Science and Technology news... :: View topic - Sing it: "Fifty Ways to Leave this Market".

Guest

On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 20:59:04 -0500, Starkiller
<NoSpamSKS_SKanz@hotmail.com> wrote:

[quote]
"You cannot enrich the poor by impoverishing the rich."

robin hood did:)

He only gave temporary relief and a little charity.

If you destroy the wealthy then who do you think is going to give you
a paycheck? The government that taxes you for their own paycheck?
[/quote]
A little more tax is destroying them? LOL. More straw man nonsense.

Get honest grow a pair.

Guest

On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 22:35:34 -0500, Starkiller
<NoSpamSKS_SKanz@hotmail.com> wrote:

[quote]On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 19:39:14 -0700 (PDT), Video61@tcq.net wrote:

On Oct 9, 9:01 pm, *Poetic Justice* <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-
Dog.com> wrote:
retrogro...@comcast.net wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 18:26:04 -0700 (PDT), Vide...@tcq.net wrote:

so far the free market has lost 2 trillion dollars alone out of 401k
plans recently.

and that was before today>s 700 point drop

What did you expect when Obama wants to Double the taxes on capital
gains.... take all your gains now before he gets a chance to steal
twice as much of your money. It>s only the smart thing to do when you
get a Socialist Obama that might actually win.

Be prepared... things won>t be getting better if Obama wins and taxes
everything.

ROTFLOL, high taxes on the wealthy helped get us out of the
depression, and the wealthy few, grew into legions under a high tax
regime. and a high capital gains tax is a safety net for the stock
market. it keeps wild speculative behavior, at bay.

You need to read legitimate history before you continue to make
yourself like an economic moron.
[/quote]
You could benefit too. Read for example how Hardings tax cuts fed the
Great Depression and roaring 20s abuses. Or how CLinton>s tax cuts
balanced the budget. Or how Bush and Reagan>s cuts bled the treasury.
http://www.treas.gov/offices/tax-policy/library/ota81.pdf

[quote]
Roosevelt made his relatively small tax hikes in 1935. (ie 75% on
incomes over $5,000,000)
By May of 1937 economic recovery ceased and a second depression
occured.
In 1938 only after the United States Housing (Wagner-Steagall) Act
passed, creating the US Housing Authority (USHA) to administer
low-interest 60-year loans to small communities for slum clearance and
construction projects and to grant subsidies for setting rent geared
to low-income levels in areas where local agencies provided 25% of the
federal grant, did the economy begin to expand again(June 1939).
About the length of time for such contracts to break ground.
The democrats lost 71 seats in the November elections in 1938.
In 1941 the Davis-Bacon Act was amended to include military
construction. The US went to war that December.
Thus creating the need for an ever increasing amount of military
construction projects.
In 1944 He raised the Maximum tax rate to 94%.
By February 1945 the country entered a recession.
After Japan surrendered economic expansion began around a month later.
Not due to high taxes but due to wartime regulations such as rationing
certain products ending.
After Truman won the 1948 election, a month later the country once
again entered into a recession.
Economic expansion did not occur until nearly a year later.

And just for fun, here>s a comparison of the Kennedy, Reagan and Bush
tax cuts.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/323.html

Interesting how the tax burden of the top income earners (over
$136,000) went up as opposed to what you all have parroted for several
years about "Tax cuts for the rich".[/quote]

mg · Guest

On Oct 10, 6:11 am, Starkiller <NoSpamSKS_SK...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 23:16:48 -0700 (PDT), mg <mgkel...@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Oct 9, 7:59 pm, Starkiller <NoSpamSKS_SK...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 18:26:04 -0700 (PDT), Vide...@tcq.net wrote:
On Oct 9, 8:17 pm, Starkiller <NoSpamSKS_SK...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 17:15:23 -0700, wis...@yahoo.com wrote:
You have read my messages for 10 days suggesting you get out of the
stock market. This does not mean you cannot get back, if and when it
stabilizes. Get you money out tomorrow am.

ted

Yeah, pull all your money out and place it in CDs or savings accounts
and let the banks invest in the market. :-)

ah, but its insured in the bank. stocks are not secure, they are a
gamble.

