Take Away The Bush Tax Cuts, Most of Which Went Only to the Top 1%.
Abel
The Republicans want you to believe that America is broke. They want
you to think that things are so bad that there are no other options
except their draconian budget cuts. It's been one of their main
themes in recent weeks. John Boehner, Chris Christie, Michele
Bachman, Tim Pawlenty, and the whole damn bunch, they're all barking
in unison, "America's broke, America's broke, America's broke".
Republicans are LIARS! These guys would have absolutely no skills
whatsoever, if they did not know how to lie so well.
The truth of the matter is that we're NOT broke, nor are we going
bankrupt. An article from Bloomberg news (linked below) verifies this
fact that America is NOT going broke.
I wholeheartedly agree with Michael Moore, who said this to a crowd of
Wisconsinites, over the weekend:
"America is not broke. Not by a long shot. We are a country that is
awash in wealth and cash. It's just that it's not in your hands. It
has been transferred, in the greatest heist in history, from the
workers and consumers, to the banks and the portfolios of the uber
rich."
According to Bloomberg news, they say that America is most definitely
NOT going broke, nor is it going bankrupt, they say that almost every
government in the world is in debt, and this is normal operating
procedure, because it's what everyone does, they take a little bit of
debt here, and a little bit of debt there, and then when you are doing
well economically you get to pay it off. This is what everyone does.
But when no one will lend you money any more (and that is far from the
case with America), then and only then can you be truly called
"broke". Other countries are only too eager to lend America money and
they are lending it to us at historically low interest rates. The
only problem is that our tax rates are badly skewed. If we ask the
very wealthy to share the pain of these economic times, then we can
balance the budget, as we did during the Clinton years...now everyone
knows this...the whole financial markets know this, otherwise they
wouldn't lend us all that money at these incredibly low rates. So you
see, this isn't about whether we can pay our bills, but about how the
wealthiest Americans avoid paying their share.
Republicans want you to believe that the only way to balance the
budget is thru the backs of the middle class. Republicans are nothing
but a bunch of lying whores. Meanwhile, us Democrats, we are doing
the patriotic thing, by coming to the front, taking the podium proudly
and speaking up to defend the middle class. Democrats are fighting
for the priorities of the American people, but Republicans are
fighting for the priorities of their wealthy political donors.
Here is America's richest billionaire, Warren Buffett, and he said
this about what the Republicans are doing:
"There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class,
that's making the war, and we're winning."
The issue is a very clear issue, what the Republicans want to do is
throw hundreds of thousands of kids off the cliff, by cutting Head
Start. They want to substantially cut back on Pell Grants, which will
impact millions of College students. They want to cut back on heating
assistance programs, they want to cut back on pregnancy prevention
programs, e.t.c, e.t.c. This is a real VISCIOUS attack. What the
Republican budget in Washington is, directed against working families
and low income paid people. Meanwhile the top 1% are doing
phenomenally well, their effective tax rate at 16% is lower than at
any time in recorded history, they have gotten hundreds of billions of
dollars in tax breaks. Instead of attacking the middle class and
working families, you've got to ask the wealthy to start paying their
fair share of taxes. If we simply do a 5% surtax on all income over a
million dollars, then it will generate so much revenue that the
Republicans will not need to cut ANYTHING at all, they will NOT need
to cut any of the programs that pertain to children, the sick, the
elderly or the poor. All that is needed is a 5% surtax on
millionaires. Go after the oil companies who are by far the richest
companies that exist, yet the oil companies have loopholes after
loopholes that are exempting them from even having to pay any taxes at
all.
Just do those things then we won't have any of the problems which the
Republicans are talking about. The ultimate solution is this, get rid
of the Bush tax cuts, most of which went only to the richest 1%. But
to get rid of the Bush tax cuts, it seems that we will need to get rid
of the Republican whores first (in November of 2012). Think about
it.
A.M.
Harold Burton
<d5b7a37e-fe38-4291...@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
Abel <abelm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Take Away The Bush Tax Cuts . .
