The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: CC27 on February 23, 2011, 09:32:28 AM
-
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Donate to DU! Wed Feb-23-11 08:41 AM
Original message
We need a Constitutional Amendment setting a permanent tax rate for the rich
A federal tax rate with zero loopholes allowed that can't be messed with!
I know it would take a long time but it would put to rest all these transfer of wealth schemes the rich constantly pull in this country.
We need a new Equal Rights Amendment movement too. The American Taliban will never stop attacking women's right until it's illegal.
Wow, what a concept. Go shit in stinky's cat box and leave me the hell alone.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x488259
-
Oh, silly, stupid, naive commies.
Don't you know complex tax laws allow your politicians to favor the highest contributors and punish those who refuse to be extorted?
And all this time you thought it was about social justice.
-
Wow, what a concept. Go shit in stinky's cat box and leave me the hell alone.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x488259
If they're becoming this delusional, the End Is Near. :o
-
Good idea DUmmy but, not for the reasons you think.
If we set a tax rate for the rich that can't be changed up or down, in 2 years you won't be able to raise taxes on them even more.
I know exactly how you goons operate. If we raise taxes on the rich this year you will only want more next year and more the next and so forth. So let's do it, let's set tax rates on the rich at a fair rate and then you can shut the **** up about raising taxes from now on.
-
Good idea DUmmy but, not for the reasons you think.
If we set a tax rate for the rich that can't be changed up or down, in 2 years you won't be able to raise taxes on them even more.
I know exactly how you goons operate. If we raise taxes on the rich this year you will only want more next year and more the next and so forth. So let's do it, let's set tax rates on the rich at a fair rate and then you can shut the **** up about raising taxes from now on.
A DUmmy stole your idea:
SDuderstadt (1000+ posts) Wed Feb-23-11 08:49 AM
Response to Original message
1. That's a really bad idea...
First of all, the setting of tax rates is a legislative function. Suppose we entered into an era where we needed to raise taxes on the wealthiest even more for the good of the country. Under your idea, we could not do that without amending the constitution again.
Like I said, a bad and, frankly, unworkable idea.
-
A DUmmy stole your idea:
I saw that shortly after I made my prediction of what they would do.
And I was spot on.
-
Good idea DUmmy but, not for the reasons you think.
If we set a tax rate for the rich that can't be changed up or down, in 2 years you won't be able to raise taxes on them even more.
You can't make it higher than 100%....wait this is DUmbass math so you can.
-
I'm still waiting for a definition of "the rich."
-
You can't make it higher than 100%....wait this is DUmbass math so you can.
Well, the "rich" would be anyone making more than, say, stevenumbers.
And, the math would work out as follows:
100% + POTATO = PRIME RIB!!!!
-
Well, the "rich" would be anyone making more than, say, stevenumbers.
And, the math would work out as follows:
100% + POTATO = PRIME RIB!!!!
Mmmm, potato & prime rib....
-
Mmmm, potato & prime rib....
I didn't say baked potato, Ralphie . . . :whistling:
-
I was so naive to think that after Obama was elected the left would return to some sanity, it's the opposite, the majority of them are unhinged.
-
If they really wanted to see the rich pay their "fair share" they'd advocate for the Fair Tax. Those who consume the most (the evil rich) pay the most taxes. The rest of us don't see our paychecks depleted by Uncle Sam.
Cindie
-
Since many lefties are rollin' in the dough, why not eliminate taxes and those lefties can donate their millions to the gubmint! problem solved!
I get a kick outa all these rich millionaire movie stars gettin' on the TV and askin' to save the children. Why they don't use their own money baffles me. If they really wanted to help, why aren't they usin' their own money in these charities instead of beggin' the populace to donate money they don't have?
-
Since many lefties are rollin' in the dough, why not eliminate taxes and those lefties can donate their millions to the gubmint! problem solved!
I get a kick outa all these rich millionaire movie stars gettin' on the TV and askin' to save the children. Why they don't use their own money baffles me. If they really wanted to help, why aren't they usin' their own money in these charities instead of beggin' the populace to donate money they don't have?
Exactly if they simply donated their own money they wouldn't need money from us.
I recall a few years back a huge rap concert to protest the cuts in NYC schools. Since they were having a concert they could have raised money to cover what was cut in the budget. Instead they sit back and bitch and moan that us taxpayers aren't forking over enough.
-
Wow, what a concept. Go shit in stinky's cat box and leave me the hell alone.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x488259
:lmao: H5. Also it makes sense that Joanne98 posted this.
-
I'm still waiting for a definition of "the rich."
Im of the impression that someone who is 'rich' makes 10-20 thousand or more than the Democrat answering the question does - unless the person the Democrat is considering is part of a union, then they are solidly 'middle class', regardless of income.
-
Why don't they advocate for a national sales tax...then only people who buy things get taxed. Wouldn't it stand to reason that "the rich" buy more stuff and more expensive stuff?
-
Why don't they advocate for a national sales tax...then only people who buy things get taxed. Wouldn't it stand to reason that "the rich" buy more stuff and more expensive stuff?
They consider that 'regressive' -- meaning since a loaf of bread costs the same regardless if you are rich or poor, the poor get taxed a higher percentage of their income. They believe if such a system is to be implemented, that all items should be priced and taxed against one's income - so for a homeless person a loaf of bread is free, but for one of the wealthy elite, its 20 thousand bucks, and taxed as such.
-
Permanent tax on the rich, huh?! You stupid communist loving idiot. Raising taxes is a form of communism, by the way DUmmie.
So,...by raising the tax on the rich, that will be better for jobs and the economy? :mental: :lmao: How's that work? Any lurking DUmpkies care to explain?
-
Im of the impression that someone who is 'rich' makes 10-20 thousand or more than the Democrat answering the question does - unless the person the Democrat is considering is part of a union, then they are solidly 'middle class', regardless of income.
Ding, ding, ding, ding.....We have a winnah! Give the man a Kewpie doll! I know someone around here has one, I've seen 'em before!
Why don't they advocate for a national sales tax...then only people who buy things get taxed. Wouldn't it stand to reason that "the rich" buy more stuff and more expensive stuff?
Ah! there in lies the problem. If ya tax everything, according to the DemoncRats, the poor are hurt the worst. However, I have a solution! How 'bout we exempt food! What else are they 'sposed to be buyin' on our dime anyway?
I firmly believe food should not be taxed anyway.