Deleted
๐จ๏ธ 0
๐๐ป
January 1970
|
US ELECTION, by Deleted on Nov 4, 2008 23:24:04 GMT 1, I voted for Obama. Why? Because, whether he does it or not, we stand a better chance of "Change" with him than McCain and Palin. McCain's warmongering and Palin's stupidty will not help us in our fight against terrorism, global economic policies, and overall image. Mike, I understand where you're coming from, but I disagree that Obama is pulling the wool over our eyes. Sure he's selling the sizzle instead of the steak, but like FDR and JFK, he's a unifier and a communicator (Reagan-esque) and that's something America hasn't had in a long time. He's proven himself as a leader because out of no where he's managed to win the Democratic party nomination, convince cross party rivals and supporters to join his campaign, and has encouraged people who have never voted to come out and vote. I see McCain playing the same poltiical game that lacks innovation or leadership. He has been on the defensive since day 1 and continues to do so by campaigning in his red states even today.
If McCain happens to win, I'll try to be patriotic and support him. Even if that means from my bomb shelter with 50 cases of protein bars and 12 shotguns.
I voted for Obama. Why? Because, whether he does it or not, we stand a better chance of "Change" with him than McCain and Palin. McCain's warmongering and Palin's stupidty will not help us in our fight against terrorism, global economic policies, and overall image. Mike, I understand where you're coming from, but I disagree that Obama is pulling the wool over our eyes. Sure he's selling the sizzle instead of the steak, but like FDR and JFK, he's a unifier and a communicator (Reagan-esque) and that's something America hasn't had in a long time. He's proven himself as a leader because out of no where he's managed to win the Democratic party nomination, convince cross party rivals and supporters to join his campaign, and has encouraged people who have never voted to come out and vote. I see McCain playing the same poltiical game that lacks innovation or leadership. He has been on the defensive since day 1 and continues to do so by campaigning in his red states even today.
If McCain happens to win, I'll try to be patriotic and support him. Even if that means from my bomb shelter with 50 cases of protein bars and 12 shotguns.
|
|
|
|
US ELECTION, by leumasdarnley on Nov 4, 2008 23:25:30 GMT 1, I voted for Obama. Why? Because, whether he does it or not, we stand a better chance of "Change" with him than McCain and Palin. McCain's warmongering and Palin's stupidty will not help us in our fight against terrorism, global economic policies, and overall image. Mike, I understand where you're coming from, but I disagree that Obama is pulling the wool over our eyes. Sure he's selling the sizzle instead of the steak, but like FDR and JFK, he's a unifier and a communicator (Reagan-esque) and that's something America hasn't had in a long time. He's proven himself as a leader because out of no where he's managed to win the Democratic party nomination, convince cross party rivals and supporters to join his campaign, and has encouraged people who have never voted to come out and vote. I see McCain playing the same poltiical game that lacks innovation or leadership. He has been on the defensive since day 1 and continues to do so by campaigning in his red states even today. If McCain happens to win, I'll try to be patriotic and support him. Even if that means from my bomb shelter with 50 cases of protein bars and 12 shotguns.
amin stop being so dramatic have you ever seen 50 cases of protein bars you probably only need about 30 ;D
I voted for Obama. Why? Because, whether he does it or not, we stand a better chance of "Change" with him than McCain and Palin. McCain's warmongering and Palin's stupidty will not help us in our fight against terrorism, global economic policies, and overall image. Mike, I understand where you're coming from, but I disagree that Obama is pulling the wool over our eyes. Sure he's selling the sizzle instead of the steak, but like FDR and JFK, he's a unifier and a communicator (Reagan-esque) and that's something America hasn't had in a long time. He's proven himself as a leader because out of no where he's managed to win the Democratic party nomination, convince cross party rivals and supporters to join his campaign, and has encouraged people who have never voted to come out and vote. I see McCain playing the same poltiical game that lacks innovation or leadership. He has been on the defensive since day 1 and continues to do so by campaigning in his red states even today. If McCain happens to win, I'll try to be patriotic and support him. Even if that means from my bomb shelter with 50 cases of protein bars and 12 shotguns. amin stop being so dramatic have you ever seen 50 cases of protein bars you probably only need about 30 ;D |
|
|
|
US ELECTION, by manchestermike on Nov 4, 2008 23:28:04 GMT 1, Again, I feel with him it's a case of what you see is what you get, with Obama I feel people have been blinded by the glitz, glamour, hype and spin of his campaign. You look already at what he (Obama) is promising and can't fulfil... tax cuts for 95% of the population... getting totally out of Iraq are just two... they won't happen. He tells people what they want to hear and with the media totally on side people lap it up. I just think that people are having the wool pulled over their eyes by Obama and I don't like it Are you kidding? All he is doing is putting the tax rate back to the same exact one we had during the Clinton administration and having the rich pull their own fair share instead of the rest of us pulling MORE than our fair share. When 1% of the population create 40% of the wealth but pay only 20% of the taxes there is an imbalance.
His tax policy is cuts for 95% - this will involve taking trillions of dollars out of the economy at the time America can least afford it. He'll be taxing those people and companies who are needed to prop the economy up, the people who can invest, who can buy property. He says he'll be raising tax on capital gains and dividends... taxing just the people he needs to help the economy again. He wants to raise corporate tax stopping growth for these companies, stopping them taking on new employees. Higher capital gains tax, again stopping the flow of money when it need to be increased.
Doing this will take the US back to the days of Carter, interest rates in the high teens and the rest. Obama's team will not be as stupid as to not realise this... it'll be one of the first promises amended
Again, I feel with him it's a case of what you see is what you get, with Obama I feel people have been blinded by the glitz, glamour, hype and spin of his campaign. You look already at what he (Obama) is promising and can't fulfil... tax cuts for 95% of the population... getting totally out of Iraq are just two... they won't happen. He tells people what they want to hear and with the media totally on side people lap it up. I just think that people are having the wool pulled over their eyes by Obama and I don't like it Are you kidding? All he is doing is putting the tax rate back to the same exact one we had during the Clinton administration and having the rich pull their own fair share instead of the rest of us pulling MORE than our fair share. When 1% of the population create 40% of the wealth but pay only 20% of the taxes there is an imbalance. His tax policy is cuts for 95% - this will involve taking trillions of dollars out of the economy at the time America can least afford it. He'll be taxing those people and companies who are needed to prop the economy up, the people who can invest, who can buy property. He says he'll be raising tax on capital gains and dividends... taxing just the people he needs to help the economy again. He wants to raise corporate tax stopping growth for these companies, stopping them taking on new employees. Higher capital gains tax, again stopping the flow of money when it need to be increased. Doing this will take the US back to the days of Carter, interest rates in the high teens and the rest. Obama's team will not be as stupid as to not realise this... it'll be one of the first promises amended |
|
Deleted
๐จ๏ธ 0
๐๐ป
January 1970
|
US ELECTION, by Deleted on Nov 4, 2008 23:28:44 GMT 1, amin stop being so dramatic have you ever seen 50 cases of protein bars you probably only need about 30 ;D
Well, my wife and soon to be born daughter will need something to eat!
amin stop being so dramatic have you ever seen 50 cases of protein bars you probably only need about 30 ;D Well, my wife and soon to be born daughter will need something to eat! |
|
|
|
US ELECTION, by They call me Stephen on Nov 4, 2008 23:29:27 GMT 1, The sheer public adoration of Obama suggest it is time for change. The Bush/McCain/Republican formula is very tired at present and has made fools of the US in the eyes of the non-US world population. I know where my vote would firmly be.
I feel Obama is the only way forward for the country. The streets are making their voices clear and it is evident where it lies.
I probably am blinded by the hype but I know the last 8 years have been pitiful under Bush's reign.
The sheer public adoration of Obama suggest it is time for change. The Bush/McCain/Republican formula is very tired at present and has made fools of the US in the eyes of the non-US world population. I know where my vote would firmly be.
I feel Obama is the only way forward for the country. The streets are making their voices clear and it is evident where it lies.
I probably am blinded by the hype but I know the last 8 years have been pitiful under Bush's reign.
|
|
|
|
US ELECTION, by junkieart on Nov 4, 2008 23:29:21 GMT 1, Surely Hope .. is better than we have ? Your sounding v right wing to me? Which annoys me.
Can you base any point to your views other than spending less? Why has the grand US of A borrowed money from the communist China to bail out the greedy fat cats for ruining the worlds economy?
It also v funny that Cuba has now found shed loads of oil perhaps if the republicans can raid them...haha
Surely Hope .. is better than we have ? Your sounding v right wing to me? Which annoys me.
Can you base any point to your views other than spending less? Why has the grand US of A borrowed money from the communist China to bail out the greedy fat cats for ruining the worlds economy?
