax man tolls, he tolls for thee.

<IMG SRC="http://www.agw-werbeartikel.de/images/easy-rider.jpg"> "Still searching for America."

ChickenHawk

05-06-2003, 08:49 PM

hey conservatives.....u like the tax cut your going to get?
Wait, this tax cut is for conservatives? Woohoo! I figured tax cuts would be based on one's income rather than their political viewpoints, but I guess not! Kick-ass!

<IMG SRC="http://homepage.mac.com/hawkwings/.Pictures/chickenhawk3.gif">
HEY BLINK! SUCK MY DINK!
(fluffernutter draws good birds.)

TheMojoPin

05-06-2003, 09:27 PM

Wait, maybe I'm clueless, but I still don't understand why a flat tax wouldn't work. Paying 15% across the board would be equal then, right? How would the rich be getting a "50% cut", as someone said? You simply pay 15% of whatever you make in taxes, no matter how much you makes, and it fluctuates with your paycheck...voila...right?

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

Death Metal Moe

05-07-2003, 12:05 PM

You see Mojo, they pay A LOT more than %15 percent now, so people see equalling out the taxes as a cut for the people paying over 70% of the nation's taxes. Even in an effort to invoke a fare tax rate, people are pissed.

The REAL deal behind this is Dems NEED all that money to fund their social experiments and entitlement programs, and KNOW that these tax breaks will mean they might have to slash their wacky programs to fund the more important ones.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>

<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>


666%

phixion

05-07-2003, 12:28 PM

You see Mojo, they pay A LOT more than %15 percent now, so people see equalling out the taxes as a cut for the people paying over 70% of the nation's taxes. Even in an effort to invoke a fare tax rate, people are pissed.

The REAL deal behind this is Dems NEED all that money to fund their social experiments and entitlement programs, and KNOW that these tax breaks will mean they might have to slash their wacky programs to fund the more important ones.

ah yes stopping overcrowding in schools are wacky experiments, proposed by idealistic fools.......i forgot this.

<IMG SRC="http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/philex/phixion.gif">
"smoking weed, smoking weed doing coke, drinking beers
drinking beers, beers, beersrolling fatties, smoking bluntswho smokes the blunts?we smoke the blunts." -Jay

FiveB247

05-07-2003, 12:35 PM

You see Mojo, they pay A LOT more than %15 percent now, so people see equalling out the taxes as a cut for the people paying over 70% of the nation's taxes. Even in an effort to invoke a fare tax rate, people are pissed.

I don't even understand what you're trying to say. Are you saying taxes are a way of leveling off the gap between the economic classes?

The REAL deal behind this is Dems NEED all that money to fund their social experiments and entitlement programs, and KNOW that these tax breaks will mean they might have to slash their wacky programs to fund the more important ones.

Congrats, Moe...you've manage to figure out the obvious. Democrats favor social issues (and are backed by mostly middle and lower class people), while Republicans favor less social spending and more military spending (and are backed by mostly upper class people).

Simplysaying "wackyprograms", "experiments" or "entitlement programs" is ridiculous. Both sides have their fair share of mistakes. Remember star wars missle defense or NASA; not exactly thriving successes. You simply favor different type of spending....but some of those un-important programs do effect you directly (medical, education, etc).

http://www.waste.uk.com/gfx/bear.gif

Death Metal Moe

05-07-2003, 01:13 PM

Oh please. Democrats are saints now? They're the ones keeping food in children's mouths? Republicans want to close schools, kick people out on the streets? Or maybe they want to give everyone out of work a job in the military? That would be great, huh? Who's delusional here? Oh, don't forget we want the elderly eating dog food. That's a gem.

Republicans favor social programs as well, just not in the amount the Dems do. The Republicans don't want to use dependence on social programs as locks in elections either. Plus, continuous hand outs make people weak and unable to fend for themselves.

As for Star Wars, I remember hearing that parts of that were being tested recently. So Reagan's brilliant project is still around! HORRAY!

And yes, Republicans favor more military spending because theu have a more realistic world view. We need to defend ourselves, and sometimes the threat of force does a lot more than deplomacy.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>

<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>


666%

TheMojoPin

05-07-2003, 01:14 PM

NASA: not exactly thriving successes

Lighten up, Francis.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

Death Metal Moe

05-07-2003, 01:25 PM

NASA represents man's reach into the cosmos. It also yeilds scientific results to experiments. You also have aero-space programs and the like for our global commuications. Remember satellites?

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>

<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>


666%

phixion

05-07-2003, 01:40 PM

Oh please. Democrats are saints now? They're the ones keeping food in children's mouths? Republicans want to close schools, kick people out on the streets? Or maybe they want to give everyone out of work a job in the military? That would be great, huh? Who's delusional here? Oh, don't forget we want the elderly eating dog food. That's a gem.

no democrats arent saints. but republicans dont want to change the current status of schools, healthcare, or anything else that deeply effects the non-wealthy. they dont have to worry about things like that, so they dont see it as a major issue. im not for welfare but workfare is good shit. i dont see how anybody can say that any socioeconomic propsed to help the lower class will do nothing but make them dependent on the gov't, when schooling provided by the government isnt equal. rich neighborhoods get good schools...the poor get poor schools.

just look at the SUNY situation......republicans are happy to allow the poor to remain poor....and they feel that is on them alone to get out of it...when the government doesnt help when it should, who should help???

<IMG SRC="http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/philex/phixion.gif">
"smoking weed, smoking weed doing coke, drinking beers
drinking beers, beers, beersrolling fatties, smoking bluntswho smokes the blunts?we smoke the blunts." -Jay

The Jays

05-07-2003, 02:56 PM

rich neighborhoods get good schools...the poor get poor schools.

I'm not even sure of the validity of this... you're saying they only build the good schools in the rich neighborhoods while they save the shitty schools for the poor ones? I would think that the "rich" people would send their kids to private school, which are far superior to public schools to begin with. The government has little to nothing to do with private schools... they are affliated with private accredidation boards, whose standards meet those of the states' requirements and beyond. Public schools are locally run, part of a board of ed, receive funding from local residents, state residents, and federal funding, meet their own board's criteria for education, which statisfies that states requirements.

I think a contributing factor to the good public school/ shitty public school arguement is location, but not that they save the good schools for the nice neighborhoods and the shitty ones for the ghetto. Rather, you take two schools, built at the same time, with the same money, with the same facilities, and same quality of teaching, except you build one in a nice middle class community, and the other in the projects. It's not rocket science which school is gonna be all flowers, sunshine, and bubblegum, and which school is gonna be fucking ruined. Why invest money in a new school for a shitty area, where the employees are not gonna be happy working there, the kids don't give a shit to begin with, and the parents could care less?

How about investing moneys into the shitty communities? Create new jobs for the area that an uneducated person can do. Give incentives to group organizations who are willing to keep the streets clean. Put some annual festivals that can bring some pride and positivity to the communities. You get people without a lil more pride in their community, a lil more responsiblity and income, and they'll become responsible people, raising their kids good, taking part what's going on. Build the community into something that the city would be willing to invest new schools in. Just fixing a shitty school in a shitty neighborhood won't do it. Fix the neighborhood, and the school will follow....

just look at the SUNY situation......republicans are happy to allow the poor to remain poor....and they feel that is on them alone to get out of it...when the government doesnt help when it should, who should help???
clarify this , please, because I do believe you're talking out of your ass again....

