New York Times: Obama Coalition Is Fraying, Poll Finds
94 replies, posted
I would rather the US had a smaller army, and I understand why jefferson would say the government could operate only on tax revenue. At the time, that's all that was needed to cover it. I don't think the same thing is even remotely true of today.
well it makes sense why this happened because after bush, no one wanted to be republican but now that hes gone things are going back to normal
[QUOTE=Warhol;25722108]a 20% tax can barely scratch a rich persons wallet.
A 20% tax can severely cripple a poor family.
you should seriously stop posting.[/QUOTE]
Where did I say 20%?
Honestly, 8% flat tax on everybody would yield increased income by the federal government. Were they to go with, say, 7.6%, they could likely get similar income to what they do now with this progressive rate.
[QUOTE=Uberman77883;25735012]Warhol, when will you stop being such a huge idiot?[/quote]
Dumb
[quote]Go look at a fucking history book. There is your source.[/quote]
Dumb
[quote]You blatantly make shit up about the past. [/quote]
Dumb
[quote]Not only this, but you fucking libel me. [/quote]
Dumb
[quote]But really, you want a source about something that happened 200 years ago?[/quote]
Yes.
[quote]Ok, here is your source.[/quote]
You did, not sure why you're whining about it.
And Jefferson decreased the money it takes in and how it's circulated, not the size of the government. And this is 200 years ago, pre-industrial. Things were SO fucking different.
[quote]You are the one making the most ridiculous claims.[/quote]
You called Starpluck and me Anti-semeits because we don't like Israel. After you knew I was Jewish.
[quote]Your grasp of reality is equivalent to a piece of string.[/quote]
You've spent more time in this post whining then arguing.
also, Dumb
[quote]How many times do I have to say I don't fucking support the tea party, I think Reagan was an OK president. When did I mention either of those things?[/quote]
When did I mention Communism? don't like that, do you? :smug:
[quote]God damn, I'm not some backwater hick.[/quote]
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSBDaeVhbd8[/url]
[quote]I tried to give you some respect, but clearly you don't give me any, so you don't deserve fucking respect.[/quote]
When did I say I wanted your respect?
[quote]And I have taken advanced history courses.[/quote] You must have flunked that shit badly.
[quote]This is where I'm fucking getting the information from. I even have my fucking history book from 3 years ago open right here, saying the exact opposite of what you are claiming. [/quote]
The same history curriculum that pretty much lies?
[quote]And if you try to refute the validity of said book, here is my textbook. Look it up.[/quote]
American text-books are not infallible.
[editline]30th October 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=Ridge;25736238]Where did I say 20%?
Honestly, 8% flat tax on everybody would yield increased income by the federal government. Were they to go with, say, 7.6%, they could likely get similar income to what they do now with this progressive rate.[/QUOTE]
8% is still crippling.
[QUOTE=Ridge;25736238]Where did I say 20%?
Honestly, 8% flat tax on everybody would yield increased income by the federal government. Were they to go with, say, 7.6%, they could likely get similar income to what they do now with this progressive rate.[/QUOTE]
we already had a thread about how flat tax is stupid because if 8% was taken from me I would be homeless right now but yet 8% would do nothing to them
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.