--
"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical
minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which
holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd
by the clean end."

"Jim" wrote in message
...
wrote:

I think that is why they want to let the Bush tax cuts expire. They
keep saying this only affects the super rich but it is also a rise of
rates across the board. Everyone's tax bill will go up.

Obviously the Dems will put forward a bill to keep rates the same for
those making less than $250,000. That's an Obama promise.
Then watch the Reps try to block that.
Obama can't lose. Except with the Fox "news" channel viewers.
You're either joking or incredibly naive.

Jim - Sometime politician. Especially when the writing is on the wall.


For the 43% who pay nothing now, a 50% increase won't hurt at all.

On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:17:25 -0500, Jim wrote:

wrote:

I think that is why they want to let the Bush tax cuts expire. They
keep saying this only affects the super rich but it is also a rise of
rates across the board. Everyone's tax bill will go up.

Obviously the Dems will put forward a bill to keep rates the same for
those making less than $250,000. That's an Obama promise.
Then watch the Reps try to block that.
Obama can't lose. Except with the Fox "news" channel viewers.
You're either joking or incredibly naive.

Jim - Sometime politician. Especially when the writing is on the wall.


unfortunately the american electorate is as dumb as the proverbial
post. i was listening to NPR the other day. an unemployed guy was
planning to vote for the GOP because he ran out of benefits and they
hadnt been extended.

he was too stupid to realize it was the GOP that torpedeoed them.

fortunately, the electorate blames bush, not obama, for the depression

On Jul 16, 9:54*am, bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:17:25 -0500, Jim wrote:
wrote:

I think that is why they want to let the Bush tax cuts expire. They
keep saying this only affects the super rich but it is also a rise of
rates across the board. Everyone's tax bill will go up.

Obviously the Dems will put forward a bill to keep rates the same for
those making less than $250,000. *That's an Obama promise.
Then watch the Reps try to block that.
Obama can't lose. *Except with the Fox "news" channel viewers.
You're either joking or incredibly naive.

Jim - Sometime politician. *Especially when the writing is on the wall..


unfortunately the american electorate is as dumb as the proverbial
post.

Correct, Obama is the proof of that.

fortunately, the electorate blames bush, not obama, for the depression

If true, more proof. Huh.

On 7/16/10 1:37 PM, Jack wrote:
On Jul 16, 9:54 am, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:17:25 -0500, wrote:
wrote:

I think that is why they want to let the Bush tax cuts expire. They
keep saying this only affects the super rich but it is also a rise of
rates across the board. Everyone's tax bill will go up.

Obviously the Dems will put forward a bill to keep rates the same for
those making less than $250,000. That's an Obama promise.
Then watch the Reps try to block that.
Obama can't lose. Except with the Fox "news" channel viewers.
You're either joking or incredibly naive.

Jim - Sometime politician. Especially when the writing is on the wall.


unfortunately the american electorate is as dumb as the proverbial
post.

Correct, Obama is the proof of that.



Jackoff believes that john "i was for it before I was against it" of
senilityville and sarah "yes I am as dumb as a doorknob but I do rile up
the base" palin would have been better.

In article ,
says...

On 7/16/10 1:37 PM, Jack wrote:
On Jul 16, 9:54 am, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:17:25 -0500, wrote:
wrote:

I think that is why they want to let the Bush tax cuts expire. They
keep saying this only affects the super rich but it is also a rise of
rates across the board. Everyone's tax bill will go up.

Obviously the Dems will put forward a bill to keep rates the same for
those making less than $250,000. That's an Obama promise.
Then watch the Reps try to block that.
Obama can't lose. Except with the Fox "news" channel viewers.
You're either joking or incredibly naive.

Jim - Sometime politician. Especially when the writing is on the wall.


unfortunately the american electorate is as dumb as the proverbial
post.

Correct, Obama is the proof of that.



Jackoff believes that john "i was for it before I was against it" of
senilityville and sarah "yes I am as dumb as a doorknob but I do rile up
the base" palin would have been better.

Harry, fat buddy, wasn't it John Kerry, a 'merican democrat who said "I
was for it before I was against it"?

On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 10:37:14 -0700 (PDT), Jack
wrote:

On Jul 16, 9:54*am, bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:17:25 -0500, Jim wrote:
wrote:

I think that is why they want to let the Bush tax cuts expire. They
keep saying this only affects the super rich but it is also a rise of
rates across the board. Everyone's tax bill will go up.