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif

Bergalad

05-07-2003, 03:37 PM

rich neighborhoods get good schools...the poor get poor schools
I would place the blame not on the quality of the schools, but on the quality of the students. The school is a reflection of the student, not the converse. I go into high schools all the time, and no matter how many computers and programs they have in them, it's the students that ultimately make the school what it is. All this has nothing to do with the thread really. The reports of the tax cut only going to the supposed "rich" is silly. I saw the president yesterday on tv saying that a family of 6 making under 50k would have their tax reduced from over $1000 to under $100 per year. Sounds pretty substantial to me, at least in that case (and don't quote me on the facts of that, I only caught the end of the clip). And just because you have money doesn't mean you owe any more to the country than a poorer person. Taxes are completely out of control and the fewer taxes on everyone the better.

The Jays

05-07-2003, 07:59 PM

It plays off on almost an instinctual level of greed.... they have money and I don't, so they should give up money so that I can have more...

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif

HBox

05-07-2003, 08:14 PM

It plays off on almost an instinctual level of greed.... they have money and I don't, so they should give up money so that I can have more...

You are completely missing the point. If we lived in the magical fantasy universe where everybody who was willing to work could get a job and a fair living wage, then a flat even tax rate for all wage earners would be fine. We aren't anywhere near that. So why should we tax the poor who work and can barely afford to live and cut taxes of people who if we taxed 70% (I'm not suggesting that, just making a point) of their income would still be able to live a life of luxury. Quit with all this poor deserve what they get shit. It's ridiculous. No one who works deserves to live in poverty in a nation as prosperous as ours. They don't deserve luxuries, but a living wage would be sufficient.

And I think this dividend tax elimination is the most ridiculous thing ever heard of. If we are going to cut taxes, can we at least cut taxes on money earned from actual work and not from just owning a piece of paper?

FiveB247

05-07-2003, 08:25 PM

Moe, I never picked the Dems over the Reps, each of their methods hold repercussions on society. That's all I was pointing out.

NASA represents man's reach into the cosmos. It also yeilds scientific results to experiments. You also have aero-space programs and the like for our global commuications. Remember satellites?

Yeah satellites are good. They give GPS, missiles targeting systems, improve tv and radio feeds....important stuff. As for man's reach to 'cosmos'..what a waste of money! I got an idea..let's send you to live on Mars...cause that will be possible too right? The only immediate help NASA would ever serve the US in a serious manner would be to spot or prevent a meteor from hitting Earth. But who knows if we'll spot such a thing or if it would even be preventable. Maybe you, Bruce Willis and NASA will stop it. haha

PS...NASA also got us Tang. And the "experiments" you refer too are a joke! As if worms in space would ever hold some bearing on human existence on Earth....riiiiggghhhttt.

http://www.waste.uk.com/gfx/bear.gif

TheMojoPin

05-07-2003, 10:45 PM

Five, without NASA, odds are you wouldn't have the spiffy computer you're using right now. NASA and our space programs have contributed so much to our everyday lives, from the cell phone to the microwave, that it's almost impossible to count. It's one of the few mass inventive corridors we have, and to shut it out would be absurd. Thousands upon thousands of techonoligcal inovations have come from NASA and slipped into our everyday lives. It would be foolish to assume they serve little or no importance.

On a related note, has anyone else seen the film "The Dish"? I love that flick...

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 5-8-03 @ 3:25 AM

Death Metal Moe

05-07-2003, 10:53 PM

let's send you to live on Mars...cause that will be possible too right?

Dude, are you huffin'?

Go ask ANY SENIOR CITIZEN if they thought cell phones would EVER exist in the 40's. Go back and look at the money wasted on a computer the size of a room that could really only crunch numbers, then consider what it turend into just 50 years later. Go ask them if they thought "Talkies" would ever jump off the movie house wall into their dens.

To say that our reach into space is a "waste" is to turn a blind eye to man's own history of technology, and our natural craving for discovery.

The space program my be one of the nobelest things we still fund. That and Government cheese. (I just HAD to ruin the moment)

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>

<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>


666%

Bergalad

05-07-2003, 11:06 PM

The dividend tax would help thousands of elderly people, so look it up before you blast it.
everybody who was willing to work

That's the problem right there. Welfare and other social programs (unemployment is another) that reward people for not working. That has to end before we worry about raising taxes to pay for broken programs like these.
So why should we tax the poor who work and can barely afford to live and cut taxes of people who if we taxed 70% (I'm not suggesting that, just making a point) of their income would still be able to live a life of luxury.
A standard, even tax would be better than just taxing those you deem "rich". The "poor" can get better jobs, that's reality. It's the desire to do that which they find difficult because all of the social programs we have don't challenge them to get out and take "less-desirable" employment for more money. A flat tax is the best, fairest way to make everything even. A rich person is no more responsible to fund this country than a poor one; each must do an equal share if they enjoy equal rights.
And the "experiments" you refer too are a joke! As if worms in space would ever hold some bearing on human existence on Earth....riiiiggghhhttt.
I don't have the time to list all the innovations and inventions derived from the space program, but come on. NASA is vital for medical studies, understanding our planet better, and discovering advanced technologies. To dismiss what NASA has done over the last 50 years is insane and uninformed in the extreme.

TheMojoPin

05-07-2003, 11:25 PM

FLAT TAX 4 PREZ 4 LIFE!!!

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

Bergalad

05-07-2003, 11:40 PM

People might be confused about what the Flat Tax is, so here is the link for the Armey plan for the Tax http://www.flattax.house.gov/. Use the tax calculator on there. Under this plan, by taxes would have dropped about $3000 a year. The biggest block to this sort of plan are the tax lawyers and such who make their living on messing with taxes and loopholes. Just another benefit from this plan would be putting those asses out of business.

TooCute

05-08-2003, 03:33 AM

The "poor" can get better jobs, that's reality

I guess you don't know any very poor people, or have any unemployed friends.

<img src=http://thereisnogod.faithweb.com/images/toocute2.gif>
!! 2% !!

A.J.

05-08-2003, 03:52 AM

PS...NASA also got us Tang.

And freeze-dried ice cream -- don't forget that.

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/ajdcsig.jpg">

A Skidmark production.

FiveB247

05-08-2003, 05:36 AM

TheMojoPin

05-08-2003, 08:40 AM

Like I said previously, un-important. Cell phones, microwaves, computers? These are why we fund NASA? Gimme a break. They are conveignences which have their place and of course techonolgy helps society. But if you somehow expect microwaves and cell phones to be considered modern day marvels of a space program..you're insane. NASA has helped furtherment of technology...but more so in the fact of moving into and learning about the beyond and space (that is their purpose for being), not so people can use cell phones, computers and microwaves.

How's the average the day in Toontown? Is the weather nice? And what basis do you have to declare that NASA's "job" is simply "moving into and learning about the beyond and space (that is their purpose for being)"? Why does everyone assume we should "easily" be on mars at this point? We barely reached the moon 35 years ago. Do you realize how much more infinitely difficult it is to reach a planet like Mars? And the experiments now are making up for lost time...all those decades where everyone thinks NASA was "exciting" they were pretty much seeing how much shit we can throw up into space and whether it'll not blow up/stay alive. Space is a perfect place to test and experiment because it's a neutral environment free of many of the natural factors that can skew an experiment on Earth. But most of all, I'm BAFFLED as to how you can just dismiss the everyday technologies that we take for granted as "useless". Like I said, odds are you wouldn't have that nifty computer you use to rant here, or it would have been five times more expensive, five times bigger, and ten times slower. NASA IS our most productive scientific and inventive federal organization. To assume we can just "cut them out" is beyone absurd.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

Captain Stubing

05-08-2003, 09:05 AM

Fellow right-wingers this debate, and our long national nightmare, is over. Why?

So what, you don't mind subsidizing this welfare for the rich program?
If you were familiar with the rules of debate, then you would know that namecalling is the same thing as raising the white flag, throwing in the towel, admitting defeat....

then, this -

Oh yeah, Dumbya's first round of tax cuts.......

