Why Tax Breaks For The Rich Are Important....To Them!

[Shuxclams]

<< I remember the Democratic congress going on a spending spree >>


And surely you remember Ronnie Raygun signing them into law, thats just narrow minded babble, you can't cut taxes and ask for billions of dollars for defense spending and create huge tax loop holes for the same people you just gave the tax cut to, here I'll put it this way, go out and max all your credit cards, then quit your job. same difference. Another thing you out there in la-la land don't realize is social programs were cut drastically, so much so that Los Angeles became a huge shanty town of homeless folks that were released from the mental wards and care facilities due to the fact that funding was stopped. How about deregulation, good idea but we havent mastered the practice, ie; the Fishing industry, de-regulated so that almost anyone could fish all day all night year round, now the atlantic cod is close to being on the endangered list? Now all those that boomed went bust and the Fishing industry has dwindled, so much for the long haul.



<< Bear in mind that the Fed has a surplus of money, and is in no way strapped for cash. >>


there is no surplus, its all smoke and mirrors, its &quot;projected&quot; not real.




SHUX

 

[jmcoreymv]

Someones been a bad boy!

 

[Russ]

<< I even kind of get a kick out his Blood and Guts way of posting. >>



Red,

Yeah, he reminds me of someone from a video store in Oklahoma.

Russ, NCNE

 

[JellyBaby]

<< what is nef? >>

An example of a nef would be if Red Dawn started a new thread entitled, &quot;Do you feel comfortable taking a dump with the bathroom door open?&quot;. Actually, a few of the younger crowd here might find some psychological value in that topic. Lets try again: if Red Dawn started this thread, &quot;I farted! heheheh n/t&quot;. That, truly, would be a heavy-duty nef.

 

[Shuxclams]

Hey &quot;I farted again&quot; was a serious topic! Damn snobbery I tell you!



SHUX

 

[etech]

Summary

Lower tax rates will help keep the economy going and also increase tax revenue.
Under Governor Bush's tax plan, the largest percentage reductions will go to the lowest-income earners.
Increasing the complexity of the tax code is a bad idea.

Quotes I liked
&quot;Another thing: instead of stealing from the rich and giving to the poor, whatever happened to elevating the poor so they too can become rich?&quot;

&quot;Well, DaBoneHead, under Bush's tax plan, you would get a break. Under Bore's, you would not.&quot;

&quot;I like the idea of flat-tax. Perhaps it is the only time Russ and I will agree on anything.&quot;


Quotes that were in error
&quot;Quite a few people have done well earning their way to the top. A small number of people have successfully invested their way to the top. No one in America has SAVED their way to the top.&quot;
Lots of people inherited their wealth, got lucky, or stole their way to the top.
Meet the Millionaire Next Door

&quot;Then we can talk about a reduction in taxes if warranted.&quot;
Keeping more of my hardearned money is always &quot;warranted&quot;

&quot;Doesn't sound fair to me.&quot;
&quot;Instead of getting a small tax cut(a big ass one if you're rich, yeah real fair there), as the Bush plan proposes&quot;
Under Governor Bush's tax plan, the largest percentage reductions will go to the lowest-income earners.

Quotes to remember

I'd give up a weeks wages to be able to have the privelege of bouncing the festering Gob you call a head off of a curb.

I smell socialists in this thread...

 

[etech]

I know, but it is still a good quote, though gorb would of been a better choice in my opinion.

Dirk has a, shall we say, forceful way with words, but the message in there is good.

 

[DirkBelig]

Now that this flame war has degenerated into an episode of &quot;Everybody Loves Dirk&quot;, let's clear up some things:

• I am NOT opposed to paying down the debt. If the surplus was spread between debt reduction and tax rate reduction, that would be fine. BUT, leaving a big pile of cash lying around D.C. will only inspire pols of BOTH parties to go buck wild with the pork and gravy trains.

• Democrats have to lie about what they are. That's the reason behind the whole &quot;New Democrat&quot; scam. Liberals can't get elected. Clinton ran the scam and the GOP put their worst guys up against him. The fact that he never got 50% of the vote shows that he was takable. Gore said &quot;era of Big Government is over&quot; and has now proposed so many giveaways and love buys that my tax cut and your debt paydown are vapor!

