Buffett Rule becomes a Bill

[Full-Auto]

What I "see" in that article is the truth and whatever "implication" you took from it was obviously clouded bt your blind hatred of NPR.

Personally I don't think we should be funding it either so we're on the same side with that issue.

NPR was just pushing how wonderful the new health care bill is. why we need it.

Just pushing was today.

Link?

Sorry I dont know how to link you to the service call I placed for DW repair. It was a hold function.

 

[DaGoose]

No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that the implication of the 'choice' is clear. NPR couldn't produce non-biased reporting if it's funded depended upon it... which, as a taxpayer, I think it should.

Why am I paying for your fucking mouthpieces?

You are incapable of seeing 'spin' from your own side... but you'll spot it in an NY minute from Fox. Fucking hypocrite.

What I "see" in that article is the truth and whatever "implication" you took from it was obviously clouded bt your blind hatred of NPR.

Personally I don't think we should be funding it either so we're on the same side with that issue.

Oh, good grief. Can we stop with the hysteria? I don't 'hate' NPR... I don't respect them as a source.... disrespect is not 'hate'. And, frankly, I'm as sick of the hysterical hyperbolic bullshit about 'hate' as I am of moronic reporting.

Ok. I'll change it.

What I "see" in that article is the truth and whatever "implication" you took from it was obviously clouded but your "disrespect" of NPR.

Personally I don't think we should be funding it either so we're on the same side with that issue

 

[California Girl]

Thanks Cali..!

I'm just calling it as I see it. The reason I don't slam Fox (and frankly, I could very easily) is just that... the left scream about Fox but refuse point blank to recognize the same crap from their own preferred 'sources'. Honestly, I don't have a lot of time for either left wing or right wing media. Although, I will sometimes try to watch both to understand where the spin is, why they're spinning and what the 'gain' is for both.

Personally, I think many posters on here would benefit from reading less media and more actual sources. This thread is a great example. Am I the only one who's read the damned bill? I don't know, but I could give it a good guess.

I didn't think there was a bill yet. Could you link it?

Oh, you know what? My bad. I was reading the Earmarks bill before I was posting and got the two mixed up.

See, I can admit when I'm wrong.

 

[DaGoose]

I'm just calling it as I see it. The reason I don't slam Fox (and frankly, I could very easily) is just that... the left scream about Fox but refuse point blank to recognize the same crap from their own preferred 'sources'. Honestly, I don't have a lot of time for either left wing or right wing media. Although, I will sometimes try to watch both to understand where the spin is, why they're spinning and what the 'gain' is for both.

Personally, I think many posters on here would benefit from reading less media and more actual sources. This thread is a great example. Am I the only one who's read the damned bill? I don't know, but I could give it a good guess.

I didn't think there was a bill yet. Could you link it?

Oh, you know what? My bad. I was reading the Earmarks bill before I was posting and got the two mixed up.

See, I can admit when I'm wrong.

Pos rep coming your way.....

 

[The T]

Example?

My short memory serves to tell me that she said she wasn't going to educate you...what of that didn't you understand?

In other words.....you and her "got 'nuthin".

Translation: "I am lazy..."

 

[Dot Com]

Hello? Anyone?

Patience, DaDumb.... I don't spend my time waiting to spoon feed stupid people....

However, since clearly 'balanced reporting' seems to be above your intellectual paygrade, let me just show you....

"We can't even get them to allow us to raise the rate 3 percent on folks on their second million dollars of income. The Republicans are unwilling to even consider that. So I think the voters are going to have to weigh in here," said McCaskill.

Voters will have a clear chance to do so, nine months from now.

Given the highly left leaning piece.... I think even you can work out that the final sentence is not balanced.

So you're saying that 9 months from now the voters will NOT have a chance to do so?

If anything is clear, this is (and you can take this to the bank).

The defining issue in the upcoming election for POTUS is going to be about the budget and taxation. It already is.

You may call it unbalanced reporting but I call it fact.