I demand a representative of non-conservative wing of the RF.net gang post on the deck of the USS Missouri to discuss surrender terms.

Fezaesthesia - Prognosis poor...

HBox

05-08-2003, 09:21 AM

The "poor" can get better jobs, that's reality

You are completely clueless. How? Go to college with money they don't have in the time they also don't have? Look for a big corporation who is handing out high-paying jobs to unqualified people?

But that isn't the point. The point is that there will always be the need for janitors, and few will play them a fair wage.

That's the problem right there. Welfare and other social programs (unemployment is another) that reward people for not working. That has to end before we worry about raising taxes to pay for broken programs like these.

Reward? Have you ever been on unemployment? It is far from a reward. Welfare is similar. They both have a place in our society. How would you feel if you lost your job today? Do you really think you'd be able to find one soon in this economy? Unemployment and Welfare are neccessary in limited form.

This message was edited by HBox on 5-8-03 @ 1:30 PM

Bergalad

05-08-2003, 10:24 AM

I guess you don't know any very poor people, or have any unemployed friends.

You are completely clueless. How? Go to college with money they don't have in the time they also don't have?
What, are you apologists for the perpetually lazy? Anyone can get a job, ANYONE. This idea that the poor are doomed to remain so is both classist and unnecessarily limiting. The problem is most people don't want to take jobs that might pay better because they feel the jobs are beneath them. Or they have children they can't afford. You don't have to go to college for a good job. I will never buy that the "poor" are unable to rise out of their poverty.
Unemployment and Welfare are neccessary in limited form.
Yes, in a LIMITED form, not this perpetual leeching that occurs today. I am not insensitive, however people need a kick in the ass to get them to move out of the ruts they make for themselves. I have known people who have been on unemployment for 8-9 months just because the rules said they could. That's an abuse we all pay for, and it needs to end.
I demand a representative of non-conservative wing of the RF.net gang post on the deck of the USS Missouri to discuss surrender terms.
What's this? Another PR move by the Republicans? How dare you sir! Get me Sen. Byrd!

This message was edited by Bergalad on 5-8-03 @ 2:37 PM

A.J.

05-08-2003, 10:32 AM

How? Go to college with money they don't have in the time they also don't have? Look for a big corporation who is handing out high-paying jobs to unqualified people?

Then how do you explain immigrants who came here with nothing, limited language skills, and a limited education? Somehow they make a decent life for themselves.

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/ajdcsig.jpg">

A Skidmark production.

JerryTaker

05-08-2003, 10:36 AM

I demand a representative of non-conservative wing of the RF.net gang post on the deck of the USS Missouri to discuss surrender terms.

Read 1984 to see what kind of world we'll live in when the conservatives find themselves unopposed...

<IMG SRC="http://afs30.njit.edu/~gsm2321/faramir.gif">

<marquee width=300 scrollamount="5">Wet and raving, The needle keeps calling me back.. To bloody my hands forever. Carved my cure with the blade That left me in scars, Now every time I'm weak, Words scream from my arm</marquee>

HBox

05-08-2003, 10:39 AM

The problem is most people don't want to take jobs that might pay better because they feel the jobs are beneath them. Or they have children they can't afford. You don't have to go to college for a good job. I will never buy that the "poor" are unable to rise out of their poverty.

I really have no idea what you are talking about. I could walk of my house this afternoon and come home tonight with a job. But it wouldn't be a job that I could independently sustain myself on. You don't HAVE to go to college for a good job but it helps a lot. Of course the poor can rise out of poverty. I just don't think they deserve to be as poor as they are if they are working.

Captain Stubing

05-08-2003, 10:40 AM

Read 1984 to see what kind of world we'll live in when the conservatives find themselves unopposed...

I have (so many years ago!) and yet, somehow, I'm still a conservative.

My lessons on what it is to be a conservative have come from Burke, Kirk and Hayek (to name a few). Might I suggest that reducing an entire political philosophy to one fictional book by one author who was, mildly put, very discontented with the extemes of Nazism and Fascism (and, frankly, discounted in general) unwise?

Incidently I'm not for any political ideology being 'unopposed'.......opposed = competition, which is good (it's the fulcrum of free market economics). Besides, what kind of world would it be if we didn't have a different side of the aisle to villify......no other side = no hobgoblins, no hobgoblins = no good.

In summary, I'm pro-hobgoblin.

Fezaesthesia - Prognosis poor...

TheMojoPin

05-08-2003, 10:56 AM

Read 1984 to see what kind of world we'll live in when the conservatives find themselves unopposed...

But it's the Democrats who usually have no problems pushing for bigger, more expansive federal government, regulation and control...

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

TheMojoPin

05-08-2003, 10:58 AM

Yes, in a LIMITED form, not this perpetual leeching that occurs today.

Less than 30% on average of people currently on welfare stay on it for more than a year. This is leeching?

Poor people CAN make better lives for themselves. They just have to work at least twice as hard for it...it's foolish to think that poor people have no help for themselves unless they're "helped" by those who are better off...but it's just as foolish to talk as though it's essentially a level playing field.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

LiquidCourage

05-08-2003, 11:07 AM

Read 1984 to see what kind of world we'll live in when the conservatives find themselves unopposed...

What a load of crap that is.
Liberals are out to lynch anyone who isn't super PC.

It's not just one side, it's both, and only the extremes.

TheMojoPin

05-08-2003, 11:19 AM

<img src=http://www.samruby.com/Villains/HobgoblinI/Hobgoblin.gif>

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

Bergalad

05-08-2003, 11:29 AM

Read 1984 to see what kind of world we'll live in when the conservatives find themselves unopposed...
I am mortified that you use Faramir for your sig pic.
I could walk of my house this afternoon and come home tonight with a job. But it wouldn't be a job that I could independently sustain myself on.

Well that is more than welfare leeches would do Hbox. It's easier for them to just sit there and have the checks come in. And there are plenty of jobs out there that you could support yourself with, so don't be so absolute in your statement.
Less than 30% on average of people currently on welfare stay on it for more than a year. This is leeching?
Yes, 30% of them are leeching. That's 1 in 3. You don't think that's a significant number? If 1 in 3 people died today (just an example!) would you say that is a significant number?
it's foolish to think that poor people have no help for themselves unless they're "helped" by those who are better off...

Exactly Mojo. No it's not level because of background and the like, but people need to take take responsibility for themselves for a change.

JerryTaker

05-08-2003, 11:41 AM

I am mortified that you use Faramir for your sig pic.

So you'd prefer if only one train of thought ruled the country unopposed?

I'm also pro Hobgoblin, and Anti Jack-O-Lantern, what a tool he was....

EDIT: Plus there's a reason why I use Faramir. Doesn't take much of a slueth to figure it out, look around the board...

<IMG SRC="http://afs30.njit.edu/~gsm2321/faramir.gif">

<marquee width=300 scrollamount="5">Wet and raving, The needle keeps calling me back.. To bloody my hands forever. Carved my cure with the blade That left me in scars, Now every time I'm weak, Words scream from my arm</marquee>

This message was edited by JerryTaker on 5-8-03 @ 3:47 PM

Bergalad

05-08-2003, 11:45 AM

I am mortified that you use Faramir for your sig pic.

So you'd prefer if only one train of thought ruled the country unopposed?

I am looking for a connection here...

JerryTaker

05-08-2003, 11:51 AM

I am looking for a connection here...

Oh christ on a crappily constructed cross, you said you were mortified I use the sig because I likened conservatives ruling the country unapposed to 1984, or can you not remember back that far???

Do you need me to read you the whole thread over, nice and slow?????

Edit: Yes, I realize now that "crap-covered cross" would have been better, I shouldn't post so angry...

<IMG SRC="http://afs30.njit.edu/~gsm2321/faramir.gif">

<marquee width=300 scrollamount="5">Wet and raving, The needle keeps calling me back.. To bloody my hands forever. Carved my cure with the blade That left me in scars, Now every time I'm weak, Words scream from my arm</marquee>

This message was edited by JerryTaker on 5-8-03 @ 4:04 PM

silera

05-08-2003, 11:54 AM

It's easier for them to just sit there and have the checks come in. And there are plenty of jobs out there that you could support yourself with, so don't be so absolute in your statement.

It's easy for you to have never walked in their shoes and judge them.

There aren't plenty of jobs. Minimum wage gets you $200 a week before taxes. Transportation, food, childcare, housing, all of these items add up.

I earn much more than $200 a week, and there are times when I simply look at my expenses and weep because I can't do it. I don't know how I will do it and I'm tired of working so hard and never moving in any direction.

If it weren't for my subsidized apartment, I'd be on the street or my kids would be in public school. If it weren't for the boys club of new york, that provides after school care practically free, I would only be able to work til 3 pm.

I'm a well educated, english speaking, attractive woman and with both luck and hard work, I've been able to carve out a semi acceptable little life.

Not everyone has those advantages.

<center>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/silera/files/Silera/sig4.gif

I can't stand myself either.</center>

nellie

05-08-2003, 11:55 AM

EDIT: Plus there's a reason why I use Faramir. Doesn't take much of a slueth to figure it out, look around the board...

Maybe he hasn't read LotR...

<IMG SRC=http://web.njit.edu/~gsm2321/nelliesig2.gif>
*kisses* for my JerryTaker for making this great sig :)
<a href="http://www.freeopendiary.com/entrylist.asp?authorcode=A935691">my poetry and other thoughts, a diary</a> I'd trade the sea for the breaze......

silera

05-08-2003, 11:56 AM

EDIT: Plus there's a reason why I use Faramir. Doesn't take much of a slueth to figure it out, look around the board...

I KNOW!!!! I KNOW!!!

<center>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/silera/files/Silera/sig4.gif

I can't stand myself either.</center>

HBox

05-08-2003, 12:17 PM

And there are plenty of jobs out there that you could support yourself with, so don't be so absolute in your statement.

Of course there are, but those jobs are hard to find and in limited supply. My only point is that there will always be people who have to do the shitty, low paying jobs. Paying them enough to live on wouldn't erase the incentive for them to try and better themselves. And, getting back to the point of the thread, cutting the taxes of the rich at their expense is unfair. They need the biggest tax cuts, not people making over 500K, even 100K.

Bergalad

05-08-2003, 12:34 PM

Do you need me to read you the whole thread over, nice and slow?????

Maybe he hasn't read LotR...

Oh I have read it, many many times. I am mortified that you sully a great literary character with your extreme positions.
It's easy for you to have never walked in their shoes and judge them.
Boo fucking hoo. No, I went out and got a job instead of sucking on the tit of the state.
I'm a well educated, english speaking, attractive woman
Hello Vanity!
And, getting back to the point of the thread, cutting the taxes of the rich at their expense is unfair.

But that's not what's happening. Look into it more. Flat tax for all!

JerryTaker

05-08-2003, 12:50 PM

Boo fucking hoo. No, I went out and got a job instead of sucking on the tit of the state.

Hey, look... more evidence that your reading comprehension skills are severely lacking...

<IMG SRC="http://afs30.njit.edu/~gsm2321/faramir.gif">

<marquee width=300 scrollamount="5">Wet and raving, The needle keeps calling me back.. To bloody my hands forever. Carved my cure with the blade That left me in scars, Now every time I'm weak, Words scream from my arm</marquee>

TheMojoPin

05-08-2003, 12:57 PM

Yes, 30% of them are leeching. That's 1 in 3. You don't think that's a significant number? If 1 in 3 people died today (just an example!) would you say that is a significant number?

So you're assuming that any and all people on welfare for more than a year are just automatically "leeches", without regard to the individual circumstances? What nonsense. Plenty of people work their asses off and STILL end up on welfare, for a multitude of reasons. You keep saying that you you agree that some form of welfare would be benficial, but I'm curious as to what you think the circumstances should be that require it and what kind of rules should regulate it.

And please don't edit my quotes so they only back up your point. While I agreed that thinking that only "handouts" from the "wealthy" will truly help the poor is foolish, I also very clearly stated right after that that simply assuming that any poor person anywhere in this country can simply pick themselves up by their bootsraps and "make things work" is absurd. Some people DO need help, no matter how hard they try, and that's just how life is. You're choosing to focus ONLY on the negative and thusly easily allowing the rest of the "poor, huddled masses" to be damned simply because of the company they keep.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

TheMojoPin

05-08-2003, 01:03 PM

Oh I have read it, many many times. I am mortified that you sully a great literary character with your extreme positions.

Oh, WOW.

Politcal and fantasy geeks as ONE. Worlds COLLIDING...I fear for my safety.

Are we going to start arguing whether Vulcans are Republicans or Democrats now?

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

TooCute

05-08-2003, 01:06 PM

Boo fucking hoo. No, I went out and got a job instead of sucking on the tit of the state.

I'm going out on a limb but you were also probably raised to think it was worthwhile to go to school and maybe even attended it every once in a while.

Good for you. Plenty of other people have jobs, too. Plenty of people also can't get jobs but I hardly consider collecting unemployment while you search for a job "sucking on the tit of the state". Are there people that abuse the system? Sure. Can you or I think of a better one? I don't know. But I find you "the unemployed are all slackers" attitude highly sheltered and ignorant. You will be happy to receive your unemployment check when you get fired and can't find a new job immediately. But then, there's always McDonald's, right?

Nevermind that there are thousands of smart, capable people who absolutely can't get jobs and guess what, it isn't their fault.

I don't want to involve other board members or anything, but didn't Hosp post a thread just a month or two ago about how he couldn't find a job for over a year no matter where he applied? Being unemplyed sucks. It doens't make you a system-abusing leech.

<img src=http://thereisnogod.faithweb.com/images/toocute2.gif>
!! 2% !!

silera

05-08-2003, 01:38 PM

Bergelad, please don't selectively quote me again.

I don't have time to argue, I have to go get my nails done, because I'm so vain.

<center>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/silera/files/Silera/sig4.gif

I can't stand myself either.</center>

Bergalad

05-08-2003, 01:48 PM

Ugh.
Hey, look... more evidence that your reading comprehension skills are severely lacking...
I know what I was replying to and about, do you? Relax.
So you're assuming that any and all people on welfare for more than a year are just automatically "leeches", without regard to the individual circumstances?

I don't think I said and/or meant that exactly, and also I shortened what you said when I quoted you but in my reply agreed that things aren't always level, just like the rest of your statement said. What I am saying is that things need to be changed, and that 30% you point to include those who can do more, I am sure you would agree. I never espoused throwing everyone out, but there needs to be more accountability in these programs to make sure they are being used by those who really can and should use them.
Are we going to start arguing whether Vulcans are Republicans or Democrats now?

They're Democrats.
But I find you "the unemployed are all slackers" attitude highly sheltered and ignorant.
Again, I am not for getting rid of these programs! I want more accountability. There are widespread abuses happening, and that is what I want fixed. There are people who, through no fault of their own, are unable to work and need assistance. I want to help those people, not the ones who could work but choose not to. Have I made myself clear on this? Can the pillory stop?
I'm so vain.
Sorry, it won't happen again.

I was kidding with you Silera. I've seen what you look like and wasn't disagreeing with your assessment of yourself, alright?

This message was edited by Bergalad on 5-8-03 @ 6:05 PM

TheMojoPin

05-08-2003, 01:56 PM

Don't give your welfare to the Koreans!!! They'll only use it on NUKES AND PORN!!!