Jealousy is not a pretty thing
jane
You made at least four mistakes in your post:
1. If "The truth of the matter is that we're NOT broke, nor are we
going
bankrupt.", then why do we need to take away the Bush Tax cuts for the
rich?
2. If you do take away the Bush tax cuts for the rich (those making
over $250k), that will only bring in $700 billion over TEN YEARS.
That is insignificant compared to the current deficit.
3. Your third mistake is stating that "The Bush Tax Cuts, Most of
Which Went Only to the Top 1%." The top 1% make $500,000 or more.
Let's add in all of those who make $250k and more: The Bush Tax Cuts
for those over $250,000 only amounts to $700 Billion over 10 years.
The Bush Tax Cuts for EVERYONE ELSE is $3 TRILLION over 10 years.
4. Your fourth mistake is your claim that "If we simply do a 5%
surtax on all income over a
million dollars, then it will generate so much revenue that the
Republicans will not need to cut ANYTHING at all, ". According to the
IRS,(www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/08in11si.xls) the TOTAL taxable income
of everyone making million dollars, and more, is $934,255 Million
($934 Billion). Five percent of that is only $46 Billion, a spit in
the bucket of our current deficit. Even if we take ALL of their
taxable income (a 100% surtax) there still won't be enough to wipe out
the current deficit.
The income of $1 million and more is only 14% of total income. If you
want to wipe out the deficit with taxation, you have to go after the
OTHER 86% of the income group.
You are a partisan hack who has listened to other partisan hacks
without checking the facts.
JLS
> In article
> <d5b7a37e-fe38-4291-ab6e-c1cc4ec58...@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
>
> Abel <abelmalc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Take Away The Bush Tax Cuts . .
>
> Jealousy is not a pretty thing
Jealousy?
So you don't believe in a progressive tax rate which takes a greater
proportion from the rich to pay for the government services and
infrastructure the wealthy enjoy so much more?
Something is badly wrong when 1% of the USA population owns 35% of its
wealth.
And if you will look at the charts, you'll see that despite periods of
progressive income taxes, changes in the holdings have been minimal
since the 1920's:
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
During the 70's the middle class appeared to thrive. But then the
robber barons got the upper hand. How did that happen?
Rank and file Americans are stupid to put up with the continuing
thievery of their wages by the conniving super rich. Wisconsin is
just the beginning.
liberal
> In article
> <d5b7a37e-fe38-4291-ab6e-c1cc4ec58...@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > Take Away The Bush Tax Cuts . .
>
> Jealousy is not a pretty thing
Yeah, you assholes look pretty bad begrudging other Americans a decent
wage and health benefits. Odd that you never look in the mirror to see
the real enemy of the nation.
liberal
Failure to understand economics is a major problem for you
>
> 1. If "The truth of the matter is that we're NOT broke, nor are we
> going
> bankrupt.", then why do we need to take away the Bush Tax cuts for the
> rich?
Because the wealthy continue to choke the US economy by concentrating
money at the very top.
>
> 2. If you do take away the Bush tax cuts for the rich (those making
> over $250k), that will only bring in $700 billion over TEN YEARS.
> That is insignificant compared to the current deficit.
Funny how Clinton's rather small tax increases created a huge
improvement in the US economy. A rational...honest person would think
back at you reichtards predicting a massive depression would result if
Clinton's 1993 budget was passed. So many reichtards believed your
1993 wacko prediction that democrats lost both houses of Congress.
But, as per ususal, real history has that awful liberal bias.
>
> 3. Your third mistake is stating that "The Bush Tax Cuts, Most of
> Which Went Only to the Top 1%." The top 1% make $500,000 or more.
> Let's add in all of those who make $250k and more: The Bush Tax Cuts
> for those over $250,000 only amounts to $700 Billion over 10 years.
> The Bush Tax Cuts for EVERYONE ELSE is $3 TRILLION over 10 years.
And how has the US economy faired under the Bush tax cuts? Versus how
it did under the Clinton tax increases?
