Have the "rich" been enslaved by the poor?

Quote from TM_Direct:




your missing the point....how many times does the same money have to be taxed????
More...

With all respect TM, the way you worded the post, it seemed to me that the $63K would most likely NOT be taxed again. If you were concerned with an estate tax, you would not be concerned with the tax on another $63k.

Sorry if I made wrong assumptions. That is just how I read it.

Peace,
:)RS
 
Quote from Error 404:



I agree with you in principal. But did we have to spend more than half a trillion dollars to defeat The Flinstones? (to loosely paraphrase Wm. Friedman in Time).

And then have no "post victory" plan? This war was ill conceived. The overthrow of Saddam was justified. The way we went about it was shameful. There was no need to spend that kind of money, risk (and lose) so many lives, and end up in another quagmire.

What now?

Peace,
RS
More...


this is not a quagmire, the reconstruction is going well and if we didn't use all the technology many more American lives would have been lost....it's funny how when Bush said he was going to rebuild a free iraq, everyone laughed at him and said its about the oil...now he's doing it and the same ones are upset about the cost.. as for a post war plan....have you seen the report front he congressmen that was over there? I think he might be a democrat but he said its going amazingly well and nothing like the paper is reporting...Im not saying its perfect but they are on course.
 
Quote from Error 404:



With all respect TM, the way you worded the post, it seemed to me that the $63K would most likely NOT be taxed again. If you were concerned with an estate tax, you would not be concerned with the tax on another $63k.

Sorry if I made wrong assumptions. That is just how I read it.

Peace,
:)RS
More...

read a few posts back ...it was an example....just for that im not going to defend you from max anymore:D :D
 
Quote from axeman:

I haven't commented on the WMD thing in a long while.

I supported going in.

What I find amusing is all this focus on finding the WMD's.

It is NOT even relevant.

If I were president, and given the exact
same situation, I would have chosen to go in
knowing full well that there might not have been any WMD's.

The point is, Saddam did an excellent job of making
it LOOK like there we're WMD's.

The UN resolutions were quite clear, and he
was in direct, blatant violation of them
for YEARS. Any rational person could come to
the conclusions that:
A) He was hiding stuff
B) Has blatantly broke multiple resolutions for years,
the last of which gave us the right to go in if he DID NOT COMPLY. Which he did not.

End of story.

I really don't care if we ever find them or not. We won the first war against him.
We had a contract for winning the war.
He broke the contract, and we enforced it


peace

axeman
More...

Im going to have to disagree with you as smart as you are...North Korea has not complied...but we can start another thread for that one....Anyways we have to look at the whole situation not just did he comply or not before spending lives and money on something that may turn out to be far worse situation than before....this isnt one of your battleship arcade games ( very good graphics by the way ) and we are not the only ones on this planet or the protector of human rights violations when it is to our benefit ( North Korea and Cuba another thread )....

it isnt about did we do the right thing as if it were past tense..it is are we doing the right thing?? honestly what do u say about this?? not about did he violate or not, but what did we get out of going to war with IRAQ??? and dont tell me we saved the people from a tyrant either....
 
"...this isnt one of your battleship arcade games ( very good graphics by the way )"

LMAOOOOOOO!!!!! Hell yeah! :D


"it isnt about did we do the right thing as if it were past tense..it is are we doing the right thing?? honestly what do u say about this?? not about did he violate or not, but what did we get out of going to war with IRAQ??? and dont tell me we saved the people from a tyrant either...."

Well it sounds like your agreeing with me, but now asking "NOW WHAT???"

That is a valid question.
The Korean point is another discussion, and no, I don't like seeing these bullshit double standards.

Anyway.... I think the worst thing we can do is give in to pressure by the democrats/bleeding-hearts or whoever, and pull out.

We are in a position to make some incredible, historic, changes in the region.

Yeah, it's expensive. Yeah, people died. But think of the potential future.

If we left everything "as is", and then tabulated the number of illegal deaths that occur in iraq over the next 5 decades, what would the number be?

Compare this to a POSSIBLE future, free, and democratic iraq, which could have huge implications on the region in general.

How many lives effectively SAVED?

What if we pull out, and Iraq collapses into a total state of chaos, and some new shit bag comes to power and starts executing anyone who challenges him, and goes to war with his neighbors every few years.

Now how many lives are lost and destroyed???

*IF*, and that is a BIG IF knowing the wishy washy-iness of washington, they get this done right, and leave Iraq in a stable, and democratic state, it could very well be worth it a thousand times over.


But I think i'm dreaming.

I stated long ago, before this even started, that the BEST argument for NOT going to war with Iraq, is that WE WOULD drop the ball, fu** it up, and give in to social pressure by all the bleeding hearts to pull out TOO SOON.

Thus throwing away our lives, their lives, and our money for nothing.

I made the comment that Americans do NOT have the backbone for this kind of endeavor.

But now that it is done, I really hope they do it right.

peace

axeman
 
Quote from ElCubano:

Im going to have to disagree with you as smart as you [axeman] are...
More...
yes, axeman is EASILY one of the best minds on ET! i consider him to have an even better mind than myself!! :D :eek:
 
Why are you asking me?

peace

axeman



Quote from dgabriel:

Let's cut the defense budget by 200 billion, and issue a corresponding tax reduction across the board.

Whaddya say axeman.
More...
 
Quote from axeman:

THAT my friend, is PRECISELY my point.

I AM NOT RICH, but you could NEVER find a
democrat that would admit that by a long shot.

I'm single and make over 100K/year.

I bet ALL dems call me rich. So they beat the living hell outta me with taxes!

"Rich" is a relative term, but as far as i'm concerned,
you are not really rich if you have to work
at all to support yourself.

This is the minimum level. Even then, you could still
claim that old retired people are all rich who are
scratching by.


peace

axeman



I don't know anything about you Axe but if you are a man of few material wants, little or no debt and mortgage, no family, and perhaps operate as a small business - any small business really, you face an even worse nightmare - your own success - if you haven't already. What's a good year and say an extra 50 to 100K going to do for you? Throw you into a sullen world of complete disincentive to do better, hire, or expand - where AMT, more payroll tax, more insurances, 60 page tax returns, BS income timing, fear of more revenue, and more tax peel the skin off you in 2 inch wide strips for what? 30K net more? You know it's really sick when you get to wanting your income to go down -not up. There are levels of income in this country for certain types of people where it just isn't worth it to try for more. :mad:
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top