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

TheMojoPin

05-08-2003, 02:20 PM

Do we have any numbers as to what actually constitutes the level of welfare "abuse" in this country? And who's to say what the "abuse" is to begin with? Of course you're going to have scumbags that try and rip the system, but how many are out there? How much money is estimated as being "lost" to people who "abuse" welfare programs?

I don't think I said that, and also I shortened what you said when I quoted you but in my reply agreed that things aren't always level, just like the rest of your statement said. What I am saying is that things need to be changed, and that 30% your point to include those who can do more, I am sure you would agree.

To a degree, yes I do. I just think compared to many, MANY other ways our government pisses away money that this really isn't the massive problem it's being made out to be. Of course it needs to be modified and streamlined, but how bad IS the problem right now? The only information I've ever seen recently reflects as to how this has been one of the biggest, "false-alarmist" issues of the last 20 years. I can't seem to pinpoint any statistical specifics that break down how many people are or might be abusing the "system" at any given time.

Please see the following books...very useful on this topic, and they all helped me a great deal...

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0465014909/qid=1052431768/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/102-9475670-5704103

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0226293645/qid=1052431896/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-9475670-5704103?v=glance&s=books

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0691026750/ref=pd_sim_books_5/102-9475670-5704103?v=glance&s=books

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1565843916/ref=pd_sim_books_1/102-9475670-5704103?v=glance&s=books

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0674004345/ref=ref=cm_bg_f_1/102-9475670-5704103

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0465032109/ref=pd_bxgy_text_1/102-9475670-5704103?v=glance&s=books&st=*

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0684854716/ref=ref=cm_bg_f_1/102-9475670-5704103

And perhaps most importantly, read THIS book ASAP.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0805063897/ref=cm_bg_d/102-9475670-5704103

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

Bergalad

05-08-2003, 02:24 PM

A.J.

05-08-2003, 02:25 PM

I don't have time to argue, I have to go get my nails done, because I'm so vain.

You probably think this thread is about you.

Don't you?

Don't you?

Don't you? :)

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/ajdcsig.jpg">

A Skidmark production.

Death Metal Moe

05-08-2003, 02:28 PM

As a Republican, I understand that welfare and other social programs are needed. I just would like to see more of the money spent on training then continued welfare. I was poor as a child. Not poor enough to go on government programs, but damn close. I think the only difference was my father took another job. But single parents don't have that option. I understand life isn't as black and white as we'd like it to be, but there must be changes to this failing system.

And as for jobs, I am also a frustrated, well educated, handsome American who is unable to find more than a "throw away" job. I need fair wages with benefits and a way to advance. I mean I could go out tomorrow and get a job pumping gas but where is the advancment there? One day I move up to the guy who just checks oil?

That is why I like this tax break. I've been hearing it will allow businesses who file taxes under one form to file under another, and this will give them more money to hire new employees. Because I mean WHAT smart business doesn't want to expand, if the economy is fruitful?

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>

<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>


666%

TheMojoPin

05-08-2003, 02:33 PM

Did you see that flat tax link I put up last night? What do you think about that idea (to try and get back on topic)? That tax calculator was interesting, as was the statistics they listed.

I did, and if it's even remotely accurate, I really liked what I saw. I was for flat tax before, and I'm an even bigger supporter of it now. VIVE LA FLAT TAX!

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

Bergalad

05-08-2003, 02:35 PM

I am also a frustrated, well educated, handsome American
Oh no! You're not gonna get me twice!!!

Bergalad

05-08-2003, 02:36 PM

I did, and if it's even remotely accurate, I really liked what I saw. I was for flat tax before, and I'm an even bigger supporter of it now. VIVE LA FLAT TAX!
I am sure I can rely on members of the board to present facts to refute the flat tax, but so far I like how the plan sounds. Fair, hard to thwart, and gets rid of lots of lawyers. What's not to love?

silera

05-08-2003, 02:51 PM

I think the only difference was my father took another job. But single parents don't have that option.

I'm now working two jobs.

I'm not going to solely blame the government for that, if I got child support I'd probably be ok, but it's mind boggling to me how I can be a single working mother and still have to fork over $500 every pay check in taxes.

<center>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/silera/files/Silera/sig4.gif

I can't stand myself either.</center>

HBox

05-08-2003, 03:05 PM

What do you think about that idea (to try and get back on topic)? That tax calculator was interesting, as was the statistics they listed.

I actually liked what I saw on that site too, but it is a very biased source. I do have questions about where the government is gonna get money if everybody gets huge tax cuts like that site says, and I'd like those questions answered by an unbiased source.

I think we need to shift some of the burden of taxes back on corporations. When the income tax was first started (I can't rememeber the exact figures) it only accounted for under 10% of government tax income. Now I believe it accounts for something over 75%.

And I remember seeing a story about some corporation that actually, becuase of tax loopholes and corporate tax breaks, didn't pay income tax one year, and instead the government actually PAID them $200,000.

FiveB247

05-08-2003, 03:10 PM

I want more accountability. There are widespread abuses happening, and that is what I want fixed.

Bergalad : blame the citizens, it's their own fault.

Me: Blame the officials, they make the policies and programs.

http://www.waste.uk.com/gfx/bear.gif

TheMojoPin

05-08-2003, 03:12 PM

I just would like to see more of the money spent on training then continued welfare.

Me too. I also have this line of thinking towards our drug policies/prison system. Instead of just throwing money to expand our growing prisons to hold drug criminals, why not at least divert SOME of that towards programs that would work to rehabilitate those convicted on drug charges instead of tossing them in a cesspool where they'll probably end up hooked on something even worse than what they were tossed in for?

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

Bergalad

05-08-2003, 06:39 PM

Bergalad : blame the citizens, it's their own fault.

Me: Blame the officials, they make the policies and programs.
Of course. So it's not the fault of the people abusing the system then? Great.

The Jays

05-08-2003, 06:45 PM

If we are going to cut taxes, can we at least cut taxes on money earned from actual work and not from just owning a piece of paper?

... three words.....

ECONOMIC STIMULUS PACKAGE.

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif

FiveB247

05-08-2003, 07:38 PM

Of course. So it's not the fault of the people abusing the system then? Great.

You can't account or stop everything...but a system such as welfare should have pausibilty factors protecting it from being abused.

If you buy a computer program and it doesn't work properly, it is your fault or the people who made and run the program?

http://www.waste.uk.com/gfx/bear.gif

Bergalad

05-08-2003, 07:46 PM

Fine, that's what I am asking for: accountability. Blame whomever you like, it still needs to be fixed no matter who is wrong.

The Jays

05-08-2003, 07:54 PM

If you buy a computer program and it doesn't work properly, it is your fault or the people who made and run the program?

This is not analogous to the discussion in its present form, so, I will do my best to make it so.

If you buy a computer program on CD, put the cd into your perfectly good cd-rom drive on your perfectly good computer, and it does not work properly, it is either the store's or company's fault.
If you buy the same cd, then proceed to drop it, break it, scratch it, tag it up with a marker, use it as a frisbee, or some other act that damages the cd, it is your own fault. If you go and fuck with the program and code it/crack it/ whatever and it fucks up, it is your fault.

The problem with this analogy is that manufacturing and selling computer programs has few similiarities to creating and implementing government policies and programs.

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif

El Mudo

05-08-2003, 09:06 PM

What's with all the hate on people who are rich? It's always about the "greedy" rich, the "selfish" rich. People seem to forget most people who are wealthy EARNED IT. For example, Dan Snyder started out with 80$ and a phone book, and look what he became as a businessman. There aren't many people who inherit wealth anymore, cause the goverment takes most of it when you die.