>
> 4. Your fourth mistake is your claim that "If we simply do a 5%
> surtax on all income over a
> million dollars, then it will generate so much revenue that the
> Republicans will not need to cut ANYTHING at all, ". According to the
> IRS,(www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/08in11si.xls) the TOTAL taxable income
> of everyone making million dollars, and more, is $934,255 Million
> ($934 Billion). Five percent of that is only $46 Billion, a spit in
> the bucket of our current deficit. Even if we take ALL of their
> taxable income (a 100% surtax) there still won't be enough to wipe out
> the current deficit.
Ahhhhhh, but there is a multiplier effect as working class people have
money to spend (see: velocity of money). Your arrogant ignorance is
your problem.
>
> The income of $1 million and more is only 14% of total income. If you
> want to wipe out the deficit with taxation, you have to go after the
> OTHER 86% of the income group.
>
> You are a partisan hack who has listened to other partisan hacks
> without checking the facts.
You are a reichtard whore who listens only to other reichtard whores
without checking the facts.
liberal
> On Mar 8, 6:55 am, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <d5b7a37e-fe38-4291-ab6e-c1cc4ec58...@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > Abel <abelmalc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Take Away The Bush Tax Cuts . .
>
> > Jealousy is not a pretty thing
>
> Jealousy?
>
> So you don't believe in a progressive tax rate which takes a greater
> proportion from the rich to pay for the government services and
> infrastructure the wealthy enjoy so much more?
>
> Something is badly wrong when 1% of the USA population owns 35% of its
> wealth.
> And if you will look at the charts, you'll see that despite periods of
> progressive income taxes, changes in the holdings have been minimal
> since the 1920's:http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
>
> During the 70's the middle class appeared to thrive. But then the
> robber barons got the upper hand. How did that happen?
Actually, the middle class did not "thrive" in the 1970s. OPEC's
quintupling of energy prices, and Volker's strangulation of US credit,
began the breaking of the middle class. Consumer prices rose five-
fold, matching the cost of energy increase...once prices caught up
with energy, inflation ended. The argument that Volker's prime rate
increases ended inflation is no more real than 18th century doctors
claims that their bleeding of a patient saved their life.
Had Volker freed up loans, people and businesses would have replaced
energy inefficient pre-WWII technology with more rational products.
The OPEC price increases achieved one positive outcome....they gave
non-OPEC nations the incentive to bring new fields on-line. However,
those fields were small and are running dry. Thus the return of oil
price increases since 2001 as a general trend (not the current jump
which is purely political).
The reason the "robber barons" have gotten the upper hand is a result
of the 1964 Goldwater defeat. Conservatives realized that only a long
term plan of undermining freedom of the press would achieve their goal
of a fascist control of the US economy. Thus FOX news, etc. and groups
like the CATO Institute.
Conservatives are convinced paying workers nothing will make them
richer. In their minds there are two separate and distinct groups in
American society: workers and consumers.
>
> Rank and file Americans are stupid to put up with the continuing
> thievery of their wages by the conniving super rich. Wisconsin is
> just the beginning.
It is nice to believe that. I suspect the furor will die down. People
will need to put food on their table and will do whatever's
necessary...even selling out their children's future.
There is no conservative/looneytunarian/teabaggette social, political,
or economic policy which has ever made the bottom 95% of America
better off. Liberal policies have, however. One need only review the
growth in the wealth of the bottom 95%, their increase in health and
lifespan, and their educational achievement since FDR until Reagan.
Then those improvements began leveling off. Under Bush---outright
reversals.
libs.exploit.death
In article <d5b7a37e-fe38-4291-ab6e-
c1cc4e...@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, abelm...@gmail.com
says...
<leftist bullshit deleted>
Ray Fischer
It is astonishing how these rightard morons will insist that the rich
get big tax cuts even though it means that they will have to pay more
in taxes and fees for themselves.
It's it some kind of cult stupidity?
Paid shills?
Gullibility?
--
Ray Fischer | Mendacracy (n.) government by lying
rfis...@sonic.net | The new GOP ideal
Ray Fischer
>When has a nation ever taxed itself into prosperity????
United States. 1950s.
Abel
> libs.exploit.death <l...@political.necrophiliacs.org> wrote:
> >When has a nation ever taxed itself into prosperity????
>
> United States. 1950s.
