DanJohnson 0 #51 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteAnd this is where you are making some mistakes here: Those " Gucci loafer" wearing fools own the land the mexican labor force is tilling. This is who pays them and grants them permission to be on their land in the first place. Your collapse will affect them too. All land in the US belongs to someone or some entity. Quote You are wrong. Nobody owns land. One would think the Native Americans owned it but they were dispossesed. These fat, parasites can be dispossesed just as easily and by my reconing even more easily. The pilsbury dough boy squishing in his loafers ,hungry and unable to feed himself or even build a fire in his own fireplace? Oh yeah.., he'll be disposessed by the very immigrants he used to exploit. And the Servants shall be the Masters. Didn't the doctor tell you? Don't take more than two of the BLUE pills. The pink pill is an alternate option in this Matrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DanJohnson 0 #52 July 18, 2011 You got to do a lot better than fantasy to argue your point. Just because you do not like the people who provide a means to allow you to feed and clothe yourself doesn't mean that they are weaker than you. Quote I do like the people I work for. If I didn't I wouldn't create for them the functional beauty . I count all of my patrons as friends. It doesn't change the fact that without the money they are toast. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DanJohnson 0 #53 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAnd this is where you are making some mistakes here: Those " Gucci loafer" wearing fools own the land the mexican labor force is tilling. This is who pays them and grants them permission to be on their land in the first place. Your collapse will affect them too. All land in the US belongs to someone or some entity. Quote You are wrong. Nobody owns land. One would think the Native Americans owned it but they were dispossesed. These fat, parasites can be dispossesed just as easily and by my reconing even more easily. The pilsbury dough boy squishing in his loafers ,hungry and unable to feed himself or even build a fire in his own fireplace? Oh yeah.., he'll be disposessed by the very immigrants he used to exploit. And the Servants shall be the Masters. Didn't the doctor tell you? Don't take more than two of the BLUE pills. The pink pill is an alternate option in this Matrix And Pi. Mmmmm, I like Pi. I really like Pi with cherries. And whipped cream. That's just awesome. Pi is nearly twice as nice as phi ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nanook 1 #54 July 18, 2011 QuoteIt doesn't change the fact that without the money they are toast. Be as it may, without their illusional money, you are toast._____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Southern_Man 0 #55 July 18, 2011 Quote I certainly don't want to see someone else go hungry and we do produce more than enough food in the US to feed everyone and beyond. 20+ years ago when I was punching a cash register food assistance was physical script. Now we've moved to this debit card 'EBT' stuff that people can use at ATMs anyplace. I'd like to see us take a step back and go back to a script system. Less efficient, but also less prone to fraud. You can't use a vood stamp card at an ATM. I don't know where you got that idea."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #56 July 18, 2011 QuoteHow many Republicans voted against raising the debt limit when Dubya was President? It sure didn't seem to be an issue until now. How many Democrats voted FOR raising the debt ceiling in 2006? ZERO. QuoteThe fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies.… Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. - Barack ObamaMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,117 #57 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteWEALTH IS NOT DISTRIBUTED. It is EARNED Half right. The people who earn it are frequently not the people who have it. Paris Hilton didn't "earn" much at all. And Conrad Hilton gave most of his fortune to charity. He also has the right to pass it on however he chooses. So I was right and your initial statement was wrong. A lot of wealth ends up (distributed) in the hands of those who didn't earn it. Thanks.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,117 #58 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteWEALTH IS NOT DISTRIBUTED. It is EARNED Half right. The people who earn it are frequently not the people who have it. Paris Hilton didn't "earn" much at all. Right, as usual find a couple of examples and then proclaim it's the norm. Most people I have met who have money made it through hard work. But, I'm sure I travel with a different crowd than you. It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,117 #59 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWEALTH IS NOT DISTRIBUTED. It is EARNED Half right. The people who earn it are frequently not the people who have it. Paris Hilton didn't "earn" much at all. And Conrad Hilton gave most of his fortune to charity. He also has the right to pass it on however he chooses. So I was right and your initial statement was wrong. A lot of wealth ends up (distributed) in the hands of those who didn't earn it. Thanks. And when you earn something you can pass it on DISTRIBUTE IT however you choose. And Paris Hilton (since you brought her up) has built herself quite a business empire. Starting with a large fortune is a good way to make a small fortune.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mirage62 0 #60 July 18, 2011 Quote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more thoughKevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,117 #61 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more though It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,090 #62 July 18, 2011 >It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being >asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are >being left alone. As he mentions, he is OK with them (the "super rich") paying more taxes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites livendive 8 #63 July 18, 2011 Quote It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone. Everyone involved in this debate seems to think the answer lies with those other people, not them. The wealthier faction says "leave my taxes alone, go get it from the overpaid/entitlement folks", and the less fortunate say "I can't afford anymore (or any at all), go get it from those who can." The only difference I see right now is the wealthier faction seems to also be able to afford megaphones. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #64 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more though It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone. That would be the poor, sick and elderly that are in the lower 50% that don't pay any taxes, then?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #65 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more though It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone. That would be the poor, sick and elderly that are in the lower 50% that don't pay any taxes, then? Mikee for Sheriff of Nottingham...Take from the poor and give to King George... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #66 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more though It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone. That would be the poor, sick and elderly that are in the lower 50% that don't pay any taxes, then? Mikee for Sheriff of Nottingham...Take from the poor and give to King George... Actually, tax cuts result in less people on the bottom end paying taxes so your lame attempts at a slam actually describe YOUR position rather than mine....like usual.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreamdancer 0 #67 July 19, 2011 QuoteActually, tax cuts result in... a huge f**king deficit - duh... (and the rich get richer)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #68 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteActually, tax cuts result in... a huge f**king deficit - duh... (and the rich get richer) Figure out the difference between wealth and income yet, DD?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreamdancer 0 #69 July 19, 2011 figured out basic economics yet? (doesn't look like it)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #70 July 19, 2011 Quotefigured out basic economics yet? (doesn't look like it) You're right, it *doesn't* look like you've figured it out.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreamdancer 0 #71 July 19, 2011 you agree then that tax increases for the top % will reduce the deficit stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #72 July 19, 2011 Quote you agree then that tax increases for the top % will reduce the deficit Worked so well for your lot, didn't it?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #73 July 19, 2011 I think Steve Wynn of Wynn Resorts says very well what most of the job creators in this country believe. I have made this point before only to be belittled by those who have never started or run a company who think that an extreme left wing President like Obama is ever going to get this country producing jobs again. Please note that Wynn is a Democrat and supports Harry Reid. QuoteWynn CEO Goes On Epic Anti-Obama Rant On Company Conference Call Joe Weisenthal|Jul. 18, 2011, 6:51 PM|266,635|379 Who doesn't love a good rant? We certainly do, and as usual, Steve Wynn, the CEO of casino company Wynn Resorts, delivered on his company's quarterly conference call today. Via Seeking Alpha, here's the crux of it: I believe in Las Vegas. I think its best days are ahead of it. But I'm afraid to do anything in the current political environment in the United States. You watch television and see what's going on on this debt ceiling issue. And what I consider to be a total lack of leadership from the President and nothing's going to get fixed until the President himself steps up and wrangles both parties in Congress. But everybody is so political, so focused on holding their job for the next year that the discussion in Washington is nauseating. And I'm saying it bluntly, that this administration is the greatest wet blanket to business, and progress and job creation in my lifetime. And I can prove it and I could spend the next 3 hours giving you examples of all of us in this market place that are frightened to death about all the new regulations, our healthcare costs escalate, regulations coming from left and right. A President that seems, that keeps using that word redistribution. Well, my customers and the companies that provide the vitality for the hospitality and restaurant industry, in the United States of America, they are frightened of this administration.And it makes you slow down and not invest your money. Everybody complains about how much money is on the side in America. You bet and until we change the tempo and the conversation from Washington, it's not going to change. And those of us who have business opportunities and the capital to do it are going to sit in fear of the President. And a lot of people don't want to say that. They'll say, God, don't be attacking Obama. Well, this is Obama's deal and it's Obama that's responsible for this fear in America. The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution and maybe we ought to do something to businesses that don't invest, their holding too much money. We haven't heard that kind of talk except from pure socialists. Everybody's afraid of the government and there's no need soft peddling it, it's the truth. It is the truth. And that's true of Democratic businessman and Republican businessman, and I am a Democratic businessman and I support Harry Reid. I support Democrats and Republicans. And I'm telling you that the business community in this company is frightened to death of the weird political philosophy of the President of the United States. And until he's gone, everybody's going to be sitting on their thumbs. http://www.businessinsider.com/wynn-ceo-steve-wynn-conference-call-transcript-obama-2011-7#ixzz1SXp0izmW Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreamdancer 0 #74 July 19, 2011 it's pretty simple - tax the top % rich (who have the money and are the richest they have ever been) and reduce the deficit (now - what's 2 plus 2 again) stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #75 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteWEALTH IS NOT DISTRIBUTED. It is EARNED Half right. The people who earn it are frequently not the people who have it. Paris Hilton didn't "earn" much at all. uh, She's earned millions, which is pretty damn good for a gal in her 20s (is she 30 yet?) I know you hate her, but face reality. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next Page 3 of 10 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
DanJohnson 0 #52 July 18, 2011 You got to do a lot better than fantasy to argue your point. Just because you do not like the people who provide a means to allow you to feed and clothe yourself doesn't mean that they are weaker than you. Quote I do like the people I work for. If I didn't I wouldn't create for them the functional beauty . I count all of my patrons as friends. It doesn't change the fact that without the money they are toast. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DanJohnson 0 #53 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAnd this is where you are making some mistakes here: Those " Gucci loafer" wearing fools own the land the mexican labor force is tilling. This is who pays them and grants them permission to be on their land in the first place. Your collapse will affect them too. All land in the US belongs to someone or some entity. Quote You are wrong. Nobody owns land. One would think the Native Americans owned it but they were dispossesed. These fat, parasites can be dispossesed just as easily and by my reconing even more easily. The pilsbury dough boy squishing in his loafers ,hungry and unable to feed himself or even build a fire in his own fireplace? Oh yeah.., he'll be disposessed by the very immigrants he used to exploit. And the Servants shall be the Masters. Didn't the doctor tell you? Don't take more than two of the BLUE pills. The pink pill is an alternate option in this Matrix And Pi. Mmmmm, I like Pi. I really like Pi with cherries. And whipped cream. That's just awesome. Pi is nearly twice as nice as phi ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nanook 1 #54 July 18, 2011 QuoteIt doesn't change the fact that without the money they are toast. Be as it may, without their illusional money, you are toast._____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Southern_Man 0 #55 July 18, 2011 Quote I certainly don't want to see someone else go hungry and we do produce more than enough food in the US to feed everyone and beyond. 20+ years ago when I was punching a cash register food assistance was physical script. Now we've moved to this debit card 'EBT' stuff that people can use at ATMs anyplace. I'd like to see us take a step back and go back to a script system. Less efficient, but also less prone to fraud. You can't use a vood stamp card at an ATM. I don't know where you got that idea."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #56 July 18, 2011 QuoteHow many Republicans voted against raising the debt limit when Dubya was President? It sure didn't seem to be an issue until now. How many Democrats voted FOR raising the debt ceiling in 2006? ZERO. QuoteThe fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies.… Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. - Barack ObamaMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,117 #57 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteWEALTH IS NOT DISTRIBUTED. It is EARNED Half right. The people who earn it are frequently not the people who have it. Paris Hilton didn't "earn" much at all. And Conrad Hilton gave most of his fortune to charity. He also has the right to pass it on however he chooses. So I was right and your initial statement was wrong. A lot of wealth ends up (distributed) in the hands of those who didn't earn it. Thanks.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,117 #58 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteWEALTH IS NOT DISTRIBUTED. It is EARNED Half right. The people who earn it are frequently not the people who have it. Paris Hilton didn't "earn" much at all. Right, as usual find a couple of examples and then proclaim it's the norm. Most people I have met who have money made it through hard work. But, I'm sure I travel with a different crowd than you. It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,117 #59 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWEALTH IS NOT DISTRIBUTED. It is EARNED Half right. The people who earn it are frequently not the people who have it. Paris Hilton didn't "earn" much at all. And Conrad Hilton gave most of his fortune to charity. He also has the right to pass it on however he chooses. So I was right and your initial statement was wrong. A lot of wealth ends up (distributed) in the hands of those who didn't earn it. Thanks. And when you earn something you can pass it on DISTRIBUTE IT however you choose. And Paris Hilton (since you brought her up) has built herself quite a business empire. Starting with a large fortune is a good way to make a small fortune.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mirage62 0 #60 July 18, 2011 Quote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more thoughKevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,117 #61 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more though It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,090 #62 July 18, 2011 >It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being >asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are >being left alone. As he mentions, he is OK with them (the "super rich") paying more taxes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites livendive 8 #63 July 18, 2011 Quote It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone. Everyone involved in this debate seems to think the answer lies with those other people, not them. The wealthier faction says "leave my taxes alone, go get it from the overpaid/entitlement folks", and the less fortunate say "I can't afford anymore (or any at all), go get it from those who can." The only difference I see right now is the wealthier faction seems to also be able to afford megaphones. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #64 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more though It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone. That would be the poor, sick and elderly that are in the lower 50% that don't pay any taxes, then?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #65 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more though It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone. That would be the poor, sick and elderly that are in the lower 50% that don't pay any taxes, then? Mikee for Sheriff of Nottingham...Take from the poor and give to King George... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #66 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more though It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone. That would be the poor, sick and elderly that are in the lower 50% that don't pay any taxes, then? Mikee for Sheriff of Nottingham...Take from the poor and give to King George... Actually, tax cuts result in less people on the bottom end paying taxes so your lame attempts at a slam actually describe YOUR position rather than mine....like usual.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreamdancer 0 #67 July 19, 2011 QuoteActually, tax cuts result in... a huge f**king deficit - duh... (and the rich get richer)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #68 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteActually, tax cuts result in... a huge f**king deficit - duh... (and the rich get richer) Figure out the difference between wealth and income yet, DD?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreamdancer 0 #69 July 19, 2011 figured out basic economics yet? (doesn't look like it)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #70 July 19, 2011 Quotefigured out basic economics yet? (doesn't look like it) You're right, it *doesn't* look like you've figured it out.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreamdancer 0 #71 July 19, 2011 you agree then that tax increases for the top % will reduce the deficit stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #72 July 19, 2011 Quote you agree then that tax increases for the top % will reduce the deficit Worked so well for your lot, didn't it?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #73 July 19, 2011 I think Steve Wynn of Wynn Resorts says very well what most of the job creators in this country believe. I have made this point before only to be belittled by those who have never started or run a company who think that an extreme left wing President like Obama is ever going to get this country producing jobs again. Please note that Wynn is a Democrat and supports Harry Reid. QuoteWynn CEO Goes On Epic Anti-Obama Rant On Company Conference Call Joe Weisenthal|Jul. 18, 2011, 6:51 PM|266,635|379 Who doesn't love a good rant? We certainly do, and as usual, Steve Wynn, the CEO of casino company Wynn Resorts, delivered on his company's quarterly conference call today. Via Seeking Alpha, here's the crux of it: I believe in Las Vegas. I think its best days are ahead of it. But I'm afraid to do anything in the current political environment in the United States. You watch television and see what's going on on this debt ceiling issue. And what I consider to be a total lack of leadership from the President and nothing's going to get fixed until the President himself steps up and wrangles both parties in Congress. But everybody is so political, so focused on holding their job for the next year that the discussion in Washington is nauseating. And I'm saying it bluntly, that this administration is the greatest wet blanket to business, and progress and job creation in my lifetime. And I can prove it and I could spend the next 3 hours giving you examples of all of us in this market place that are frightened to death about all the new regulations, our healthcare costs escalate, regulations coming from left and right. A President that seems, that keeps using that word redistribution. Well, my customers and the companies that provide the vitality for the hospitality and restaurant industry, in the United States of America, they are frightened of this administration.And it makes you slow down and not invest your money. Everybody complains about how much money is on the side in America. You bet and until we change the tempo and the conversation from Washington, it's not going to change. And those of us who have business opportunities and the capital to do it are going to sit in fear of the President. And a lot of people don't want to say that. They'll say, God, don't be attacking Obama. Well, this is Obama's deal and it's Obama that's responsible for this fear in America. The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution and maybe we ought to do something to businesses that don't invest, their holding too much money. We haven't heard that kind