The last thing I want is more of my money in the hands of the government, because they never spend it on things they say they are, I dont trust any politician, Republican or Democrat. For example, I read about how the cigarrette settlement funds in NC are not being used for their purposes, and here in DC, they want to use public money on a baseball stadium. I'm all for baseball in the district again, but not with public money, the money of the taxpayers. Abe Pollin built his own stadium with his money, Jack Kent Cooke built his stadium with his own money. I don't need more of my tax dollars going to build stadiums...

http://www.thebattlezone.com/decals/decalpix/d47nso.jpg

HBox

05-08-2003, 09:10 PM

cause the goverment takes most of it when you die.

Not anymore. I think the estate tax is soon to be abolished. That tax LITERALLY only affected the top 1%, but not anymore. But at least its going to a good cause, the spoiled brat children of the ultra-rich.

The Jays

05-08-2003, 09:18 PM

That tax LITERALLY only affected the top 1%, but not anymore.

...oh, LITERALLY? As opposed to FIGURATIVELY?

But at least its going to a good cause, the spoiled brat children of the ultra-rich.

Yes, that's right, all children of the top 1% are the spoiled brat children of the ultra-rich. And they all have yachts, and vacation on European coasts.

These same children drink all the time, have their limo drivers bring them from store to store spending thousands left and right (yet remarkably can be accused of hording all their money), and don't do a lick of work. Oh, and they ALL wear top hats. They religiously watch the first half of the movie "Arthur" over and over again to observe the proper conduct of a child of the wealthy.

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif

TheMojoPin

05-08-2003, 09:28 PM

Can we at least agree that people like the Hilton Sisters DO fall into that stereotype and deserve as LITTLE as possible?

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

HBox

05-08-2003, 09:28 PM

These same children drink all the time, have their limo drivers bring them from store to store spending thousands left and right (yet remarkably can be accused of hording all their money), and don't do a lick of work. Oh, and they ALL wear top hats. They religiously watch the first half of the movie "Arthur" over and over again to observe the proper conduct of a child of the wealthy.

Exactly my thoughts.

EDIT: Especially about the top hats. Even the women wear top hats, just like the Monopoly guy.

This message was edited by HBox on 5-9-03 @ 1:30 AM

Bergalad

05-08-2003, 11:01 PM

Can we at least agree that people like the Hilton Sisters DO fall into that stereotype and deserve as LITTLE as possible?
Yes. I still think they are kinda dirty hot though.

phixion

05-09-2003, 06:09 AM

I mean I could go out tomorrow and get a job pumping gas but where is the advancment there? One day I move up to the guy who just checks oil?

no u get to b the dude behind the glass wall...adn that kicks ass!!! u get to steal all the vanilla dutches u can stand....that would save me hundreds each year. dude i wanna work at a gas station. =)

<IMG SRC="http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/philex/phixion.gif">
"smoking weed, smoking weed doing coke, drinking beers
drinking beers, beers, beersrolling fatties, smoking bluntswho smokes the blunts?we smoke the blunts." -Jay

Se7en

05-09-2003, 07:15 PM

Oh, and they ALL wear top hats.

I know I do. But I'm just trying to bring back the fashion.

BTW, I'd fuck the Hilton sisters in front of their parents. It's a control thing.

<img border="0" src="http://se7enrfnet.homestead.com/files/captainamerica.jpg" width="300" height="100">

Cap sez: The mods are all Nazi fascist cocksuckers drunk with power. Does THAT fit inside 3 lines, asshole?

Death Metal Moe

05-10-2003, 03:42 PM

I also have this line of thinking towards our drug policies/prison system. Instead of just throwing money to expand our growing prisons to hold drug criminals, why not at least divert SOME of that towards programs that would work to rehabilitate those convicted on drug charges instead of tossing them in a cesspool where they'll probably end up hooked on something even worse than what they were tossed in for?

I have to agree with that. Prision time just seem to no oger be a deterrant to "career criminals" anymore. They're in and out of prison like 5 times before they're 25 and just keep comitting crimes. Something besides expanding the exsiting prison system has to be undertaken.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>

<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>


666%

phixion

05-10-2003, 06:55 PM

What's with all the hate on people who are rich? It's always about the "greedy" rich, the "selfish" rich. People seem to forget most people who are wealthy EARNED IT. For example, Dan Snyder started out with 80$ and a phone book, and look what he became as a businessman. There aren't many people who inherit wealth anymore, cause the goverment takes most of it when you die.

yes i understand that. if u are rich, whether or not ur earned doenst matter. its yours. but to give money to ppl who obviously dont NEED it.....i dont see the point.

i mean can u justify a person NEEDING a billion dollars? 500 million? i mean there should b a point in these ppls lives where they say " im rich enough." but they never do.....

<IMG SRC="http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/philex/phixion.gif">
"smoking weed, smoking weed doing coke, drinking beers
drinking beers, beers, beersrolling fatties, smoking bluntswho smokes the blunts?we smoke the blunts." -Jay

The Jays

05-10-2003, 07:34 PM

yes i understand that. if u are rich, whether or not ur earned doenst matter. its yours. but to give money to ppl who obviously dont NEED it.....i dont see the point.

i mean can u justify a person NEEDING a billion dollars? 500 million? i mean there should b a point in these ppls lives where they say " im rich enough." but they never do.....

This is scary. This seems like you are asking for the government to decide who is rich enough, and then having them take money away from them because of their finiancial standing. The reward for moving up in financial status is to pay for more taxes. That once you reach a certain level of money, the rest of the money should go to the government. That's just keen and peachy.

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif

FUNKMAN

05-10-2003, 07:41 PM

This is scary. This seems like you are asking for the government to decide who is rich enough, and then having them take money away from them because of their finiancial standing. The reward for moving up in financial status is to pay for more taxes. That once you reach a certain level of money, the rest of the money should go to the government. That's just keen and peachy

okay, how about this thought?

to me, people who are wealthy are able to pay for an accountant... an accountant can find many ways for the wealthy to not pay their fair share, through writeoffs, loopholes, etc... they can pay someone to help them invest their money wisely...

now look at this: in most cases in a "checking account"... the person who is unable to keep a certain amount of money in the account is charged a fee, in my mind these are the people who can least afford to keep enough money in the account and in turn least afford to pay the fee...

someone who is unable to put 20% down a home gets charged the PMI penalty... i would say the people who cannot afford to put 20% down can least afford to pay an additional fee...

these are just a few ways that additional money gets taken from people at the lower end of the financial spectrum... never mind the exorbitant interset rates they pay for having a mark on their credit record...

I Said Nuff!

<img src="http://www.grandfunkrailroad.com/covers/btd100.jpg">

This message was edited by FUNKMAN on 5-11-03 @ 12:02 AM

TheMojoPin

05-10-2003, 08:50 PM

This is scary. This seems like you are asking for the government to decide who is rich enough, and then having them take money away from them because of their finiancial standing.

Actually, he was wondering why some of these these people themselves don't choose to help those less fortunate than themselves more often. Kind of the idle, "well, how CAN you rwally spend 500 billion dollars?"-sorta pie in the sky thinking. I guess you're just seeing what you "want" to see. Lighten up, Francis.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 5-11-03 @ 1:44 AM

Death Metal Moe

05-11-2003, 02:13 PM

If the Left gets to continue to punish you the richer you get, then eventually we'll all give up and live on the welfare system.

Then they'll get to give us exactly what they want. They'll give us what they think we deserve.

And THAT is as close to a 1984 world than any of the other examples I've heard.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>

<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30>DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!</marquee>


666%

Se7en

05-11-2003, 02:45 PM

Actually, he was wondering why some of these these people themselves don't choose to help those less fortunate than themselves more often. Kind of the idle, "well, how CAN you rwally spend 500 billion dollars?"-sorta pie in the sky thinking. I guess you're just seeing what you "want" to see. Lighten up, Francis.

