Main Menu |
Most Favorited Images |
Recently Uploaded Images |
Most Liked Images |
Top Reviewers |
cockalatte |
649 |
MoneyManMatt |
490 |
Still Looking |
399 |
samcruz |
399 |
Jon Bon |
397 |
Harley Diablo |
377 |
honest_abe |
362 |
DFW_Ladies_Man |
313 |
Chung Tran |
288 |
lupegarland |
287 |
nicemusic |
285 |
Starscream66 |
281 |
You&Me |
281 |
George Spelvin |
270 |
sharkman29 |
256 |
|
Top Posters |
DallasRain | 70812 | biomed1 | 63453 | Yssup Rider | 61114 | gman44 | 53307 | LexusLover | 51038 | offshoredrilling | 48750 | WTF | 48267 | pyramider | 46370 | bambino | 42977 | The_Waco_Kid | 37283 | CryptKicker | 37225 | Mokoa | 36497 | Chung Tran | 36100 | Still Looking | 35944 | Mojojo | 33117 |
|
|
05-24-2011, 03:28 PM
|
#226
|
Lifetime Premium Access
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,267
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshall
|
No the graph shows that taxes went up on the lower class under Reagan. That is what I said. To be fair they did go down since then but that does not change one bit the premise that concentration of wealth was implemented under Reagan.
Who cares if the poor do not pay any taxes (though you folks bitch about that too). They still make no money and have no real wealth.
|
|
| 1 user liked this post
|
05-24-2011, 03:31 PM
|
#227
|
BANNED
Join Date: Mar 14, 2011
Location: Wild Wild West!
Posts: 1,556
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTF
No the graph shows that taxes went up on the lower class under Reagan. That is what I said. To be fair they did go down since then but that does not change one bit the premise that concentration of wealth was implemented under Reagan.
Who cares if the poor do not pay any taxes (though you folks bitch about that too). They still make no money and have no real wealth.
|
Define "poor" for me.....
|
|
| 1 user liked this post
|
05-24-2011, 03:36 PM
|
#228
|
Lifetime Premium Access
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,267
|
You start making a couple of mil a year and then you might be accumulating some wealth
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshall
Define "poor" for me.....
|
Anything under 500k a year is wannabe rich.
People making 50k - 100k are just getting by.
You make 15 or 20k and life ain't good.
|
|
| 1 user liked this post
|
05-24-2011, 03:45 PM
|
#229
|
BANNED
Join Date: Mar 14, 2011
Location: Wild Wild West!
Posts: 1,556
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTF
Who cares if the poor do not pay any taxes (though you folks bitch about that too). They still make no money and have no real wealth.
|
A lot of people are upset that the tax code is used to redistribute wealth....it's not that they don't pay taxes, it's that they get "tax refunds" for taxes they never paid.......
many people don't believe others should be given their money so the others can buy iphones and big screen tv's........
many believe that those who receive "charity" from government should be obligated to do some public service, even if it's just picking up trash on the side of the road.....
|
|
| 1 user liked this post
|
05-24-2011, 03:50 PM
|
#230
|
Lifetime Premium Access
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,267
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshall
many believe that those who receive "charity" from government should be obligated to do some public service, even if it's just picking up trash on the side of the road.....
|
Maybe they should have to join the military to help drive down that cost.
Make those lazy bums work. I have no problem making people work for chairty, though then it would be hard to call it a chairty.
Not sure what you would bitch about then, probably the lowering of salaries and saving the government money. You bitch about the first and ignore the resulting second point!
|
|
| 1 user liked this post
|
05-24-2011, 04:01 PM
|
#231
|
BANNED
Join Date: Mar 14, 2011
Location: Wild Wild West!
Posts: 1,556
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTF
Maybe they should have to join the military to help drive down that cost.
Make those lazy bums work. I have no problem making people work for chairty, though then it would be hard to call it a chairty.
Not sure what you would bitch about then, probably the lowering of salaries and saving the government money. You bitch about the first and ignore the resulting second point!
|
military is a necessity and a legitimate government function, so I want to have a military that can protect us, and one that can defeat our enemies by a wide margin
you can't find a post of mine that says don't cut the military....military is still government and government is incompetent and corrupt....good thing our government usually goes to war with other governments.....remember those $800 for toilet seats?.....
|
|
| 1 user liked this post
|
05-24-2011, 04:02 PM
|
#232
|
BANNED
Join Date: Mar 14, 2011
Location: Wild Wild West!