of talk except from pure socialists. Everybody's afraid of the government and there's no need soft peddling it, it's the truth. It is the truth. And that's true of Democratic businessman and Republican businessman, and I am a Democratic businessman and I support Harry Reid. I support Democrats and Republicans. And I'm telling you that the business community in this company is frightened to death of the weird political philosophy of the President of the United States. And until he's gone, everybody's going to be sitting on their thumbs. http://www.businessinsider.com/wynn-ceo-steve-wynn-conference-call-transcript-obama-2011-7#ixzz1SXp0izmW Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreamdancer 0 #74 July 19, 2011 it's pretty simple - tax the top % rich (who have the money and are the richest they have ever been) and reduce the deficit (now - what's 2 plus 2 again) stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #75 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteWEALTH IS NOT DISTRIBUTED. It is EARNED Half right. The people who earn it are frequently not the people who have it. Paris Hilton didn't "earn" much at all. uh, She's earned millions, which is pretty damn good for a gal in her 20s (is she 30 yet?) I know you hate her, but face reality. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next Page 3 of 10 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
DanJohnson 0 #53 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAnd this is where you are making some mistakes here: Those " Gucci loafer" wearing fools own the land the mexican labor force is tilling. This is who pays them and grants them permission to be on their land in the first place. Your collapse will affect them too. All land in the US belongs to someone or some entity. Quote You are wrong. Nobody owns land. One would think the Native Americans owned it but they were dispossesed. These fat, parasites can be dispossesed just as easily and by my reconing even more easily. The pilsbury dough boy squishing in his loafers ,hungry and unable to feed himself or even build a fire in his own fireplace? Oh yeah.., he'll be disposessed by the very immigrants he used to exploit. And the Servants shall be the Masters. Didn't the doctor tell you? Don't take more than two of the BLUE pills. The pink pill is an alternate option in this Matrix And Pi. Mmmmm, I like Pi. I really like Pi with cherries. And whipped cream. That's just awesome. Pi is nearly twice as nice as phi ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nanook 1 #54 July 18, 2011 QuoteIt doesn't change the fact that without the money they are toast. Be as it may, without their illusional money, you are toast._____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Southern_Man 0 #55 July 18, 2011 Quote I certainly don't want to see someone else go hungry and we do produce more than enough food in the US to feed everyone and beyond. 20+ years ago when I was punching a cash register food assistance was physical script. Now we've moved to this debit card 'EBT' stuff that people can use at ATMs anyplace. I'd like to see us take a step back and go back to a script system. Less efficient, but also less prone to fraud. You can't use a vood stamp card at an ATM. I don't know where you got that idea."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #56 July 18, 2011 QuoteHow many Republicans voted against raising the debt limit when Dubya was President? It sure didn't seem to be an issue until now. How many Democrats voted FOR raising the debt ceiling in 2006? ZERO. QuoteThe fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies.… Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. - Barack ObamaMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,117 #57 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteWEALTH IS NOT DISTRIBUTED. It is EARNED Half right. The people who earn it are frequently not the people who have it. Paris Hilton didn't "earn" much at all. And Conrad Hilton gave most of his fortune to charity. He also has the right to pass it on however he chooses. So I was right and your initial statement was wrong. A lot of wealth ends up (distributed) in the hands of those who didn't earn it. Thanks.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,117 #58 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteWEALTH IS NOT DISTRIBUTED. It is EARNED Half right. The people who earn it are frequently not the people who have it. Paris Hilton didn't "earn" much at all. Right, as usual find a couple of examples and then proclaim it's the norm. Most people I have met who have money made it through hard work. But, I'm sure I travel with a different crowd than you. It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,117 #59 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWEALTH IS NOT DISTRIBUTED. It is EARNED Half right. The people who earn it are frequently not the people who have it. Paris Hilton didn't "earn" much at all. And Conrad Hilton gave most of his fortune to charity. He also has the right to pass it on however he chooses. So I was right and your initial statement was wrong. A lot of wealth ends up (distributed) in the hands of those who didn't earn it. Thanks. And when you earn something you can pass it on DISTRIBUTE IT however you choose. And Paris Hilton (since you brought her up) has built herself quite a business empire. Starting with a large fortune is a good way to make a small fortune.