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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (158025)	10/17/2008 11:43:45 AM
From: Travis_Bickle	Respond to of 306849

I wish Obama were in fact a Marxist as it would make the next few years pretty interesting to say the least (next best thing to an Anarchist in the White House) but I think he will prove to be a middle of the road type President. Anyone who gets upset over a proposed adjustment in the income tax rate paid by a small portion of our society needs to get a more interesting hobby.

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (158025)	10/17/2008 11:48:04 AM
From: GraceZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

that you need to pay more taxes so he can "redistribute" the wealth as he sees fit. You have to understand, Jim, that the majority of the voters don't see a problem with that idea as long as it is not their wealth that is being redistributed. It's like ten people who go out to lunch, then the majority vote that the guy that makes the most money at the table should foot the entire bill. It's not a despotic clepto-majority, it's fairness!

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (158025)	10/17/2008 11:51:44 AM
From: BWAC	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 306849

<convey that you need to pay more taxes so he can "redistribute" the wealth as he sees fit.> Hardly. The tax changes proposed on a net income of $250,000 equals about $900. Chump change, or should be for that income bracket. And why are you so against a little redistribution of wealth? Estate taxes don't do it anymore thanks mainly to new rules and various detailed schemes to circumvent. Think back in history. As in colonial days. King of England didn't want his wealth redistributed either when the colonies broke away. More modern........Ever see the Biltmore House in Asheville, NC? Breakup of monopolies in the US industrial coming of age history?

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (158025)	10/17/2008 11:56:38 AM
From: Jet.Screamer	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 306849

Obama did not single him out, he asked Obama a question and Obama answered it. As for all the attention Joe is getting that is the fault of McCain for bringing it up at the debate and repeatedly referring to it. What Obama proposes is hardly socialism. Taxing the wealthiest 5% of americans more and giving a tax cut or no tax increase to the rest of the country does not constitute socialism just a readjustment of the underlying policy as to who the taxation favors. I don't have kids but everyone who does gets to take a deduction for each child. According to your definition of socialism the preference towards having children is socialism.