Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Bush Is At It Again  
User currently offlineCba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3
Posted (11 years 9 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2021 times:

http://money.cnn.com/2002/12/25/news/dividends/index.htm

Moron/President Bush wants to ram a bill through that would cut dividend taxes in half to "stimulate the economy," a move that would only benefeit the wealthy.

I have to wonder whether this man is just an idiot or if he is evil. A moron who has never seen anything less than a silver spoon is deciding what is best for this country. That fact alone scares me. This man is sending this great nation to hell in a hand basket.

75 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineNormalSpeed From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (11 years 9 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2010 times:

A tax cut? How evil can you get?! I mean I thought I'd seen it all, but now this!! The man actually wants to let us keep our own money! Does he think we are morons?! I, for one, will not stand for this!

Please! If it's government revenue that you are concerned about, there's a (very) basic economic principle that states that when taxes are cut, government revenue actually increases. I'd recite it for you, but then again, it's your job to get aquainted with the facts of the matter, not mine.

Sure, this may benefit the rich. It will also benefit every joe/jane who has an IRA or a mutual fund--I'm included in this group, and I make less than $20,000 per year.

Now, this type of tax cut may not help the economy that much. I see where those skeptical economists are coming from--the money that is given back to the public may not be significant enough stoke a fire under the economy. But I don't consider the government proposing that I keep more of my own money evil. If you think this is the issue that you are going to nail Bush on, then you better keep looking. In any case, it just goes to show how desperate Bush's opponents are--they can't find anything of real substance, so they feel they must fabricate, miscontextualize, and blow out of proportion.

Nice try, no cigar.

'Speed


User currently offlineTwaneedsnohelp From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (11 years 9 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2001 times:

This man is sending this great nation to hell in a hand basket.

correction: to hell in a Kate Spade hand basket (they're cousins).


User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted (11 years 9 months 3 days ago) and read 1994 times:

Let's start a communist revolution!
Power to the collective, down with individual ownership!

Rename the USA to United Soviet States of the Americas!

That should cure the economy.



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineMatt D From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9502 posts, RR: 46
Reply 4, posted (11 years 9 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1974 times:

A moron who has never seen anything less than a silver spoon is deciding what is best for this country.

Maybe you'd be happier with these people running the richest, most powerful, and most diverse nation on earth, i.e. deciding what's best for us?






User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 9 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1971 times:

Matt D, KROC might be ugly but that doesn't mean you can insult his intelligence.

User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16283 posts, RR: 56
Reply 6, posted (11 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1929 times:

Bush Is At It Again

Bush is "what" again?

Having oral sex in the White House???? Errrr...no. That was Clinton.

Getting impeached????? Errr...no. That was Clinton.

Emboldening Al Qaida by not responding to the Yemen & Kenya bombings????? Errr...no. That was Clinton.

Fending off charges of illegal real estate dealings (Whitewater)???? Errr....no. That was Clinton.






Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (11 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1919 times:

Bush Is At It Again

Yyz717, I think he was going for the ol' "Bush is a moron" angle. Blowjob in the White House! They shoulda shot him!


User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16283 posts, RR: 56
Reply 8, posted (11 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1917 times:

I'll take a moron in the White House over a Rhodes scholar in the White House who defiles it by having oral sex with fat interns.


Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (11 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1915 times:

Yyz717, for God's sake, is Clinton all you can bring up in response to this subject. The man has been out off office two years now, so stop being Rush-like, and get over the guy. Unbelievable.

As for the subject, yes, it's true that the Republicans have ALWAYS felt the best way to economic nirvana is trickle-down: let the rich get the immediate benefit, and the rest will trickle down to us peons somehow. It doesn't work, of course, but it's as much faith in the GOP as it the belief that Ronald Reagan single-handedly brought down the Soviet Union.

And, to be a bit balanced here, a president of either party will offer up such economic stimuli when the economy is going bad. It's not unusual in that respect.


User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (11 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1914 times:

Wow, a guy....had ORAL SEX! OUT OF MARRIAGE!!

Guess what, it's happened a lot before and it'll happen in the future. Get over yourself.


User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16283 posts, RR: 56
Reply 11, posted (11 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1912 times:

Yyz717, for God's sake....Unbelievable.

Oh settle down. Maybe, just maybe, I was being sarcastic or joking. Oh brother.




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 12, posted (11 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1910 times:

Alpha1, it DOES work. It just takes longer than the time until the next elections when they're voted out of office again by the lies and exagerations in the socialist election brochures.