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mirage62 0 #60 July 18, 2011 Quote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more thoughKevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,117 #61 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more though It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,090 #62 July 18, 2011 >It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being >asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are >being left alone. As he mentions, he is OK with them (the "super rich") paying more taxes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites livendive 8 #63 July 18, 2011 Quote It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone. Everyone involved in this debate seems to think the answer lies with those other people, not them. The wealthier faction says "leave my taxes alone, go get it from the overpaid/entitlement folks", and the less fortunate say "I can't afford anymore (or any at all), go get it from those who can." The only difference I see right now is the wealthier faction seems to also be able to afford megaphones. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #64 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more though It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone. That would be the poor, sick and elderly that are in the lower 50% that don't pay any taxes, then?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #65 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more though It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone. That would be the poor, sick and elderly that are in the lower 50% that don't pay any taxes, then? Mikee for Sheriff of Nottingham...Take from the poor and give to King George... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #66 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more though It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone. That would be the poor, sick and elderly that are in the lower 50% that don't pay any taxes, then? Mikee for Sheriff of Nottingham...Take from the poor and give to King George... Actually, tax cuts result in less people on the bottom end paying taxes so your lame attempts at a slam actually describe YOUR position rather than mine....like usual.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreamdancer 0 #67 July 19, 2011 QuoteActually, tax cuts result in... a huge f**king deficit - duh... (and the rich get richer)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #68 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteActually, tax cuts result in... a huge f**king deficit - duh... (and the rich get richer) Figure out the difference between wealth and income yet, DD?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreamdancer 0 #69 July 19, 2011 figured out basic economics yet? (doesn't look like it)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #70 July 19, 2011 Quotefigured out basic economics yet? (doesn't look like it) You're right, it *doesn't* look like you've figured it out.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreamdancer 0 #71 July 19, 2011 you agree then that tax increases for the top % will reduce the deficit stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #72 July 19, 2011 Quote you agree then that tax increases for the top % will reduce the deficit Worked so well for your lot, didn't it?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #73 July 19, 2011 I think Steve Wynn of Wynn Resorts says very well what most of the job creators in this country believe. I have made this point before only to be belittled by those who have never started or run a company who think that an extreme left wing President like Obama is ever going to get this country producing jobs again. Please note that Wynn is a Democrat and supports Harry Reid. QuoteWynn CEO Goes On Epic Anti-Obama Rant On Company Conference Call Joe Weisenthal|Jul. 18, 2011, 6:51 PM|266,635|379 Who doesn't love a good rant? We certainly do, and as usual, Steve Wynn, the CEO of casino company Wynn Resorts, delivered on his company's quarterly conference call today. Via Seeking Alpha, here's the crux of it: I believe in Las Vegas. I think its best days are ahead of it. But I'm afraid to do anything in the current political environment in the United States. You watch television and see what's going on on this debt ceiling issue. And what I consider to be a total lack of leadership from the President and nothing's going to get fixed until the President himself steps up and wrangles both parties in Congress. But everybody is so political, so focused on holding their job for the next year that the discussion in Washington is nauseating. And I'm saying it bluntly, that this administration is the greatest wet blanket to business, and progress and job creation in my lifetime. And I can prove it and I could spend the next 3 hours giving you examples of all of us in this market place that are frightened to death about all the new regulations, our healthcare costs escalate, regulations coming from left and right. A President that seems, that keeps using that word redistribution. Well, my customers and the companies that provide the vitality for the hospitality and restaurant industry, in the United States of America, they are frightened of this administration.And it makes you slow down and not invest your money. Everybody complains about how much money is on the side in America. You bet and until we change the tempo and the conversation from Washington, it's not going to change. And those of us who have business opportunities and the capital to do it are going to sit in fear of the President. And a lot of people don't want to say that. They'll say, God, don't be attacking Obama. Well, this is Obama's deal and it's Obama that's responsible for this fear in America. The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution and maybe we ought to do something to businesses that don't invest, their holding too much money. We haven't heard that kind of talk except from pure socialists. Everybody's afraid of the government and there's no need soft peddling it, it's the truth. It is the truth. And that's true of Democratic businessman and Republican businessman, and I am a Democratic businessman and I support Harry Reid. I support Democrats