edthecynic
Censored for Cynicism
- Oct 20, 2008
- 43,044
- 6,888
- 1,830
Soak the Rich, Lose the Rich
- Thread starter ozzmdj
- Start date
i'm not arguing against the cbo, i am agreeing with them mm?
The CBO is who said, FISCAL YEAR.....not me!!!! and the fiscal year ends sept 30 every year and begins oct 1....so fiscal 2009 began oct 1 2008....
We said the economy was falling apart and you said things were great. We told you that NAFTA was going to hurt the middle class and you kept bragging that corporate profits were up and we were benefitting from the cheap goods. Well, no one is buying shit my friend.
You were either lying or wrong all the way up until November 2008. Then if you kept denying the facts, you would have lost the election for being ignorant. So at the last minute you finally started admitting the truth, only you tried to blame Pelosi & Reed instead of the GOP who ruled for 6 straight years. 8 if you count Bush's last 2 years.
Economics, or S&D don't really add up when you are talking about things like gas prices. Its not an exact science. Let me explain. Last year they raised gas prices when Isreal flew over Iran. What a joke. Or they spiked the prices a year after Katrina in FEAR that another category 5 might occur? Speculation! In other words, they can use any news from the day before to raise prices. That's called speculation. Plus, anyone who knows how energy prices are set, knows you don't know what the **** you are talking about. Plus, there is no competition. The oil companies basically have a monopoly. Sure there are many gas companies, but we all know they are in collusion together. If you don't know, now you know. Same as we know OPEC is a monopoly. So sometimes S&D don't mean dick. There was no gas shortage yet the prices tripled?
And if you understand economics, explain to me this. The gas companies said that S&D was why prices went up and that they weren't gouging us. If that were true, then their profits wouldn't have gone up. They would have simply passed on the added costs to us and their profits wouldn't have quadrupled. Isn't that true mr. Smartypants?
Yea, I got the feeling he was talking down to us as an "economic expert" too Shogun.
Well lets see him explain. Lets expose him for the ignorant bastard he is.
edthecynic
Censored for Cynicism
- Oct 20, 2008
- 43,044
- 6,888
- 1,830
First you claim Bush's 5 trillion added to the national debt the last 8 years would be quadrupled this term, but when challenged to back your parroted GOP hate radio lie, you switched to the annual deficit. But since that doesn't help you either, you dishonestly used the phony annual deficit that Bush used which doesn't include spending on Iraq or Katrina because he knows CON$ are too STUPID to do simple arithmetic.
If you simply take Bush's 5 trillion of new debt over his 8 years and divide by 8 you get an average of $625 billion per year annual deficit.
Quadruple that and you get 2.5 trillion. The CBO does not project a 2.5 trillion annual deficit for the current budget.
No stat from any CON$ervative source can ever be trusted.
I remember Obama saying he would include the wars in his budget. Are righties ignoring this fact? Because that was my fear when I heard Obama was going to do that. Because you know Rush/O'Reilly/Hannity aren't going to tell voters this if it is true.
So are they counting Iraq spending? If they are, I just want to say I KNEW IT!!
Also, I heard Obama has only spent 10% of the $700 billion stimulus bill so far. In other words, he isn't pissing away the money recklessly like Bush and the Tom Delay GOP did when they ran the entire government. They had zero oversite. And the GOP aren't talking shit about the stimulus because they know the projects are probably good ones and long overdue.
HUGGY
I Post Because I Care
You are a piece of shit ******. You neg repped me for saying I don't mind paying taxes? As an American you are worthless. Too bad the internet is the only place you can get in. What a pathetic loser in a pink tutu. It is too bad there aren't bounties on sacks of liquid crap like you.
Xenophon
Gone and forgotten
You still cling to the nonsense that there is a difference between the parties, until you shit that notion out of your brain, you will get nowhere.
Its only taken 6 months, keep up with current events.
I notice you always try to add some sex comment to posts, stop trying to over compensate.
Your one inch ain't ever getting bigger, live with it.
EriktheRed
Eh...
Randian bullsihit.
Here's my response:
MaggieMae
Reality bits
- Apr 3, 2009
- 24,043
- 1,635
- 48
Why should millionnaires/billionnaires have special ways to hide their money and avoid taxes?
chanel
Silver Member
And they always will... So the doctor, electrician, accountant, etc. making $250K will be carrying the load for the 95%. But hey - small businesses only employ the majority of US workers. right?
ozzmdj
Senior Member
- Thread starter
- #55
Read and learn kooks.....States of Opportunity - WSJ.com
jeffrockit
Senior Member
- Nov 16, 2008
- 1,341
- 165
- 48
You mean the ones (lobbyists) that Obama said would not find a job in his administration, but have.
edthecynic
Censored for Cynicism
- Oct 20, 2008
- 43,044
- 6,888
- 1,830
If you are truly rich, or more accurately WEALTHY, you pay no taxes. Even LimpBoy admits it. But it's not as hard as LimpBoy would have you believe, CON$ never tell the whole truth.
