Political signs

Page 8 of 11  


I prefer that those who benefit the most pay more taxes. But to follow along with your reasoning.

But they most certainly benefit from a good public education. Better to have smart folks working their widget factory.

I'll give you that- but I wonder which my bleeding heart liberal state pays more for- food stamps, or a state owned ski slope. . . or a canal so those rich folks can go from the Atlantic Ocean to the great lakes in their multimillion dollar yachts.

We don't have a 'county hospital' - but the local hospital, subsidized by the county, state & feds, has a few VIP rooms that are reserved for those rich folks. And they are 5 star accommodations. not that 'regular people' don't have decent rooms there, but the hospital makes a huge fuss over 'rich folks'.

They don't end up in jail 'as a rule' because the cost so much more to prosecute. Ask OJ how great it is to be able to afford a better legal team than they can mount against you. And when they do - for their 'white collar' crimes- they cost a lot more to maintain than their counterparts in gen-pop.

The class warfare game is an old one. IMO the most prosperous time in the 20th century was the 1950's. To a large extent that was post-war euphoria- but the top tax bracket was 73-90%- and you could make an equivalent of over $100,000 before you paid a penny in tax.
Trickle down doesn't work. Somebody has to have enough money to buy your widgets or services.
Jim
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The benefits they receive by living in our society include far more than the simplistic ones you suggest. Their lifestyle displays this clearly.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob F wrote:

I think we're seeing it already as the investor class computes the future of a probable Obama administration.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Amazing. It is all because Obama is getting elected, not because of the obcene rupublican policies and lack of regulation that collapsed the economy? It is crazy the way republicans can blame anythig that happens on the democrats. It seems like republicans can make no mistakes at all. LOL!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob F wrote:

Let's get up-to-date, Slick. It was the PRESENCE of regulations that caused the current collapse. Specifically the Community Redevelopment Act "enhancements" in 1995 that mandated banks provide low (or no) interest loans to people who were simply unqualified.
The Republicans have tried, most recently in 2005, to impose oversight on Mae and Mac but were rebuffed by the Democrats. Actually, John McCain was a co-sponsor of the the '95 bill to scrutinize both Mae & Mac.
To paraphrase Al Gore, "Everything that should not be regulated was, and everything that was not regulated should have been."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
HeyBub wrote:

The above post should have read: "John McCain was co-sponsor of the _2005_ bill to scrutinize both Mae & Mac."
We regret the error.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There is another on-going regulation that has played a BIG part in most of the financial hoohas over the last 15 years or so. The Congress passed a law that mandated salaries over $1 million could not be deducted. In an attempt to "align the interests of top management with those of the shareholders", compensation in the form of "performance-based" and stock options was treated favorably for tax purposes. This had three results: It put a floor under the salaries of the bigwigs of $1 million. (2). It resulted in total compensation being a few orders of magnitude above what any board of directors would have had the balls to give the dudes and dudettes in salary and (3). It actually divorced the interests of the bigwigs and the stockholders by making 80-90% of their compensation dependent on ever-increasing metrics and stock prices. I don't think it is just happenstance that every major corporate scandal since then is to a great extent based on executive's actions trying to boost stock price and "performance".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kurt Ullman wrote:

Yep. It's none of the government's concern (or almost anybody else's) what the company shareholders want to pay their chief executive. Where the government gets screwed, of course, is when the president of a (relatively) small, closely held, corporation gets a huge compensation.
Suppose a company makes $10 million in profit and pays the entire sum to its president as "salary." Presto, no corporate income tax! If, however, the company paid the owner $1 million, the remaining $9 million would be subject to corporate income tax of, say, 30%. The residual $5.4 million gets taxed again as stock dividend.
This can be solved by simply not taxing corporations at all. Tax the profits after they are distributed as dividends. Or, if they're going to tax corporations, then dividends should be tax exempt since they were already taxed. Let's do the Obama "fairness" thing - tax profits once.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Maybe, maybe not. Many, if not most, smaller companies like that are Subchapter S companies which means they don't exist for tax purposes and everything flows through to the shareholders personal taxes.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Wow!
So any money that's previously been taxed should never be taxed again. That's amazing!
Why don't you stick to home repair?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

This is true, to a point. The banks were scared of falling afoul of that law, sure, but there were other things that should have been regulated that weren't. The latter point you will hear emphasized by Democrats; the point you made will be emphasized by Republicans. Nobody wants to admit that they actually share the blame for the current mess.

Indeed.
nate
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I'll admit, that I'm rather nervous.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I don't think Obama signs would put out useful heat. Rather, they would take heat from the rich, and use most of that heat to keep the White House warm, and you'd get a tiny warm feeling.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

But then, the Republicans plans and methods are 100% proven failures. In both foreign affairs and economic planning. They never learn.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Oct 22, 12:30pm, "Stormin Mormon"

Save the McCain ones. He might want to try again in 2012.
If at first you don't succeed...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
DerbyDad03 wrote:

Yeah. I save mine for reuse. I think, however, my collection of "Goldwater '64" material may be useless.
Oh well.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The bigger ones work well as Blankets for the homeless?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@invalid.com wrote:

I kinda doubt that any wacko or semi-wacko would take a chance on whether McCain would fight back. Many in his own party, however, expect Obama to be 'tested.'
Consider what we did with Sadaam. We invaded his country, evicted him from his homes, confiscated his fortunes, killed his children, exiled his family, imprisoned his friends and associates, and, after he witnessed all that, hanged his skanky ass. These actions should serve as a significant deterrent to other cheese-brains similarly inclined.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

er: "similarly inclined"
Similarly inclined to do what? What did Sadaam do to the US that others might be "similarly inclined" to do?
You used the words "fight back". What did Sadaam do that we were "fighting back" against?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
DerbyDad03 wrote:

## He made a face and it stayed that way.

## He made a face and it stayed that way.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.