Posts: 1,556
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTF
Maybe they should have to join the military to help drive down that cost.
|
Many poor people join the military and come out good useful citizens.....
|
|
| 1 user liked this post
|
05-26-2011, 01:44 PM
|
#233
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Dec 23, 2009
Location: gone
Posts: 3,401
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTF
No the graph shows that taxes went up on the lower class under Reagan. That is what I said. To be fair they did go down since then but that does not change one bit the premise that concentration of wealth was implemented under Reagan.
|
I realize that you never let facts get in the way of your opinions, but that "blip" you are seeing in the lower income groups tax rates was actually caused by increases to FICA tax rates (social security) that were signed into law by Jimmy Carter in 1977. They were scheduled to increase for a number of years and rather sharply in 1981, 1984 & 1988.
Where is my yapping dog video.
|
|
| 1 user liked this post
|
05-26-2011, 09:01 PM
|
#234
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: In hopes of having a good time
Posts: 6,942
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjorourke
Where is my yapping dog video.
|
CC uses it for his avatar.
|
|
| 1 user liked this post
|
05-27-2011, 09:03 AM
|
#235
|
Lifetime Premium Access
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,267
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjorourke
I realize that you never let facts get in the way of your opinions, but that "blip" you are seeing in the lower income groups tax rates was actually caused by increases to FICA tax rates (social security) that were signed into law by Jimmy Carter in 1977. They were scheduled to increase for a number of years and rather sharply in 1981, 1984 & 1988.
Where is my yapping dog video.
|
Nothing change the fact that I think it is not a good thing to concretrate wealth .
That is what has happened in the last thirty years, no amount of spinning will change that fact.
You lower tax's and then bitch about the deficit!
|
|
| 1 user liked this post
|
05-27-2011, 09:28 AM
|
#236
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Dec 23, 2009
Location: gone
Posts: 3,401
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTF
1. Nothing change the fact that I think it is not a good thing to concretrate wealth .
2. You lower tax's and then bitch about the deficit!
|
So does this mean you are retracting all the mean shit you have written about St. Ronnie screwing the poor?
1. One thing MUCH worse than concentrated wealth is the government deciding who has too much.
2. One more time: We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. That is what is causing the deficits.
|
|
| 1 user liked this post
|
05-27-2011, 10:15 AM
|
#237
|
Lifetime Premium Access
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,267
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjorourke
So does this mean you are retracting all the mean shit you have written about St. Ronnie screwing the poor?
.
|
You know me better than that. I think about Reagan, like you think about Carter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjorourke
1. One thing MUCH worse than concentrated wealth is the government deciding who has too much.
.
|
The wealthy are government. You think poor people buy election and officials?
That is why you limit the concertration of wealth. IMHO of course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjorourke
2. One more time: We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. That is what is causing the deficits.
|
Yes and Sir Ronnie was the one that started us on this path! He did not cut spending. Contrary to Atlas Shurgged held beliefs.
|
|
| 1 user liked this post
|
05-27-2011, 03:17 PM
|
#238
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Dec 19, 2009
Location: Buffalo NY
Posts: 7,271
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjorourke
2. One more time: We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. That is what is causing the deficits.
|
No, we have a revenue problem. Democrats keep getting elected because the American people like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, public schools, paved roads, Pell Grants, HEAP, social programs in general, etc etc etc.
Republicans keep getting elected because what the American people don't like is paying for it all.
|
|
| 1 user liked this post
|
05-27-2011, 04:20 PM
|
#239
|
Lifetime Premium Access
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,267
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doove
No, we have a revenue problem. Democrats keep getting elected because the American people like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, public schools, paved roads, Pell Grants, HEAP, social programs in general, etc etc etc.
Republicans keep getting elected because what the American people don't like is paying for it all.
|
:surfi ng:
|
|
| 1 user liked this post
|
|
AMPReviews.net |
Find Ladies |
Hot Women |
|