just a longer version of the "nothing" you previously posted...where is the calling for tax cuts for those you pretend were being treated unfairly?. As your reasoning becomes more and more transparent, they are suddenly no longer of any use to you.
Both parties attempt to buy loyalty by crafting expensive programs. They also want to build dependence on them.
With varying degrees of success.
Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime
But not a single poll EVER that wants US style H.C IN ANY OTHER UHC NATION
Weird, economists measure revenues and spending by the percentage of GDP, care to guess which 3 US Presidents the past 45 years POLICIES create the debt by reducing revenues AS they blew up spending?
F/Y 1980, CARTER'S FINAL F/Y - 19.2% of GDP, with total receipts of $517.1 billion. The total federal outlays (spending) for the same period was 21.2% of GDP
You say 'punish', I say put a cap on the lottery they won. If they can't scrape by on a few million and the best education available, I don't feel sorry for them.
Bush was president when he preempted all state laws against predatory lending. he was president when he relaxed the net capital rule for investment banks. hey, how's that explanation of how the repeal of GS is coming affected mortgage lending standards coming? .
US founders generally viewed inherited wealth with skepticism, fearing it would create an aristocracy and undermine equality, famously stating, “The Snowball will grow as it rolls” (John Adams). They favored meritocracy, with Jefferson advocating for taxes on wealth to reduce inequality and prevent the "perpetuation of wealth and power" in families.
- John Adams (1814): “As long as Property exists, it will accumulate in Individuals and Families. Accumulations of it will be made, the Snowball will grow as it rolls”. Adams feared a return to European-style class structures.
- Thomas Jefferson: Warned that without safeguards, the government would be corrupted, leading to the "perpetuation of wealth and power in individuals and their families". He supported the abolition of feudal inheritance laws (primogeniture) in Virginia to prevent the concentration of wealth.
- Gouverneur Morris: At the 1787 Constitutional Convention, he argued that “Wealth tends to corrupt the mind & to nourish its love of power, and to stimulate it to oppression”.
- John Hancock: Represented the practical side of inherited wealth, inheriting a massive mercantile business, which he managed while noting "money some way or other goes very fast".
- Property Rights vs. Inheritance: Founders generally defended the right to acquire property, but some, like Jefferson, considered it necessary to prevent the excessive concentration of wealth that threatened a republic.
- Meritocracy: They generally preferred a "natural aristocracy" based on talent and virtue rather than an artificial one based on wealth
The Economic Principles of America’s Founders: Property Rights, Free Markets, and Sound Money
Abstract: Although there are many scholarly treatments of the Founders’ understanding of property and economics, few of them present an overview of the complete package of the principles and policies upon which they agreed. Even the fact that there was a consensus among the Founders is often...www.heritage.org
You must be shaving or brushing your teeth
You don't, that is what you are being accused of genius
TRANSLATION: "all I care about is other peoples money"
and that would best be done by encouraging spending for goods even/especially when it comes to tax incentives
that seems to be what's really driving your rant.
In other words, you believe that Karl Marx was right when he said, "from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs". I do sorry for people who have that kind of thinking. More often than not, those who espouse those views are people who follow the view that they don't mind therefore it doesn't matter.
It is not the kids who paid those taxes.
Those are publicly traded companies, I think, so they will endure. Tens of thousands of jobs depend on those companies, should they be run by a mentally ill sociopath just because he is related to the founder?