It also v funny that Cuba has now found shed loads of oil perhaps if the republicans can raid them...haha
|
|
|
|
|
|
US ELECTION, by leumasdarnley on Nov 4, 2008 23:31:07 GMT 1, Doing this will take the US back to the days of Carter, interest rates in the high teens and the rest. Obama's team will not be as stupid as to not realise this... it'll be one of the first promises amended Ohh no Mike don't shake a finger at Jimmy Carter he was a wonderful president ask Bill Clinton.
Doing this will take the US back to the days of Carter, interest rates in the high teens and the rest. Obama's team will not be as stupid as to not realise this... it'll be one of the first promises amended Ohh no Mike don't shake a finger at Jimmy Carter he was a wonderful president ask Bill Clinton. |
|
|
|
US ELECTION, by leumasdarnley on Nov 4, 2008 23:32:08 GMT 1, Bush was an idiot no one will argue that
Bush was an idiot no one will argue that
|
|
|
|
US ELECTION, by manchestermike on Nov 4, 2008 23:33:59 GMT 1, Surely Hope .. is better than we have ? Your sounding v right wing to me? Which annoys me.
I consider myself to be pretty central and to take things piece by piece rather than conforming to any right or left wing view. I'll look at policies on their own merit rather than just blindly disagree with political parties - Of course I am referring to UK politics.
As for very right wing annoying, it does similar with me, as do those on the very left. Extremism either way is not good.
Surely Hope .. is better than we have ? Your sounding v right wing to me? Which annoys me. I consider myself to be pretty central and to take things piece by piece rather than conforming to any right or left wing view. I'll look at policies on their own merit rather than just blindly disagree with political parties - Of course I am referring to UK politics. As for very right wing annoying, it does similar with me, as do those on the very left. Extremism either way is not good. |
|
|
|
US ELECTION, by Daniel Silk on Nov 4, 2008 23:35:57 GMT 1, Blame Silky, apparently he's responsible for everything... apparently  Silky's not to blame... anyone called Silky, is a friend of mine...for three reasons... Silky may be a stripper (strippers are an essential ingredient in today's society, helping the world keep track of it's small bills), or he's a smooth customer (and you don't mess with smooth customers), or he's simply soft to the touch (like a squirrel... or angel tears... or the ass of a care bear). I voted two weeks ago for Obama....and tonight he becomes President Elect Obama.... and all the rednecks and right wingers will feel what everyone else has been feeling for the last 8 years. America must evolve.
Yes everything is my fault ;D and yes I am a part time stripper ;D
See ya later down the club Adam 
Blame Silky, apparently he's responsible for everything... apparently Silky's not to blame... anyone called Silky, is a friend of mine...for three reasons... Silky may be a stripper (strippers are an essential ingredient in today's society, helping the world keep track of it's small bills), or he's a smooth customer (and you don't mess with smooth customers), or he's simply soft to the touch (like a squirrel... or angel tears... or the ass of a care bear). I voted two weeks ago for Obama....and tonight he becomes President Elect Obama.... and all the rednecks and right wingers will feel what everyone else has been feeling for the last 8 years. America must evolve. Yes everything is my fault ;D and yes I am a part time stripper ;D See ya later down the club Adam |
|
Deleted
๐จ๏ธ 0
๐๐ป
January 1970
|
US ELECTION, by Deleted on Nov 4, 2008 23:36:44 GMT 1, I've heard an interesting argument that the reality is that Congress is to blame for the ineffectiveness of Bush. But, there have been plenty of instances where a strong President has managed an opposing Congress.
I have a good friend who is just as brainwashed about McCain as we are with Obama. It's just as interesting to hear him throw out Ayers association references, ACORN terrorism metaphors, and how Obama is a liar for not taking public financing. He really hates Obama and honestly thinks that the end of the world is nigh in the event he's President.
I've heard an interesting argument that the reality is that Congress is to blame for the ineffectiveness of Bush. But, there have been plenty of instances where a strong President has managed an opposing Congress.
I have a good friend who is just as brainwashed about McCain as we are with Obama. It's just as interesting to hear him throw out Ayers association references, ACORN terrorism metaphors, and how Obama is a liar for not taking public financing. He really hates Obama and honestly thinks that the end of the world is nigh in the event he's President.
|
|
|
|
US ELECTION, by They call me Stephen on Nov 4, 2008 23:40:59 GMT 1, crazy, everyone is hoodwinked essentially.
