Send Flowers to Russia, Ukraine and Worldwide with Cyber-Florist.com Fiance.com: Beautiful Russian brides
Home  |  About  |  Forum  |  User Blogs  |  Login  |  Register

	Create New Topic   My Posts   My forum buddies   Invite friends   Private messages Russian brides > Main Forum > NASFAN6 SPECIAL Author Post wtrav02 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/15/2006 8:09:41 PM   nasfan, you asked a question and what a better way to reply to you by using your own words. If you decided to switch from libertarian to a reagan conservative during the last 18 months, I am not the one to blame. I just re-stated your own words. People's preferences change over time. We do not live in a perfectly rationale world. I am tempted to use the exact words that you used in 2005 to answer you question "Pluralistic party?" referring of course to the democratic party. Hence, here it goes: To try to explain to you, nasfan, what a democrat is, I might as well talk to the wall. It would make as much impact, though I shouldn't insult the wall so badly::)) Your comments about Soros, the other folks and the islamic sites is the usual blah blah scary tactics used each time by republicans prior to elections. Have you realized that the election is over and the next one is in two years from now? nasfan perhaps you need to reset your calendar::)) No need to spread propaganda for another year or so::)) So, get some rest and give the poor voters some rest as well::)) Think about it this way, if you keep saying the same things, i.e. the terrorists will harm us, blah blah blah, then come next election two things are possible: (a) all voters will be completely brainwashed and GOP (very ulikely) or (b) all voters will reject the GOP propaganda (much more likely). So, why don't follow the party line (even if you are so different than the others you being a reagan conservative:) and give the scare tactics some rest for a while, so the propaganda will sound like it is new the next time you use it since you conservs have no other ammunition anyway::)) However, I am tempted to say that I sensed some wishful thinking in your words as if you'd be happy if we were hit again had you been able to blame it on the dems this time?? Iraq was it a defensive or an offensive war? is this a philosophical question?? I thought we went in there to find Saddam's WMD's. Hence, on paper, it was a defensive war, i.e. a pre-emptive attack to prevent Sadam's imminent launch of an attack against the whole western hemisphere by means of using weapons of mass destruction. However, as we all know, no WMD's existed. The whole story was made up by the Bush administration (Chenney, Rumsfeld and others working for them to be exact) in order to dupe Congress and the citizens of the USA, the UK and other nations in order to gain support for the war. Chenney and Co. were so stupid to believe it would be a piece of cake, which it was not and the rest everyone knows. Summary: defensive war on paper, offensive war in reality. Does this answer your question? nasfan6 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/16/2006 7:10:36 AM   You're wrong all the way around. The last thing I want is this country to get hit again. Though, I worry about the democrats backbone. As for the libertarian remark, go ahead copy and paste where I claimed I was a libertarian, I've never claimed to be a libertarian, nothing wrong with being one. What I believe can be summed up in the mission statement of the John Birch Society, Less government, more personal responsibility and with Gods help a better world, but that's typical like using a soundbyte and twisting it. Also it was not even implied Hussien was going to use WMD's on the western hemisphere. Though you deny him having them, even when you're own party went on record of him having them. We know he had them, we know he used them. As for scare tactics, that is a democratic ploy or should I say a socialist ploy, kind of like the population explosion. The secularist and socialist always have had this limited resource mentality. What happened to the most ethical congress? Seems to me Ms. Pelosi is showing her real stripes. Already starting to act like the socialists they are. You are far from being a democrat. You are an extreme socialist. I liked the corporate bonanza remark, as if the big corporations employ most of the work force. You need to get out of your ivory towers and see that small business employs more people than anybody else. Remember the "little Guy" you dems like to say you support. You believe economics is a zero sum game. If I have more it means someone else has less. Your party, has went so extreme left. Though they don't have the courage to admit they are socialists, and denounce the wrongdoers in their own party. Remember this was the overthrow of the culture of corruption. Though it was just a mere six years ago that we left the administration that defined what corruption in politics really is. This last election wasn't about Iraq as your media claimed. Hell now the Dems are already backtracking on the withdrawing of troops from Iraq. It's really amusing to me,that the extreme left was duped by your party. We'll get that Bush guy, now you party has no clue on what to do, they ran on no issues, but hating Bush and getting out of Iraq, which they will not do in any short time as they campaigned they would. Have a great day Wtrav, and don't make too much money today, you might starve some poor child somewhere. wtrav02 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/16/2006 5:40:50 PM   "Seems to me Ms. Pelosi is showing her real stripes" this is precious::)) she's been elected the Speaker of the House since three hours ago and nasfan already figured that she's showing her real stripes::)) how is so? may I ask? As a House Representative, Nancy Pelosi proposed legislation that would impose strict restrictions on disguised puppet projects that the republicans used to pass under the table along with larger bills. Such puppet projects were designed to benefit GOP campaign contributors (Abrahmov (now in jail), Enron execs (now in jail), big oil, big pharma (we’ll see about these), etc.) as well as the corrupt GOP house represantives’ states, cities, locales. However, the previous republican Congress did not accommodate Mrs. Pelosi's initiative (surpise::)) She'll pass that legislation now that we are the majority in both houses (let's see what the reaction of the GOP members of the Congress will be). She'll also launch an investigation into the gauging of gasoline prices last summer (did the Exxon boys and the oil patch in Houston see this coming?), and will allow Medicare to negotiate prescription drugs with big pharma (while Bush prohibited Medicare from negotiatiing with big pharma I guess for the benefit of the little guy????) let alone an investigation into the defense and supplier contracts for Iraq. Let’s see then who represents the corrupt and the unprincipled in this country. 6 years they demolished and stole public property, well now they’ll be exposed and the criminals will be brought to justice. The American people gave the mandate to the Democratic Party to clean the house of the government. Small businesses (including self-employed individuals) represent more than 99 percent of all employers and employ 51 percent of private-sector workers. Hence, small business/self-employed and corporate employment are equally important with respect to size. However, corporations are much more powerful than small businesses (1% of firms employs half of private sector workers), thus corps do impose their rules of the game to the government. Under the Bush administration, certain companies have experienced as you correctly copied a bonanza to say the least (big oil, big pharma, defense contractors). The little guy is being squeezed at the corner and being forced to the role of the observer of an unheard re-distribution of wealth in this country during the dreadful, last 6 years. Even G. Bush Jr. in one of his speeches urged corporations to share some of the benefits of globalization with the people instead of pocketing everything. In other words, he told them to at least throw the people some bones just to save face on behalf of his administration::)) You keep touting all this GOP propaganda jargon. What does extreme left mean? what does being a liberal mean? in the GOP propaganda dictionary ... nasfan6 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/17/2006 6:48:36 AM   What will be next Trav, alternative fuel such as ethanol, Next agenda you will have will be to bring down "Big Corn!" As for Pelosi, she's window dressing, she's already backing out of campaign promises. Supporting Murtha for house majority leader was a joke. I see the democrats already bucking her choices. Most ethical congress, yeah right. I don't know where you get this redistribution of wealth. So next year when an additional 2 grand of my money is taken in taxes where is that going? Mandate in congress? You are amusing. 51-49 in the Senate is now mandate by any means. I think you need to see how a bill becomes a law before you start spewing this great mandate. There also not a great majority in the house. Wow what a mandate! I think the Dems could start by cleaning up there house. I hear Teddy Kennedy is starting a driving school called "The Bridge" oops that's the Name of Neil Youngs school. Well as for theft maybe I will vote for Hillary in 2008, at least we won't have to furnish the White house, she can just bring back what they took. And Billy will be happy to be back in his intern playground as first man. wtrav02 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/17/2006 8:39:45 PM   2 grand of your money will go to pay our country's debt. Any suggestions how to pay the republicans' debt? in kidney beans maybe? or corn? the tax cuts to the very rich benefited specific individuals and corps in the billions, and that was lost revenue for the treasury, now someone's got to pay for the bonanza of the last years. Pelosi said they're only gonna bring back the estate tax. They can't do much about the other tax cuts to the rich currently since the republicans have already extended them through 2008 (they expected their loss of the House and they run to pass legislation as first order of business to protect the tax cuts to the rich). What do you suggest we do then? you don't want to pay out of your pocket but you don't want the rich to pay either (!), then who is going to pay?? do you have a clue? I know unless we have 60/40 majority there is not much we can do through the Senate. However, this was a midterm election (only about a third of the seats up for grabs) and you lost 6 seats in the Senate and you went from a decent 55/45 majority to a 51/49 minority. You also lost more than 30 seats in Congress where we went from minority to a 55/45 majority. If this is not impressive, I don't know what planet you are living on:) Don't worry it's not gonna be Hilary, not that she would not make a great president, but we have someone better beyond any doubt. The next president of the U.S.A. will be Barak Obama. jetmba. Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/17/2006 9:09:51 PM   PLEASE MODERATORS - do not under any conditions delete the above post! If it is possible for trav to look any more foolish than he regularly makes himself appear - this statement will be a gem in two years. I look forward to reminding him of it and watching him make excuses about what happened. (After all you KNOW he's still going to be here. Its apparent that he checks this forum for comments eight or ten times per day and its unlikely that he will develope any more of a life in the next two years.) nasfan6 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/18/2006 8:46:41 AM   Baaaaaaaaaaaaaraaaaaaaaakkkkkkkkkkkkk Ooooooooooobbbbbbbbbbbbbbaaaaaaaaaaaaaamaaaaaaaaaaaa! Wtrav please, please seek help immediately, or I hope that was tongue in Cheek! Nope Mrs. Bill is your Nominee, George Soros is will to spend a billion dollars to guarantee that. How can a Junior Senator from Illinois with only 2 years experience become a president? Alan Keyes and JC Watts are more eloquent speakers and writers than Obama. Oh I forgot you can't be black and a conservative, it's impossible, must be some trick. This is classic. Almost as classic as carpet bagging hypocrite Hillary, becoming a senator. I wonder if the New York Libs knew Hillary sat on the board of directors of Walmart for almost 7 years.God how the libs hate walmart. Hey, on the minimum wage, I agree lets just quick screwing around and make it 25.00 an hour and move on to other legislation. If you don't think raising the minimum wage isn't a hidden tax hike agenda, then I know you haven't owned your own business. Yep use the people's emotion to raise tax money. So screw it I'm all for 25.00 an hour so I will let my two employees go and do it myself. I heard The Senior blimp from Massachussetts Saying were going to raise it, raise it, raise it etc. Teddy too bad you didn't Raise Mary Jo out the the water you drunken bastard. jetmba. Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/18/2006 1:15:01 PM   I was going to refrain from talking about politics since trav finds it impossible to control himself in any disagreement and tends to spread it all over the board, but since that has already occured - I will make a comment. The people who voted Democrat this time were comprised of a loose coalition of people who are against the war and those who have been told by liberal media not to like Bush or the Republicans. The country is split generally in half betwee those who consider themselves to be Democrat and those who consider themselves Republican (maybe a few more Republicans especially in the last two decades) and it doesn't take much to sway the middle folks one way or another. But the Dmeocrats HAVE no plan. They have no basic ideas or central charismatic person. Only a fool sees the most recent elections as temporary adjustment. wtrav02 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/19/2006 10:00:24 AM   He is refraining, restraining, restricting, and constricting himself not to reply not to comment but he does come after my posts continuously. Hey grandpa are you so obsessed with me? Do you want me to send you my picture, so you can place it on your night stand, that way you don’t have to wait for my reply::))) Did you try what I told ya in the other thread? did it work? (when we have no reports from this guy, something has gone wrong with his dates as usual:::)))) then again in a few weeks he will blurt everything amidst crying and complaining all over the board, so I suggest patience to the whole crew::))) wtrav02 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/19/2006 10:06:28 AM   nasfan, I only have one word for you: BARAK OBAMA is the republicans' fear and I do hope he decides to throw his hat in for the nomination. It;s a joke to even think that you may have bodies who could stand next to the Senator for Illinois. He's got fresh ideas, great education and background, he's young, extremely articulate, inspirational, and you can find nothing in his past to defame him. If he's not nominated, I am positive he'll be extended an offer from Hillary to join her as a VP candidate in the democratic ticket. A woman president and a black guy vice president, that's got to be new to you:) I'll leave you the next two years to slowly get used to the idea, hopefully you'll catch up by then:) jetmba. Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/19/2006 4:42:40 PM   Posted by wtrav02 to me on 11/17 "jetmba, you're a very sad and mean individual ... I never made any comments that involved any of the ladies that you said you were dating in the past. Further, I never made any comments about anyone's lady, significant other let alone spouse. Perhaps you could get some help by visiting a pastor at a church wherever it is that you may find peace (if you do) and confess what you said about my wife whom you've never known...." Boo hoo. Trav Booo hooo! nasfan6 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/20/2006 6:39:42 AM   Trav Barak Obama will never happen. Hey do me a favor, tell me what is some of his new ideas? Well try to tell me one, okay I have some time. I like the great education. Does that mean some liberal school. Like Yale or Harvard? Any other school lacks quality education? So in your eyes, Notre Dame, Indiana,Rose Hulman, Purdue are places where you get less than a great education? By the way Barak Obama is two words. I'm still surprised the troops are still in Iraq. What amazed me about the electorate, and it was