'A government big enough to give you everything you want, is
big enough to take away everything you have.'

so far the free market has lost 2 trillion dollars alone out of 401k
plans recently. and the free market has soaked up 2-4 trillion dollars
of bailout money from labor. you see, labor is bailing out capital,
because capital is so stupid:)
thank god for FDR>s social security:)

"You cannot enrich the poor by impoverishing the rich."

robin hood did:)

He only gave temporary relief and a little charity.

If you destroy the wealthy then who do you think is going to give you
a paycheck? The government that taxes you for their own paycheck?

"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said.
"We>re saying that for America to get back on track,
we>re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you.
We>re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

Raising taxes on the wealthy, or putting the rates back where they
were before Bush took office won>t destroy the wealthy. Building a
bunch of guillotines and cutting their heads off, though, like the
French did would.

Well, I>m sure the rich would have no problem whatsoever going back to
the rates prior to the Bush tax cuts. They would be paying LESS
taxes.http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/323.html

Learn your facts before simply repeating DNC propaganda.
[/quote]
Nonsense. What is it specifically that you think that site proves?

mg · Guest

On Oct 10, 6:42 am, jim <jim10...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote][Default] On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 23:16:48 -0700 (PDT), mg

mgkel...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Oct 9, 7:59 pm, Starkiller <NoSpamSKS_SK...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 18:26:04 -0700 (PDT), Vide...@tcq.net wrote:
On Oct 9, 8:17 pm, Starkiller <NoSpamSKS_SK...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 17:15:23 -0700, wis...@yahoo.com wrote:
You have read my messages for 10 days suggesting you get out of the
stock market. This does not mean you cannot get back, if and when it
stabilizes. Get you money out tomorrow am.

ted

Yeah, pull all your money out and place it in CDs or savings accounts
and let the banks invest in the market. :-)

ah, but its insured in the bank. stocks are not secure, they are a
gamble.

'A government big enough to give you everything you want, is
big enough to take away everything you have.'

so far the free market has lost 2 trillion dollars alone out of 401k
plans recently. and the free market has soaked up 2-4 trillion dollars
of bailout money from labor. you see, labor is bailing out capital,
because capital is so stupid:)
thank god for FDR>s social security:)

"You cannot enrich the poor by impoverishing the rich."

robin hood did:)

He only gave temporary relief and a little charity.

If you destroy the wealthy then who do you think is going to give you
a paycheck? The government that taxes you for their own paycheck?

"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said.
"We>re saying that for America to get back on track,
we>re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you.
We>re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

Raising taxes on the wealthy, or putting the rates back where they
were before Bush took office won>t destroy the wealthy.

What is 'wealthy' and where do they get their money? Bill Gates and
Buffet are certainly in that category. But what about the retiree who
has spent 40 years saving from their income in various ways. They
have a house and may even rent a couple out. They have an IRA account
and other savings. All of it may add up to several million dollars.
But, their income over years was often very modest.

Now in retirement, others see them as being in some small category of
'rich' that could certainly stand being tapped for more taxes.

What is the incentive for anyone to save anything in that situation?
If they do save anything, why would they make their savings known buy
investing publically in stock markets so government could observe and
get into it?

The point is, that to fulfull the Obama promise of lowering taxes on
everyone below 250k will suck a tremendous amount out of the treasury
and there are not enougn in those top numbers to pay the taxes.

Assume you make a million bucks a year. What are you going to do with
your money. Most people making that kind of money will save or spend.
What are the other options. If you save it in a bank account, they
lend it to others to buy cars or homes. If you invest in stocks, the
money increases the capital to capitalize for jobs. If you spend it
on a boat, some boat maker will hire people to makeboats.

This socialism of bringing real incomes closer together by really
nailing the rich bastards and then paying for the needs of those who
really need the stuff of life like free health is wrong and will kill
our economy. Study some history. In the end, the rich bastards are
either gone to other parts of the world or they become poor bastards
too.

We will see an exodus of wealth just like they had in Hong Kong as
they neared reversion to China. Go to many Canadian cities and see
the large number of Chinese who brought their money to invest in
Canada.

Building a

bunch of guillotines and cutting their heads off, though, like the
French did would.

Oh yeah, that will create a lot of jobs eh? And what did many rich
French do in response to this egalitarianism? They went to England,
Germany, the US, South Africa, and other distant parts with their
intellectual wealth leaving France all the poorer.

Do no - DO NOT try to say you are not a socialist. Now go try to find
any place in the world where socialism works to fulfill the promises?
And while you are at it, see who really takes it in the ear. Are the
promises of those coming in power really met?

The next step we will see will be a strong effort to become a
one-party government. Everything possible will be pushed to destroy
media that does not support the liberal/socialist line. Leaders of
industry will be intimidated to bully them to support stronger
centralized government. Anyone who is real competition to Democrats
will be marginalized and if possible criminalized.

Remember what I am saying when you see it. Fucking idiots who have no
understanding of this socialism.
[/quote]
As I have many times before, ultimately most all of the arguments over
taxes, boil down to whether you believe in a progressive tax system or
a regressive tax system. That>s true whether you>re arguing at the
water cooler at the office, or your brother-in-law in your living, or
on these newsgroups. If you believe in a progressive tax system, as I
do, that doesn>t mean you are a socialist. As I>ve also said before, I
don>t believe in the ideology of either the left wingnuts or the right
wingnuts. I believe in using common sense and intelligence to solve
problems.

I have defended the upper middle class many times on these newsgroups
going back for years. Here>s a copy of something I posted on March 31,
2007, for example:

"The top 1% consists of people making more than $328,049. An upper
middle-class, professional couple who have worked hard and went to
school half of their life could probably make this much quite easily
by the time they get to be about 50 years old and have managed to
slowly climb the ladder of success. What is telling, though, is that
this couple is paying at almost the same rate as a CEO, for example,
who is making $100 million. That>s an example of how the middle class
gets screwed, in my opinion.

Speaking of numbers, here>s an interesting one: The top 1% have 39.7%
of the financial wealth in the U.S. The bottom 80% only have about
8.8% of the financial wealth. However, most of the taxes the idle rich
pay is based on capital gains and dividend payments which are taxed at
a
rate of 15%. In other words, a billionaire cashing dividend checks
pays at almost half the rate as the upper middle-class couple who have
worked their entire life to achieve the American dream.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html "

Guest

On Oct 10, 7:42 am, jim <jim10...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote][Default] On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 23:16:48 -0700 (PDT), mg

mgkel...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Oct 9, 7:59 pm, Starkiller <NoSpamSKS_SK...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 18:26:04 -0700 (PDT), Vide...@tcq.net wrote:
On Oct 9, 8:17 pm, Starkiller <NoSpamSKS_SK...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 17:15:23 -0700, wis...@yahoo.com wrote:
You have read my messages for 10 days suggesting you get out of the
stock market. This does not mean you cannot get back, if and when it
stabilizes. Get you money out tomorrow am.

ted

Yeah, pull all your money out and place it in CDs or savings accounts
and let the banks invest in the market. :-)

ah, but its insured in the bank. stocks are not secure, they are a
gamble.

'A government big enough to give you everything you want, is
big enough to take away everything you have.'

so far the free market has lost 2 trillion dollars alone out of 401k
plans recently. and the free market has soaked up 2-4 trillion dollars
of bailout money from labor. you see, labor is bailing out capital,
because capital is so stupid:)
thank god for FDR>s social security:)

"You cannot enrich the poor by impoverishing the rich."

robin hood did:)

He only gave temporary relief and a little charity.

If you destroy the wealthy then who do you think is going to give you
a paycheck? The government that taxes you for their own paycheck?

"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said.
"We>re saying that for America to get back on track,
we>re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you.
We>re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

Raising taxes on the wealthy, or putting the rates back where they
were before Bush took office won>t destroy the wealthy.

What is 'wealthy' and where do they get their money? Bill Gates and
Buffet are certainly in that category. But what about the retiree who
has spent 40 years saving from their income in various ways. They
have a house and may even rent a couple out. They have an IRA account
and other savings. All of it may add up to several million dollars.
But, their income over years was often very modest.