no one vote, viva la revolution...lets make the free world free and not corporation/government led 
crazy, everyone is hoodwinked essentially. no one vote, viva la revolution...lets make the free world free and not corporation/government led |
|
pfffffffffft
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 1,472
๐๐ป 1,017
July 2008
|
US ELECTION, by pfffffffffft on Nov 4, 2008 23:48:11 GMT 1, Are you kidding? All he is doing is putting the tax rate back to the same exact one we had during the Clinton administration and having the rich pull their own fair share instead of the rest of us pulling MORE than our fair share. When 1% of the population create 40% of the wealth but pay only 20% of the taxes there is an imbalance. His tax policy is cuts for 95% - this will involve taking trillions of dollars out of the economy at the time America can least afford it. He'll be taxing those people and companies who are needed to prop the economy up, the people who can invest, who can buy property. He says he'll be raising tax on capital gains and dividends... taxing just the people he needs to help the economy again. He wants to raise corporate tax stopping growth for these companies, stopping them taking on new employees. Higher capital gains tax, again stopping the flow of money when it need to be increased. Doing this will take the US back to the days of Carter, interest rates in the high teens and the rest. Obama's team will not be as stupid as to not realise this... it'll be one of the first promises amended
No it will involve taking money from the rich assholes who havent been paying their fair share and readjusting the rate so those of us paying disproportionately too much compared to the top of the food chain will be paying the rates we should be paying.
THESE ARE THE SAME FUCKING TAX RATES AS UNDER THE CLINTON YEARS AND THE COUNTRY DID JUST FINE!
Wake the fuck up, the rich getting richer hasnt helped the poor get richer.
Are you kidding? All he is doing is putting the tax rate back to the same exact one we had during the Clinton administration and having the rich pull their own fair share instead of the rest of us pulling MORE than our fair share. When 1% of the population create 40% of the wealth but pay only 20% of the taxes there is an imbalance. His tax policy is cuts for 95% - this will involve taking trillions of dollars out of the economy at the time America can least afford it. He'll be taxing those people and companies who are needed to prop the economy up, the people who can invest, who can buy property. He says he'll be raising tax on capital gains and dividends... taxing just the people he needs to help the economy again. He wants to raise corporate tax stopping growth for these companies, stopping them taking on new employees. Higher capital gains tax, again stopping the flow of money when it need to be increased. Doing this will take the US back to the days of Carter, interest rates in the high teens and the rest. Obama's team will not be as stupid as to not realise this... it'll be one of the first promises amended No it will involve taking money from the rich assholes who havent been paying their fair share and readjusting the rate so those of us paying disproportionately too much compared to the top of the food chain will be paying the rates we should be paying. THESE ARE THE SAME FUCKING TAX RATES AS UNDER THE CLINTON YEARS AND THE COUNTRY DID JUST FINE! Wake the fuck up, the rich getting richer hasnt helped the poor get richer. |
|
|
|
US ELECTION, by manchestermike on Nov 4, 2008 23:52:33 GMT 1, His tax policy is cuts for 95% - this will involve taking trillions of dollars out of the economy at the time America can least afford it. He'll be taxing those people and companies who are needed to prop the economy up, the people who can invest, who can buy property. He says he'll be raising tax on capital gains and dividends... taxing just the people he needs to help the economy again. He wants to raise corporate tax stopping growth for these companies, stopping them taking on new employees. Higher capital gains tax, again stopping the flow of money when it need to be increased. Doing this will take the US back to the days of Carter, interest rates in the high teens and the rest. Obama's team will not be as stupid as to not realise this... it'll be one of the first promises amended No it will involve taking money from the rich assholes who havent been paying their fair share and readjusting the rate so those of us paying disproportionately too much compared to the top of the food chain will be paying the rates we should be paying. THESE ARE THE SAME f**kING TAX RATES AS UNDER THE CLINTON YEARS AND THE COUNTRY DID JUST FINE! Wake the f**k up, the rich getting richer hasnt helped the poor get richer.
Taking money from these "rish assholes" that are the people who are the EXACT people that the economy needs at the moment, the people who can put the money into the economy in ways needed to stimulate growth... The country was in a very different state under Clinton. Because something worked years ago does not mean it will work now.