Obviously the Dems will put forward a bill to keep rates the same for
those making less than $250,000. *That's an Obama promise.
Then watch the Reps try to block that.
Obama can't lose. *Except with the Fox "news" channel viewers.
You're either joking or incredibly naive.

Jim - Sometime politician. *Especially when the writing is on the wall.


unfortunately the american electorate is as dumb as the proverbial
post.

Correct, Obama is the proof of that.

vs 2 terms of bush? i dont think so!


fortunately, the electorate blames bush, not obama, for the depression

If true, more proof. Huh.

no doubt you say that 'cuz obama's black. no economist blames obama
for the depression. only the right wing racists do

In article ,
says...


Well, you are wrong, the lower 50% will pay it all. Folks who make over
250,000 aren't going to give anything up for the new taxes, they will
just increase their profits and fees to the rest of us until the whole
tax burden falls completely on the lower 50% of income earners. Do you
really think if you raise corporate taxes they are just gonna' reach
into their pockets and pay the difference? Of course not, they will just
increase rates to make up the full difference, every penny of it. In
theory it may sound good to the truly stupid, but in fact, the whole tax
burden will eventually come from those of us who make less than
250,000...


--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - We race for cheese!

I am Tosk wrote:
In article ,
says...

Well, you are wrong, the lower 50% will pay it all. Folks who make over
250,000 aren't going to give anything up for the new taxes, they will
just increase their profits and fees to the rest of us until the whole
tax burden falls completely on the lower 50% of income earners. Do you
really think if you raise corporate taxes they are just gonna' reach
into their pockets and pay the difference? Of course not, they will just
increase rates to make up the full difference, every penny of it. In
theory it may sound good to the truly stupid, but in fact, the whole tax
burden will eventually come from those of us who make less than
250,000...


Hey, that gives me an idea.
Raise taxes on the low incomes.
Eliminate taxes on the high incomes.
Then the low incomes won't have money to spend.
But the high incomes will be rolling in dough.
So then they just start giving away stuff to the low incomes.
The low incomes will feel real grateful.
The high incomes will feel real generous.
Very nice feelings all around.
I think that's a good platform for the GOP.
But maybe they already have that, but without the giving stuff away
part. They should adjust that.
I been thinking about all this talk about 43% not paying Fed income tax.
Looks like 50% of all taxpayers have less than $32k income.
But $32k - that's a whole lot of money right there.
Why ain't these cheap *******s paying Fed income tax?
Especially all the ones of them making $10-15k doing them flunky jobs so
they can get their kids fat on junk food and sodee pop.
Then their standard and dependent deductions for expenses adjusts their
gross to nothing, so they skate paying Fed taxes.
What's wrong with these deadbeats?
That's why we should flip the tax structure.
Everybody happier, and healthier kids.
Yep, a nation of boaters.

Jim - Tosk makes see things in a different light.

On Jul 16, 6:34*am, bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 01:33:21 -0400, wrote:
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 22:13:26 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 23:34:35 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

uh no. george bush handed the keys to the economy to his rich friends..
the 2003 and 2006 tax cuts benefited the ultra wealthy. *and the
middle class paid for them.

... and 43% at the bottom don't pay any income taxes.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...rpeoplesmoney/....

Yeah, the poor people. Sure is easy to blame them! But those rich people,
gotta give them all the breaks.

Again you miss the point.
If you rescind the Bush tax cuts, you also raise the tax rate of those
people near the bottom. For example the 10% rate is gone, replaced by
15%, the same is true of all the rates.

the bush tax cuts would remain for people earning less than 250K

the rich, who destroyed the economy, would start to pay their fair
missing

Someone making 250K is not rich, had nothing to do with the economy
issues, and is already paying more in taxes than others who earn less.

On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 15:22:17 -0700 (PDT), Jack
wrote:

On Jul 16, 6:34*am, bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 01:33:21 -0400, wrote:
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 22:13:26 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


the bush tax cuts would remain for people earning less than 250K

the rich, who destroyed the economy, would start to pay their fair
missing

Someone making 250K is not rich, had nothing to do with the economy
issues, and is already paying more in taxes than others who earn less.

someone's gotta pay. making the victims pay, like the right wing wants
to do, is hardly the way to go.

and the right hasn't figured out that the middle class drives the
economy. not the rich