>
> --
> Ray Fischer | Mendacracy (n.) government by lying
This is a conservative talking point, Rush Limbo repeats it over and
over again, so does FOX, and all those other brainless wing-nut
clones. When ever he can take time out of his constant spreading of
hate, Rush Limbo screams: "No country has ever taxed itself into
prosperity!"
In the 1950's, the tax rate on the richest Americans was 90%. That
means that 4 out of every 5 dollars that the uber rich made, they paid
in taxes. That's how we paid for World War 2. Those were the days,
when Democrats were in charge, and the people were truly patriotic,
and willing to make sacrifices. Contrast it to these days, where
Republicans are spearheading a movement that amounts to sheer hate,
selfishness, and then they also talk a good game of patriotism, but
they will not do anything really, except talk, and then they keep
spreading hate, and they keep spreading lies, but there is absolutely
nothing which Republicans do that is good for our country. We would
have lost World War 2 if the Republicans were in charge. Check out
this video, if you want to see something funny, a World War 2
propaganda piece, to get Americans to sacrifice: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbcgKf7SdO8
The 1950's, after World War 2 was won, the tax rate remained at 90%,
where Eisenhower took advantage of the extra revenue by building the
nation's highway system and expanding the electricity grid many other
infrastructure projects.
When we were attacked on 9/11/01, Republicans responded by insisting
that there should be more tax cuts for the rich, and then they jacked
up spending, where too much of the spending went to corrupt war
profiteering scams associated with Halliburton and Bechtel and then
who can forget the $8 billion that just disappeared into thin air in
Iraq. Imagine the stupidity of it all, lowering taxes while
increasing war time spending at the same time.
The other time that our nation was "taxed into prosperity" was when
Clinton was President, with only a modest tax increase on the uber
rich, Clinton created tens of millions of jobs and he created
surpluses and then our country was well on its way to erase the
national debt, that was in 2000. But then Bush happened, and he cut
taxes on the rich, and he increased spending on wars, e.t.c.
Dave Heil
> libs.exploit.death<li...@political.necrophiliacs.org> wrote:
>> When has a nation ever taxed itself into prosperity????
>
> United States. 1950s.
Don't you ever get anything right, Ray?
We manufactured our way into prosperity. Maybe you missed it.
Ray Fischer
The rightard dumbass ignores the much higher taxes of the 1950s and
completely changes the subject. Possibly it's too stupid to realize
that the manufacturing base was created by (gasp!) TAXES! You know,
all those factories created by the government for the war effort, and
all of those workers trained and educated by the GI bill. Funded by
TAXES!
Dave Heil
> Dave Heil<k8...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>> On 3/9/2011 06 47, Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> libs.exploit.death<li...@political.necrophiliacs.org> wrote:
>>>> When has a nation ever taxed itself into prosperity????
>>>
>>> United States. 1950s.
>>
>> Don't you ever get anything right, Ray?
>>
>> We manufactured our way into prosperity.
>
> The rightard dumbass ignores the much higher taxes of the 1950s and
> completely changes the subject.
Let's go back:
Q: When has a nation ever taxed itself into prosperity?
WR: United States. 1950s.
Me: Don't you ever get anything right, Ray?
Me: We manufactured our way into prosperity.
I didn't change any subject, Wrong Ray.
> Possibly it's too stupid to realize
> that the manufacturing base was created by (gasp!) TAXES! You know,
> all those factories created by the government for the war effort, and
> all of those workers trained and educated by the GI bill. Funded by
> TAXES!
The war was over in the 1950's, Wrong Ray. Most workers did not receive
their training under the G.I. bill. Our enormous prosperity in the
1950's did not come from taxes but came *in spite of them*.
Wise up.
Ray Fischer
>On 3/10/2011 08 38, Ray Fischer wrote:
>> Dave Heil<k8...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>>> On 3/9/2011 06 47, Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> libs.exploit.death<li...@political.necrophiliacs.org> wrote:
>>>>> When has a nation ever taxed itself into prosperity????
>>>>
>>>> United States. 1950s.
>>>
>>> Don't you ever get anything right, Ray?
