Democrats tax plan

[ironglow]

   Fifty thousand people go to a baseball game, but the game was rained out and a refund was due.

The team was about to send out refunds when someone stopped them and suggested that they send out refund amounts based on the their interpretation of fairness. After all, if the refunds were made based on the price each person paid for the tickets, most of the money would go to the richest people.

Their plan says:

- People in the $10 seats will get back $15, because they had less money to spend.

- People in the $15 seats will get back $15, because that's only fair.

- People in the $25 seats will get back $1, because they already make a lot of money and don't need a refund.

- People in the $50 luxury seats will have to pay another $50, because they already have way too much money to spend.

- People driving by the stadium who couldn't afford to watch the game will get $10 each, even though they didn't pay anything in, just because they need the most help.
 


   NOTE: The one thing they forgot to mention..the one who "refunds" the money, keeps 50%.."for administrative costs".

[Troyboy]

Sounds like a good example




                                                   Troy

[jimster]

Too many taxes come from too much spending, period.  Spending is always the key and the math always works the same.  That's why they promise you tax cuts...but....they don't stop confiscating it out of your paychekcs, oh no....too easy....they print it, borrow it, ect...then call it a rebate of some sort, which many don't qualify for anyways.  I'ts insane really.  If your married to a spouse that can't stop spending you divorce them....hard to divorce congress, you have to vote them out.

Last I know taxes were prgressive as all get out.....that's why most of them are paid by the highest earners.  Normal human nature for anyone, is to try to keep your money at all costs.  Thus...tie it up till taxes get lower.  Nobody can force anyone to pull the money out till it's safe to do so.

Lower classes always do better if upper classes are left alone,  you can't spread the wealth through legislation.  Government can't even collect as much as they would get if people were throwing their own money around,  IRS even says so.  Most money won't be circulated unless taxes allow it.  It's common sense.


If government wanted to see money flow to them, they would just cut taxes...but they can't...cause they can't stop spending it faster than they get it.

Divorce them all.

[magooch]

Well, for those who favor spreading their wealth around--have at it.  There is no law against it.  But when government gets into the act, that is when it's just plain wrong.

It irritates me raw when politicians, or anyone else complain about taxes not being high enough on the wealthy.  In Osama's case and most of the other Dumbycrats, they are the wealthy and they are more than welcome to send in any extra bucks they feel they should.  And while I'm at it, it really galls me when I hear those same dumbies talk about sacrifice.  Like we're supposed to sacrifice because we're involved in a couple of "wars."  Sacrifice is Dumbycrat code for raise your taxes.

[deltecs]

Well, for those who favor spreading their wealth around--have at it.  There is no law against it.  But when government gets into the act, that is when it's just plain wrong.

It irritates me raw when politicians, or anyone else complain about taxes not being high enough on the wealthy.  In Osama's case and most of the other Dumbycrats, they are the wealthy and they are more than welcome to send in any extra bucks they feel they should.  And while I'm at it, it really galls me when I hear those same dumbies talk about sacrifice.  Like we're supposed to sacrifice because we're involved in a couple of "wars."  Sacrifice is Dumbycrat code for raise your taxes.

Well here is perfect example of Obama's spread the wealth tax plan.  I went to a restuarant where a homeless man outside was holding a sign asking for monetary assistance.  The waiter was wearing an Obama tie who took my order.  After eating my meal, I told the waiter that he would not get a tip.  Naturally the waiter called me a greedy old man and indignantly walked away muttering under his breath about this injustice for good sevice.  I gave the $7.00 dollar tip to the homeless man outside the restuarant and told him it came from the waiter inside.  That is the person you should thank.  On an aside, I will not eat in this restuarant again for permitting employees to engage in political expressions while at work.  So, not only did the waiter lose his tip and the restuarant from future profits, it was only the homeless who benefited from the financial exchange.  If all America did this, how long does anyone think the restuarant will stay in business, the waiter to have a job or the homeless man to find a home?  He won't find a home as he'll make more money by not having one.  For the life of me, I cannot understand how Obama thinks he can unite the country by non parisanship politics with concepts like this tax plan.  Does anyone think the waiter is going to appreciate the homeless man's thank you for the donation?

[Graybeard]

That "homeless" man might actually have a home. It might be he just finds it easier and more profitable to him to make his living asking for hand outs in front of the restaurant. Many do just such.

As to the political tie on the waiter I think he has as much right to do that as you do to express your views. I don't care for his choice but I'll defend his right to make it to the end.

[deltecs]

That "homeless" man might actually have a home. It might be he just finds it easier and more profitable to him to make his living asking for hand outs in front of the restaurant. Many do just such.

As to the political tie on the waiter I think he has as much right to do that as you do to express your views. I don't care for his choice but I'll defend his right to make it to the end.

I wasn't criticizing his right to wear the tie, but at his place of employment where all the waiters had company uniforms.  If the company supports a candidate by permitting employees to express personal political opinions at work, then I must presume the company has the same political persuasion.  As this disagrees with mine, I chose not to support such mentality or business.  The intent was to indicate the results of Obamas share the wealth tax plan and his ridiculous concept that only he can unite the people without partisan politics.  It doesn't matter that the homeless man may have a home or not.  This is the end result of Obama's tax plan. 

[ironglow]

  While the waiter has a right to wear the tie...and his employer has a right to allow him to do so.,.we each have a right to patronize those establishments we wish to. I probably would have done just about what Deltecs did..although GB is correct about some of those homeless..
   From what I hear the way most Alaskans so strongly back Sarah..the restaurant owner or manager must figure he needs a tax break...by having his business drop off dramatically !