The "success tax" debate is something separate that I have strong views on, but we'll leave that for another time. But I will say that these "rich assholes" already pay more tax due to the way the taxation system is
His tax policy is cuts for 95% - this will involve taking trillions of dollars out of the economy at the time America can least afford it. He'll be taxing those people and companies who are needed to prop the economy up, the people who can invest, who can buy property. He says he'll be raising tax on capital gains and dividends... taxing just the people he needs to help the economy again. He wants to raise corporate tax stopping growth for these companies, stopping them taking on new employees. Higher capital gains tax, again stopping the flow of money when it need to be increased. Doing this will take the US back to the days of Carter, interest rates in the high teens and the rest. Obama's team will not be as stupid as to not realise this... it'll be one of the first promises amended No it will involve taking money from the rich assholes who havent been paying their fair share and readjusting the rate so those of us paying disproportionately too much compared to the top of the food chain will be paying the rates we should be paying. THESE ARE THE SAME f**kING TAX RATES AS UNDER THE CLINTON YEARS AND THE COUNTRY DID JUST FINE! Wake the f**k up, the rich getting richer hasnt helped the poor get richer. Taking money from these "rish assholes" that are the people who are the EXACT people that the economy needs at the moment, the people who can put the money into the economy in ways needed to stimulate growth... The country was in a very different state under Clinton. Because something worked years ago does not mean it will work now. The "success tax" debate is something separate that I have strong views on, but we'll leave that for another time. But I will say that these "rich assholes" already pay more tax due to the way the taxation system is |
|
|
|
pfffffffffft
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 1,472
๐๐ป 1,017
July 2008
|
US ELECTION, by pfffffffffft on Nov 5, 2008 0:00:14 GMT 1, No it will involve taking money from the rich assholes who havent been paying their fair share and readjusting the rate so those of us paying disproportionately too much compared to the top of the food chain will be paying the rates we should be paying. THESE ARE THE SAME f**kING TAX RATES AS UNDER THE CLINTON YEARS AND THE COUNTRY DID JUST FINE! Wake the f**k up, the rich getting richer hasnt helped the poor get richer. Taking money from these "rish assholes" that are the people who are the EXACT people that the economy needs at the moment, the people who can put the money into the economy in ways needed to stimulate growth... The country was in a very different state under Clinton. Because something worked years ago does not mean it will work now. The "success tax" debate is something separate that I have strong views on, but we'll leave that for another time. But I will say that these "rich assholes" already pay more tax due to the way the taxation system is
1% of the population makes 40% of the wealth and only pays 20% of the taxes.
Sorry, this isnt a "rich" tax. This is correcting what went lopsided during the republican administration. I dont need to pay toward Bill Gates share. Warren Buffet issued a challenge , Warren will pay 1 million cash to any of the Forbes Top 400 richest Americans that can prove they pay less tax rate than their Assistant's, or Front Desk worker. No one has collected that million yet.
As we've seen over the past few years, trickle down economics doesnt work, it's creating a larger gap between the rich and the middle class.
Again, why should the wealthy pay LESS in taxes than the rest of us?
No it will involve taking money from the rich assholes who havent been paying their fair share and readjusting the rate so those of us paying disproportionately too much compared to the top of the food chain will be paying the rates we should be paying. THESE ARE THE SAME f**kING TAX RATES AS UNDER THE CLINTON YEARS AND THE COUNTRY DID JUST FINE! Wake the f**k up, the rich getting richer hasnt helped the poor get richer. Taking money from these "rish assholes" that are the people who are the EXACT people that the economy needs at the moment, the people who can put the money into the economy in ways needed to stimulate growth... The country was in a very different state under Clinton. Because something worked years ago does not mean it will work now. The "success tax" debate is something separate that I have strong views on, but we'll leave that for another time. But I will say that these "rich assholes" already pay more tax due to the way the taxation system is 1% of the population makes 40% of the wealth and only pays 20% of the taxes. Sorry, this isnt a "rich" tax. This is correcting what went lopsided during the republican administration. I dont need to pay toward Bill Gates share. Warren Buffet issued a challenge , Warren will pay 1 million cash to any of the Forbes Top 400 richest Americans that can prove they pay less tax rate than their Assistant's, or Front Desk worker. No one has collected that million yet. As we've seen over the past few years, trickle down economics doesnt work, it's creating a larger gap between the rich and the middle class. Again, why should the wealthy pay LESS in taxes than the rest of us? |
|
|
|
US ELECTION, by manchestermike on Nov 5, 2008 0:04:08 GMT 1, Taking money from these "rish assholes" that are the people who are the EXACT people that the economy needs at the moment, the people who can put the money into the economy in ways needed to stimulate growth... The country was in a very different state under Clinton. Because something worked years ago does not mean it will work now. The "success tax" debate is something separate that I have strong views on, but we'll leave that for another time. But I will say that these "rich assholes" already pay more tax due to the way the taxation system is 1% of the population makes 40% of the wealth and only pays 20% of the taxes. Sorry, this isnt a "rich" tax. This is correcting what went lopsided during the republican administration. I dont need to pay toward Bill Gates share. Warren Buffet issued a challenge , Warren will pay 1 million cash to any of the Forbes Top 400 richest Americans that can prove they pay less tax rate than their Assistant's, or Front Desk worker. No one has collected that million yet. As we've seen over the past few years, trickle down economics doesnt work, it's creating a larger gap between the rich and the middle class. Again, why should the wealthy pay LESS in taxes than the rest of us?
They don't they pay MORE tax
They are at a higher tax bracket (if not the highest) so pay a HIGHER percentage of their income as tax. They also earn more therefore pay a HIGHER amount of tax cash wise...
HIGHER + HIGHER = MORE TAX, not less
And I will say, if 1% of the population are paying 20% of the tax then the other 99% of the population should be happy they only pay 80% between them
Taking money from these "rish assholes" that are the people who are the EXACT people that the economy needs at the moment, the people who can put the money into the economy in ways needed to stimulate growth... The country was in a very different state under Clinton. Because something worked years ago does not mean it will work now. The "success tax" debate is something separate that I have strong views on, but we'll leave that for another time. But I will say that these "rich assholes" already pay more tax due to the way the taxation system is 1% of the population makes 40% of the wealth and only pays 20% of the taxes. Sorry, this isnt a "rich" tax. This is correcting what went lopsided during the republican administration. I dont need to pay toward Bill Gates share. Warren Buffet issued a challenge , Warren will pay 1 million cash to any of the Forbes Top 400 richest Americans that can prove they pay less tax rate than their Assistant's, or Front Desk worker. No one has collected that million yet. As we've seen over the past few years, trickle down economics doesnt work, it's creating a larger gap between the rich and the middle class. Again, why should the wealthy pay LESS in taxes than the rest of us? They don't they pay MORE tax They are at a higher tax bracket (if not the highest) so pay a HIGHER percentage of their income as tax. They also earn more therefore pay a HIGHER amount of tax cash wise... HIGHER + HIGHER = MORE TAX, not less And I will say, if 1% of the population are paying 20% of the tax then the other 99% of the population should be happy they only pay 80% between them |
|
|
|
US ELECTION, by manchestermike on Nov 5, 2008 0:07:06 GMT 1, Anyhow... enjoy the election all, I'm going to get in bed and watch until I go to sleep... whoever wins I'm just glad it's finally almost over by the time I get up ;D
Anyhow... enjoy the election all, I'm going to get in bed and watch until I go to sleep... whoever wins I'm just glad it's finally almost over by the time I get up ;D
|
|
pfffffffffft
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 1,472
๐๐ป 1,017
July 2008
|
US ELECTION, by pfffffffffft on Nov 5, 2008 0:43:35 GMT 1, 1% of the population makes 40% of the wealth and only pays 20% of the taxes. Sorry, this isnt a "rich" tax. This is correcting what went lopsided during the republican administration. I dont need to pay toward Bill Gates share. Warren Buffet issued a challenge , Warren will pay 1 million cash to any of the Forbes Top 400 richest Americans that can prove they pay less tax rate than their Assistant's, or Front Desk worker. No one has collected that million yet. As we've seen over the past few years, trickle down economics doesnt work, it's creating a larger gap between the rich and the middle class. Again, why should the wealthy pay LESS in taxes than the rest of us? They don't they pay MORE tax They are at a higher tax bracket (if not the highest) so pay a HIGHER percentage of their income as tax. They also earn more therefore pay a HIGHER amount of tax cash wise... HIGHER + HIGHER = MORE TAX, not less And I will say, if 1% of the population are paying 20% of the tax then the other 99% of the population should be happy they only pay 80% between them
No Mike, Warren's challenge was based on percentages not totals. All of the assistants were paying a higher PERCENTAGE which is why no one collected that million.
It's really simple. 40% of the income should pay 40% of the Tax.
Lets try it this way:
Person A makes $50
Persons B,C,D,E makes a total collectively of $50
Person A pays 20% thus paying $10
Persons B-E pays the remaining 80% thus paying $40
Do you not grasp how f**ked up that is? Different amounts for the same amount of money. THAT'S what's happening in the US economy now. All Obama is proposing is the wealthy pay their fair share instead of the rest of us subsidizing their summer homes.
1% of the population makes 40% of the wealth and only pays 20% of the taxes. Sorry, this isnt a "rich" tax. This is correcting what went lopsided during the republican administration. I dont need to pay toward Bill Gates share. Warren Buffet issued a challenge , Warren will pay 1 million cash to any of the Forbes Top 400 richest Americans that can prove they pay less tax rate than their Assistant's, or Front Desk worker. No one has collected that million yet. As we've seen over the past few years, trickle down economics doesnt work, it's creating a larger gap between the rich and the middle class. Again, why should the wealthy pay LESS in taxes than the rest of us? They don't they pay MORE tax They are at a higher tax bracket (if not the highest) so pay a HIGHER percentage of their income as tax. They also earn more therefore pay a HIGHER amount of tax cash wise... HIGHER + HIGHER = MORE TAX, not less And I will say, if 1% of the population are paying 20% of the tax then the other 99% of the population should be happy they only pay 80% between them No Mike, Warren's challenge was based on percentages not totals. All of the assistants were paying a higher PERCENTAGE which is why no one collected that million. It's really simple. 40% of the income should pay 40% of the Tax. Lets try it this way: Person A makes $50 Persons B,C,D,E makes a total collectively of $50 Person A pays 20% thus paying $10 Persons B-E pays the remaining 80% thus paying $40 Do you not grasp how f**ked up that is? Different amounts for the same amount of money. THAT'S what's happening in the US economy now. All Obama is proposing is the wealthy pay their fair share instead of the rest of us subsidizing their summer homes. |
|
Winter
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 7,155
๐๐ป 4,461
March 2007
|
US ELECTION, by Winter on Nov 5, 2008 0:45:56 GMT 1, Just been looking at this interview with Shepard Fairey. Some nice images
Just been looking at this interview with Shepard Fairey. Some nice images |
|
spirit
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 2,956
๐๐ป 516
August 2007
|
US ELECTION, by spirit on Nov 5, 2008 0:56:45 GMT 1, It's really simple. 40% of the income should pay 40% of the Tax. Lets try it this way: Person A makes $50 Persons B,C,D,E makes a total collectively of $50 Person A pays 20% thus paying $10 Persons B-E pays the remaining 80% thus paying $40 Do you not grasp how f**ked up that is?
Eh?
Person A Earns ยฃ50 and pays tax at 20% which = $10
Persons B-E earn a total of $50 which = $12.50 each. They also pay tax at 20%. 20% of $12.50 is $2.50 so they pay $2.50 each. 4 x $2.50 = $10 dollars
Person A earns $50 and pays $10 dollars tax
Persons B-E earn $50 and pay $10 dollars tax between them
is that not fair?
It's really simple. 40% of the income should pay 40% of the Tax. Lets try it this way: Person A makes $50 Persons B,C,D,E makes a total collectively of $50 Person A pays 20% thus paying $10 Persons B-E pays the remaining 80% thus paying $40 Do you not grasp how f**ked up that is? Eh? Person A Earns ยฃ50 and pays tax at 20% which = $10 Persons B-E earn a total of $50 which = $12.50 each. They also pay tax at 20%. 20% of $12.50 is $2.50 so they pay $2.50 each. 4 x $2.50 = $10 dollars Person A earns $50 and pays $10 dollars tax Persons B-E earn $50 and pay $10 dollars tax between them is that not fair? |
|
pfffffffffft
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 1,472
๐๐ป 1,017
July 2008
|
US ELECTION, by pfffffffffft on Nov 5, 2008 1:07:07 GMT 1, It's really simple. 40% of the income should pay 40% of the Tax. Lets try it this way: Person A makes $50 Persons B,C,D,E makes a total collectively of $50 Person A pays 20% thus paying $10 Persons B-E pays the remaining 80% thus paying $40 Do you not grasp how f**ked up that is? Eh? Person A Earns ยฃ50 and pays tax at 20% which = $10 Persons B-E earn a total of $50 which = $12.50 each. They also pay tax at 20%. 20% of $12.50 is $2.50 so they pay $2.50 each. 4 x $2.50 = $10 dollars Person A earns $50 and pays $10 dollars tax Persons B-E earn $50 and pay $10 dollars tax between them is that not fair?
No, what you are missing is the top tier who are making 40% of the wealth are only paying 20% of the total tax due on the $100 - the other 80% is being paid by everyone else.
I tried to use a simple analysis to break it down and show the difference between what the wealthy are paying and what the rest of us are paying. of the total amount due.
Let me try it this way, this way is probably more accurate.
On $100, total tax due should be 30% or $30.
Person A is in the top tier and makes $50 of that $100 and pays 20% of that $30 tax - thus paying $6
Persons B,C,D,E make the other $50 of that 100 and end up paying the other 80% of that $30 thus paying $24
Hopefully that is a better example.