• I think that there'd be more concern for one's fellow man if we didn't have this nagging, &quot;I gave at the office.&quot; feeling. When street people come begging, all I can think is, &quot;There's a McDonalds hiring at $8/hr. and all sorts of welfare that I've paid for. Why are you bugging me?!?&quot;

OK.....Dirk tired now....must go sleep. Hasta...

 

[Raspewtin]

<< Liberals can't get elected. >>



Was Clinton not a liberal? Wilson? Roosevelt? lol.




<< I even kind of get a kick out his Blood and Guts way of posting >>



IMO if Dirk had any real confidence in his posts, he wouldn't need to resort to name-calling. Any difference of opinion immediately results in insults, showing his ideas are sometimes so weak they can't be supported without an insult.

A very amusing game is to be equally rude and insulting and scream extreme-left wing sentiments, and laugh as you pull the strings, and watch him dance. People filled with hate and greed are the easiest to manipulate.


That being said, if one keeps talking long enough, eventually, something randomly slips out that sounds intelligent.

 

[chess9]

Raspewtin:

I'm not so sure about Wilson and Clinton, but I think we can safely finger FDR as a liberal. Clinton is a mixed bag, and Wilson really doesn't fit into any of our modern stereotypes.

Occasionally, probably by accident as you suggest, Dirk slips up and makes sense. Most of his posts in this thread, excepting the last one, are unmitigated disasters.

 

[DirkBelig]

Ah, RaSPEWtin oozes up from the muck to say hello.

FYI: I gave him so many beatings at AGN that he qualifies as a merangue. He's a playa hater and can be ignored safely.

Clinton IS a liberal. His letting Hillary plot the takeover of ONE-SEVENTH of the Nation's economy showed that he was trying to outdo FDR AND LBJ (not Spanish for &quot;the blowjob&quot. He CALLED himself a &quot;New Democrat&quot;, but that would be the same as Bush calling himself, &quot;The Smartest Dude Around&quot;, it just ain't so.

 

[Raspewtin]

<< RaSPEWtin oozes up from the muck >>



First comes the patented opening insult ... (Dirk, you're so smart, you got the &quot;spew&quot; joke) You've already used this one, you need new material.



<< FYI: I gave him so many beatings at AGN that he qualifies as a merangue. He's a playa hater and can be ignored safely. >>



Finally, the fish takes the worm.

I proved he is inconsistent (for lack of a nicer term) with his own posts, and seems the greatest American hero is still nursing some wounds (licking an open sore only makes them worse, Dirk) Here's another example below, to show the playa couldn't stay consistent if his life depends on it.

Two quotes by the brilliant Dirk:


<< Liberals can't get elected. >>




<< Clinton IS a liberal >>




Red Dawn,

He has interesting, intelligent ideas, and probably would have many more if hate didn't consume him and drive him. I admit I missed seeing his amusing posts on many political issues. I think most of the stupid things he says (see quotes above) comes from his focused anger and hatred. Of course, as you'll find after a few threads, he gets a little boring and repetitive.


Now where's that next angry insult, Dirk?

 

[DirkBelig]

I was unclear in my previous post. I should've said:

Liberals can't get elected when running OPENLY as avowed liberals. That's why they call themselves &quot;moderate&quot; or &quot;progressive&quot; or &quot;New Democrat&quot; (as opposed to the term &quot;Old Dem.&quot; which clearly means LIBERAL). The public knows that &quot;liberal&quot; means higher taxes and bigger government, neither of which is very appetizing to the majority of people.
-------------------
The &quot;SPEW&quot; part is new to this board. In a good granola-crunching, bunny-hugger move, I could RECYCLE (heh) every beating you and splitfire received at my hands at AGN and it'll all seem new to this crowd. Spare yourself the indignity, mmmkay? You're welcome.

 

[Raspewtin]

You do have a point. Please recycle. Let's do the &quot;Gore indistinguishable from Unabomber&quot; one again. I kicked your arse on that one, especially with the actual definition of indistinguishable from Webster's. Or I believe you also wanted to correct yourself on that one as well. Or how about the one with you saying pervervially shut up and I never silence anyone in the same thread? I believe you also had to correct &quot;what you meant&quot; on that one also.

 

[denali]

<< Liberals can't get elected >>



I was wondering if you considered Nixon a Liberal, he elected twice if I remember.

 

[Raspewtin]

Red Dawn,

His work with China was impressive, though, don't you think? I guess that could have been mostly Henry Kissinger.