Now in retirement, others see them as being in some small category of
'rich' that could certainly stand being tapped for more taxes.

What is the incentive for anyone to save anything in that situation?
If they do save anything, why would they make their savings known buy
investing publically in stock markets so government could observe and
get into it?

The point is, that to fulfull the Obama promise of lowering taxes on
everyone below 250k will suck a tremendous amount out of the treasury
and there are not enougn in those top numbers to pay the taxes.

Assume you make a million bucks a year. What are you going to do with
your money. Most people making that kind of money will save or spend.
What are the other options. If you save it in a bank account, they
lend it to others to buy cars or homes. If you invest in stocks, the
money increases the capital to capitalize for jobs. If you spend it
on a boat, some boat maker will hire people to makeboats.

This socialism of bringing real incomes closer together by really
nailing the rich bastards and then paying for the needs of those who
really need the stuff of life like free health is wrong and will kill
our economy. Study some history. In the end, the rich bastards are
either gone to other parts of the world or they become poor bastards
too.

We will see an exodus of wealth just like they had in Hong Kong as
they neared reversion to China. Go to many Canadian cities and see
the large number of Chinese who brought their money to invest in
Canada.

Building a

bunch of guillotines and cutting their heads off, though, like the
French did would.

Oh yeah, that will create a lot of jobs eh? And what did many rich
French do in response to this egalitarianism? They went to England,
Germany, the US, South Africa, and other distant parts with their
intellectual wealth leaving France all the poorer.

Do no - DO NOT try to say you are not a socialist. Now go try to find
any place in the world where socialism works to fulfill the promises?
And while you are at it, see who really takes it in the ear. Are the
promises of those coming in power really met?

The next step we will see will be a strong effort to become a
one-party government. Everything possible will be pushed to destroy
media that does not support the liberal/socialist line. Leaders of
industry will be intimidated to bully them to support stronger
centralized government. Anyone who is real competition to Democrats
will be marginalized and if possible criminalized.

Remember what I am saying when you see it. Fucking idiots who have no
understanding of this socialism.
[/quote]
what!!!!!!!!!!!!!! taxing the wealthy will kill our economy. where
have you been rip van winkle. the lower the taxes go on the rich, the
larger the wealth disparities have become, the worse our economy gets

Guest

On Oct 10, 8:13 am, Stray Dog <sdog2...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
[quote]On Thu, 9 Oct 2008, Vide...@tcq.net wrote:
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2008 18:26:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Vide...@tcq.net
Newsgroups: alt.politics.economics, soc.retirement, alt.rush-limbaugh,
alt.politics.republicans, alt.politics
Subject: Re: Sing it: "Fifty Ways to Leave this Market".

deleted

so far the free market has lost 2 trillion dollars alone out of 401k
plans recently. and the free market has soaked up 2-4 trillion dollars
of bailout money from labor. you see, labor is bailing out capital,
because capital is so stupid:)
thank god for FDR>s social security:)

"You cannot enrich the poor by impoverishing the rich."

robin hood did:)

Also, good old progressive taxation (which has been undermined since the
'70s) did a pretty good job of distributing the wealth more equitably.

And--not that very many people would like this this--the conversion of
Russia from a capitalist economy, starting in 1917, to a marxist-leninist
economy did keep a "rich class" from forming. Not everyone would like
this.

However, the idea that the rich should enrich themselves at the expense of
the poor is the most deplorable system, but unfortunately not everyone
understands that the few foxes in charge of the large sheep herd have a
guaranteed supply of dinners and the sheep haven>t figured it out yet why
their numbers keep decreasing.
[/quote]
correct, and the worshippers of wealth are so stupid that they do not
realize that labor is bailout capital right now. and the reason why?
because the little guys have nothing, and can longer consume. yet,
when rates were high from the 1930>s till the early 1970>s, the
country roared.

Guest

On Oct 10, 9:59 am, retrogro...@comcast.net wrote:
[quote]On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 12:42:45 GMT, jim <jim10...@gmail.com> wrote:

Raising taxes on the wealthy, or putting the rates back where they
were before Bush took office won>t destroy the wealthy.

