A lot of you wont like this

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Dixie, what this WHOLE stalemate comes down to is Republicans refuse to increase revenues. Obama wants to end the Bush tax cuts for anyone making over $250,000 and have the wealthiest Americans taxes increased to what they were under Clinton. It is about 3 fucking percent more, BUT ONLY on income over $250,000. So someone making $250,001 would pay FIVE CENTS more in taxes.

First of all, it has never been demonstrated, that increasing top marginal tax rates, increases revenues. NEVER! Hasn't happened! ...Secondly, even IF IT DID happen, the expected increase in revenue PALES in comparison with Obama's debt... it's not nearly enough, even in the wildest pinhead prognostications. So, you can't increase revenues by increasing top marginal rates, and even if you could, it wouldn't be enough to make a difference with the amount of debt Obama has racked up. Massive spending cuts have to be made, and no one in Washington is willing to go to the chopping block for those, especially Democrats who depend on Special Interest votes.

 

[Bfgrn]

First of all, it has never been demonstrated, that increasing top marginal tax rates, increases revenues. NEVER! Hasn't happened! ...Secondly, even IF IT DID happen, the expected increase in revenue PALES in comparison with Obama's debt... it's not nearly enough, even in the wildest pinhead prognostications. So, you can't increase revenues by increasing top marginal rates, and even if you could, it wouldn't be enough to make a difference with the amount of debt Obama has racked up. Massive spending cuts have to be made, and no one in Washington is willing to go to the chopping block for those, especially Democrats who depend on Special Interest votes.

Taking IN more revenue has never increased revenues? REALLY...was your school bus short and came at a different time than the big buses?

 

[apple0154]

Dixie, what this WHOLE stalemate comes down to is Republicans refuse to increase revenues. Obama wants to end the Bush tax cuts for anyone making over $250,000 and have the wealthiest Americans taxes increased to what they were under Clinton. It is about 3 fucking percent more, BUT ONLY on income over $250,000. So someone making $250,001 would pay FIVE CENTS more in taxes.

It's the Joe the Plumber Republican logic. Remember when Repub Joe said he wouldn't buy a business if he had to pay 3% more on income over $250,000? At $275,000 he'd pay an additional $750.00 on the extra $25,000 but that would be a deal breaker.

Of course, Joe's financial wizardry became apparent when we found out he didn't even have enough money to pay his land tax and he wasn't really a plumber either but that didn't stop the Republican Party enlisting him as a spokesman. The Repubs and Joe deserve each other.

 

[christiefan915]

Well actually I don't think you're fat. Just homely as a mud hen. I just throw it in there for good measure because I see how it "gets to you."

I know you need to keep up the pretense that we don't "know your biography", but mare you and I both know you were incredulous to discover we in fact do. You claim you didn't know how we found out, but let me quote your little friend Tommy Tempertantrum as he said to Yurt in the Webbway poll thread:

"Google is your friend" and as you know, you can thank him and yourself for steering us in THAT direction.

Dont'cha just HATE IT???

You're still pissed about me welcoming you back that August from vacation when you took your daughter to see colleges.

OIC, now I'm not fat and ugly, I'm just "homely". What else is going to change, now that I called out this lie.

You have no more credibility than Pinocchio. You lied when you tried to claim Frog and I were bad-mouthing another poster but you didn't cite proof. You lied again when you accused me of planning something big against you, that I was supposedly going to spring on the forum. What were your words now, "I don't think you're going to do something, I know it for a fact." Another baseless accusation with no proof.

The only thing about you that I find incredulous is your determination to convince a crowd of strangers that another stranger is "fat, homely, badly-dressed, dentally-challenged, etc." In fact, you've said that very same thing about every single poster here that you despise, bar none. I, Frog, Darla, Zap, Low, Tom, Taichi, plus any number from JPP have all been on the receiving end of those comments from you. Shall I reference the latest crap you spewed about Darla? Once you started claiming that everyone is ugly, etc. we understood that the ugliness is inside you. We're getting a close look at your damaged psyche and it's not a pretty sight.

You think you know all about me and you constantly drop these sly references on the board, as if I'm suddenly going to scream "OMG, she KNOWS!" Kindly disabuse yourself of that notion. If you really knew and posted my personal business, I'd be emailing Damo with verification and asking him to get your skanky ass off the board permanently.

