On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:10:06 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 08:39:23 -0400, W1TEF wrote:

On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 21:58:55 -0400, bpuharic wrote:


since the rich are irrelevant to the recovery...if they dont steall
ALL trhe money and leave SOME for working people...we'll see what
happens.

Heh - So I take it that all your hollering about the rich raping the
land and citizenry is also not relevant to anything? To be
consistent, if I parse what you say right, the rich should be taxed to
hell and gone to save the little guy and now it's ok as long as
"something" is left for the little guy.

uh no. what i said was that the rich, having stolen the entire economy
over the last 30 years, should pay the taxes on what they stole

But that's not consistent my friend. On the one hand, you want to
confiscate and redistribute the "stolen" wealth and have been loud and
vociferous in arguing for same. Now that those who would do what you
wish appear to have changed their minds for the sake of the "economy",
it's ok because at least something will be left for the little guy.

This is the same tax regime as Bush. On the one hand you despise that
tax structure as "evil" and "stealing", now you appear to be content
that something will be left for the little guy with the exact same
regime.

Which is it?

Well, at least you are consistent in your inconsistency.

whatever. when you put words in peoples' mouths, you generally get the
argument you make

Come on now - that's not correct and you know it. I'm restating, not
verbatim admittedly, your expressed opinions about taxes. I don't
believe that I've distorted your views beyond recognition.