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: Road Walker who wrote (354617)	10/12/2007 11:49:15 AM
From: d[-_-]b	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573682

In the end, the poor pay a much larger percentage of their 'discretionary income' in taxes than the rich. They might not pay federal income tax, but they pay 5%-7% sales tax and all the myriad others from taxes on federal, state and regional on gasoline to phone taxes to liquor taxes to taxes on cigarettes and toll roads and utilities. When will the Dems get behind dropping the Cigarette and Liquor taxes and really help the poor. They tried to drop the Children's insurance scam on the backs of the poor by raising cigarette taxes again. :-)

To: Road Walker who wrote (354617)	10/12/2007 3:06:43 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573682

John, Listen Jozef, your rallying cry of Tax The Poor!!!! just doesn't have a lot of resonance. As I said, this is would be just a symbolic thing. It's not that the amount raised will make much of a dent. But their inclusion in the system would make them "owners" of the country, and responsible for its well being. So then, when a new goodie is dangled in front of them with a question: "Do you want this goodie and do you want to pay for it?" Their answer to the question may be different that the current question: "Do you want this goodie and do you want someone else to pay for ig? It is largely psychological and symbolic. Not tax the poor. Joe