![]() |
Avoiding taxes....
"Frogwatch" wrote in message ... On Jul 23, 5:50 pm, jps wrote: On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:47:11 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:13:19 -0700, jps wrote: On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:18:26 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:06:50 -0700, jps wrote: You think there are more rich Ds than Rs? Just the ones with power, like Senators and presidents. I am sure a lot more poor people believe Democrats are helping them but if you can believe the chart Bob is selling this week, the "middle class" got screwed as badly in the 90s as they did in the 2000s. Oh, come on. Those are the second and third tier sock puppets who do the bidding of the truly powerful. They write and pass laws to protect wealth and put systems in place to ensure that the wealthy aren't disturbed. My bet is that wealthy Ds are far more likely to accept a raise in taxes than their Republican counterparts. It certainly wouldn't be Kerry would it? Singling out one example is silly and you know it. Who (in this group especially) wouldn't want to avoid paying excise tax on a boat purchase if they could do so by mooring the vessel in a nearby state? That's a ****load of moorage prepaid. Being a Democrat doesn't obligate you to run towards paying taxes. Being a Republican does obligate you to tilt the tax structure towards favoring the wealthy. It is a simple case of hypocrisy, wanting other people to pay taxes he is not willing to pay. This is the way of liberalism. In your case, it's a simple case of stupidity. |
Avoiding taxes....
wrote in message ... On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 16:01:47 -0700, jps wrote: You are rife with dishonesty. Gore isn't an average person. Is he any greater or less than a person in similar circumstances? When they compared Gore's house with GWB's house it was apparent who the real carbon hog was. Gore does live in a castle (now two castles) but I guess he is a lot richer than Bush ... from selling phony carbon credits and being a TV evangelist for a cult religion.. That is a business that makes CDO salesmen look like an honorable profession. Come on. The world's problems are not Gore's fault or Bush's fault, but when you look at who has caused the most problems for the world, that would be Bush and it's not even close. |
Avoiding taxes....
wrote in message ... On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:50:30 -0700, jps wrote: My bet is that wealthy Ds are far more likely to accept a raise in taxes than their Republican counterparts. It certainly wouldn't be Kerry would it? Singling out one example is silly and you know it. Kerry is an all around hypocrite. He rails on about "carbon" but he was one of the loudest critics of "Cape Wind". All of that alternate energy stuff is great as long as it isn't near his house. There may be some Democrats who really care about he working man but most of them are indistinguishable from republicans. That is certainly true of the two (D) presidents since Carter. One admits he was a Bush brother, the other one hasn't come out of the closet yet. What are you talking about??? I'm having trouble thinking of ONE Republican, president, senator, or representative who actually gives a damn about doing what's right for people in this country. The latest debacle with the unemployment ins. extension is a prefect example. Two Republican senators voted for the money for desperate people. One Democrat voted against it. |
Avoiding taxes....
"Charles C." wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:50:30 -0700, jps wrote: My bet is that wealthy Ds are far more likely to accept a raise in taxes than their Republican counterparts. It certainly wouldn't be Kerry would it? Singling out one example is silly and you know it. Kerry is an all around hypocrite. He rails on about "carbon" but he was one of the loudest critics of "Cape Wind". All of that alternate energy stuff is great as long as it isn't near his house. Yep. Notice how Kerry is keeping a low profile nationally? Tries to stay off the radar screen. Doesn't want to comment on much of anything going on. Plays the party line when he has to in terms of supporting Obama, but doesn't offer much. He's watching from the sidelines. If he determines that Obama is in trouble in 2012, Kerry will be the first to throw O under the bus and pursue the nomination. CC You're going after Kerry???? How about all the jerkoffs in the Republican caucus who don't have a problem giving rich people a break and turn around and try and prevent desperate people from feeding their kids. |
Avoiding taxes....
wrote in message ... On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 16:56:27 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 15:55:29 -0400, wrote: . gee. why not let the GOP drop its lies about capital gains tax cuts stimulating the economy and see? I think we have already seen. When Clinton cut the Cap gains rate to 20% the Dow went to $11,000. When Bush cut it to 15% the Dow went to $14,000. gee. how'd the dow do over the last 3 years with bush's tax cuts in place oh. it tanked. yeah. that's certainly proof that tax cuts help the economy, isn't it? The Dow was $10,424 Friday and if Obama could actually create some jobs that weren'r census takers and unemployment clerks it would be $15,000. Of course that only affects "buy and hold" people. If you had sense enough to stop l;oss your windfall in 2006-2007 then buy back in after the crash, you made a lot of money. I posted my 401k numbers the other day and my fund manager made over 4% per year over the last 3. Bummer about the facts isn't it... http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/...reation-in-1q/ |
Avoiding taxes....
wrote in message ... On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 19:25:18 -0400, bpuharic wrote: You really do not knwo economics if you do not understand government cannot create wealth. weatlh has many forms. and yes, govt can create wealth ever hear of public education? You don't want to go there. The public education system has created those 100,000,000 million people without the job skills to compete in a world economy. Completely and utter nonsense. |
Avoiding taxes....
|
Avoiding taxes....
wrote in message ... On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 18:41:49 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: The latest debacle with the unemployment ins. extension is a prefect example. Two Republican senators voted for the money for desperate people. One Democrat voted against it. The GOP just wanted to pay for the extra benefits, not borrow more money. The Democrats said, in the whole 2.38 trillion dollar budget, they couldn't find a way to cut $33 billion from something to make this revenue neutral. Just a suggestion, that is about a month of what we are ****ing away in Afghanistan. The fact is that the GOP is quite willing to let the rich have their tax breaks without any cuts elsewhere, but when it comes to people who are struggling, they have to be funded by cutting something. Afg. has nothing to do with denying family's their ability to feed their kids. |
Avoiding taxes....
wrote in message ... On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 20:53:56 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 20:44:51 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 19:25:18 -0400, bpuharic wrote: You really do not knwo economics if you do not understand government cannot create wealth. weatlh has many forms. and yes, govt can create wealth ever hear of public education? You don't want to go there. The public education system has created those 100,000,000 million people without the job skills to compete in a world economy. uh no. wall street did that. virtually all those people were employed prior to 2007. then wall street went crazy and destroyed the economy. or are you saying that, in a period of 3 years, the entire educational structure of the US collapsed and caused 50 year old workers to lose their skills? I am saying there were a lot of people working in jobs that don't really require much skill and making a lot of money. Those jobs moved offshore. If you are a "rust belt" auto worker you better move to Tennessee or Mexico if you are not willing to learn a whole new profession. There is nothing the government can do about that. Our universities give people a well rounded liberal arts degree with very little that actually has anything to do with what an employer wants you to do at work. Completely wrong. A well-rounded liberal arts degree is an excellent gateway for lots of well-paying jobs. You don't have to be an engineer to be hirable. They have business school graduates who don't have a clue how to actually run a business. Or a country, aka GWB. As you are complaining about, even an engineering degree is no guarantee of a good job, particularly when there is a kid in India with a fresher degree and all the new technology knowledge who will work for $10,000 a year. So, if that's true, then what's wrong with an English degree for example? It's much harder to send a job that requires colloquial American English skills to India than it takes for one to hire an excellent programmer in India. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:17 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com