aquart
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-27-10 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
|
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.
|
| -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 |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread