XPost: alt.impeach.clinton, alt.society.liberalism, talk.politics.misc   
   XPost: alt.atheism   
   From: linder.one@osu.edu   
      
   Nicklas@Click.com wrote:   
      
   >On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 17:25:57 GMT, linder.one@osu.edu   
   >(Jeffrey Scott Linder) wrote:   
   >   
   >>Nicklas@Click.com wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 12:36:25 GMT, linder.one@osu.edu   
   >>>(Jeffrey Scott Linder) wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>>>You keep saying the "wealthy earned their money"   
   >>>>>Those that earn money after enheriting all their   
   >>>>>wealth---pay little taxes on income.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>Well of course we know that's not true.  But then you just keep   
   >>>>snipping the evidence don't you.   
   >>>   
   >>>Yes, the books written on how the wealthy "write off"   
   >>>their income don't exist, right?   
   >>   
   >>Since you're a clueless ass   
   >   
   >Have books been written on the ways the weallthy keep   
   >from paying taxes?  or not?   
      
   Have they?  Name a few.   
      
   >   
   >>>They pay LESS of their income than the poor.   
   >>   
   >>Maybe you can demonstrate that?   
   >   
   >"Demonstrate"?   
   >   
   >A $20,000 a year "mom" pays all relevant state, local   
   >and federal taxes on everything. Food, rent, clothing,   
   >gas, oil, health care, etc.   
      
   I guess I should have said "prove".   
      
   >The disposable income of any given "poor person" is   
   >eaten up by taxes, or necessities.   
   >   
   >OTOH, the $15 million that some obscure   
   >money-manipulating asshole made for a "bonus" is   
   >immediately scrutinized for any/all savings he can make   
   >by the tax laws written for him, shelters to protect   
   >it, investments that help defray the taxes.  His   
   >"contribution" to society is a fraction of HIS total   
   >income. Not to mention rightwing fucks like Scaife,   
   >upon reaching the age of 18, have a couple of billion   
   >handed to them which in turn is used to fuck the poor.   
      
   Of course you haven't proved any of this...nor will you even attempt   
   to do so.   
      
   >   
   >   
   >>>>I've never claimed that taxation ruins investment   
   >>>   
   >>>Then why else would you oppose taxing the wealth?   
   >>   
   >>Because the government doesn't tax wealth.   
   >   
   >If you have money, you have wealth   
      
   Maybe, mabye not.   
      
   >If you have land, investments, you have wealth   
   >   
   >If they don't tax "wealth"---then they should   
      
   Ahhh...now the truth comes out.   
      
   >   
   >>>The justification against taxing the wealthy is that it   
   >>>"stifles" growth.  Not true.   
   >>   
   >>Throw as much straw around as you want.   
   >   
   >"Stifling investment" was the "biggie" excuse used for   
   >lowing taxes on the wealthy, you dumb fuckwit.   
      
   Keep thrashing.   
      
   >By allowing fewer and fewer people to amass wealth, the   
   >"theory" is that THEY will help society   
      
   It is?  Whose theory is that?  Is it one you just came up with?   
      
   >Not true, never has been.   
      
   Apparently so.   
      
      
   >>>Crickets Wave.............   
   >>   
   >>That's the sound of the evidence you've provided.   
   >   
   >Stamping your foot and saying "is not, is not" is not   
   >supporting your silly arguments, LinderLoon.   
      
   lol.  I've supported my arguements with data.  You've done   
   nothing...nor does anyone really ever expect you to do so.   
      
   JSL   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)