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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (542797)	2/19/2004 3:32:44 PM
From: CYBERKEN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

What an incredibly STUPID analysis! There are too many left wing sewer rats trying to pretend to know something about economics. It badly fools the patsymckee morons. It no longer fools 80% of the public though. They've seen ENOUGH of you sewer rats stealing their property and transferring it to the worthless. Thus the ongoing PURGE...

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (542797)	2/19/2004 3:43:40 PM
From: JDN	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 769670

That all sounds accurate, but dont you agree, we the middle class will ALWAYS carry the greatest share of the load cause there are just SO DAMN MANY OF US. (gg). When the Democrats talk about increasing the taxes for the wealthy and THEN loading us up with NEW GOVT PROGRAMS do you REALLY think the additional taxes they squeeze out of the wealthy will pay for the ADDITIONAL SPENDING Kerry and others wish to do. To argue about the wealthys tax rate is IN MY OPINION merely a Democrapic PLOY to keep our eye OFF the ball WHICH IS GOVT SPENDING. The great Alan Greenspan himself worries NOT about tax cuts but GOVT. SPENDING. jdn

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (542797)	2/19/2004 4:06:28 PM
From: Srexley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

"I don't believe economics or math are your strong points" Not sure on economics. Very strong on math, and fairness. "That means that if they earn 43% of the dollars earned in this country, they should pay 43% of the taxes for the country" I know what it means. Also means the bottom 30% need to do the same. You guys leave this out of the equation, so math is wrong. If the top 43% pay 43% of their wealth, it would be MORE progressive than it is now. I say (clearly and repeatedly), it is plenty progressive as it is. "then those can afford to pay should carry some of the taxes of those that go to bed hungry" They do, canyon man. The top 1% (that is 1 out of 100) pay 36% of the taxes (that is 36 out of 100, or 3,600% of their share of services). The bottom 30% or so (that is 30 out of 100) pay 0% of the taxes (that is 0%). Are you starting to get "the math"? "should pay slightly more than their percentage of earnings" I would say the difference of 0% and 36% is significantly MORE than slighly more of their earnings. But then again, I don't know math, right? "That's why some our wealthiest citizens have derided the latest tax cuts as fundamentally unfair to working people. Got it?" But they are not. Only by the loud mouth standards of the demo party. I think I have laid out a pretty strong case that those who EARN more pay ENOUGH more to not get slammed by the demo party and those like you who WANT MORE OF THE WEALTH THESE PEOPLE EARN. "By that accounting you had a dramatic tax increase and the middle class' share of that increase was disproportionately large." hahaha. You guys and your funny math. "It's good of you to worry so much about those that make over $200,000 a year though" I don't worry about them. I primarily worry about my family and our situation. But I am a fair person, and we live in a free and capitilistic society. The accumulation of wealth by the smartest and hardest working is good for the entire society. The higher you tax them, the more you dis-incentive them. Over 1/3 of their income for just one of the many taxes they have to pay is enough. But not for unfair and greedy people like yourself that want more of their hard work and perspiration for yourselves. No, I don't worry about them, but I am a fair person and do not remotely think they are not paying their share. Which again is 3,600% of their portion of the services. Much higher than that when you figure they are not recipients of any entitltements. They are the SUPPLIERS for them. But it is not enough for you, and I am lousy at math. LOL