Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (175538)	9/29/2003 1:24:14 PM
From: d[-_-]b	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1576690

Alighieri, re:Did she not pay her fair share of taxes on the money she earned in the period in which she earned it? It amazes me that I make way less than her, have a carry forward loss of $50,000 and still paid more than 10 times as much tax as that woman. No I believe she has cooked her books and everything in her life is apparently a business expense.

To: Alighieri who wrote (175538)	9/29/2003 2:03:20 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576690

Al, Did she not pay her fair share of taxes on the money she earned in the period in which she earned it? That all depends on what your definition of "fair share" is. If she did, there would be no justification for hiking up taxes, because that would be admitting that she paid less than her "fair share" back when the taxes were lower. If she did not, she should retroactively pay her fair share and stop hoarding money that belongs to the government, according to the unwritten rules of "fair share." Now before you point out that Huffington paid few taxes under Bush's tax cuts, let me point out other rich liberals like Kennedy, Kerry, and Clinton. Funny how none of them are giving back their "ill-gotten" tax breaks to the government, even while Clinton brags that he didn't deserve it. With the WH, congress and senate in republican hands, it is hilarious that you would make reference to democrats on the state of the budget and spending. The deficit is a problem created by both parties. Republicans want their defense spending and tax cuts, while Democrats want their social programs. With such a partisan mix of interests, what happens? Either everyone gets what they want, or no one gets what they want. Even you can figure out which is the path of least resistance. Tenchusatsu