|
traddad
Nov 3, 2011, 7:12 AM
Post #1 of 10
(671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2001
Posts: 7125
|
I'm having a hard time understanding why a more equitable realignment of the tax code is meeting with so much resistance. The stats are there: Middle class income has remained stagnant or decreased over the last ten or so years http://money.cnn.com/...ddle_class/index.htm .
The wealthy are getting exponentially wealthier http://www.advisorone.com/...s-income-growth-outp .
Large corporations are screwing the public-at-large http://www.salon.com/..._corporate_tax_scam/
Why, the fuck, are we letting this happen? Why is the Tea Party propping up the American Corporate Oligarchy (and why is it still referred to as “populist”)? How can the Republicans dress up deregulation and call it a jobs bill…with a straight face? Why are the Democrats and Obama bending over and taking it up the ass?
This is a mystery to me.
|
|
|
|
|
scrapedape
Nov 3, 2011, 7:35 AM
Post #2 of 10
(666 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 23, 2004
Posts: 2389
|
Because all in all, we still have it pretty good?
In reply to: Why is the Tea Party propping up the American Corporate Oligarchy (and why is it still referred to as “populist”)?
Because they don't realize that's what they're doing?
In reply to: How can the Republicans dress up deregulation and call it a jobs bill…with a straight face?
Because they truly believe it.
In reply to: Why are the Democrats and Obama bending over and taking it up the ass?
Because they like it?
In reply to: This is a mystery to me.
You're not alone. That much I know for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Nov 3, 2011, 8:08 AM
Post #3 of 10
(659 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18043
|
traddad wrote: I'm having a hard time understanding why a more equitable realignment of the tax code is meeting with so much resistance. The stats are there: Middle class income has remained stagnant or decreased over the last ten or so years http://money.cnn.com/...ddle_class/index.htm . The wealthy are getting exponentially wealthier http://www.advisorone.com/...s-income-growth-outp . Large corporations are screwing the public-at-large http://www.salon.com/..._corporate_tax_scam/ Why, the fuck, are we letting this happen? Why is the Tea Party propping up the American Corporate Oligarchy (and why is it still referred to as “populist”)? How can the Republicans dress up deregulation and call it a jobs bill…with a straight face? Why are the Democrats and Obama bending over and taking it up the ass? This is a mystery to me.
It's right there--who do you think bought our government anyway?
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
traddad
Nov 3, 2011, 8:21 AM
Post #4 of 10
(649 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2001
Posts: 7125
|
curt wrote: traddad wrote: I'm having a hard time understanding why a more equitable realignment of the tax code is meeting with so much resistance. The stats are there: Middle class income has remained stagnant or decreased over the last ten or so years http://money.cnn.com/...ddle_class/index.htm . The wealthy are getting exponentially wealthier http://www.advisorone.com/...s-income-growth-outp . Large corporations are screwing the public-at-large http://www.salon.com/..._corporate_tax_scam/ Why, the fuck, are we letting this happen? Why is the Tea Party propping up the American Corporate Oligarchy (and why is it still referred to as “populist”)? How can the Republicans dress up deregulation and call it a jobs bill…with a straight face? Why are the Democrats and Obama bending over and taking it up the ass? This is a mystery to me. It's right there--who do you think bought our government anyway? Curt
Agreed. The Republican party has essentially become the lobbying arm of the US Chamber of Commerce. Democrats are not far behind....
|
|
|
|
|
veganclimber
Nov 3, 2011, 9:41 AM
Post #5 of 10
(640 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 17, 2005
Posts: 2773
|
http://news.yahoo.com/...eople-040233161.html
In reply to: About 20.5 million Americans, or 6.7 percent of the U.S. population, make up the poorest poor, defined as those at 50 percent or less of the official poverty level. Those living in deep poverty represent nearly half of the 46.2 million people scraping by below the poverty line. In 2010, the poorest poor meant an income of $5,570 or less for an individual and $11,157 for a family of four.
Yet, our number one priority is keeping tax rates on millionaires and billionaires at historically low levels. Face it, this country is done. We have no values other than greed. We deserve what's coming.
|
|
|
|
|
traddad
Nov 3, 2011, 11:46 AM
Post #6 of 10
(631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2001
Posts: 7125
|
Will no one defend the Job Creators from the onslaught of unwashed communist hippies that is OWS? Think of the children! What will they do if they have to give up their private dressage lessons and stable their polo ponies in BARNS for God's sake!
CLASS WARFARE!! Quit oppressing the wealthy! They're better than you!
|
|
|
|
|
rmsusa
Nov 4, 2011, 12:43 PM
Post #7 of 10
(581 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2004
Posts: 1017
|
In reply to: I'm having a hard time understanding why a more equitable realignment of the tax code is meeting with so much resistance. ......... This is a mystery to me.
1. People are always resistant to change, no matter what the change is.
2. There's a lot of money tied up in the present situation that will have to make big adjustments.
3. You use the word equitable, but there's zero consensus around what equitable means when you apply it to the tax code. Some are convinced they know what's equitable, but 50% of the country demonstrably doesn't agree.
It's sort of like asking "why can't we convert to the metric system?". It makes so much sense.
|
|
|
|
|
ubu
Nov 4, 2011, 4:54 PM
Post #8 of 10
(566 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2008
Posts: 1475
|
rmsusa wrote: In reply to: I'm having a hard time understanding why a more equitable realignment of the tax code is meeting with so much resistance. ......... This is a mystery to me. 1. People are always resistant to change, no matter what the change is.
True, but then again I don't remember many people resisting the change obscene hand-out that was the Bush tax cuts...
In reply to: 2. There's a lot of money tied up in the present situation that will have to make big adjustments.
Yup.
In reply to: 3. You use the word equitable, but there's zero consensus around what equitable means when you apply it to the tax code. Some are convinced they know what's equitable, but 50% of the country demonstrably doesn't agree.
Well, 50% of the country also has an IQ below 100. Correlation, or causation?
In reply to: It's sort of like asking "why can't we convert to the metric system?". It makes so much sense.
I blame the red states for this one. Also.
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Nov 4, 2011, 6:02 PM
Post #9 of 10
(561 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2004
Posts: 3388
|
ubu wrote: rmsusa wrote: In reply to: I'm having a hard time understanding why a more equitable realignment of the tax code is meeting with so much resistance. ......... This is a mystery to me. 1. People are always resistant to change, no matter what the change is. True, but then again I don't remember many people resisting the change obscene hand-out that was the Bush tax cuts... In reply to: 2. There's a lot of money tied up in the present situation that will have to make big adjustments. Yup. In reply to: 3. You use the word equitable, but there's zero consensus around what equitable means when you apply it to the tax code. Some are convinced they know what's equitable, but 50% of the country demonstrably doesn't agree. Well, 50% of the country also has an IQ below 100. Correlation, or causation? In reply to: It's sort of like asking "why can't we convert to the metric system?". It makes so much sense.I blame the red states for this one. Also.
I blame American football. Can you imagine having to converts all those stadium and rules to metric. Wow.
|
|
|
|
|
ubu
Nov 5, 2011, 4:37 AM
Post #10 of 10
(527 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2008
Posts: 1475
|
guangzhou wrote: I blame American football. Can you imagine having to converts all those stadium and rules to metric. Wow.
Nah, just say "meter" for "yard" and don't change anything on the field. Nobody will know the difference.
"It's 4th and centimeters" doesn't have such a bad ring to it...
|
|
|
|
|
|