What is 'wealthy' and where do they get their money? Bill Gates and
Buffet are certainly in that category. But what about the retiree who
has spent 40 years saving from their income in various ways. They
have a house and may even rent a couple out. They have an IRA account
and other savings. All of it may add up to several million dollars.
But, their income over years was often very modest.

And we>re talking an INCOME tax. Sheesh. Savings are not covered by
it. Are you confused or trying intentionally to create fear through
introducing confusion?
[/quote]
yep, either he is confused, or indoctrinated. i wonder which?

Guest

On Oct 10, 10:11 am, *Poetic Justice* <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-
Dog.com> wrote:
[quote]retrogro...@comcast.net wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 07:09:14 -0500, Starkiller
NoSpamSKS_SK...@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 22:56:22 -0700, retrogro...@comcast.net wrote:

On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 20:59:04 -0500, Starkiller
NoSpamSKS_SK...@hotmail.com> wrote:

"You cannot enrich the poor by impoverishing the rich."
robin hood did:)
He only gave temporary relief and a little charity.

If you destroy the wealthy then who do you think is going to give you
a paycheck? The government that taxes you for their own paycheck?
A little more tax is destroying them? LOL. More straw man nonsense.

Get honest grow a pair.
When have any of you fools ever said "a little more tax"?
Every time it is brought up you all have preached how you want to go
back to a 94% income tax. That>s not a little.
Get honest, quit lying.

This is exactly why we collapsed, people with money invested know that
if the Democrats get the "White House" and both Houses of Congress that
the taxes will go up and "Capital Gains Tax" will go way up, they need
to take all those gains before the election and it>s too late. Combine
that with the existing Democrat created crash in Mortgages and you>ve
got a stampede to get out of the Government controlled economy.

You>re lying again. Is that all you can do?

Most people are talking a return to the Reagan era 1987 rates of 38.5%
on those making over $250,000 or more.

Only the right wing liars and a few radicals are talking absurd
numbers like yours.

Liberals always want more, as soon as you get 38.5% you liberals will
want 78% then you>ll want 94%.... You are going to do what FDR did and
Socialize another large portion of the economy. The people who have
money want to keep it and they are leaving your soon to be socialist
economy.

--

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YL36nwCSYUM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJFO6COAMCY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUEQz5dltmI
Can>t drill, can>t use alternatives, the only thing left is that the
Democrats want an energy shortage....
[/quote]
ROTFLOL

Starkiller · Guest

On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 22:56:22 -0700, retrogrouch@comcast.net wrote:

[quote]On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 20:59:04 -0500, Starkiller
NoSpamSKS_SKanz@hotmail.com> wrote:

"You cannot enrich the poor by impoverishing the rich."

robin hood did:)

He only gave temporary relief and a little charity.

If you destroy the wealthy then who do you think is going to give you
a paycheck? The government that taxes you for their own paycheck?

A little more tax is destroying them? LOL. More straw man nonsense.

Get honest grow a pair.
[/quote]
When have any of you fools ever said "a little more tax"?
Every time it is brought up you all have preached how you want to go
back to a 94% income tax. That>s not a little.
Get honest, quit lying.

"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said.
"We>re saying that for America to get back on track,
we>re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you.
We>re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

Starkiller · Guest

On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 23:16:48 -0700 (PDT), mg <mgkelson@yahoo.com>
wrote:

[quote]On Oct 9, 7:59 pm, Starkiller <NoSpamSKS_SK...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 18:26:04 -0700 (PDT), Vide...@tcq.net wrote:
On Oct 9, 8:17 pm, Starkiller <NoSpamSKS_SK...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 17:15:23 -0700, wis...@yahoo.com wrote:
You have read my messages for 10 days suggesting you get out of the
stock market. This does not mean you cannot get back, if and when it
stabilizes. Get you money out tomorrow am.

ted

Yeah, pull all your money out and place it in CDs or savings accounts
and let the banks invest in the market. :-)

ah, but its insured in the bank. stocks are not secure, they are a
gamble.