What's so unfair in having the same tax RATE for all people (or at least something close to it)?
Why should I pay 80% taxes over the money I get for an honest day's work while you pay 40% just because I get paid more per hour than do you? (percentages fictional, but you get the idea)...
Even if your CEO pays the same rate you do, he's still paying a lot more taxes.
Because he has more money after taxes, salaries before taxes can be lowered which means higher profits AND more money in the economy.
That will mean more jobs at the lower end (to make all those goods all those people with more money can now afford to buy), which is good for people with lower incomes.

Just raising taxes for more social security programs will mean that in the end you get the current situation where everyone except stockbrokers and cleaning ladies is unemployed.



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineTWAL1011 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 206 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (11 years 9 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1890 times:

Wow, a guy....had ORAL SEX! OUT OF MARRIAGE!!

That doesn't bother you?


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29800 posts, RR: 58
Reply 14, posted (11 years 9 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 1878 times:

I have to agree with Jwenting,

That money that they government doesn't take in taxes is going to have to be put somewhere, and that is back into the economy. There is no other place to do it. You don't think that corparate CEO's put it in mattresses or glass jars buried in the backyard do you.

It doesn't mater if the investor is the person or the bank that is holding the cash. Eventually it will have to be reinvested or else it isn't making any value, just losing it's value due to inflation.




OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlinePHX-LJU From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (11 years 9 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1871 times:

Matt D wrote:

"Maybe you'd be happier with these people running the richest, most powerful, and most diverse nation on earth, i.e. deciding what's best for us?"

Well, chances are they'd do a better job than Dubya.  Big grin In any case, they would probably do a lot less damage to our country's image than Bush has done since taking office.


User currently offlineBoeing4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (11 years 9 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1861 times:

Emboldening Al Qaida by not responding to the Yemen & Kenya bombings????? Errr...no. That was Clinton.

hmmmm. Ok everyone listen up.

Food for thought:

Dubya is considered unilateral. But wait, so far he has consulted Congress to pass a resolution on Iraq. He has also pressured the UN.

Clinton on the other hand, responded to Saddam kicking inspectors out by launching cruise missiles at him on the eve of his impeachment. "Wag the Dog" anyone? He did this without consulting the UN.

He also responded to the embassy bombings by launching cruise missiles at pharmaceutical factories in Sudan, hitting no terrorist targets. He did this without consulting the UN, Congress, or even his own Joint Chiefs.

Bush may need hooked on phonics, but at least he read the rule book on a President's role in decisions on warfare a bit.

B4e-Forever New Frontiers


User currently offlineDelta-flyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 2676 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1827 times:

Cba ... It never ceases to amaze me how a teenager can determine that a president is a moron based on a single, exremely complicated issue -- taxation. If you are so well-versed in macro-economics, how come you do not back up your opinion with some credible arguments?

Your calling Bush evil, an idiot and a moron does not make him so. Saying he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth does not lead to that conclusion either.

Here are some of the issues......

On the Adminstration's side, the argument is that lowering dividend taxes will spur investment, which will create new jobs. The people newly employed will then have money to spend, increasing demand for goods and services, thereby creating more employment.

The opposing side says that the tax break should go to consumers, who will then create demand, which creates employment. The higher demand will ultimately result in increased profit for businesses, which will raise stock prices, and result in new investments.

Obviously, there has to be a balance between the two sides. Rich people must have sufficient incentive to invest, so businesses can create new jobs, while consumers should not be overtaxed.

Where is the right balance? Economists are divided on this issue, but it's nice to know that Cba has all the answers.

Pete


User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1826 times:

That doesn't bother you?

There are far worse things in the world.


User currently offlineTWAL1011 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 206 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1820 times:

You still didn't answer my question. Does that bother you?

User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1819 times:

It bothers me to a point. Like I said, there are worse things for a man to do! Clinton did a lot more good than bad. Fact is the man was good for America, blowjob or no blowjob.

User currently offlineMatt D From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9502 posts, RR: 46
Reply 21, posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1819 times:

Delta-Flyer:

That was an excellent post.

I would also like to add to it that it never ceases to amaze me how these very same teenagers all cry about how the taxpayers need to "help the poor", "expand health care", pay for this and that, all while living under the safety of their parents' home.

Wait until they go into the workforce on their own, and have to put in their 40 or more hours, find a place to live, put food on the table, gas in their car, and toilet paper in the bathroom, and see their GROSS versus NET income and where the disparity went on their pay stubs.

It's always easy to be altruistic and compassionate as long as you are using someone elses money.

Wait until it's your own. Then your tune will change real fast.


User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1816 times:

Alpha1, it DOES work. It just takes longer than the time until the next elections when they're voted out of office again by the lies and exagerations in the socialist election brochures.

As opposed to the lies and exaggerations of the religious conservatives elecitons brochurses? Oh, please, grow up and give me a break. You sound like your sitting on the GOP Platform committe.  Laugh out loud It works both ways-and actually, you'll see far more "propoganda sheets" from ultra-coservatives than you will ultra-liberals.

What's so unfair in having the same tax RATE for all people (or at least something close to it)?

Maybe because the wealthies people in the country-the ones who can afford to hire lawyers to find every loophole-get out of paying most taxes as it is? This way, their lawyers will just be saving them less in taxes. The rest of us don't have that luxury.

You don't need to milk the rich, but if you're going to lower tax rates such as this, why not close up ALL loopholes in the tax code that lawyers for the rich can find? I have no problem with such tax cuts if it weren't for the fact that the very wealthy in this country are not, for the most part, paying their fair share becuase of loopholes.


User currently offlineTWAL1011 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 206 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1816 times:

Fact is the man was good for America, blowjob or no blowjob.

Well, that's where we would disagree.


User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1812 times:

The guy's presidency should be judged on how America changed during his term in office, not his private life. Anyway, it's 2 years ago...

25 TWAL1011 : The guy should have waited 'til the end of his term before engaging in his private life.
26 Post contains links NormalSpeed : "Maybe because the wealthies people in the country-the ones who can afford to hire lawyers to find every loophole-get out of paying most taxes as it i
27 Alpha 1 : If Rush published it, I don't believe it, Normal Speed. They pay 96% of the taxes? Bullshit. It's nice that you're here to defend the incredibly rich,
28 Yyz717 : The guy's presidency should be judged on how America changed during his term in office, not his private life. Let's put aside the oval office blow job
29 Alpha 1 : Yes, let's focus on the impeachment, Yyz717, shall we? The culmination of a 6-year witchunt that began the day he was ELECTED, and didn't end until th
30 Maiznblu_757 : What's Bush? Signed, Matt D
31 Post contains images Delta-flyer : Matt D, thanks for the compliment. It seems that this thread has taken a drastic turn away from the topic. Not surprising, since the issue of taxation
32 JetService : Let's not forget that any incentive to bolster market investment is also good for the employees of the company being traded. The first thing companies
33 NormalSpeed : "They pay 96% of the taxes? [expletive deleted]! It's nice that you're here to defend the incredibly rich, though. Someone has to do it." Well, you ma
34 Post contains images We're Nuts : Haven't we already proven that lowering taxes doesn't help the economy? How many more nest-eggs are the Republicans going to have to break before they
35 Dc10guy : Hey All, Have you ever wondered where the republicans would be if it wasn't for Clinton? Bush seized power 2 years ago and they still blame him for ev
36 Donder10 : '' Since 1975, practically all the gains in household income have gone to the top 20% of households. '' Taken from the CIA site.Perhaps the trickle-do
37 777236ER : The guy should have waited 'til the end of his term before engaging in his private life. What nonsense is this? He may be the president but he still h
38 XFSUgimpLB41X : Geez, 777236ER, I've seen 15 year olds with more maturity than you. 8 years without sex? Nope... that is what his WIFE is for. Hillary probably has a
39 Post contains images 777236ER : Geez, 777236ER, I've seen 15 year olds with more maturity than you. Awww 8 years without sex? Nope... that is what his WIFE is for. Hillary probably h
40 Cba : I don't know how this got to be about Clinton again. Bush is proposing a 50% dividend tax cut that would benefeit shareholders (ie the wealthier chunk
41 Post contains images B747forlife : Delta-flyer - And it never ceases to amaze me that some of the members here who aren't teenagers think that anything a teenager says is moronic. Now,
42 Delta-flyer : .....some of the members here who aren't teenagers think that anything a teenager says is moronic. Do I think that? Read my post again. My objection i
43 B747forlife : Delta-Flyer - I was just saying, that he has a right to an opinion. If he thinks some person is an idiot, that is his right. Just because he is a teen
44 We're Nuts : Why should they have to pay a higher percentage than any other person? I'll tell you why: We have two men, man 1 and man 2. Man 1 is just starting out
45 Donder10 : The solution to that Nuts is to introduce a tax threshold but continue with the flat tax rate,kicking in at say 20k or so?
46 We're Nuts : Well I don't have all the answers. I just know what the problems are.
47 MD-90 : My mother is one of the so-called rich people that you are trashing. She's 53 years old and makes $90,000/year. She has two bachelors degrees and a ma
48 We're Nuts : Don't give me your bleeding heart conservative "I'm too rich for taxes" crap! I don't give a damn. I'm not sure where you got the idea that government
49 Maiznblu_757 : Nobody has answered my question! Whats Bush??????? Signed, Matt D
50 B747forlife : We're Nuts - You know what, the guy from United worked his way up to where he is. Why should he be punished for working hard? Wait, he shouldn't, that
51 NormalSpeed : You guys are forgetting something. I already mentioned this, but it deserves to be repeated. A tax cut in dividends will not only benefit the "rich."
52 Post contains images Delta-flyer : Gentlemen, No one is being "punished" for making a lot of money (by the way, $90K a year hardly makes one rich). It is the principle of "equal sacrifi
53 MD-90 : Maybe I sort of have libertarian leanings, but I'd rather the government cut itself down and have less need for our tax dollars and less incentive to
54 Heavymetal : I vacationed this past week amongst friends of the family, down to the Keys for the holiday & New Year......a half dozen midwest auto industry profess
55 Boeing4ever : The middle doesn't need to be educated. If anything it's the middle that should educate the left and right. PERIOD. B4e-Forever New Frontiers
56 NormalSpeed : Ok, Delta-Flyer... I see what you are getting at. Thanks for clearing that up. "I was amazed at the contempt they held George W. Bush in." Heavy, Well
57 Boeing4ever : In fact, I'll even go a step further and say that to love or hate a politician is misplacing energy. It's best to keep an objective view no matter wha
58 Post contains images We're Nuts : We're Nuts - You know what, the guy from United worked his way up to where he is. Why should he be punished for working hard? Wait, he shouldn't, that
59 B747forlife : We're Nuts - The point is, that if the poor wanted to be in a higher class, they would try. They don't try. Many liberals say that is because there is
60 NormalSpeed : "...and you call yourself a follower of Jesus." Come on, 'Nutsy. You don't need to make personal attacks to get your point across. Anyway, since you b
61 Post contains links Heavymetal : The point is, that if the poor wanted to be in a higher class, they would try. They don't try. And oh great glory and joy when they get into those hig
62 NormalSpeed : "And Normal, your charecterization of liberals as uncouth dronish Robin Hoods who never met a welfare cheat they didn't like is a tad outdated." Yeah,
63 L-188 : Just the ones that seem to get elected think that way.
64 Heavymetal : They do? Funny, Clinton rubbed his most fervant liberal supporters the wrong way right outta the gate in 1993 when he slammed the door on many of thei
65 Cfalk : Let's get this straight, shall we? Here is a very simplified course in macroeconomics 101. Government income depends largely on income tax, both corpo
66 Heavymetal : Thanks for the lesson, Charles. So if it were that guaranteed, where the hell was the recovery after Bushie's first tax cut and retroactive payback? I
67 Cfalk : Heavymetal, Guaranteed? Nothing in economics is guaranteed. The rules of economics are based on AOTBE, or All Other Things Being Equal - a concept kno
68 Heavymetal : I accept that your rules work. What I don't accept is the credibility of this Administration to apply them. You mention 9/11 as an "new element that s
69 Cfalk : What I don't accept is the credibility of this Administration to apply them. So you should have little to worry about. The administration does not con
70 Heavymetal : I've heard that one from you before, and I know before I've outlined that I believe the policies of the Oval Office very much can and do effect the ec
71 Delta-flyer : Charles, Good post. But the argument is not over the wisdom of a tax cut, but how should it be distributed through society? Pete
72 Cfalk : But the argument is not over the wisdom of a tax cut, but how should it be distributed through society? OK, remember that the original article is a CN
73 Post contains links L-188 : The arguement that reducing the tax of gains on stocks only helps the rich has been loosing water for 15 twenty years now as the percentage of America
74 We're Nuts : Sorry I'm late with this reply, we had a big power outage last night and only got back online this evening. Come on, 'Nutsy. You don't need to make pe
75 Delta-flyer : Charles & L188 .... Yes, cutting taxes on stock gains is good. However, is that the best place to cut taxes to stimulate the economy today? Obviously,
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Raggedy Ann Is At It Again... posted Mon Jul 31 2006 00:58:42 by Boeing744
Chavez Is At It Again 2 posted Mon Jun 12 2006 09:57:11 by AR385
Chavez Is At It Again posted Sun May 21 2006 23:33:00 by AR385
Psycho Cindy Is At It Again posted Sat Sep 17 2005 01:36:00 by TedTAce
Looks Like Icahn Is At It Again posted Wed Apr 20 2005 05:07:30 by BIGBlack
Peta Is At It Again... posted Wed Nov 17 2004 21:47:38 by NWA742
Puget Sound Convergence Zone Is At It Again posted Tue Sep 14 2004 07:14:05 by ScarletHarlot
Peta Is At It Again posted Tue Jan 7 2003 16:08:25 by Alpha 1
Osama Bin Laden Is At It Again posted Thu Jun 21 2001 17:56:28 by VirginA340
Bush At It Again! posted Mon Feb 9 2004 18:29:48 by 777236ER