Posts: 39,635
Threads: 2,365
Joined: Apr 2007
Reputation:
111
[size=2][size=3]Read the last paragraph even if you skip the rest ~ this lady is a nut case!
You aren't going to believe this.
Madam speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock market profits (including Retirement fund, 401Ks and Mutual Funds! Alas, it is true - all to help the 12 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed Minorities!
Boy, are we in trouble... This woman is frightening. Take special note of the last paragraph. Is she really this whacked out?
Nancy Pelosi condemned the new record highs of the stock market as "just another example of Bush policies helping the rich get richer". "First Bush cut taxes for the rich and the economy has rebounded with new record low unemployment rates, which only means wealthy employers are getting even wealthier at the expense of the underpaid working class".
She went on to say "Despite the billions of dollars being spent in Iraq our economy is still strong and government tax revenues are at all time highs. What this really means is that business is exploiting the war effort and working Americans, just to put money in their own pockets".
When questioned about recent stock market highs she responded "Only the rich benefit from these record highs. Working Americans, welfare recipients, the unemployed and minorities are not sharing in these obscene record highs". There is no question these windfall profits and income created by the Bush administration need to be taxed at 100% rate and those dollars redistributed to the poor and working class". Profits from the stock market do not reward the hard work of our working class who, by their hard work, are responsible for generating these corporate profits that create stock market profits for the rich. We in congress will need to address this issue to either tax these profits or to control the stock market to prevent this unearned income t o flow to the rich."
When asked about the fact that over 80% of all Americans have investments in m mutual funds, retirement funds, 401Ks, and the stock market she replied "That may be true, but probably only 5% account for 90% of all these investment dollars. That's just more "trickle down" economics claiming that if a corporation is successful that everyone from the CEO to the floor sweeper benefit from higher wages and job security which is ridiculous". "How much of this 'trickle down' ever gets to the unemployed and minorities in our county? None, and that's the tragedy of these stock market highs."
"We democrats are going to address this issue after the election when we take control of the congress. We will return to the 60% to 80% tax rates on the rich and we will be able to take at least 30% of all current lower income tax payers off the rolls and increase government income substantially." We need to work toward the goal of
equalizing income in our country and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest."
When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied : "We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we have an estimated [i]12 million illegal immigrants[/i] in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long ways to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as 'Americans'."
[/size][/size]
Posts: 5,310
Threads: 183
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation:
2
Why is it that the only time Democrats can find some backbone is when they have their heads up their own asses?
Even though she does have a minor point lost in the fog and BS in there somewhere----5% of the people in this country DO control something like 80% of the wealth, and the top 1-2% controls, iirc, about 40%---the LAST thing we need to do is facilitate MORE illegal immigration.
'Member those Scandinavian countries with the high taxes and even higher standards of living I was talking about in another thread? Just TRY to emigrate to one of them . . . you need to speak the language AND have a guaranteed job to even file the paperwork!
We need to close the borders and sort out who all's here before we let any more in.
NANPâ¢
[cigar]
NANP™
Posts: 39,635
Threads: 2,365
Joined: Apr 2007
Reputation:
111
Well said NANP. I'm just amazed at the stupidly of some comments and the theory that to fix something we need to keep taxing people. Let's not solve the problem but let's TAX people instead.
The first thing they need to do is have these polliticans pay social security taxes like the rest of us.
I didn't want to post that thread but it just pisses me off that someone could say something so stupid and get away with it.
It hurts the poor souls who actually need help.
Posts: 7,351
Threads: 373
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation:
14
How about helping the people who work the hardest and pay the most taxes percentage wise. THE MIDDLE CLASS
I know I'm tired of caring the brunt of it.
________________________________________________________________
What's the point in arguing or trying to make sense of something that is lost?
Posts: 19,851
Threads: 1,833
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation:
50
GO SOCIALISM!!!
WTF, these idiots cant read? Rape the rich and the world collapses. Remember the Regan Tax Enactment Act of 88? (signed 10/22/1988, a date I will never forget). Remember the world wide recession that followed?
This tax act was supposed to simplify our taxes. Regan decided that instead of taxing the wealthy at 55% and giving them loopholes to reduce it, he would cap it at 45% and eliminate the loopholes. OK, what were the loopholes? Lets look at a few. The wealthy used to be able to buy herds of cows and lease them back to farmers. The farmers got cheap heifers at a fixed cost. The investor got several write-offs for the investment, farming and other stuff. This was outlawed. Over 800 dairy farmers nationwide went belly up.
The act also eliminated the deduction where an individual could buy trains and lease them back to various municipalities. Well, without the tax incentive the municipalities now have to float costly bonds.
Also various deductions were eliminated on business expenses and taxes imposed on luxury items. Over 20% (or was it 30) of the boating manufacturers went out of business.
The wealthy may be a lot of things... Stupid is not on the list.
Congress needs an enema. Too much shit.
Posts: 19,851
Threads: 1,833
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation:
50
ok, more comments... What the fk does everyone have against someone achieving the american dream? And why reward the lazy?
I know it's not all lazy people in need, but... hey, I live in NY & am the king of cold.
Taxing on a constant percentage is mathematically correct and fair.
If everyone paid lets say 20% tax. A person making $20,000 per year would pay $4,000. A person making $200,000/year pays $40,000. Works out nicely. Why does that person making $200,000 need extra burdens? Why bump their taxes to over 50%? Why all this extra stuff?
Why take away so much incentive to succeed?
Pass this tax Nancy and go down in history as the single greatest reason for the worse & total collapse of the American economy.
Posts: 7,351
Threads: 373
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation:
14
Skipper the cigar aFISHinodo Wrote:ok, more comments... What the fk does everyone have against someone achieving the american dream? And why reward the lazy?
I know it's not all lazy people in need, but... hey, I live in NY & am the king of cold.
Taxing on a constant percentage is mathematically correct and fair.
[color="blue"] If everyone paid lets say 20% tax.[/color] A person making $20,000 per year would pay $4,000. A person making $200,000/year pays $40,000. Works out nicely. Why does that person making $200,000 need extra burdens? Why bump their taxes to over 50%? Why all this extra stuff?
Why take away so much incentive to succeed?
Pass this tax Nancy and go down in history as the single greatest reason for the worse & total collapse of the American economy. I wish.
________________________________________________________________
What's the point in arguing or trying to make sense of something that is lost?
Posts: 5,310
Threads: 183
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation:
2
Quote:If everyone paid lets say 20% tax. A person making $20,000 per year would pay $4,000. A person making $200,000/year pays $40,000. Works out nicely. Why does that person making $200,000 need extra burdens? Why bump their taxes to over 50%? Why all this extra stuff?
As you say, John, one thing the rich aren't is stupid.
Find me someone in that 5% that's actually paying 50% on their REAL income. The Bushes are a billionaire family, something they tend to keep secret, and have paid less in taxes some years than I do . . . a single income schoolteacher.
*shrug*
Personally, I'd think the rich'd be a bit more grateful, considering all this country does, from personal freedom to capitalist economy to corporate subsidies to NAFTA, to ensure they're able to keep getting richer. But when you get down to the real money . . . none of it ever sees the IRS accounting office.
I think most people---educated, ambitious, hardworking ones anyway---hear talk about increasing the taxes the rich pay and think, hey, wait a minute, I'm doing pretty good here, don't punish me for my success . . . but when we're talking that top 5%, we're talking people with three or more fully staffed homes, favorite restaurants in five countries, private jets, and multigenerational family trust funds.
Honk if that's you. [really]
NANPâ¢
[cigar]
NANP™
Posts: 2,965
Threads: 93
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation:
0
we all know politicians are up to no good. what's depressing is when they think they're being really clever machiavellians, and it's just as transparent as all get out.
no finesse, no misdirection. the dems are killing themselves by putting up these amateurs. truly f***ing the electorate is an art form, and a lot of congress these days is populated by clumsy wannabes who think far too highly of their own skills.
i just picture bill clinton shaking his head, saying softly to himself, "tut, tut...nancy, nancy... that's not how it's done."
Posts: 150
Threads: 8
Joined: Oct 2007
Reputation:
0
Warren Buffett wrote a great article about the Bush Tax Cuts, where he shows that his secretary pays a much bigger percentage of her income than he does. The secretary also needs that money just a bit more than Buffett does.
http://money.cnn.com/2003/05/20/news/buffett_tax/
That's a very short version. I remember reading a much longer version.
I hope after penning that article, ol' Warren gave his secretary a raise.
|
