Not one penny......for the rich.....

They will if they have to.

 

Did you want to say anything that was relevant to my post?

 

The only reason democrats dont want tax cuts is cause they dont pay any taxes.

 

You can't make them without price controls and lets not go there

 

True. They can try to raise prices and potentially lose customers.

 

I think completely refuting your false premise is relevant.

 

If you really want to end welfare for the rich you would demand that the military industrial complex be abolished.

 

Sure

Taxes, like a higher minimum wage raise prices and reduce economic activity

Which is something to be avoided

 

You want to explain how your post:

1. They give the dems more money
2. They never lobby for a reduced rate with less complexity
3. The Republicans being a party for the rich is a fabrication


"completely refuted" this statement:

If higher taxes "simply allows the super rich to maintain their advantage" it sure is weird how they fight so hard (through their minions in the Republican party) to lower their taxes

 

America would not remain free very long without a military

 

False RW propaganda repeated like a broken record. Prove it.

Neither higher taxes nor higher minimum wages seemed to reduce economic activity in the 1990s, when, after Clinton's tax increase and with MW increases, we had the longest post-WWII expansion, and the best economy overall since the 1960s.

 

Sure - the idea of buying andselling, of demand is shallow and simplistic ...

... especially compared to the idea that the best solution to all economic issues is to hose down the wealthy with money in hopes they will make it all better.

After all, that worked so well for 1700's England and France.

 

You prove it for me.

Your words:

"True. They can try to raise prices and potentially lose customers."

 

I'm a Democrat. I paid $40K in taxes last year.

Do you ever get anything right?

 

Historically...the tax cutters don't have a leg to stand on

 

This reminds me off my friend who defected from the old Soviet Union, he was out with a few friends on a boat in lake Michigan and it cap sized, the coast guard was there to rescue them and he said "No, No" because he thought he was going to get charged for it.


.

 

I have discovered that on the internet every liberral is rich with expensive cars and beautiful girl friends

and they only want to take all the money so that they can give it away to others less fortunate than themselves

 

I have discovered that on the internet every liberral is rich with expensive cars and beautiful girl friends

and they only want to take all the money so that they can give it away to others less fortunate than themselves

 

that's like a 3rd grade understanding of morality--giving and taking...lol
unfortunately, society is far more complex than that.
consider that the system is systematically designed to allow rich people to accumulate wealth, such that the money that rich people "earn" isnt necessarily "rightfully theirs."

 

Bullshit. The system isn't "designed" at all, it's the long-term result of 200 years of increasing government interference with the functioning of the free market. The free market isn't designed, either, it's the only system that doesn't have a design, and doesn't have a predetermined outcome. Why do football players get rich in America and soccer players not? Soccer is the world's most popular sport, but can't draw a crowd in the US. Millions of people will tune in a football game, though. Who is more "deserving" of millions of dollars, the football player or the soccer player? To the free market, IT DOESN'T MATTER. The football player gets rich because millions of people will tune in to watch him play. The soccer player doesn't because no one cares. So, how much of the millions that the football player earns isn't "necessarily rightfully [his]"? (your words)

 

Pretty explanatory. You need to break the glass in case of emergency or something if you can't understand it.

 

Historically, the dems have almost exclusively designed our tax code. Argue as you will, but there's a reason why corporation's give more to the dems. The current tax code is designed to give a competitive advantage to the wealthy.

 

You ignore millions of other variables. How do we know what caused the recession at the end of Clintons term?

 

Are you one of those folks that only see extremes? How about we allow everyone to enjoy the privilege to spend their money appropriately without deciding whose spending is better for the economy?

 

Yeah, the coast guard would be the first thing in my list.... Jesus, do you guys ever get tired of being irrational?