'A government big enough to give you everything you want, is
big enough to take away everything you have.'

so far the free market has lost 2 trillion dollars alone out of 401k
plans recently. and the free market has soaked up 2-4 trillion dollars
of bailout money from labor. you see, labor is bailing out capital,
because capital is so stupid:)
thank god for FDR>s social security:)

"You cannot enrich the poor by impoverishing the rich."

robin hood did:)

He only gave temporary relief and a little charity.

If you destroy the wealthy then who do you think is going to give you
a paycheck? The government that taxes you for their own paycheck?

"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said.
"We>re saying that for America to get back on track,
we>re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you.
We>re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

Raising taxes on the wealthy, or putting the rates back where they
were before Bush took office won>t destroy the wealthy. Building a
bunch of guillotines and cutting their heads off, though, like the
French did would.
[/quote]
Well, I>m sure the rich would have no problem whatsoever going back to
the rates prior to the Bush tax cuts. They would be paying LESS
taxes.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/323.html

Learn your facts before simply repeating DNC propaganda.

"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said.
"We>re saying that for America to get back on track,
we>re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you.
We>re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

jim · Guest

[Default] On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 23:16:48 -0700 (PDT), mg
<mgkelson@yahoo.com> wrote:

[quote]On Oct 9, 7:59 pm, Starkiller <NoSpamSKS_SK...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 18:26:04 -0700 (PDT), Vide...@tcq.net wrote:
On Oct 9, 8:17 pm, Starkiller <NoSpamSKS_SK...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 17:15:23 -0700, wis...@yahoo.com wrote:
You have read my messages for 10 days suggesting you get out of the
stock market. This does not mean you cannot get back, if and when it
stabilizes. Get you money out tomorrow am.

ted

Yeah, pull all your money out and place it in CDs or savings accounts
and let the banks invest in the market. :-)

ah, but its insured in the bank. stocks are not secure, they are a
gamble.

'A government big enough to give you everything you want, is
big enough to take away everything you have.'

so far the free market has lost 2 trillion dollars alone out of 401k
plans recently. and the free market has soaked up 2-4 trillion dollars
of bailout money from labor. you see, labor is bailing out capital,
because capital is so stupid:)
thank god for FDR>s social security:)

"You cannot enrich the poor by impoverishing the rich."

robin hood did:)

He only gave temporary relief and a little charity.

If you destroy the wealthy then who do you think is going to give you
a paycheck? The government that taxes you for their own paycheck?

"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said.
"We>re saying that for America to get back on track,
we>re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you.
We>re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

Raising taxes on the wealthy, or putting the rates back where they
were before Bush took office won>t destroy the wealthy.
[/quote]
What is 'wealthy' and where do they get their money? Bill Gates and
Buffet are certainly in that category. But what about the retiree who
has spent 40 years saving from their income in various ways. They
have a house and may even rent a couple out. They have an IRA account
and other savings. All of it may add up to several million dollars.
But, their income over years was often very modest.

Now in retirement, others see them as being in some small category of
'rich' that could certainly stand being tapped for more taxes.

What is the incentive for anyone to save anything in that situation?
If they do save anything, why would they make their savings known buy
investing publically in stock markets so government could observe and
get into it?

The point is, that to fulfull the Obama promise of lowering taxes on
everyone below 250k will suck a tremendous amount out of the treasury
and there are not enougn in those top numbers to pay the taxes.

Assume you make a million bucks a year. What are you going to do with
your money. Most people making that kind of money will save or spend.
What are the other options. If you save it in a bank account, they
lend it to others to buy cars or homes. If you invest in stocks, the
money increases the capital to capitalize for jobs. If you spend it
on a boat, some boat maker will hire people to makeboats.

This socialism of bringing real incomes closer together by really
nailing the rich bastards and then paying for the needs of those who
really need the stuff of life like free health is wrong and will kill
our economy. Study some history. In the end, the rich bastards are
either gone to other parts of the world or they become poor bastards
too.

We will see an exodus of wealth just like they had in Hong Kong as
they neared reversion to China. Go to many Canadian cities and see
the large number of Chinese who brought their money to invest in
Canada.

Building a
[quote]bunch of guillotines and cutting their heads off, though, like the
French did would.
[/quote]
Oh yeah, that will create a lot of jobs eh? And what did many rich
French do in response to this egalitarianism? They went to England,
Germany, the US, South Africa, and other distant parts with their
intellectual wealth leaving France all the poorer.