 

[denali]

Red Dawn,

Yes Nixon was a crook but he was also a Liberal.

It was under Nixon that social spending came to exceed defense spending for the first time. Social spending soared from $55 billion in 1970 (Nixon's first budget) to $132 billion in 1975, from 28 percent of the federal budget when LBJ left office to 40 percent of the budget by the time Nixon left in 1974. While Nixon would criticize and attempt to reform welfare, he nonetheless approved massive increases in funding for other Great Society programs such as the Model Cities program and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Some of the changes in spending policies that Nixon supported, such as automatic cost-of-living increases for Social Security recipients and other entitlement programs, contributed to runaway spending trends in successive decades. Federal spending for the arts, which went mostly to cultural elites who hated Nixon, quadrupled. Economist Herbert Stein, who served on Nixon's Council of Economic Advisers, summed up this dubious record: &quot;The administration that was against expanding the budget expanded it greatly; the administration that was determined to fight inflation ended by having a large amount of it.&quot;

Source

 

[chess9]

Denali:

He conveniently left out a lot of information. Johnson's &quot;Great Society&quot; legislation had not been fully implemented when Nixon came to power. Many regulations had to be finalized, and the country was in no mood to change directions. Furthermore, during his first term, Congress, I believe, was controlled by Democrats. Bills such as Title IX, which had their genesis under Johnson really picked up support and steam and were passed during that first term. He had little choice but to sign them. Calling Nixon a liberal is really laughable. I guess right wing think tanks will publish anything these days. John Ashbrook was a complete jerk and right winger of the worst kind. The piece is obviously revisionist history.

 

[DirkBelig]

Red Dawn: I thought you were seeing the light, but it's clear that you are too marshy in your thinking to be helped.

Nixon did bad things and was punished. Clinton did even worse things and is hailed as a great man and leader. Clinton's worst crime was debasing the culture to the point where there are no values.

Your smack against anyone who isn't a militant abortion rights zealot reveals your true colors: Pink to the core and afraid of anyone who can distinguish right from wrong.

Calling yourself a &quot;moderate&quot; is just a feeble attempt to say, &quot;I'm not an extremist, please don't be mean to me. Love me...I love you. I don't judge you. (Unless you're Dirk.)&quot; Wishy-washy mushheads like you fear people like me because I stand for TRUTH and won't back down from the righteous battle unlike wusses like you.

And Raspwtin, EVERYONE who witnessed the thorough boning, gutting and mounting I dealt you is laughing their asses off at your claims. Of course, you refer to posts from a DEFUNCT BBS (AGN) as victories because you know that it's impossible for anyone to look for themselves and see how full of manure you are. You should go before you get maimed again

I was discussing this thread with someone in ICQ and I mentioned that NO ONE ever argues the FACTS, or even THEIR OPINIONS. People like chess9, Red Dawn and Raspewtin just call names and say that conservatives suck. They NEVER talk up what's good and fair and right about their Big Nanny Government plans for us all. It's all just, &quot;Bush is stupid. The Religious Right scares me. Dirk is a poopy pants.&quot; They NEVER say, &quot;Higher taxes and more government usurpation of liberties and freedom is good because...&quot; They just parrot the propaganda that they've absorbed from the media and regurgitate it without the slightest comprehension of what it means.

The funny thing is, for all the misrepresentations you've tried to make about me and my beliefs, NO ONE has ever asked me what my views are on a slew of issues. There are many things that I'm opposed to that I wouldn't prohibit if I ran the show.:Q Two examples:

DRUGS: I have never ever HIT a joint nor tried anything harder. I don't smoke, hardly drink (2-3 beers is a bender for me on a Saturday night). I would decriminalize them and end this retarded &quot;War on Drugs&quot;. It's been nothing more than a &quot;War on Freedom&quot; with the government using it as an excuse to go hardcore SWAT style on it's own citizens. Addicts should be treated, not warehoused for over $27,000/year on the taxpayers tab. Some users will OD, but that's just Darwin at work. It's a good thing.[/Martha Stewart voice]

HELMET/SEATBELT LAWS: Everyone should wear them, they save lives, but I believe that the government should stay the Hell out of people's self-destructive urges, so I'd allow people to risk their necks all they want. BUT, if insurance companies don't want to pay for people's idiocy, they shouldn't be forced to and the people aren't gonna pay the bill either. You want to kill yourself, go ahead. Just don't give me the bill when you faw down an' go BOOM!