and Republicans. And I'm telling you that the business community in this company is frightened to death of the weird political philosophy of the President of the United States. And until he's gone, everybody's going to be sitting on their thumbs. http://www.businessinsider.com/wynn-ceo-steve-wynn-conference-call-transcript-obama-2011-7#ixzz1SXp0izmW Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreamdancer 0 #74 July 19, 2011 it's pretty simple - tax the top % rich (who have the money and are the richest they have ever been) and reduce the deficit (now - what's 2 plus 2 again) stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #75 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteWEALTH IS NOT DISTRIBUTED. It is EARNED Half right. The people who earn it are frequently not the people who have it. Paris Hilton didn't "earn" much at all. uh, She's earned millions, which is pretty damn good for a gal in her 20s (is she 30 yet?) I know you hate her, but face reality. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next Page 3 of 10 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
nanook 1 #54 July 18, 2011 QuoteIt doesn't change the fact that without the money they are toast. Be as it may, without their illusional money, you are toast._____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #55 July 18, 2011 Quote I certainly don't want to see someone else go hungry and we do produce more than enough food in the US to feed everyone and beyond. 20+ years ago when I was punching a cash register food assistance was physical script. Now we've moved to this debit card 'EBT' stuff that people can use at ATMs anyplace. I'd like to see us take a step back and go back to a script system. Less efficient, but also less prone to fraud. You can't use a vood stamp card at an ATM. I don't know where you got that idea."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #56 July 18, 2011 QuoteHow many Republicans voted against raising the debt limit when Dubya was President? It sure didn't seem to be an issue until now. How many Democrats voted FOR raising the debt ceiling in 2006? ZERO. QuoteThe fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies.… Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. - Barack ObamaMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,117 #57 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteWEALTH IS NOT DISTRIBUTED. It is EARNED Half right. The people who earn it are frequently not the people who have it. Paris Hilton didn't "earn" much at all. And Conrad Hilton gave most of his fortune to charity. He also has the right to pass it on however he chooses. So I was right and your initial statement was wrong. A lot of wealth ends up (distributed) in the hands of those who didn't earn it. Thanks.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,117 #58 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteWEALTH IS NOT DISTRIBUTED. It is EARNED Half right. The people who earn it are frequently not the people who have it. Paris Hilton didn't "earn" much at all. Right, as usual find a couple of examples and then proclaim it's the norm. Most people I have met who have money made it through hard work. But, I'm sure I travel with a different crowd than you. It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,117 #59 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWEALTH IS NOT DISTRIBUTED. It is EARNED Half right. The people who earn it are frequently not the people who have it. Paris Hilton didn't "earn" much at all. And Conrad Hilton gave most of his fortune to charity. He also has the right to pass it on however he chooses. So I was right and your initial statement was wrong. A lot of wealth ends up (distributed) in the hands of those who didn't earn it. Thanks. And when you earn something you can pass it on DISTRIBUTE IT however you choose. And Paris Hilton (since you brought her up) has built herself quite a business empire. Starting with a large fortune is a good way to make a small fortune.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mirage62 0 #60 July 18, 2011 Quote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more thoughKevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,117 #61 July 18, 2011 QuoteQuote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more though It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #62 July 18, 2011 >It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being >asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are >being left alone. As he mentions, he is OK with them (the "super rich") paying more taxes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #63 July 18, 2011 Quote It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone. Everyone involved in this debate seems to think the answer lies with those other people, not them. The wealthier faction says "leave my taxes alone, go get it from the overpaid/entitlement folks", and the less fortunate say "I can't afford anymore (or any at all), go get it from those who can." The only difference I see right now is the wealthier faction seems to also be able to afford megaphones. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #64 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more though It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone. That would be the poor, sick and elderly that are in the lower 50% that don't pay any taxes, then?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #65 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more though It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone. That would be the poor, sick and elderly that are in the lower 50% that don't pay any taxes, then? Mikee for Sheriff of Nottingham...Take from the poor and give to King George... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #66 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote It's about 50/50 with me. I know quite a lot of super rich (>$1Bn) people (trustees of the university), and about 1/2 of them inherited their wealth. Even the lazy idiot child of a multi-billionaire ends up very rich. So John the 50% that DIDN'T inherite their wealth...your ok with them paying more taxes...guess what I am to. I'm not a fan of the the 100K a year people paying more though It seems unreasonable to me that the poor, sick and elderly are being asked to pick up the burden of reducing the deficit, but the super-rich are being left alone. That would be the poor, sick and elderly that are in the lower 50% that don't pay any taxes, then? Mikee for Sheriff of Nottingham...Take from the poor and give to King George... Actually, tax cuts result in less people on the bottom end paying taxes so your lame attempts at a slam actually describe YOUR position rather than mine....like usual.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #67 July 19, 2011 QuoteActually, tax cuts result in... a huge f**king deficit - duh... (and the rich get richer)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #68 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteActually, tax cuts result in... a huge f**king deficit - duh... (and the rich get richer) Figure out the difference between wealth and income yet, DD?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #69 July 19, 2011 figured out basic economics yet? (doesn't look like it)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #70 July 19, 2011 Quotefigured out basic economics yet? (doesn't look like it) You're right, it *doesn't* look like you've figured it out.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #71 July 19, 2011 you agree then that tax increases for the top % will reduce the deficit stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #72 July 19, 2011 Quote you agree then that tax increases for the top % will reduce the deficit Worked so well for your lot, didn't it?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #73 July 19, 2011 I think Steve Wynn of Wynn Resorts says very well what most of the job creators in this country believe. I have made this point before only to be belittled by those who have never started or run a company who think that an extreme left wing President like Obama is ever going to get this country producing jobs again. Please note that Wynn is a Democrat and supports Harry Reid. QuoteWynn CEO Goes On Epic Anti-Obama Rant On Company Conference Call Joe Weisenthal|Jul. 18, 2011, 6:51 PM|266,635|379 Who doesn't love a good rant? We certainly do, and as usual, Steve Wynn, the CEO of casino company Wynn Resorts, delivered on his company's quarterly conference call today. Via Seeking Alpha, here's the crux of it: I believe in Las Vegas. I think its best days are ahead of it. But I'm afraid to do anything in the current political environment in the United States. You watch television and see what's going on on this debt ceiling issue. And what I consider to be a total lack of leadership from the President and nothing's going to get fixed until the President himself steps up and wrangles both parties in Congress. But everybody is so political, so focused on holding their job for the next year that the discussion in Washington is nauseating. And I'm saying it bluntly, that this administration is the greatest wet blanket to business, and progress and job creation in my lifetime. And I can prove it and I could spend the next 3 hours giving you examples of all of us in this market place that are frightened to death about all the new regulations, our healthcare costs escalate, regulations coming from left and right. A President that seems, that keeps using that word redistribution. Well, my customers and the companies that provide the vitality for the hospitality and restaurant industry, in the United States of America, they are frightened of this administration.And it makes you slow down and not invest your money. Everybody complains about how much money is on the side in America. You bet and until we change the tempo and the conversation from Washington, it's not going to change. And those of us who have business opportunities and the capital to do it are going to sit in fear of the President. And a lot of people don't want to say that. They'll say, God, don't be attacking Obama. Well, this is Obama's deal and it's Obama that's responsible for this fear in America. The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution and maybe we ought to do something to businesses that don't invest, their holding too much money. We haven't heard that kind of talk except from pure socialists. Everybody's afraid of the government and there's no need soft peddling it, it's the truth. It is the truth. And that's true of Democratic businessman and Republican businessman, and I am a Democratic businessman and I support Harry Reid. I support Democrats and Republicans. And I'm telling you that the business community in this company is frightened to death of the weird political philosophy of the President of the United States. And until he's gone, everybody's going to be sitting on their thumbs. http://www.businessinsider.com/wynn-ceo-steve-wynn-conference-call-transcript-obama-2011-7#ixzz1SXp0izmW Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #74 July 19, 2011 it's pretty simple - tax the top % rich (who have the money and are the richest they have ever been) and reduce the deficit (now - what's 2 plus 2 again) stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #75 July 19, 2011 QuoteQuoteWEALTH IS NOT DISTRIBUTED. It is EARNED Half right. The people who earn it are frequently not the people who have it. Paris Hilton didn't "earn" much at all. uh, She's earned millions, which is pretty damn good for a gal in her 20s (is she 30 yet?) I know you hate her, but face reality. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