Furthermore, I know plenty about you and your personal business, but you're not worth my getting banned for posting it. So don't get too smug because "google is my friend" and your hatred has already tripped you up big-time.

 

[Canceled2]

OIC, now I'm not fat and ugly, I'm just "homely". What else is going to change, now that I called out this lie.

You have no more credibility than Pinocchio. You lied when you tried to claim Frog and I were bad-mouthing another poster but you didn't cite proof. You lied again when you accused me of planning something big against you, that I was supposedly going to spring on the forum. What were your words now, "I don't think you're going to do something, I know it for a fact." Another baseless accusation with no proof.

The only thing about you that I find incredulous is your determination to convince a crowd of strangers that another stranger is "fat, homely, badly-dressed, dentally-challenged, etc." In fact, you've said that very same thing about every single poster here that you despise, bar none. I, Frog, Darla, Zap, Low, Tom, Taichi, plus any number from JPP have all been on the receiving end of those comments from you. Shall I reference the latest crap you spewed about Darla? Once you started claiming that everyone is ugly, etc. we understood that the ugliness is inside you. We're getting a close look at your damaged psyche and it's not a pretty sight.

You think you know all about me and you constantly drop these sly references on the board, as if I'm suddenly going to scream "OMG, she KNOWS!" Kindly disabuse yourself of that notion. If you really knew and posted my personal business, I'd be emailing Damo with verification and asking him to get your skanky ass off the board permanently.

Furthermore, I know plenty about you and your personal business, but you're not worth my getting banned for posting it. So don't get too smug because "google is my friend" and your hatred has already tripped you up big-time.

You and zap and your exaggerations- aka lying gene- about what gets said who says it. You are a homely/ugly woman-of course that's purely in the eyes of the beholder. You dress like a dowager, but at 62 perhaps that's understandable Loyal has never said anything about how anyone looks that she has not actually seen, except for Tom and Low. They have said plenty themselves, about how posters look, that they have never seen-so that's a wash...and btw you do have a fat saggy ass as well.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Taking IN more revenue has never increased revenues? REALLY...was your school bus short and came at a different time than the big buses?

That's not what I said, moron... read it again! Raising taxes on the so-called "RICH" will NOT increase revenues, it will DECREASE revenues... it always has, every time we've ever RAISED the top marginal tax rate... so there is NO revenue gained by RAISING tax on "the rich!" Perhaps you should have spent more time ON the bus, than actually sucking the exhaust fumes from the tailpipe?

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

OIC, now I'm not fat and ugly, I'm just "homely". What else is going to change, now that I called out this lie.

You have no more credibility than Pinocchio. You lied when you tried to claim Frog and I were bad-mouthing another poster but you didn't cite proof. You lied again when you accused me of planning something big against you, that I was supposedly going to spring on the forum. What were your words now, "I don't think you're going to do something, I know it for a fact." Another baseless accusation with no proof.

The only thing about you that I find incredulous is your determination to convince a crowd of strangers that another stranger is "fat, homely, badly-dressed, dentally-challenged, etc." In fact, you've said that very same thing about every single poster here that you despise, bar none. I, Frog, Darla, Zap, Low, Tom, Taichi, plus any number from JPP have all been on the receiving end of those comments from you. Shall I reference the latest crap you spewed about Darla? Once you started claiming that everyone is ugly, etc. we understood that the ugliness is inside you. We're getting a close look at your damaged psyche and it's not a pretty sight.

You think you know all about me and you constantly drop these sly references on the board, as if I'm suddenly going to scream "OMG, she KNOWS!" Kindly disabuse yourself of that notion. If you really knew and posted my personal business, I'd be emailing Damo with verification and asking him to get your skanky ass off the board permanently.

Furthermore, I know plenty about you and your personal business, but you're not worth my getting banned for posting it. So don't get too smug because "google is my friend" and your hatred has already tripped you up big-time.

this whole post reeks of meltdown

 

[Lowaicue]

My wife speaks to me every day. And, yes, she is highly educated. She was a Town Manager making over six figures a year when she married me. And she's nine years younger. And being fluently bi-lingual and uninhibited it's music to my ears when I hear, "OUI! OUI! OUI"!

So, how's the blow-up doll holding up?

I hear it's full.

 

[Lowaicue]

Who owns America? Hint: It's not China

"So America owes foreigners about $4.5 trillion in debt. But America owes America $9.8 trillion."

... and can pay neither!

 

[Bfgrn]

That's not what I said, moron... read it again! Raising taxes on the so-called "RICH" will NOT increase revenues, it will DECREASE revenues... it always has, every time we've ever RAISED the top marginal tax rate... so there is NO revenue gained by RAISING tax on "the rich!" Perhaps you should have spent more time ON the bus, than actually sucking the exhaust fumes from the tailpipe?

WOW Dixie, you have found the golden goose. If Obama just eliminates all taxes, we can pay off our debt tomorrow huh pea brain?

Let's see Dixie, HERE is the Top U.S. Federal marginal income tax rate from 1913 to 2011.

AND, here is our debt

NOW, look at 1980 and see where lower top marginal tax rates take us.

 

[DamnYankee]

I like highly educated women.

You don't care if they are educated or not. What's important to you is if their legs are open.

 

[Disillusioned]

Not too sure about the economic merits of either plan the political parties have put forward, I don't have enough priot knowledge, but to an undereducated guy like me, it seems that both parties are playing a game of chicken with the budget waiting to see who's going to blink first

 

[DamnYankee]

Not too sure about the economic merits of either plan the political parties have put forward, I don't have enough priot knowledge, but to an undereducated guy like me, it seems that both parties are playing a game of chicken with the budget waiting to see who's going to blink first

If it's a game of chicken then Boehner is sitting on top of the wall and The Obama is running towards it with his head down and eyes closed. Boener's plan is a compromise; the "do nothing" option is what fiscal conservatives prefer. It will force the federal government to only spend what comes in- the exact same thing that would happen if a balanced budget amendment was somehow passed on August 2nd.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Toilet comes from the French word toilette as in faire sa toilette, do think that eau de toilette is made from toilet water?

Knowing the French.... yes.

 

[christiefan915]

You and zap and your exaggerations- aka lying gene- about what gets said who says it. You are a homely/ugly woman-of course that's purely in the eyes of the beholder. You dress like a dowager, but at 62 perhaps that's understandable Loyal has never said anything about how anyone looks that she has not actually seen, except for Tom and Low. They have said plenty themselves, about how posters look, that they have never seen-so that's a wash...and btw you do have a fat saggy ass as well.

62? What happened to 57, and before that, 50? Why don't we just settle on 85, it's a nice, round number.

Actually, I had clothing similar to what you wear... back in the '80s, when it was fashionable. Time for you to update the dumpy dresses and the droopy bangs, dear, they are so two decades ago.

But enough with the insults. You've been had. Big time.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

WOW Dixie, you have found the golden goose. If Obama just eliminates all taxes, we can pay off our debt tomorrow huh pea brain?
Let's see Dixie, HERE is the Top U.S. Federal marginal income tax rate from 1913 to 2011.

AND, here is our debt

NOW, look at 1980 and see where lower top marginal tax rates take us.

Just curious as to why you didn't post a graph of actual revenues in relation to tax rates as compared with GDP.... perhaps because it proves I am right and you are wrong? Whenever we've increased the top marginal tax rate, it produced less revenue as percent of GDP... Whenever we've lowered the top marginal rate, it has produced an increase in revenue as percent of GDP. Those are facts you can't dispute and no graph can refute.

No one is arguing that lowering tax rates to zero would bring in the most revenue... that's silly and superfluous. There is a thing called the Laffer Curve... it offers the premise that optimal revenue is obtained somewhere between 0 and 100% taxation. If you tax at a rate of 100%, no one has motive to earn income... it will all be confiscated in taxation... If you tax at a rate of 0%, no revenue can be produced. At 100% or 0% ...no revenue is produced. This means, optimal taxation is somewhere in between. This supports my argument that raising top marginal tax rates will produce less revenue.

Hey, even Barack Obama said he realized raising taxes on the upper incomes wouldn't produce more revenues... He told Joe the Plumber, who made that very point to him, that it wasn't about increasing revenues, it was about "fairness" and "spreading the wealth around." So why don't we stop it with this silly and simple-minded child-like argument over taxation? If you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, just shut the hell up and move on! Raising taxes doesn't equate to more revenues... it just doesn't. You can falsely believe it does, like an ignorant idiot, if you want to... but the facts are the facts, and they say it doesn't work that way in the real world.