My philosophy could be described as &quot;Objectivist Libertarian Anarchist&quot;. Do what you want to yourself without harming others or saddling them with the cost of your care with as little government interference as possible.

The much-malligned Religious Right is absolutely right in it's moral opposition to much of the societal decay, BUT (and this is key) they have no right to use government as a weapon of their desires. That's why Pat Buchannan is no different from Gore or Nader. He wants to get control of the government to inflict his views on others and that's just not acceptable.

{kicks back and awaits the next wave of mischaracterisations....}

[edited typos and grammar]

 

[Raspewtin]

<< You should go before you get maimed again ...EVERYONE who witnessed the thorough boning, gutting and mounting I dealt you is laughing their asses off at your claims >>



Dirk, maybe if you tell yourself this enough, it will become true. ROFLMAO. Dirk is also the Queen of Spain.

Quotes from Dirk:



<< People like chess9, Red Dawn and Raspewtin just call names and say that conservatives suck. >>






<< If you are trying to say who deserves what, then your are a COMMIE MOOCHER!!!! Suck it hard, Boyeeeeeee!!!!!!!! >>



What a hypocrite.

I could care less if you're conservative or not. It's not what you think politically, Dirk, it's how you try to step on everyone who thinks differently than you.

 

[Dameon]

Two things:
1) Go dirk. Amen. Preach on brother.
2) RedDawn, Chess9, raspewtin... get over it.... none of you have truly addressed why Americans are not entitled to have their own money back. You are still trying to bait people into this interclass warfare. May god have mercy on your soul.

 

[Raspewtin]

<< ...raspewtin... get over it.... none of you have truly addressed why Americans are not entitled to have their own money back. >>




Why would I argue against it? I'm for a fiscally responsible tax cut.

 

[etech]

Gov. George Bush

Trust People: Governor Bush believes all taxpayers should be allowed to keep more of their own money. Every family faces different challenges: some need better childcare, some need tutoring for their children, and others need more after-school programs. Government cannot tailor its programs to the needs of each family. The best way to help all families is to let each family keep more of its income and spend it as it deems appropriate.

1. Increase access to the middle class for hard working families:
Cut the current 15 percent tax bracket to 10 percent for the first $6,000 of taxable income for singles, the first $10,000 for single parents, and the first $12,000 for married couples. Double the child tax credit to $1,000.

2. Treat all middle class families more fairly:
Cut the maximum tax rate for the middle class to 25 percent (versus the current maximum rates of 28 and 31 percent). Greatly reduce the marriage penalty by restoring the 10 percent deduction for two earner families, allowing them to deduct up to an additional $3,000.

3. Encourage entrepreneurship and growth:
Cut the top tax rate at 33 percent (down from the current 39.6 percent).
Eliminate the death tax.
Make the research and development tax credit permanent.

4. Promote charitable giving and education:
Extend the deduction for charitable contributions to the 80 million taxpayers that do not itemize, and raise the cap on corporate giving.
Increase the annual contribution limit on Education Savings Accounts from $500 to $5,000 per child.

Tax Relief for Families of Four
A family of four making $35,000 will receive a $1,500 tax cut, a 100 percent reduction.
A family of four making $50,000 will receive a $2,000 tax cut, a 50 percent reduction.
A family of four making $75,000 will receive a $2,500 tax cut, a 25 percent reduction.
Tax Relief for Single Parents
A single mother with one child making $22,000 will receive a $1,000 tax cut, a 100 percent reduction.
A single mother with two children making $32,000 will receive a $1,500 tax cut, a 95 percent reduction.

Now can anyone find the details of Gore's plan? Who will be getting those targeted tax cuts? Why is it better to be targeted by the government then an across the board cut for all?
Does anyone think that increasing the complexity of the tax code is a good idea?

 

[Ornery]

Argh, Red stole my sig!

Damn Dirk if you'd only tone it down a notch your posts would be near perfect. I could just sit on the political sidelines and relax.

Thanks to you I can see where flying off the handle doesn't help the cause. Your posts stand on their own. If somebody disagrees with them and they throw a few flames in the process, it doesn't help their case either. That's plain in this topic. Stay on the high road, man! I've seen the light and am changing my ways. Now, I just gotta work on my grammar and rambling...