A reductio ad absurdum of the idea of social democracy.
A reductio ad absurdum of the idea of social democracy.
Calypso Jones (11-07-2012),Mainecoons (11-08-2012)
that was good. Do you think any leftie will understand it? me either.
nope, none will
See discussion on Haidt: http://thepoliticalforums.com/thread...l=1#post180069. Obviously it goes right over awryly's head.
Warren Buffett, write that check. Write it now. Whatever you have - all of it.
Oh, i get it... the same old bs continues to be sold as some kind of defense for the people who make the decision to send their manufacturing jobs overseas to increase their bottom line, at the cost of their american compadres. Every job that goes off-shore costs an American his job.
Nobody as far as i know is pushing for the elimination of the bush tax-cuts for those making $250,000 more with the idea that doing so might somehow balance the budget. That's not the point, and the right knows it. The tax-cuts were designed to end in 2010, which of course, thanks to the hostage-holding actions of the congressional GOP members, didn't happen. That's the point. Legislation is tilted to the wealthy in this country, thanks to the wonderful work their lobbyists do. That's the point. This increases the gap, strengthening the wealthy, and weakening the rest of the population. This is extremely counter-productive and extremely damaging to the country. That's the point. The working middle and lower classes lose jobs, experience loss of assets, become depressed and struggle to stay afloat, while we wait for trckle-down to take affect. These people have been waiting for almost 8 years...
I know that almost every one on the right HATE Bill Maher, but he makes the point that i agree with (the bogus trickle-down theory), go to 3:21.
You might get it, but so many think that this has nothing to do with the increasing wealth gap. The working middle class has no say in whether their job stays or travels to another part of the world. But they are the ones that pay the price. For awhile these newly unemployed folks hunt for new job(s). But after a time, some give up and take the assistance offered to them by the government because their back is up against the wall. Now they are a part of the 47%.
...Just sayin'
Please note: verbage enclosed by < > indicates sarcasm
"There's class war alright. But it's my class that's making the war. And we're winning it." - Warren Buffet
No offense, but wise up. He (and the dems in Congress) gives a tax break here and increases a tax, fee, or regulation somewhere else. That's how they play the game. Then they can say they reduced taxes. They even call future spending on wars which have ended, a tax cut. We're not ignorant, ya know.
Always willing to learn, but don't pretend to tell me that only the dems play the tax game with the american public. That's how it's been done since forever. And here's a thought: maybe we shouldn't have stuck our noses in Iraq if we didn't have the money to pay for it, since it was a war of convenience anyway. Those two wars have to be paid for, and we're taking it up the butt now, in large part because of it. And what did we get for it all. Nothing to write home about.
The OP video tiresomely exposes once again the "fact" that if the government took all of the wealth accumulated by the 1% and applied it to the debt it would only cover it for a few weeks or whatever. Been there, have seen that before. So what? Does that mean that tax breaks for the wealthy should remain in place? Why? What was the purpose of the tax-breaks from the beginning? Why did the former administration initiate them in the first place? Officially, it was designed to spur growth, which it did not. Ok, so the program failed. It was designed to expire in 2010, but was not allowed. Why... what are we waiting for? What magic comes of this. It's pretty obvious that the true effect here is that the wealthy continue to enjoy increased tax savings. That's nice. But somehow they didn't require those breaks under Clinton. Yet they were still able to watch their money grow. So... what was the problem with that?
Please note: verbage enclosed by < > indicates sarcasm
"There's class war alright. But it's my class that's making the war. And we're winning it." - Warren Buffet
You do know that GE specifically as well as a number of other obama donors have moved overseas, taking jobs with them? You DO know this don't you? Obama doesn't have to say it, he knows it is a lie, taxing the socalled rich (over 250,000 per year) will not take care of any debt, but that is what he has insinuated to his followers. THEY think that is what is going to happen. it isn't. You along with other obama supporters are going to be paying more in taxes maybe as early as January 2013. I don't want to hear a word outta ya. You're already paying more at the grocery store, or yo mama is, and your parents are paying $2000 more per year for gas.
Well, i DO know GE has not moved it's Corporate Headquarters overseas. They're still located in Connecticut. I DO know that they have sent their x-ray business division to China along with jobs. I DO know that GE paid little if any taxes last year. Kind of strange when you think of it, isn't it? Why would any big multi-billion dollar Corporation even consider moving, when they pay so damn little in federal taxes here. I guess that's just one of those "business" thingies that's way above my head.
What other Obama donors have skipped town? Please list them and share a link if you can.
Please note: verbage enclosed by < > indicates sarcasm
"There's class war alright. But it's my class that's making the war. And we're winning it." - Warren Buffet