You're giving him about 3847 times more credit than he deserves.

YOU may argue that he's giving this abstract "shouldn't the rich want to help the needy?" point, but I don't see it that way, and I'm not just "seeing what I want to see" in my point of view.

<img border="0" src="http://se7enrfnet.homestead.com/files/captainamerica.jpg" width="300" height="100">

Cap sez: The mods are all Nazi fascist cocksuckers drunk with power. Does THAT fit inside 3 lines, asshole?

phixion

05-11-2003, 06:37 PM

You're giving him about 3847 times more credit than he deserves.

ur just holding my adamant love for taker against me.

<IMG SRC="http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/philex/phixion.gif">
"smoking weed, smoking weed doing coke, drinking beers
drinking beers, beers, beersrolling fatties, smoking bluntswho smokes the blunts?we smoke the blunts." -Jay

Bigden

05-14-2003, 10:43 AM

Recyclerz

05-14-2003, 01:23 PM

OK, I've tried to stay out of the flame wars on this thread but this one is too much

Its not like he was conducting treasonous dealings with a repressive state

Yeah, it's not like the company that he was CEO of (Halliburton) was doing anything like profiting from dealing with a rogue Axis of Evil nation led by a Hitler clone that supported international terrorism.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/iraq1/oilforfood/2001/0627chen.htm

http://www.truthout.org/docs_01/02.03E.Hallib.Iraq.htm

Oh wait. Actually it is like that.

[b]You're only young once but you can be immature forever[b]

HBox

05-14-2003, 01:36 PM

Please enough with Cheney and how he is actually a successfull business man. He worked hard and made alot of money in a free economy. We should all be trying to do what he did. Its not like he was conducting treasonous dealings with a repressive state- See Clinton and the Chinese.

First of all, that has little to do with this thread. Second of all, at least Clinton didn't wage a war with one of China's allies and then hand them lucrative construction contracts without competive bids.

And Clinton hasn't cuddled up with Chinese as much as Bush has trying to open up trade. But hey, as long as they can give us cheap goods, who cares if they are brutal to their citizens and their completely inept government and its attempt at a coverup are partly responsible for rapid outbreak of SARS. Who cares about China's massive military? Who cares they are communist? Who cares that their ideals are completely opposite to ours?

42nd-delay

05-14-2003, 03:34 PM

Although this thread has inevitably gone off in other related tangents, I have a few general points about taxes on the rich and the Bush cuts specifically:

- I don't buy the argument that taxing the rich at a higher rate will disuade people from trying to make more money or become wealthy. If your boss said that starting tomorrow, they were ready to start paying you a million a year for the same work you do now, would anybody reject it because of the increased taxes you'll pay? Furthermore, until the 80s, the highest brackets were taxed at a much higher rate than they are today, yet the American economy mostly boomed, and none of the rich left the country or decided to live on welfare cause of taxes. I don't think we should go back to those earlier rates, but the 39% or so it was in the 90s seemed to work well.

- The economy is in bad shape, yet Bush's solution is to: 1. increase and accelerate the tax cuts he made last year, which resulted in over a million addition jobs being lost and a widening deficit; 2. abolish dividend taxation, which will provide little if any short turn stimulus (according to just about every economist out there). In fact, you'll be hard pressed to find any economists who have faith in the Bush plan.

- Any wealthy person who is smart or has a competent accountant invests most of their money in T-Bills and lives off the income. Put 3 million in a T-Bill at 4% and you'll get $120,000 a year in interest, tax-free, without touching your principal. Plus, the rich can afford to use any number of schemes to avoid taxes. The point is, they're paying more, but not as much more as it seems. While it may seem fairer to tax everyone at the same rate, is it worth having to wade through mothers begging on the street, or seeing schools fall into disrepair and libraries have to close? How about the fact that out children and probably their children will have to bear the debt burden of the bad economic planning of today? Is that fair? And in any case, while it may be only 15 percent of a person's income, for someone poor, that's a lot of money. Milk and bread doesn't cost any less when you're poor. Taxing the poor less and the rich more allows us to be a more humane society.

- How about cutting out the middle man and just producing incentives and stimuli for small business, for tech innovation, and other ways to get the economy moving, instead of waiting for the rich to decide to trickle it down? It worked in the 90s.

------------------------------
"42nd-delay is the only person who's making sense." - Ron, 3-12-02

<img src="http://www.krikordaglian.com/images/sigpic4.gif">

Now playing in the Entertainment forum - Murder at the Super Bowl: the Trailer! 
<a href = "http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=80&Topic=8046">Click here to see it!</a>

Bergalad

05-15-2003, 01:55 PM

And in any case, while it may be only 15 percent of a person's income, for someone poor, that's a lot of money.
Look at the Flat Tax plan again. Depending on the number of dependents a poor family has, they won't pay ANY taxes at all! That seems more than fair to me.

high fly

05-20-2003, 09:18 AM

The ones with 40% of the money ought to pay at least 40% of the taxes.
That's the way it was under Clinton, Dumbya is for reducing their share of the taxes.
To make up for the cuts, the government will borrow to make up the difference.
The interest on the loans will grow faster than the economy -it always has- but when payback time comes, the rich will pay less and the rest of us will pick up the slack.
A typicalRepublican reverse Robin Hood scheme.

" and they ask me why I drink"

Bergalad

05-20-2003, 11:18 AM

The ones with 40% of the money ought to pay at least 40% of the taxes.

What are these figures you refer to here? Just because you have more money does NOT mean you should pay more taxes. A rich person has the same rights under the Constitution as a poor one, so why should they pay more in taxes for those same rights.
A flat, equal tax is the only fair thing for everyone. This isn't a welfare state or socialism as many on here want to make it. It's retarded to penalize someone because they are successful and living the dream. Punishing the wealthy and "rewarding" the poor gives rise to a mindset that failure and second or third-best is preferable to winning. That's contrary to how this country was founded and is only acceptable to nations without the will to lead.

HBox

05-20-2003, 11:56 AM

Can we please let this thread die alraedy?

TooCute

05-20-2003, 12:09 PM

I want this to just die but...
Punishing the wealthy and "rewarding" the poor gives rise to a mindset that failure and second or third-best is preferable to winning.

Yes, I'm sure Bill Gates is cursing the government. Damn it! I wish I was poor!

<img src=http://thereisnogod.faithweb.com/images/toocute2.gif>
!! 2% !!

Recyclerz

05-20-2003, 01:41 PM

We can't let it die before Warren Buffet has his say.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13113-2003May19.html

Is it just me that finds it odd that people that have earned great wealth through brains, hard work and, yes, a little luck seem to spend a lot less time bitching about paying taxes than those born to affluent families who are worrying about inheriting Grandpa's stash in toto?

[b]You're only young once but you can be immature forever[b]

HBox

05-20-2003, 02:02 PM

That was a great article. I declare this thread resuscitated.

The Jays

05-20-2003, 06:19 PM

The ones with 40% of the money ought to pay at least 40% of the taxes.
That's the way it was under Clinton, Dumbya is for reducing their share of the taxes.

I'll do you one better! The Top 50 % of wage earners already pay 96.09% of Income Taxes!!!!!! Isn't that great??????????

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif

HBox

05-20-2003, 06:25 PM

I'll do you one better! The Top 50 % of wage earners already pay 96.09% of Income Taxes!!!!!! Isn't that great??????????

Read that article by Warren Buffet to get the truth about that.

Death Metal Moe

05-20-2003, 06:30 PM

Fuck this Tax Cut thing. I'm gonna get a tan and try to get 40 acres and a mule.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>
DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!!!
666%

Bergalad

05-20-2003, 06:44 PM

Read that article by Warren Buffet to get the truth about that.
Warren Buffet: A non-partisan tax law super-genius that has no ulterior motives. Yup, we should listen to him because he speaks the truth!