>>>
>>> We manufactured our way into prosperity.
>>
>> The rightard dumbass ignores the much higher taxes of the 1950s and
>> completely changes the subject.
>
>Let's go back:
>
>Q: When has a nation ever taxed itself into prosperity?
>
>WR: United States. 1950s.
>
>Me: Don't you ever get anything right, Ray?
As usual the rightard bigot simply ignores all facts which
challenge its cult insanity.
>> Possibly it's too stupid to realize
>> that the manufacturing base was created by (gasp!) TAXES! You know,
>> all those factories created by the government for the war effort, and
>> all of those workers trained and educated by the GI bill. Funded by
>> TAXES!
>
>The war was over in the 1950's, Wrong Ray.
And all the factories just disappeared in 1946, dumbass?
Rightards: Dumb as toast and batshit crazy.
Harold Burton
rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >In article
> ><d5b7a37e-fe38-4291...@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
> > Abel <abelm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Take Away The Bush Tax Cuts . .
> >
> >Jealousy is not a pretty thing
>
> It is astonishing how these rightard morons will insist that the rich
> get big tax cuts even though it means that they will have to pay more
> in taxes and fees for themselves.
It's call fairness and integrity. Not surprised you don't understand it.
> It's it some kind of cult stupidity?
>
> Paid shills?
>
> Gullibility?
snicker.
Harold Burton
<46ff17f6-040d-4b41...@t15g2000prt.googlegroups.com>,
liberal <liber...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 8, 6:55 am, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <d5b7a37e-fe38-4291-ab6e-c1cc4ec58...@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > Abel <abelmalc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Take Away The Bush Tax Cuts . .
> >
> > Jealousy is not a pretty thing
>
> Yeah, you assholes look pretty bad begrudging other Americans a decent
> wage and health benefits.
That has to do with across the board tax cuts, how?
snicker
Harold Burton
<0ef82eb7-a5f2-498f...@v11g2000prb.googlegroups.com>,
JLS <jls...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> On Mar 8, 6:55 am, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <d5b7a37e-fe38-4291-ab6e-c1cc4ec58...@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > Abel <abelmalc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Take Away The Bush Tax Cuts . .
> >
> > Jealousy is not a pretty thing
>
> Jealousy?
>
> So you don't believe in a progressive tax rate which takes a greater
> proportion from the rich to pay for the government services and
> infrastructure the wealthy enjoy so much more?
snicker
Harold Burton
<45c1e7a7-dbe8-44eb...@o21g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
liberal <liber...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 8, 9:05 am, JLS <jls1...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > On Mar 8, 6:55 am, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> > > <d5b7a37e-fe38-4291-ab6e-c1cc4ec58...@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > > Abel <abelmalc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Take Away The Bush Tax Cuts . .
> >
> > > Jealousy is not a pretty thing
> >
> > Jealousy?
> >
> > So you don't believe in a progressive tax rate which takes a greater
> > proportion from the rich to pay for the government services and
> > infrastructure the wealthy enjoy so much more?
> >
> > Something is badly wrong when 1% of the USA population owns 35% of its
> > wealth.
> > And if you will look at the charts, you'll see that despite periods of
> > progressive income taxes, changes in the holdings have been minimal
> > since the 1920's:http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
> >
> > During the 70's the middle class appeared to thrive. But then the
> > robber barons got the upper hand. How did that happen?
>
> Actually, the middle class did not "thrive" in the 1970s.
Only in the fevered "minds" of idiot lefturds.
snicker
Dave Heil
> Dave Heil<k8...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>> On 3/10/2011 08 38, Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> Dave Heil<k8...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>>>> On 3/9/2011 06 47, Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>> libs.exploit.death<li...@political.necrophiliacs.org> wrote:
>>>>>> When has a nation ever taxed itself into prosperity????
>>>>>
>>>>> United States. 1950s.
>>>>
>>>> Don't you ever get anything right, Ray?
>>>>
>>>> We manufactured our way into prosperity.
>>>
>>> The rightard dumbass ignores the much higher taxes of the 1950s and
>>> completely changes the subject.
>>
>> Let's go back:
>>
>> Q: When has a nation ever taxed itself into prosperity?
>>
>> WR: United States. 1950s.
>>
>> Me: Don't you ever get anything right, Ray?
>
> As usual the rightard bigot simply ignores all facts which
> challenge its cult insanity.
You still don't have it. Let's do it again:
Q: When has a nation ever taxed itself into prosperity?
Wrong Ray: United States. 1950s.
Me: Don't you ever get anything right, Ray?
>>> Possibly it's too stupid to realize
>>> that the manufacturing base was created by (gasp!) TAXES! You know,
>>> all those factories created by the government for the war effort, and
>>> all of those workers trained and educated by the GI bill. Funded by
>>> TAXES!
>>
>> The war was over in the 1950's, Wrong Ray.
>
> And all the factories just disappeared in 1946, dumbass?
We're talking about the 1950's, Ray. 1946 is not in the 1950's.
> Rightards: Dumb as toast and batshit crazy.
I see your tactics. You post something in error and that's supposed to
make your opponent stupid.
Have you stopped wearing your mother's nighties yet?
Ray Fischer
> rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > Abel <abelm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Take Away The Bush Tax Cuts . .
>> >
>> >Jealousy is not a pretty thing
>>
>> It is astonishing how these rightard morons will insist that the rich
>> get big tax cuts even though it means that they will have to pay more
>> in taxes and fees for themselves.
>
>It's call fairness and integrity.
It's "fair" to see the rich profit from the work of the middle class.
It's "fair" to put people onto the streets so that the rich can have
millions more.
> Not surprised you don't understand it.
You think it's "fair" that you should have to pay more so that
somebody who gets paid $100 million a year can pay millions less
in supporting the government that protects that income.
It's not "fairness", rightard. It's malicious stupidity.
Ray Fischer
>On 3/12/2011 04 21, Ray Fischer wrote:
>> Dave Heil<k8...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>>> On 3/10/2011 08 38, Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> Dave Heil<k8...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 3/9/2011 06 47, Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>> libs.exploit.death<li...@political.necrophiliacs.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> When has a nation ever taxed itself into prosperity????
>>>>>>
>>>>>> United States. 1950s.
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't you ever get anything right, Ray?
>>>>>
>>>>> We manufactured our way into prosperity.
>>>>
>>>> The rightard dumbass ignores the much higher taxes of the 1950s and
>>>> completely changes the subject.
>>>
>>> Let's go back:
>>>
>>> Q: When has a nation ever taxed itself into prosperity?
>>>
>>> WR: United States. 1950s.
>>>
>>> Me: Don't you ever get anything right, Ray?
>>
>> As usual the rightard bigot simply ignores all facts which
>> challenge its cult insanity.
>
>You still don't have it.
Quit whining, dumbass. We alreadfy know you're stupid and you don't
keep having to prove it.
>>>> Possibly it's too stupid to realize
>>>> that the manufacturing base was created by (gasp!) TAXES! You know,
>>>> all those factories created by the government for the war effort, and
>>>> all of those workers trained and educated by the GI bill. Funded by
>>>> TAXES!
>>>
>>> The war was over in the 1950's, Wrong Ray.
>>
>> And all the factories just disappeared in 1946, dumbass?
>
>We're talking about the 1950's, Ray.
That's right, dumbass. Are you going to answer the question?
>> Rightards: Dumb as toast and batshit crazy.
>
>I see your tactics.
Now that rightard asshole is going to try and blame me for its
malicious stupidity.
Dave Heil
>
"The question" is irrelevant.
>>> Rightards: Dumb as toast and batshit crazy.
>>
>> I see your tactics. You post something in error and that's supposed
>> to make your opponent stupid.
> Now that rightard asshole is going to try and blame me for its
> malicious stupidity.
Au contraire, Wrong Ray, I'm going to blame you for your own stupidity.
You don't know anything, can't prove anything and can't argue anything.
Run away, coward.
Dave Heil
> does.
Well, I've established that Ray doesn't like it when someone else uses
his tactics.
Ray Fischer
The rightard turns tail. Anything to avoid the truth.