Do no - DO NOT try to say you are not a socialist. Now go try to find
any place in the world where socialism works to fulfill the promises?
And while you are at it, see who really takes it in the ear. Are the
promises of those coming in power really met?

The next step we will see will be a strong effort to become a
one-party government. Everything possible will be pushed to destroy
media that does not support the liberal/socialist line. Leaders of
industry will be intimidated to bully them to support stronger
centralized government. Anyone who is real competition to Democrats
will be marginalized and if possible criminalized.

Remember what I am saying when you see it. Fucking idiots who have no
understanding of this socialism.

Stray Dog · Guest

On Thu, 9 Oct 2008, Video61@tcq.net wrote:

[quote]Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2008 18:26:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Video61@tcq.net
Newsgroups: alt.politics.economics, soc.retirement, alt.rush-limbaugh,
alt.politics.republicans, alt.politics
Subject: Re: Sing it: "Fifty Ways to Leave this Market".

[/quote]
deleted

[quote]
so far the free market has lost 2 trillion dollars alone out of 401k
plans recently. and the free market has soaked up 2-4 trillion dollars
of bailout money from labor. you see, labor is bailing out capital,
because capital is so stupid:)
thank god for FDR>s social security:)

"You cannot enrich the poor by impoverishing the rich."

robin hood did:)

[/quote]
Also, good old progressive taxation (which has been undermined since the
'70s) did a pretty good job of distributing the wealth more equitably.

And--not that very many people would like this this--the conversion of
Russia from a capitalist economy, starting in 1917, to a marxist-leninist
economy did keep a "rich class" from forming. Not everyone would like
this.

However, the idea that the rich should enrich themselves at the expense of
the poor is the most deplorable system, but unfortunately not everyone
understands that the few foxes in charge of the large sheep herd have a
guaranteed supply of dinners and the sheep haven>t figured it out yet why
their numbers keep decreasing.

Guest

On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 07:09:14 -0500, Starkiller
<NoSpamSKS_SKanz@hotmail.com> wrote:

[quote]On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 22:56:22 -0700, retrogrouch@comcast.net wrote:

On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 20:59:04 -0500, Starkiller
NoSpamSKS_SKanz@hotmail.com> wrote:

"You cannot enrich the poor by impoverishing the rich."

robin hood did:)

He only gave temporary relief and a little charity.

If you destroy the wealthy then who do you think is going to give you
a paycheck? The government that taxes you for their own paycheck?

A little more tax is destroying them? LOL. More straw man nonsense.

Get honest grow a pair.

When have any of you fools ever said "a little more tax"?
Every time it is brought up you all have preached how you want to go
back to a 94% income tax. That>s not a little.
Get honest, quit lying.
[/quote]
You>re lying again. Is that all you can do?

Most people are talking a return to the Reagan era 1987 rates of 38.5%
on those making over $250,000 or more.

Only the right wing liars and a few radicals are talking absurd
numbers like yours.

Guest

On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 07:11:46 -0500, Starkiller
<NoSpamSKS_SKanz@hotmail.com> wrote:

[quote]Raising taxes on the wealthy, or putting the rates back where they
were before Bush took office won>t destroy the wealthy. Building a
bunch of guillotines and cutting their heads off, though, like the
French did would.

Well, I>m sure the rich would have no problem whatsoever going back to
the rates prior to the Bush tax cuts. They would be paying LESS
taxes.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/323.html

Learn your facts before simply repeating DNC propaganda.
[/quote]
This says nothing like that. Can you read?

Guest

On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 06:34:59 -0700 (PDT), mg <mgkelson@yahoo.com>
wrote:

[quote]
Well, I>m sure the rich would have no problem whatsoever going back to
the rates prior to the Bush tax cuts. They would be paying LESS
taxes.http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/323.html

Learn your facts before simply repeating DNC propaganda.

Nonsense. What is it specifically that you think that site proves?
[/quote]

You>re not supposed to ask. he posts a lie and a random related link
that says nothing about the lie.


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Economy Forum	Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Page 2 of 4