Obama Sends $3.7 Trillion Budget to Congress - Page 4

gimpy117 · 02-15-11, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

That's all it is, just an idea, and given the Dems fixation on it's probably been spun beyond recognition.

On the other hand your party has already enacted tax increases cleverly timed to hit post presidential election that will have the middle class paying far more.

far more? you sure? Im sure everybody would take an increase across the board if anything. Because frankly we can't pay for the programs we all want without either getting rid of them, or increasing taxes. At least were not handing more and more money to the richest of us.

and spun out of proportion? I read an independent report that was the source of everything I said.

August · 02-15-11, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimpy117

At least were not handing more and more money to the richest of us.

Handing the rich more money? Do you actually believe that tripe?

Allowing people to keep more of their own money is not the same thing as handing them money.

gimpy117 · 02-15-11, 03:39 PM

completely different August...but nice try. That proposed budget gives the already over advantaged more, and then taxing the middle class more as a result. It's class discrimination...if you're gonna raise taxes for the less fortunate..you better do it for the more well off as well, otherwise it's an unfair policy that targets a specific group.

So i'd say, that taking from one group more, so another more fortunate bracket can get deeper cuts is pretty close to handing them money.

August · 02-15-11, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimpy117

It's class discrimination...

Class discrimination is forcing one group to pay a higher percentage than another, pure and simple, which is exactly what you advocate.

UnderseaLcpl · 02-15-11, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Class discrimination is forcing one group to pay a higher percentage than another, pure and simple, which is exactly what you advocate.

No, August, that's "progressive" taxation. It's where we make the rich pay more to enhance social equality even though they end up paying less as percentage of income than the middle class does.

You can tell that it's a good idea because it has the word "progress" in it.

mookiemookie · 02-15-11, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Class discrimination is forcing one group to pay a higher percentage than another, pure and simple, which is exactly what you advocate.

Pardon me while I cry for the poor oppressed country club and yacht set. Can they ever overcome the burden of luxury and success and having to pay an grand or two in taxes? I sure hope so.

nikimcbee · 02-15-11, 04:06 PM

Speaking of progress, inflation has arrived. I went shopping last night, and food prices have gone up.

That's okay, we got free healthcare and we can just print more money when it runs out.

Aramike · 02-15-11, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Pardon me while I cry for the poor oppressed country club and yacht set. Can they ever overcome the burden of luxury and success and having to pay an grand or two in taxes? I sure hope so.

Ah, class envy at work.

Good to know that's what liberals use to define "fairness" when formulating fiscal policy.

And really, what about those rich lefties who are always pushing for such policies? What's stopping them from paying more taxes?

Aramike · 02-15-11, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikimcbee

Speaking of progress, inflation has arrived. I went shopping last night, and food prices have gone up.

That's okay, we got free healthcare and we can just print more money when it runs out.

Remember: food and energy aren't calculated in the CPI, so there's no inflation. Really. Obamanomics is working.

mookiemookie · 02-15-11, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aramike

Ah, class envy at work.

Good to know that's what liberals use to define "fairness" when formulating fiscal policy.

The rich rule this country - they buy the elections, they set the tone of the national discourse. "Fairness" indeed. Frack 'em.

gimpy117 · 02-15-11, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Class discrimination is forcing one group to pay a higher percentage than another, pure and simple, which is exactly what you advocate.

See thats where I think logic breaks down. Having a more fortunate bracket pay a little bit more isn't such a bad thing to ask. It allows programs, and lower taxes for people who need it more. Lets face it, america has always been very good to it's elite...so why can't they give back? especially when the wealth gap marches on. At the very least you can call it a necessary evil.

Doing the opposite, taxing the the middle class more, so the rich can get historic low tax levels is a complete travesty.

Ill post this again. read it. http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3114

August · 02-15-11, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Pardon me while I cry for the poor oppressed country club and yacht set. Can they ever overcome the burden of luxury and success and having to pay an grand or two in taxes? I sure hope so.

Yeah and when they overcome that burden by firing a couple more employees or moving another plant overseas where it's cheaper, will that stop your crocodile tears?

mookiemookie · 02-15-11, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Yeah and when they overcome that burden by firing a couple more employees will that stop your crocodile tears?

There's no evidence that tax rates and employment are correlated.

Aramike · 02-15-11, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

The rich rule this country - they buy the elections, they set the tone of the national discourse. "Fairness" indeed. Frack 'em.

Do you mean the "rich" or the "super-duper-duper rich".

For instance, Obama's attacking my income as well. I'm rather well off, I wouldn't say quite "yacht" rich but nice suburban home, cars, an office in the city, etc. I also pay for the kids' educations, am building a nest egg, and employ a few people for various tasks (a couple of which I may lay off if my taxes get much higher).

My wife and I have worked our entire lives to earn this, and we work hard at living WELL within our means, maybe even a bit below. Why should more of what I've worked for be taken away from me and mine in order to spare a little bit for others? Why can't I be allowed to decide how to distribute my wealth? Why should I have to pay more for the entitlement of some useless urban family which chooses to feed (well) at the government teet rather than earn anything?

By the way, I'm pretty sure the unions have infiltrated the political discourse as deeply as the rich. Where's your complaint there?

gimpy117 · 02-15-11, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aramike

Why should I have to pay more for the entitlement of some useless urban family which chooses to feed (well) at the government teet rather than earn anything?

I like your straw man. can i play too?

02-15-11, 03:39 PM	#48
gimpy117 Ocean Warrior Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Kalamazoo, MI Posts: 3,243 Downloads: 108 Uploads: 0	completely different August...but nice try. That proposed budget gives the already over advantaged more, and then taxing the middle class more as a result. It's class discrimination...if you're gonna raise taxes for the less fortunate..you better do it for the more well off as well, otherwise it's an unfair policy that targets a specific group. So i'd say, that taking from one group more, so another more fortunate bracket can get deeper cuts is pretty close to handing them money. __________________ Member of the Subsim Zombie Army

02-15-11, 04:06 PM	#52
nikimcbee Fleet Admiral Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Patroling the Slot. Posts: 17,952 Downloads: 90 Uploads: 0	Speaking of progress, inflation has arrived. I went shopping last night, and food prices have gone up. That's okay, we got free healthcare and we can just print more money when it runs out. __________________