CG pwned again for criticizing the piece before reading it She even highlighted the non-controversial clause then tried to backpedal when called on it

Thanks for this quote too. You'll never hear repubs admit to their gullible base that the taxes don't kick in til AFTER it reaches a comfortable threshold:

Quote:

"We can't even get them to allow us to raise the rate 3 percent on folks on their second million dollars of income. The Republicans are unwilling to even consider that. So I think the voters are going to have to weigh in here," said McCaskill.

Voters will have a clear chance to do so, nine months from now.

 

[DaGoose]

My short memory serves to tell me that she said she wasn't going to educate you...what of that didn't you understand?

In other words.....you and her "got 'nuthin".

Translation: "I am lazy..."

I did not call you guys lazy. Stop putting words in my mouth.

 

[bripat9643]

'Buffett Rule' Becomes A Bill, And Congress Bickers : NPR

The GOP will not hear of this! Their wealthy supporters will shoot this down. Perhaps middle America will take notice this time. I know they the white and rich front running GOP candidate will turn thumbs down on this Bill.

Anyone with a brain will turn thumbs down on the bill. Apparently you believe that only white people have brains.

Why because it elimates obnoxious loopholes like the carry exception where millionaire hedge fund managers get taxed the capital gains rate on what is essentially a management fee.

The fact Republican's support this is obnoxious and it is amusing they will nominate a candidate who got rich off it. This guarentees it becomes and issue in the election and the Republican's lose big on this one.

This is not to say the Republicans are all wrong and the Democrats are all right but this is one of the worst things that Republicans support and it will become front and center.

I haven't noted any Republicans supporting this rule. I haven't even seen any proof that it exists. If it does, I would probably be against it. However, given the track record of turds like you, I'm certain you're misstating it.

Lying is what liberals do.

 

[The T]

In other words.....you and her "got 'nuthin".

Translation: "I am lazy..."

I did not call you guys lazy. Stop putting words in my mouth.

Didn't. Your meaning was clear. You are a big boy and have a search function do you not?

Go figure.

 

[DaGoose]

Anyone with a brain will turn thumbs down on the bill. Apparently you believe that only white people have brains.

Why because it elimates obnoxious loopholes like the carry exception where millionaire hedge fund managers get taxed the capital gains rate on what is essentially a management fee.

The fact Republican's support this is obnoxious and it is amusing they will nominate a candidate who got rich off it. This guarentees it becomes and issue in the election and the Republican's lose big on this one.

This is not to say the Republicans are all wrong and the Democrats are all right but this is one of the worst things that Republicans support and it will become front and center.

I haven't noted any Republicans supporting this rule. I haven't even seen any proof that it exists. If it does, I would probably be against it. However, given the track record of turds like you, I'm certain you're misstating it.

Lying is what liberals do.

Sure. Like "Reagonomics" wasn't the biggest lie ever perpetrated on the American taxpayers.

 

[GuyPinestra]

In fact, in 2009, the top 1 percent of tax filers paid about 37 percent of all federal income taxes.

How much SHOULD they pay?? All of it??

 

[DaGoose]

Translation: "I am lazy..."

I did not call you guys lazy. Stop putting words in my mouth.

Didn't. Your meaning was clear. You are a big boy and have a search function do you not?

Go figure.

Believe it or not I did before I ever posted it. I did a search for the word Fox on my name ang got ZERO hits.

You should stop trying to imply things that are not true.

 

[Full-Auto]

Why because it elimates obnoxious loopholes like the carry exception where millionaire hedge fund managers get taxed the capital gains rate on what is essentially a management fee.

The fact Republican's support this is obnoxious and it is amusing they will nominate a candidate who got rich off it. This guarentees it becomes and issue in the election and the Republican's lose big on this one.

This is not to say the Republicans are all wrong and the Democrats are all right but this is one of the worst things that Republicans support and it will become front and center.

I haven't noted any Republicans supporting this rule. I haven't even seen any proof that it exists. If it does, I would probably be against it. However, given the track record of turds like you, I'm certain you're misstating it.

Lying is what liberals do.

Sure. Like "Reagonomics" wasn't the biggest lie ever perpetrated on the American taxpayers.