a typical trick that has been pulled by the democrats in the past also. When it was put to a roll call vote in the house only 3 congressmen voted for an immediate pullout of Iraq. Wasn't that the big campaign message? Get out? Now they are back peddling? I'm sure it will be Bushes fault that they BS'd the people on the campaign trail. The reality of the issue, and the dems know it, but don't want you to know is, if they pullout withing the 4-6 month timetable, that will give them a year and a half before the election of 2008. They won't do it in fear of being hit again by Al Qaeda. Now who is playing politics with American lives or subliminally proving Bushes point that having the front on the war with terror is better in Iraq than being hit again on our own soil. The story about it being a war for oil now grows lame and weak on the dems part. Now your party is the party of "Big Oil" or they would pull out. Nope it's just liberal lip service being paid to the people as usual. Oh just a footnote, One of my accounts happens to be Eli Lily in Indianapolis. Big Pharma, you know those guys. Funny they keep a 300 million dollar war chest for frivolous law suits. How's that for cost on your prescription drugs. Gee, it must be all the greed on "Big Pharma", no I think you can blame that on the American Trial Lawyers. I'm surprised I never hear about Tort reform from your party, but I keep forgetting, your the party of the little guy. So the little guy can keep the lawyers rich and happy and pay both ways. wtrav02 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/20/2006 3:08:38 PM   Nasfy, some of the scools that you mentioned may indeed be higher rated in particular fields than the Ivy League schools taht you mentioned. If the question is which are the most prestigious schools overall (i.e. which have the most prominent wow effect on the general public), then Harvard, Princeton, Yale, MIT and so on would be the answer. If the question is which are the highest rated schools in a particular field, then we'll have to look at the particular rankings and it should be no surprise if schools perceived as most prestigious overall in fact rank lower than mainstream schools. Overall, however, the most prestigious schools have the funds and reputation that attract both top notch researchers and students. I mentioned that Obama has great education. I did not say that his education is great because he went to Harvard Law School. It seems to me you have a complex or hostility with educated people and the education system overall (?) They're not back peddling. There is no bigger stupidity than being stubborn like Bush is these days and while realizing that his policy in Iraq is a failure he "stays the course". Only a herd of sheep stays the course even if the course leads to the edege of a steep hill ... It is smart politics to realize the change in dynamics and adjust policy accordingly. Republicans are not the party that could make adjustments. They are the party that stays the course no matter where the hell the course takes us. You may not know this (in fact, from what you say, I'd be surprised if you had any idea), but only a very small number of corporations are net tax payers. Further, the percentage of overall taxes paid by corporations is in the low teens. If you ever worked in the executive ranks of a coproration, you'd know very well the schemes that are devised by staffs of tax experts and tax consultants, schemes aimed at reducing the corporate effective tax rate to zero. When the schemes are not enough or have an adverse effect, then highly paid Washington lobbyists take over and influence goverment policy to the corporation's benefit. I can refer to specific examples! Do you personally have any tax staff working for your benefit around the clock to bring down your tax rate to zero? do you have any lobbyists in DC manking sure your interests are well served? I don't and I do not vote for those who support and encourage this practice, i.e. the GOP. Although I am not against small business, you must know that most small businesses do not pay taxes at all (and in many occasions have both profits and receive money from the IRS, e.g. EIC). In fact, much of the boom in small business that presumably occured the last six years consisted of businesses that existed for the sole purpose of providing tax heavens for the owners. nasfan6 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/21/2006 6:27:57 AM   Small business doesn't pay any tax at all. Now I know you are out of touch. That's been the problem since the passing of the 16th amendment. It's given government the free will to tax at will. I have never received earned income credit in my business venture. Sometimes your arrogance flows out. Hostility towards education? That's just a bluebloods way of insulting people. Like I said you need to get out of your ivory tower. I may be far more educated than you know. That's what I really like about liberals. They talk down to people, then when the get cornered with their lack of knowledge it becomes an insult contest. The biggest lie the libs perpetrate on the people is they are going after the rich guy. They create class warfare and envy. They don't go after the rich guy(I guess Pelosi and the Blimp from Massachussetts will cut their own wallets, I doubt it. Hey John Kerry, what was his private sector Job?). They understand the simple mathematics that the middle class will always be the largest tax base and the easiest to accrue taxation from, because one, they are two income earners, not because they want to be, but due to taxation they have to be. It's redistribution of wealth. Just like your home, no one in America owns their home, not a single person. You rent it from the government. That my friend is socialism at it's finest moment. The American dream, dashed by the insidious rule of socialism that you endorse so highly. I still wonder why the fruit of a man's labor is taken from him even after death. Thus, this steals from the very mouths he stuggled to feed during his life, and the children the libs so much care for. Nope my friend you endorse theft from people, but it's done on the sly. It's still theft and still a lie perpetrated on the working class of America, the ones the libs always pay lip service too, but they are too busy working to pay taxes to pay attention to the one's they think are helping them are stealing from them. wtrav02 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/21/2006 8:35:45 AM   nasfan, I did not intend to insult you by any means. I have said many times that I respect you and indeed I enjoy the discussion with you even if we hardly agree on anything. You have on occasion in the past talked in a negative manner about education and you've even praised school drop-outs. You've also referred to the liberal education system in a similar manner to which you've referred to the liberal media and liberal Hollywood, etc. I figured that for some reason you are not in favor of education. As we all know, many ultra conservatives avoid sending their kids to college or choose certain southern colleges to send their kids because they're afraid their kids will return liberals::)) I didn't think that you are of the same mindset like these ultra conservatives and I am glad that you confirm it. You're saying that there are no small businesses that pay no tax? I won't go into the legal mumbo jumbo, so tell me this: couldn't you set up a business so that you could combine your losses from the business with your gains from other employment and credits so that your net is negative and if you have kids you can even be entitled to a refund in the form of EIC? do you have any idea how many businesses are set up like this intentionally? aside from this, even if the business makes money, the owner can deduct various personal expenses including expenses related to big ticket items. Real profit and reported profit for tax are very different and the difference almost always favors the business entity. I'm not saying I'm against our tax laws for small businesses. I am just pointing the fact that most taxes are indeed paid by people who receive wages. That is plain truth, the work force pays the expenses of the government of the United States. The rich used to pay some taxes, but Bush took care of it. For instance, he eliminated the estate tax that mainly hit the rich, but did nothing about the AMT which only hits the middle class. I'm always amazed to see middle class people or even lower than middle class support the party that favors the rich on the premise that the democratic party has also some rich supporters such as Soros, Hollywood actors, etc. You must understand that ideology is the strongest motivation in people's life and the people that you mentioned are driven by ideals. Why Warren Buffet donated his 40 billion dollar wealth to the Bill Gates foundation? there's a question ... you referred to John Kerry. Kerry fought in Vietnam although he did not have to, as you very well know, he comes from a wealthy family and it would have been very easy for him to bail out like George did. Then when he came back with a boatload of medals, he united his efforts with those of other veterans to raise awareness against the war. What else could he have done? sit on the riches of his parents, become a playboy, a drunkard, get involved in baseball ... reminds anyone at all?? You did not answer me the question about how do you suggest we pay the debt? you do not want to pay higher taxes, but you do not favor the reinstatement of the Bush tax cuts to the rich. Then how do we pay for the Bush government's current expenses and the trillion in debt? nasfan6 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/21/2006 10:14:52 AM   Let me clarify something. I didn't take it as a personal insult. Also I do endorse education, but it's not the only means to being successful. As with education and any endearvor you may take up in life input=output. Though dyed in the wool liberals like to flaunt their pedigrees and lessen a mans success due to the lack of a degree from some stuffed shirt university. As for the Boatload of medals, well I will refrain from hammering but state just one thing. In Viet Nam there were more CMH's given out than during any of our previous wars combined. To me that lessens the heroism of the bronze and silver star winners of the previous wars, who may in fact acted more bravely than the one's who received the CMH in Viet Nam. Not to lessen the value of heroism, but it surely diluted the bravery point. Just remember when Clinton was running, Military service shouldn't be a pre-requisite to the presidency, that was they liberal hype. Though Dan Quayle got hammered and called in so many words a pussy for being in the National Guard. Now Kerry was a big hero and Bush was more or less labeled a draft dodger. Trav you can't have it both ways. As for small business administration, well that's a topic I could go on for hours on. As for income tax and perks, you got to remember, those perks come out of operating expenses and the write offs are not nearly what