You need only know how the wealthy pervert the charity deduction and then take advantage of the deduction yourself. You use your "charity" to accumulate and protect your wealth.
Mrs. Clinton Honest About Taxes
August 7, 2007
CALLER: And, you know, and the way our tax system works, we have an overly complex system, which in and of itself is a problem, but the way our tax system works and the way the tax laws are written, it's based on a few kind of like hinge numbers like adjusted gross income and taxable income, and while the soak the rich -- or however you choose to describe it -- really doesn't come down that way. It really comes down to much lower income levels.
RUSH: It does, exactly, and here's the dirty little secret if you ever to pull it off. It's hard. This is why most people don't understand the tax-the-rich business. You've got to structure your life so you have no "earned" income. I'm out of time. I'll explain that. There's a category called earned income versus other kinds of income. Earned income is what the income tax rate is on. That's how "the rich" do it. They don't have "earned" income.
END TRANSCRIPT
The Truth About Taxes
The Truth About Taxes
August 6, 2007
RUSH: But there's no tax on wealth. There is a tax on income, and the tax on income is designed to keep everybody who is not wealthy from getting there.
Yeah that's about it.
The middle and upper middle class pays the lions share of the Federal taxes. And in terms of the percentage of their incomes paid in all taxes, they definitely are the most oppressed by taxes, too.
Sadly so many of them are brainwashed enough to imagine that one day they'll be among the truly superrich, so they continue to support the party which continues to give tax breaks to billionaires, thus necessitating that the merely comfortably affluent must pay even more taxes.
Ironic, isn't it?
These threads are hilarious. Why anyone would defend the rich and wealthy is beyond me, it is sorta like 'the sermon on the mount' has been reversed and it is the rich who need our help. Too funny, actually rather absurd.
I know enough rich to know they sure as hell don't need your help. A few may wish the market went up a bit but unless you can do that you'll need to stick with prayer, animal sacrifice, and inane threads in cyberspace. LMAO
The rich get rich because of their merit.
"The conclusion is that, if anything, tax increases on higher-income families are the least damaging mechanism for closing state fiscal deficits in the short run. Reductions in government spending on goods and services, or reductions in transfer payments to lower-income families, are likely to be more damaging to the economy in the short run than tax increases focused on higher-income families. In any case, in terms of how counter-productive they are, there is no automatic preference for spending reductions rather than tax increases."
Spending Cuts Vs. Tax Increases at the State Level, 10/30/01
"There is no historical evidence that tax cuts spur economic growth. The highest period of growth in U.S. history (1933-1973) also saw its highest tax rates on the rich: 70 to 91 percent. During this period, the general tax rate climbed as well, but it reached a plateau in 1969, and growth slowed down five years later. Almost all rich nations have higher general taxes than the U.S., and they are growing faster as well."
Tax cuts spur economic growth
Inequality on the March by J. Bradford DeLong Project Syndicate
Firedoglake » Newsflash: Ronald Reagan Raised Taxes (You Idiots)
I know enough rich to know they sure as hell don't need your help. A few may wish the market went up a bit but unless you can do that you'll need to stick with prayer, animal sacrifice, and inane threads in cyberspace. LMAO
The rich get rich because of their merit.
"The conclusion is that, if anything, tax increases on higher-income families are the least damaging mechanism for closing state fiscal deficits in the short run. Reductions in government spending on goods and services, or reductions in transfer payments to lower-income families, are likely to be more damaging to the economy in the short run than tax increases focused on higher-income families. In any case, in terms of how counter-productive they are, there is no automatic preference for spending reductions rather than tax increases."
Spending Cuts Vs. Tax Increases at the State Level, 10/30/01
"There is no historical evidence that tax cuts spur economic growth. The highest period of growth in U.S. history (1933-1973) also saw its highest tax rates on the rich: 70 to 91 percent. During this period, the general tax rate climbed as well, but it reached a plateau in 1969, and growth slowed down five years later. Almost all rich nations have higher general taxes than the U.S., and they are growing faster as well."
Tax cuts spur economic growth
Inequality on the March by J. Bradford DeLong Project Syndicate
Firedoglake » Newsflash: Ronald Reagan Raised Taxes (You Idiots)
Last edited:
Similar threads
New Topics
-
The war you're watching isn't a war. What unrestricted US warfare actually looks like.- Started by Anomalism
- Replies: 10
-
Donald Trump scores migrant deportation win- Started by 1srelluc
- Replies: 0
