Nickname said:
Since MasterP wanted proof he is wrong, I am here to give it to you.
MasterP said:
NuRayZ said:
again it’s not all about money masterp, what did we have to show for those 8 glorious years of tax cuts, war, and spending?
The highest Dow Jones in the history of the stock market. I’d say that’s at least worth something…
Until you look at the fact that the Dow Jones DECREASED by over 2500 points while he was in office. On Jan 20, 2001, it was at 10659.98, on Jan 20, 2009, it was at 8077.56. Yup, seems like he did a great job.
Nickname said:
MasterP said:
Bitey said:
What I can’t stand for right now is the inability for conservatives to see that the obnoxiously wealth are killing our economy. Do you not realize that defending them makes you look like a complete jack *edited*? Let’s defend the guy who sits on a throne instead of the guy who makes an honest day to day living, YEAH THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE, GOD I BET THE GUY ON THE THRONE IS PERFECT AND HAS DONE NOTHING WRONG HE DESERVES ALL OF THAT MONEY!What you fail to realize is that the vast majority of the wealthy got it by honest, day to day living. The difference being they targetting their labor into more productive enterprises or simply rose the corporate ladder better. What you’re saying is that since they’re more successful than you are, as a nation, we should punish them with 90% taxes. How is that fair? Who determines what is and is not “wealthy”? What happens when people start thinking that anything above minimum wage should be taxed 90%? Surely you don’t think THAT’S fair…
Nickname said:
I hate to say it Bitey, but MP is right here. http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/rich_work_more_than_the_working_class If you work hard for the money and earned it… hard to argue with that.
I understand this will always be a matter of opinion though, I agree that a person that works should be able to keep their money, working “hard” is a pretty relative term though. I think I work harder than most CEOs and I make $10/hr, the cleaning lady at my work works harder than me and she makes minimum wage. Even you and MasterP I am sure work harder than most CEOs, I have seen your work ethic, so I know. Everything is backwards in my mind, it seems the less work that you actually do the more you get paid and the more benefits you get. Now some of these guys worked and worked their *edited* off to gain the positions they are in, I will never argue that they don’t deserve it. Others had it handed to them through favors/shady deals/daddy owned the company kind of thing. Until you can truly understand that nature of all of this and what it means it is really hard to make a true judgement call on whether or not people these “hard” workers truly earned their money. Again it is all pretty relative…. My main point is at the end of the day after all taxes are taken out if you still make 100 million dollar/years, you’re still rich as *edited* and you can suck my left nut if you want to whine about being taxed heavily.
Nickname said:
MasterP said:
Bitey said:
So here is the honest to God truth, when the economy is down, we need to tax the *edited* out of the rich. When it is up and we are in peace times, national debt is down, give them a tax cut. I think that is a fair solution for everyone.So you haven’t read anything I’ve posted here. Go re-read my first post which details how and why that policy doesn’t work and gives a historic example of when the exact opposite worked beautifully. I’m not going to waste my time retyping it, it’s not what you want to hear and puts a giant crack in your view of reality so I’m not really expecting you to read it. At least pretend like you did though so you aren’t saying the same things over and over after being proven wrong by your own historic example.
Nickname said:
Again MP is correct. When the economy is down you need to lower taxes to increase spending and be willing to absorb that increase in national debt. When times are good, raise taxes and cut down the national debt. This is exactly what Clinton did in the 90s and it worked great, but if we weren’t already in an economic upswing, raising taxes would have stalled out our economy.
This is where we will again disagree, this is because lowering taxes on the rich in most cases has been proven to increase spending, but right now, nobody is spending money, the rich are hoarding the money. Hence the problem. Nothing is stimulating the economy because the poor people aren’t spending money, the middle class is trying to save up so they don’t get reemed, and the rich are just saving up for no reason really. Rich people need to be buying *edited* like there is no tomorrow. If they aren’t going to spend their money, then guess what we have to tax them. This is why there can never really be a “permanent” tax solution the economy will always dip and change and we have to accommodate for those changes.
Lastly Clinton raised the top tax in 1993 from 31 percent to 39.6 percent. Some conservatives would have you believe that this was the biggest tax increase in history, but as we know from previous things I have posted this is not even the case.
“From 1939 through 1944, overall federal general fund revenue from corporate and individual income taxes, excise taxes and other levies rose from $4.8 billion to $40.5 billion, a 744 percent increase. If federal taxes were raised at the same rate they were between 1939-44, the government would have taken in over $5.5 trillion last year, enough money to virtually wipe out the national debt in one year.” (Keep in mind again that this article comes from 1998)
By the way from 1939-1944 the top tax went from 78% – 94&….. And were rich people still rich? …..Yep.
Nickname said:
Ok so really that is all I could comment on, and I only really found 1 thing he said that I strongly disagreed with so….