HBox

05-20-2003, 06:50 PM

Warren Buffet: A non-partisan tax law super-genius that has no ulterior motives. Yup, we should listen to him because he speaks the truth!

Why would he have an ulterior motive? Does he secretly actually WANT to pay more taxes. This guy knows more about economics than everybody on this board combined. His main point was how useless the dividend tax cut will be.

Oh wait, maybe he's a [dun dun dun!] LIBERAL!!!!!! EEEEEEKK!!!!! Protect your children, he'll EAT them and steal your money and give it to the lazy good for nothing poor!!!!!!

TheMojoPin

05-20-2003, 07:11 PM

Most importantly...where's my goddamn check?!?! I can't buy anything will all these damn bills!

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD. >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

Bergalad

05-21-2003, 04:35 AM

Protect your children, he'll EAT them and steal your money and give it to the lazy good for nothing poor!!!!!!
Good. I see you're finally starting to come around on this hehe.

Yerdaddy

05-21-2003, 08:54 PM

Warren Buffet: A non-partisan tax law super-genius that has no ulterior motives. Yup, we should listen to him because he speaks the truth!
Warren Buffet: The second richest man in America who says that both he and his secretary pay about 30% of their income in taxes, but under the tax cut proposal he could arrange it so that he payed 3%. He says that's not fair, and that it won't stimulate the economy. Tonight on Nightline he went further, saying that the modern tax system is supposed to be progressive, meaning those with higher incomes should pay a higher percentage to taxes. This is for two reasons, (philosophically, that is): 1) that the higher one's income, the less of a percentage of that income is needed for basic necessities, and 2) (the case Buffet made) that the higher income he makes is due as much to him benefiting from the American system as it is his own personal abilities, and thus he should be obligated to pay a higher share into that system. Unless he's lying for some personal gain, which I can't imagine what that would be, he believes that this tax cut reverses the tax burden so that the less you make, the higher percentage you pay.

<IMG SRC="http://czm.racknine.net/images/yersig.gif">
CZM productions

FREE YERBOOBIES!

Bergalad

05-23-2003, 08:19 AM

Here's a link on what the newly-passed tax break means to people's wallets: http://money.cnn.com/2003/05/22/pf/taxes/q_taxbill/index.htm.
It's not a sweeping reform, that's for sure, but any money I get back in my pocket from the government is fine by me.

silera

05-24-2003, 08:28 AM

I think I'm in love with Warren Buffet.

<center>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/silera/files/Silera/sig4.gif

I can't stand myself either.</center>

Recyclerz

05-24-2003, 09:11 AM

For anybody who is interested in the economic/political theory behind the structure of these tax cuts here's a nice little piece from Slate:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2083561/

Those of you who managed to stay awake through a history or Poli Sci class will remember a political theory from the turn of the last century called Social Darwinism. It's back.

PS
I'm gonna get a tan and try to get 40 acres and a mule.

No reparations for you Moe until you pass that Florida standardized test!

[b]You're only young once but you can be immature forever[b]

Recyclerz

05-24-2003, 09:30 AM

Editted cuz I'm a dumbass.

This message was edited by Recyclerz on 5-24-03 @ 1:33 PM

high fly

05-24-2003, 10:00 AM

THEY"RE NOT REALLY TAX CUTS!
They are tax deferments.
These "cuts" put the government [us] deeper in debt which means it will be borrowing the money and we will have to pay it all back WITH INTEREST!
With the tax "cuts", us regular folk will pay a larger portion. How is this good?
After Bergaland gets around to tackling the issues raised by Buffet head on, perhaps he can give some examples where tax cuts spurred the economy to grow faster than the interest rate the government pays on the national debt.

" and they ask me why I drink"

Bergalad

05-24-2003, 10:28 AM

After Bergaland gets around to tackling the issues raised by Buffet head on, perhaps he can give some examples where tax cuts spurred the economy to grow faster than the interest rate the government pays on the national debt.
Thanks for taking the time to spell my name right Hi Fi. Since when did I become the tax expert? If you look back at my posts, you will see that I am not incredibly big on this tax cut, but have been espousing the benefits of a Flat Tax. Do I want more money in my pocket from this cut? Sure, but what I am really asking for is parity and reform. The Flat Tax is what I want, not this bloated mess of a tax law we have now.

high fly

05-24-2003, 10:40 AM

Sorry 'bout the misspelling, there, Bergalad, I got a good laugh at the "hi fi' reference.
I am for greatly reducing the complexity of the tax code and closing a lot of the loopholes- there are some obscure provisions in there that benefit only one or just a few individuals.
The Republicans had a plan to do so several years ago, they called it something with the phrase "A to Z" in it. They were going to systematically go through the tax code and winnow out the bullshit.
This "A to Z" thing seems to have gone the way of the Republican "principle" of a balanced budget amendment and the Republican alternative to the Clinton proposal for national health insurance...

" and they ask me why I drink"

This message was edited by high fly on 5-24-03 @ 2:49 PM

Donnielimes

05-24-2003, 01:35 PM

I'm going to take some of that extra cash in my check due to the lowering of income taxes and keep buying stocks. real stuff like Wendy's cause a wendy's triple is the closest thing to perfect in this world. Oh yeah and George Bush rocks lets start trimming down on the government a bit o' streamlining of the porkfat and get on with some growth in the private sector and starting some businesses any kind of business it's America you can do that.

"Good Times/Noodle Salad, Thats my story"

Bergalad

05-24-2003, 03:28 PM

Good enough HF. The current tax code needs to go away, and now. All these loopholes and lawyers suck. I keep harping on the Flat Tax because it does away with all that, but lobbyists for BOTH sides will strive to make sure these inequities continue. Let's not fool ourselves and only blame the Republicans for the mess the tax laws are in; they are all to blame.

Bergalad

05-27-2003, 04:54 PM

The ones with 40% of the money ought to pay at least 40% of the taxes.
I know this thread should die, but I heard a item on the radio today and wondered if anyone else has heard this before. They said that the top 10% pays 70% of the taxes in the country. The bottom 50% pays only 4% of the taxes. Anyone heard this before?

Recyclerz

05-27-2003, 06:19 PM

I heard a item on the radio today and wondered if anyone else has heard this before. They said that the top 10% pays 70% of the taxes in the country. The bottom 50% pays only 4% of the taxes. Anyone heard this before?

Variations on a theme; both sides on the debate cherry pick numbers to make the other side seem unreasonable, if not insane.
Bergalad, those #s are feasible if you are looking at the absolute number of $; it is just a function of arithmetic that people with high incomes will pay more than people with moderate incomes, even under a flat tax system. I don't think anybody on this board is saying that everyone should pay the exact $ amount in taxes. (At least I hope not.)

One bit of sophistry the pro-tax crew is engaging in is only looking at federal income tax numbers. They conveniently leave FICA and Medicare taxes out of the analysis because these taxes take a larger % of the take home pay of people with moderate incomes (~$60K) or below.

The thing I find infuriating about Bush's economic policies is that his administration is pushing through some fairly radical policies that primarily benefit the very wealthy, while spinning the story that they are helping average middle-class folks. While some bits of the current tax scheme do make sense (i.e. upping the per child tax credit), the overall focus of Bush's proposals is to make income derived from capital less taxable and to leave the burden of taxes on wages, which automatically is more unpopular politically.

What bugs me the most is that the people who are hurt most by the long-term consequences of his actions, young people and the middle class, (which I define as up to $100k/yr for a married couple) are getting snookered into benefiting the class of people who made their money the old-fashioned way - by inheriting it.

[b]You're only young once but you can be immature forever[b]