Story Comments
Posted by: slate 1 year, 8 months ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
Neutral
slate1 year, 8 months ago
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
crespi1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You mean like the $200,000,000,000.00 of American taxpayers' money Bush just gave to the richest, most powerful bank in the world, that has been fully implicated in engineering WWI for profit?
Your evil empire is crumbling tang.
You'd better tell your Neocon pals to initiate the "event" that will force America into martial law or Obama may win.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
ETproductions1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If everybody gets a 5% tax cut, that means that poor and middle income wage earners get very little. 5% of a taxable income of $20,000 (after deductions) is $1,000. FOr the top income bracket, 5% of a taxable income of $1,000,000 is $50,000. For the hedge fund managers that brought in $650 million on average, their tax cut was $3,250,000.
The small break the middle Americans got was offset by slashing Pell Grants for college education, cutting support to the states for police on the streets and other state subsidies, thus driving up state property taxes. You got NOTHING. The really wealthy got a HUGE bonanza.
Reply-
Neutral
ETproductions1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Report Says That the Rich Are Getting Richer Faster, Much Faster
The poorest fifth of households had total income of $383.4 billion in 2005, while just the increase in income for the top 1 percent came to $524.8 billion, a figure 37 percent higher.
The total income of the top 1.1 million households was $1.8 trillion, or 18.1 percent of the total income of all Americans, up from 14.3 percent of all income in 2003. The total 2005 income of the three million individual Americans at the top was roughly equal to that of the bottom 166 million Americans, analysis of the report showed.
All figures are from the Congressional Budget Office.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/15/business/15ri...
Reply-
Neutral
tanglang1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So what? If the taxes are raised by 5%, it appears that the rich are getting scewed and the so called poor are not. Either way, everybody is getting the same percentage back so where is the effing problem?
I love how you libs hate the rich but constantly support millionaires for your leadership postions. Do you really think that Edwards, Clinton or BO want to increae their taxes? You guys should also note that right now all the "evil corporations" are giving their money to BO and Clinton. That way if elected their company might get preferential treatment.
Reply-
Neutral
crespi1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Tang you poor naive thing.
The people you mentioned are not WEALTHY!
They just have a little money.
The REAL super-wealthy (starting at 10 TIMES RICHER than Edwards) tend to stay out of the light.
There are good posts up naming the 6,0000 people who meet at Davos and secretly divide America and the world like a pie.
YOU are not even NEAR their class.
To THEM you are down here with the minimum wage workers and will be given the same treatment.
YOU THINK YOU ARE SPECIAL?
Your Neocon masters will dump you faster than Ernst Rohm.
Thanks for standing with THEM against the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the American people. We'll remember.
The day of reckoning is drawing near. As is yours.
Reply-
-
-
mntnman444Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned4 Replies
-
-
Neutral
ETproductions1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This is NOT about hating the rich. It's about leveling the playing field so we fund government on tax revenue instead of disastrous debt -- $10 trillion and counting.
And it's about setting up a system like virtually all other developed nations have, and like we had until the the RepubliConMen got into power and dismantled it; a system to prevent the concentration of wealth in dynasties.
If we leave the current tax system in place and permanently eliminate the estate tax on super large estates, we are on track to become a banana republic. If that's what you truly hanker for, move to Hatti. Their government already has it in place.
Reply-
Neutral
amazed1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Excuse me, but here in CT, my "tax freedom day" is not until sometime towards the end of May. Now, maybe I AM just a greedy so-and-so, but it seems to me, that if I'm the one doing the work, and I'm the taking the risks, then I'm the one who should get the reward -- not be forced to hand over half of it to someone else who has NOT worked for it or taken any risk for it to decide how to spend it.
Reply-
Neutral
miklkit1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
When that bridge you drive over collapses under you who is going to come to your aid? The police? Nope. Laid off. The firemen? Nope. Laid off. A road repair crew? Nope. Laid off. You want that bridge to stay safe? Maybe you should get out there and repair it yourself. Or pay taxes......
Reply-
Neutral
tanglang1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I don't think we are talking about bridges here. We are talking about the hundreds of billions that we waste on bs social services and illegal aliens. Not to mention that the war in Iraq is costing less than the 45 year national average for military spending yet the left says it is "bankrupting" us so we need to further tax the rich.
Reply -
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Lurch1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
that only touches on income taxes.
how about SS, sales, and other regressive taxes? Notice DC never bases tax entitlements on the regressive taxes?
SS tops out at about $95K/year. How about basing `stimulus` tax refunds on that tax?
Every study I have ever read or seen on the subject indicates beyond any doubt that a federal dollar provided/returned to a welfare recipient actually is recycled more and more quickly through the economy than one that is given to the rich or the corporations. The poor spend it quickly and locally more often than the rich or the corporations. The rich have everything they need anyway, at least in America. The corporations take time to plan and implement investments (spending)
Macro economics.
The Bush tax break is nothing more than a handout to himself, his family, and his America-hatin` base.
Reply
-
-
-
loading ...
ETproductions
oldgringo
CactusAnnie
mcarpentry
nostalgia
tanglang
miklkit
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.