Once again, I ask what bill did the dem congress send to Reagen for him to be credited with a special brand of economics?

 

[HUGGY]

Buffett Rule

Another other Buffet rule...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL9O0B0gzZE]Why Don't We Get Drunk and Screw? - YouTube[/ame]

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

In fact, in 2009, the top 1 percent of tax filers paid about 37 percent of all federal income taxes.

How much SHOULD they pay?? All of it??

Year $10,001 $20,001 $60,001 $100,001 $250,001
1913 1% 2% 3% 5% 6%
1914 1% 2% 3% 5% 6%
1916 2% 3% 5% 7% 10%
1918 16% 21% 41% 64% 72%
1920 12% 17% 37% 60% 68%
1922 10% 16% 36% 56% 58%
1924 7% 11% 27% 43% 44%
1926 6% 10% 21% 25% 25%
1928 6% 10% 21% 25% 25%
1930 6% 10% 21% 25% 25%
1932 10% 16% 36% 56% 58%
1934 11% 19% 37% 56% 58%
1936 11% 19% 39% 62% 68%
1938 11% 19% 39% 62% 68%
1940 14% 28% 51% 62% 68%
1942 38% 55% 75% 85% 88%
1944 41% 59% 81% 92% 94%
1946 38% 56% 78% 89% 91%
1948 38% 56% 78% 89% 91%
1950 38% 56% 78% 89% 91%
1952 42% 62% 80% 90% 92%
1954 38% 56% 78% 89% 91%
1956 26% 38% 62% 75% 89%
1958 26% 38% 62% 75% 89%
1960 26% 38% 62% 75% 89%
1962 26% 38% 62% 75% 89%
1964 23% 34% 56% 66% 76%
1966 - 1976 22% 32% 53% 62% 70%
1980 18% 24% 54% 59% 70%
1982 16% 22% 49% 50% 50%
1984 14% 18% 42% 45% 50%
1986 14% 18% 38% 45% 50%
1988 15% 15% 28% 28% 28%
1990 15% 15% 28% 28% 28%
1992 15% 15% 28% 28% 31%
1994 15% 15% 28% 31% 39.6%
1996 15% 15% 28% 31% 36%
1998 15% 15% 28% 28% 36%
2000 15% 15% 28% 28% 36%
2002 10% 15% 27% 27% 35%
2004 10% 15% 25% 25% 33%
2006 10% 15% 15% 25% 33%
2008 10% 15% 15% 25% 33%
2010 10% 15% 15% 25% 33%

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

We need to return to the 1913 levels and we'd see an economic boom unparalleled to any we've ever experienced.

 

[initforme]

This bill will never make it. The wealthy control the whole show and they'll be darned if they are going to let america become a land of equal opportunity. It simply isnt going to happen. EVER.

 

[Chris]

Why because it elimates obnoxious loopholes like the carry exception where millionaire hedge fund managers get taxed the capital gains rate on what is essentially a management fee.

The fact Republican's support this is obnoxious and it is amusing they will nominate a candidate who got rich off it. This guarentees it becomes and issue in the election and the Republican's lose big on this one.

This is not to say the Republicans are all wrong and the Democrats are all right but this is one of the worst things that Republicans support and it will become front and center.

I haven't noted any Republicans supporting this rule. I haven't even seen any proof that it exists. If it does, I would probably be against it. However, given the track record of turds like you, I'm certain you're misstating it.

Lying is what liberals do.

Sure. Like "Reagonomics" wasn't the biggest lie ever perpetrated on the American taxpayers.

Reagan's own budget director, David Stockman, said that the Reagan tax cut was a "Trojan Horse" to lower taxes for the rich.

Why should the idle rich, who DON'T WORK, pay taxes at a lower rate than people who DO WORK?

 

[Chris]

This bill will never make it. The wealthy control the whole show and they'll be darned if they are going to let america become a land of equal opportunity. It simply isnt going to happen. EVER.

It will happen, one day.

If God is with you, who can stand against you?

 

[initforme]

This is all going to come down to one class waking up and taking their country back. ITs called the middle class. This is coming from an owner of a business that has been around for twenty three years.