It's really simple. 40% of the income should pay 40% of the Tax. Lets try it this way: Person A makes $50 Persons B,C,D,E makes a total collectively of $50 Person A pays 20% thus paying $10 Persons B-E pays the remaining 80% thus paying $40 Do you not grasp how f**ked up that is? Eh? Person A Earns ยฃ50 and pays tax at 20% which = $10 Persons B-E earn a total of $50 which = $12.50 each. They also pay tax at 20%. 20% of $12.50 is $2.50 so they pay $2.50 each. 4 x $2.50 = $10 dollars Person A earns $50 and pays $10 dollars tax Persons B-E earn $50 and pay $10 dollars tax between them is that not fair? No, what you are missing is the top tier who are making 40% of the wealth are only paying 20% of the total tax due on the $100 - the other 80% is being paid by everyone else. I tried to use a simple analysis to break it down and show the difference between what the wealthy are paying and what the rest of us are paying. of the total amount due. Let me try it this way, this way is probably more accurate. On $100, total tax due should be 30% or $30. Person A is in the top tier and makes $50 of that $100 and pays 20% of that $30 tax - thus paying $6 Persons B,C,D,E make the other $50 of that 100 and end up paying the other 80% of that $30 thus paying $24 Hopefully that is a better example. |
|
skelly
New Member
๐จ๏ธ 616
๐๐ป 0
February 2008
|
US ELECTION, by skelly on Nov 5, 2008 1:57:56 GMT 1, I have to say I voted for Obama...sadly I am predicting a Mccain victory
I have to say I voted for Obama...sadly I am predicting a Mccain victory
|
|
|
|
|
|
US ELECTION, by alsbabar on Nov 5, 2008 1:59:22 GMT 1, have faith skelly
have faith skelly
|
|
burnz
New Member
๐จ๏ธ 124
๐๐ป 0
October 2009
|
US ELECTION, by burnz on Nov 5, 2008 2:00:22 GMT 1, WILL BE COLSE I THINK BUT OBAMA MIGHT JUST WIN IT BY A FEW
WILL BE COLSE I THINK BUT OBAMA MIGHT JUST WIN IT BY A FEW
|
|
Greg
New Member
๐จ๏ธ 363
๐๐ป 233
April 2007
|
US ELECTION, by Greg on Nov 5, 2008 2:02:48 GMT 1, GOODLUCK OBAMA... My vote would go to you
16
52
Whoop Whoop
GOODLUCK OBAMA... My vote would go to you
16
52
Whoop Whoop
|
|
|
|
US ELECTION, by alsbabar on Nov 5, 2008 2:04:53 GMT 1, 84 -27
Pennsylvania - one of the key states turned from Republic to Democrat
84 -27
Pennsylvania - one of the key states turned from Republic to Democrat
|
|
stoopydex
New Member
๐จ๏ธ 45
๐๐ป 0
April 2007
|
US ELECTION, by stoopydex on Nov 5, 2008 2:09:37 GMT 1, I know I probably look like the real oddball, I voted for Bob Barr the libertarian candidate. I believe the only real change is through smaller government. I don't care if I am voting for someone I know is going to loose I just can't vote for two candidates I don't want as president, they both represent giant government.
I know I probably look like the real oddball, I voted for Bob Barr the libertarian candidate. I believe the only real change is through smaller government. I don't care if I am voting for someone I know is going to loose I just can't vote for two candidates I don't want as president, they both represent giant government.
|
|
etched
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 2,302
๐๐ป 72
February 2008
|
US ELECTION, by etched on Nov 5, 2008 2:11:02 GMT 1, I have to say I voted for Obama...sadly I am predicting a Mccain victory
you on kethamine ?
I have to say I voted for Obama...sadly I am predicting a Mccain victory you on kethamine ? |
|
Greg
New Member
๐จ๏ธ 363
๐๐ป 233
April 2007
|
US ELECTION, by Greg on Nov 5, 2008 2:14:56 GMT 1, Next time it will be ARNIE....
"I need you clothes, your boots and you motorcycle!" ;D
Next time it will be ARNIE....
"I need you clothes, your boots and you motorcycle!" ;D
|
|
|
|
US ELECTION, by mose on Nov 5, 2008 2:32:33 GMT 1, Pennsylvania - one of the key states turned from Republic to Democrat
No true. Pennsylvania has been Democratic for 20 years.
There is almost no chance of a McCain victory at this point. If Virginia or North Carolina go Democratic, then there is no chance.
Pennsylvania - one of the key states turned from Republic to Democrat No true. Pennsylvania has been Democratic for 20 years. There is almost no chance of a McCain victory at this point. If Virginia or North Carolina go Democratic, then there is no chance. |
|