Harold Burton
rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> >> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Abel <abelm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> Take Away The Bush Tax Cuts . .
> >> >
> >> >Jealousy is not a pretty thing
> >>
> >> It is astonishing how these rightard morons will insist that the rich
> >> get big tax cuts even though it means that they will have to pay more
> >> in taxes and fees for themselves.
> >
> >It's call fairness and integrity.
>
> It's "fair" to see the rich profit from the work of the middle class.
> It's "fair" to put people onto the streets so that the rich can have
> millions more.
works for me. And ya know what makes it even better? Listening to you
whine about it.
snicker
Dave Heil
I'm right here, Ray. The truth is that 1946 is not the 1950's.
The United States manufactured itself to prosperity.
Dave Heil
> tactics ;-)
It's just like dealing with a car salesman: hold your breath and wash
your hands as soon as possible.
Ray Fischer
That's because you're servile worm, grovelling at the feet of your
masters.
Beg for scraps, worm.
Harold Burton
rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) whined:
> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >In article <4d7bf880$0$10585$742e...@news.sonic.net>,
> > rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> >
> >> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> > rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> >> >> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > Abel <abelm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> >> Take Away The Bush Tax Cuts . .
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Jealousy is not a pretty thing
> >> >>
> >> >> It is astonishing how these rightard morons will insist that the rich
> >> >> get big tax cuts even though it means that they will have to pay more
> >> >> in taxes and fees for themselves.
> >> >
> >> >It's call fairness and integrity.
> >>
> >> It's "fair" to see the rich profit from the work of the middle class.
> >> It's "fair" to put people onto the streets so that the rich can have
> >> millions more.
> >
> >works for me.
>
> That's because you're servile worm, grovelling at the feet of your
> masters.
Living quite well off dividends and capital gains, actually. But feel
free to call that "grovelling" if it make you feel better. It appears
you can't even hold a job, based on your usenet posting schedule . . .
that, or you're more than willing to post on company time. Don't expect
too many raises with that work ethic. No wonder leftards whine about
being poor.
snicker
Ray Fischer
>In article <4d7d0cb1$0$10590$742e...@news.sonic.net>,
> rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) whined:
>
>> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >In article <4d7bf880$0$10585$742e...@news.sonic.net>,
>> > rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>> >
>> >> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>> >> >> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> > Abel <abelm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >> >> Take Away The Bush Tax Cuts . .
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Jealousy is not a pretty thing
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It is astonishing how these rightard morons will insist that the rich
>> >> >> get big tax cuts even though it means that they will have to pay more
>> >> >> in taxes and fees for themselves.
>> >> >
>> >> >It's call fairness and integrity.
>> >>
>> >> It's "fair" to see the rich profit from the work of the middle class.
>> >> It's "fair" to put people onto the streets so that the rich can have
>> >> millions more.
>> >
>> >works for me.
>>
>> That's because you're servile worm, grovelling at the feet of your
>> masters.
>
>Living quite well off dividends and capital gains, actually.
So you're one of those greedy assholes who is happy to screw over
other people so long as you get to keep your stolen goods.
Marvin The Martian
> Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>Living quite well off dividends and capital gains, actually.
>
> So you're one of those greedy assholes who is happy to screw over other
> people so long as you get to keep your stolen goods.
If you think it is easy to find which companies are the most likely to
pay good dividends over time or grow, then you're an ignorant idiot.
Good investing helps good business to be founded and grow. You betcha it
involves work and risk. It's EARNED. As usual, you just lie and smear
people who disagree with you.
Harold Burton
rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
And the fact that it makes you whine makes it even better.
snicker
Harold Burton
Poor Ray. Check out his posting habits. He posts to usenet at all
hours of the day. Either he has no job or he's perfectly willing to
waste his employer's time by posting to usenet on company time. Not
likely to rise above minimum wage that way. No wonder he's bitter about
everyone who's successful.
snicker.
Ray Fischer
As expected, you're on the side of the criminals and the traitors.
The morality of the fascist.
Harold Burton
rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
As I said, the fact that it makes you whine makes it even better.
snicker