they used to be. I pay tax on inventory, I pay tax to operate a business, I must have liability insurance, I had to form an LLC to protect my individual assests, though even then, if it is due negligence on my part I am still liable. I pay the 14 percent in social security on my income and income of two employees. We don't get off scott free my friend. As for paying off the debt. Tighten spending, abolish the IRS and set a national consumption tax.Can you write a bad check without penalty of prosecution? Hell no, so why should the government be able to do such. That will eliminate loopholes. I guess you should define what is rich. If a man works all his life let's say he's frugal and on 50k a year he amasses a 3 million dollar net worth. Is the federal government entitled to 40%? In todays dollars a two income family making 100K isn't classified as rich due to the dollar. The national average of a two income family is about 65K are they rich in todays market. No way.Why destroy what they accumulate over a lifetime to pass down to their children, that's is what is so wrong with the estate tax. The top 10% of the wage earners carry about 60% of the tax burden any way, why penalize the middle class on estate taxes. No I respect your debate, but you are younger than 40, so there is still hope for you. wtrav02 Member send PM   block PM add to buddies Send: 11/22/2006 4:11:37 PM   Regarding business, you're talking about a real business. I am not arguing that you pay your fair share of taxation. I was talking about the fake businesses that one can set up to substantially reduce or eliminate taxes. Because of the Bush incentives the number of "not so real" businesses in this country has exploded. In addition, the number of tax credits and tax breaks that Congress over the years has instituted in legilsation is just phenomenal. I have taken part in the legal (underscore) exploitation of such credits that produced tens of millions of avoided taxes for one my former employers. To realize such tax credits, a corp. has to make up front investments in certain money losing operations, but the return is almost risk-free (guaranteed by the government in the form of tax credits). Is there a bigger insanity than this? and it goes further ... because in some cases there is a remote possibbility that something can go really wrong and a phase out or a loss of the credits can be triggered, and it has happened, but no worries because the lobbyists will campaign for new legislation that will take care of that problem as well. If you argued that the whole thing is fraud, you'd be right, but not technically because it's all perfectly legal. I fully agree with you about tightening government spending. I am a strong believer of true laissez-faire, which mandates that the government's role should be limited to making legislation that ensures the efficient functioning of a free market, i.e. the government's sole role in the economy is to ensure there are no barriers to a fee market. As strange as it may sound, the last six years showed us that the GOP and the neo-conservatives are by no means the party of laissez-faire in this country and I would argue that the democratic party in its current form can more convincingly claim that we are certainly more capitalists than the Bush gang who have been spending public money as if it were their own and as if there was no tomorrow. The term "liberal" that has been attached to those of us who do not vote for the GOP is the biggest fraud that will ever be told. We are indeed more capitalists than them if we go by the true principles of capitalism. This traitor and liar, Karl Rove, simply found a way to discredit and defame people by telling lies. The truth is Bush was the one who said vote for me because you know where I stand and he was the one who deceived the very people who voted for him. I could not disagree more with you on how to pay off the debt. National consumption tax is worse for the middle class and the poor than even a flat tax. So, you say the guy who is worth $40 billion should pay about the same as the guy who is worth nothing. In addition, a national consumption tax would have to be very high to compensate for the lack or substantial reduction of the income tax. This would have staggering negative effects on consumption and economic growth (do not forget 2/3 of GDP is the consumer, i.e. you and I). Hence, as much as we may not like IRS, its presence is essential. I define rich as the 1-2% of the population. The ones that you mentioned are the middle class. The democartic party does not have any intention to tax the middle class and if they ever do, I will be against such action. None would argue that people who work hard to build wealth for their retirement years should be subject to heavy taxation. Corporations have managed to pay next to nothing and this does not bother you??? If certain groups be it corporate entities or extremely wealthy individuals have managed to influence legislation to enjoy tax relief, it is a topic that affects all of us. However, only democrats see it this way. Republicans think: "I am not affected, none's taking any money from me directly (i.e. none is physically picking my pocket), I'm even given a $300 tax cut, so this is great!". We have to think about the long-term effects of loading massive amounts of debt onto this country. You know who will pay eventually, the middled class. Your Reply: Your name:   New Registration Password:   Forgot password?   refresh Code:   Russian brides > Main Forum > NASFAN6 SPECIAL
	Pages: 1 2 3