You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #14: For WHOM? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-27-10 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. For WHOM?
Significantly higher taxes for people who are TOO RICH to begin with?

BTW, that idiot saying of the Duchess of Windsor: "You can never be too thin or too rich" was untrue. Ask people who are starving (something she knew nothing about)or have anorexia (although anorexics would agree just before they dropped dead).

No man should be so rich he has nothing left to buy but his government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -No Tax Holiday for the Working Poor: 42% of taxpayers will actually pay more taxes in 2011! Better Believe It  Dec-27-10 02:50 PM   #0 
  - Why do you hate Obama? n/t  Foo Fighter   Dec-27-10 02:53 PM   #1 
  - You're joking. Right? Do you think the writer hates Obama?  Better Believe It   Dec-27-10 02:54 PM   #4 
     - LOL, yes, of course I was joking.  Foo Fighter   Dec-27-10 06:40 PM   #35 
  - recommend  xchrom   Dec-27-10 02:53 PM   #2 
  - Again, was the deal actually better than no deal at all?  gratuitous   Dec-27-10 02:54 PM   #3 
  - me too. the poor pay more, but it doesn't bring significant revenue.  Hannah Bell   Dec-27-10 03:02 PM   #7 
  - Not to mention  gratuitous   Dec-27-10 04:03 PM   #17 
  - Slightly higher taxes vs significantly higher taxes.  Statistical   Dec-27-10 03:34 PM   #13 
  - For WHOM?  aquart   Dec-27-10 03:43 PM   #14 
  - No the people in the 42% stated in the OP.  Statistical   Dec-27-10 03:46 PM   #15 
     - The deal is done. The bill was signed. eom  Hello_Kitty   Dec-27-10 06:00 PM   #27 
        - And Obama signed it because....  Statistical   Dec-27-10 06:10 PM   #29 
           - Letting the tax cuts expire is not a possibility at this point  Hello_Kitty   Dec-27-10 06:15 PM   #30 
           - Hardly. For more people the difference is negligble.  Statistical   Dec-27-10 06:30 PM   #33 
           - Opening the door to the destruction of Social Security. That's some compromise!  Better Believe It   Dec-27-10 08:53 PM   #41 
           - Yet it is still is still interesting that  ThomCat   Dec-28-10 03:09 AM   #43 
  - Fiscal Responsibility verses Fiscal Irresponsibility  Bandit   Dec-28-10 11:34 AM   #51 
  - Don't tilt against the illusion..  sendero   Dec-27-10 05:27 PM   #20 
  - No deal at all is no longer an option. The deal was done.  Hello_Kitty   Dec-27-10 05:57 PM   #26 
  - Obviously  gratuitous   Dec-27-10 06:16 PM   #31 
     - How do you figure?  Statistical   Dec-27-10 06:32 PM   #34 
  - He could have gotten the Republicans to vote on a unempoyment package  jtown1123   Dec-28-10 02:45 PM   #53 
  - Bogus stat.  Statistical   Dec-27-10 02:56 PM   #5 
  - without the compromise, it would have been Republicans fault  hfojvt   Dec-27-10 03:12 PM   #8 
  - "The Republicans were unwilling to extend MWPC" When did they win control of the government?  Better Believe It   Dec-27-10 03:20 PM   #10 
  - No but it takes 60 votes.  Statistical   Dec-27-10 03:33 PM   #12 
  - Another meaningless non-sequitur..  sendero   Dec-27-10 05:31 PM   #21 
  - 60 votes.  Statistical   Dec-27-10 05:45 PM   #22 
     - Politically...  sendero   Dec-27-10 06:22 PM   #32 
        - Politically maybe, but not better for the country, not better for the unemployed, not better for  Statistical   Dec-27-10 07:16 PM   #36 
           - With most poor people..  sendero   Dec-27-10 07:20 PM   #37 
           - No compromise means poor would be paying SIGNIFICANTLY more taxes.  Statistical   Dec-27-10 07:32 PM   #38 
           - Sorry, but that sounds a bit too like enabler talk  NickB79   Dec-28-10 02:55 PM   #54 
  - Which still leaves people who earn less than $20K paying more in 2011 vs 2010  Hello_Kitty   Dec-27-10 05:53 PM   #25 
  - I followed the link, but the page now "couldn't be found"...nt  GReedDiamond   Dec-27-10 03:01 PM   #6 
  - Here's a different link to the same article.  Better Believe It   Dec-27-10 03:22 PM   #11 
     - Thanks, BBI, I appreciate that...nt  GReedDiamond   Dec-27-10 04:00 PM   #16 
        - No problem. I don't know why the first link stopped working.  Better Believe It   Dec-27-10 04:52 PM   #18 
  - Ahh. The Great Compromise = Fuck the poor on behalf of the rich  somone   Dec-27-10 03:19 PM   #9 
  - The Making Work pay credit was always intended as a one-shot stimulus.  pnwmom   Dec-27-10 05:19 PM   #19 
  - Neither were the Bush cuts but here they are.  TheKentuckian   Dec-27-10 05:49 PM   #23 
  - At a minimum.  Statistical   Dec-27-10 05:51 PM   #24 
  - I don't know where you got your statistics,  pnwmom   Dec-27-10 10:36 PM   #42 
     - I think you misunderstood.  Statistical   Dec-28-10 09:40 AM   #48 
        - You're right -- thanks for the clarification, and the numbers. n/t  pnwmom   Dec-28-10 02:42 PM   #52 
  - No, that is not the real question.  Hello_Kitty   Dec-27-10 06:04 PM   #28 
  - Worst case, we're talking about $3.90 a week. C'mon.  Still a Democrat   Dec-27-10 08:00 PM   #39 
  - Yeah, and it's just the paupers anyway. Who cares?  Hello_Kitty   Dec-27-10 08:15 PM   #40 
  - What economic stimulus are you writing about?  Better Believe It   Dec-28-10 08:44 AM   #44 
     - Oh goodie another brilliant firedoglake analysis  Still a Democrat   Dec-28-10 09:37 AM   #47 
     - The payroll tax holiday is $120B not $60B. n/t  Statistical   Dec-28-10 09:45 AM   #50 
  - Oh, but just the other day, someone was saying that the bottom  bullwinkle428   Dec-28-10 08:47 AM   #45 
  - Exactly!  katnapped   Dec-28-10 09:07 AM   #46 
  - But Michael Vick is a great football player - why do you hate Obama? nt  TBF   Dec-28-10 09:41 AM   #49 
 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC