Bush vs. Clinton

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Heh... Tax cuts for the rich! Tax cuts for the rich! Bah...

My post from the other thread...

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Tax cuts will always favor those with higher incomes when they are the only people paying taxes. The top 1% pay 34% of the income tax. The top 5% pay 55% of all income tax. And the top 10% pay nearly 66% of all the income tax.

We live in a country where half the wage earners pay almost no income tax.

Oh, and how rich do you have to be to get in the top 10%? Answer: An adjusted gross income of $51,000.

Link Scroll to the bottom... Last line.

People in the top 10% are pretty much the only people left to give a tax cut to!

 

[Eddieo]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Heh... Tax cuts for the rich! Tax cuts for the rich! Bah...

My post from the other thread...

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Tax cuts will always favor those with higher incomes when they are the only people paying taxes. The top 1% pay 34% of the income tax. The top 5% pay 55% of all income tax. And the top 10% pay nearly 66% of all the income tax.

We live in a country where half the wage earners pay almost no income tax.

Oh, and how rich do you have to be to get in the top 10%? Answer: An adjusted gross income of $51,000.

Link Scroll to the bottom... Last line.

People in the top 10% are pretty much the only people left to give a tax cut to!

I disagree with that. Where did you get your figures? Did you know that John Kerry and T. Heinz hardly paid any taxes because of all the loopholes rich people can do?

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Heh... Tax cuts for the rich! Tax cuts for the rich! Bah...

My post from the other thread...

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Tax cuts will always favor those with higher incomes when they are the only people paying taxes. The top 1% pay 34% of the income tax. The top 5% pay 55% of all income tax. And the top 10% pay nearly 66% of all the income tax.

We live in a country where half the wage earners pay almost no income tax.

Oh, and how rich do you have to be to get in the top 10%? Answer: An adjusted gross income of $51,000.

Link Scroll to the bottom... Last line.

People in the top 10% are pretty much the only people left to give a tax cut to!

Youre such a joke. Dumbyas cuts are meant for the start of his term through 2010. total percentages from 2006-2010:
top 1%, 44%.
lowest 20%, 1.4%

from 2001-2010:
top 1%, 36%
lowest 20%, 1.5%

Yes, this means that the top 1% are seeing HUGE reductions (not to mention that they hid the sh!t outta their money so they dont have to pay taxes on it) while the bottom 20% are seeing sh!t.

More numbers for the dope...

BTW, are you ever going to answer my question in the god/dinosaurs thread?

 

[Eddieo]

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Heh... Tax cuts for the rich! Tax cuts for the rich! Bah...

My post from the other thread...

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Tax cuts will always favor those with higher incomes when they are the only people paying taxes. The top 1% pay 34% of the income tax. The top 5% pay 55% of all income tax. And the top 10% pay nearly 66% of all the income tax.

We live in a country where half the wage earners pay almost no income tax.

Oh, and how rich do you have to be to get in the top 10%? Answer: An adjusted gross income of $51,000.

Link Scroll to the bottom... Last line.

People in the top 10% are pretty much the only people left to give a tax cut to!

Youre such a joke. Dumbyas cuts are meant for the start of his term through 2010. total percentages from 2006-2010:
top 1%, 44%.
lowest 20%, 1.4%

from 2001-2010:
top 1%, 36%
lowest 20%, 1.5%

Yes, this means that the top 1% are seeing HUGE reductions (not to mention that they hid the sh!t outta their money so they dont have to pay taxes on it) while the bottom 20% are seeing sh!t.

More numbers for the dope...

BTW, are you ever going to answer my question in the god/dinosaurs thread?

Nice post Homercles

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: bdude

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: Eddieo

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Eddieo
You forgot this nasty deficit we are in.

as opposed to the surplus we had in 2000?...

Could have used that surplus to help pay for SS.

Where do you think the surplus came from?

Fiscal responsibility.

He was spending the Social Security surplus. The end result is that the national debt continued to grow. Not very responsible.

Better than we have now for sure. But not as rosey as some would like to think.

The SS surplus was being spent a longtime before Clinton was President. So it is correct that Fiscal Responsibility was the reason for the Surplus.

 

[Aisengard]

It was actually more gridlock than anything.

Republican house + Congress plus Democratic President means very little rubber-stamping.

Sure, Clinton was 'fiscally responsible' by raising taxes for the middle class (which means most Americans) but, surprise surprise, it didn't bring down the economy like so many 'conservatives' like to claim it would.

But anyway, the surplus mostly came from gridlock and higher taxes.

 

[Todd33]

Originally posted by: Aisengard
It was actually more gridlock than anything.

Republican house + Congress plus Democratic President means very little rubber-stamping.

Sure, Clinton was 'fiscally responsible' by raising taxes for the middle class (which means most Americans) but, surprise surprise, it didn't bring down the economy like so many 'conservatives' like to claim it would.

But anyway, the surplus mostly came from gridlock and higher taxes.

Clinton didn't raise taxes on the middle class per se. Of course every Republican voted no and many said it would cause a recession - what the opposite of a recession?

It created 36 percent and 39.6 rates for individuals, and created a 35 percent rate for corporations. The cap on Medicare taxes was repealed, transportation fuels taxes were hiked by 4.3 cents per gallon, and the taxable portion of Social Security benefits was raised.

The phase-out of the personal exemption and limit on itemized deductions were permanently extended.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: DennyD
So Clinton sees Lewinski shake her booty and think - "hey, I'd hit that!"
And he did.
And he got caught.
So what happens? The feces hit the fan and they're talking impeachment and it was almost bye-bye Billy.

Now we have a war mongering, oil-lovin', civillian killin', troop sacrificing sub-human that secretly wiretapped anyone he wanted to without permission.

And no one is batting an eye. It's a thousand times more than what Clinton did.
Bush should be impeached; he's got the lowest level of support/popularity ever now.

And he's not in his right mind either... getting a bunch of Arabs - FROM THE DESERT - to run SEAPORTS? Jeesh...

I'd like to see George Carlin as president; he'd take no crap and tell it like it is.



Oh, and you all know what Bush is another word for...

DennyD you are so misinformed its laughable and pathetic at the same time...
In fact thats what I believe one of those 9/11 conspiracy theory wacko would say....
Bush should be impeached; he's got the lowest level of support/popularity ever now.

And he's not in his right mind either... getting a bunch of Arabs - FROM THE DESERT - to run SEAPORTS? Jeesh...

I`m am so glad they actually let these kids post in these forums to teach us adults a thing or 3...lolol

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Feldenak

Originally posted by: Astaroth33

Originally posted by: lozina
Well, for one thing Bush's party is in the majority in Congress. That's a blessing Clinton didn't have

And there's your answer as to why Bush is still in office.

Even if the Democrats had the majority in Congress, Bush would still be in office. It's quite difficult to impeach a sitting president.

I don't know...the real reason behind Clinton's impeachment hearings was his perjury. Thanks to the Republican congress, Bush and his leadership team have been able to avoid a lot of that pesky testifying under oath. Lying is only an impeachable offense if it's perjury, the regular kind isn't a big issue. I don't think a Democratic majority would allow Bush and co to dodge officially testifying as much as the Republicans have.

 

[DennyD]

Yeah, those kids are funny. Us in our mid 30s sure get a good laugh.
But I still don't see where the humor lies in Bush wanting people from the desert running security at seaports...

When I made the statement that his support/popularity is so low, I wasn't making it in connection to the impeachment; just a fact that the bush voters are realizing they screwed up.

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
DennyD you are so misinformed its laughable and pathetic at the same time...
In fact thats what I believe one of those 9/11 conspiracy theory wacko would say....
Bush should be impeached; he's got the lowest level of support/popularity ever now.

And he's not in his right mind either... getting a bunch of Arabs - FROM THE DESERT - to run SEAPORTS? Jeesh...

I`m am so glad they actually let these kids post in these forums to teach us adilts a thing or 3...lolol

 

[Aarondeep]

Originally posted by: loup garou
I've got no love for Bush or for foreign countries running our ports, but this

And he's not in his right mind either... getting a bunch of Arabs - FROM THE DESERT - to run SEAPORTS? Jeesh...

is one of the dumbest things I've ever read in P&N, and that is saying a lot.

While I agree that it does sound stupid, I find it strange that congress blocks the sale of Unocal to China and allows the sale of ports to the UAE. Seems kind of contradicitve.
Selective protectionism.

 

[loup garou]

Originally posted by: DennyD
But I still don't see where the humor lies in Bush wanting people from the desert running security at seaports...

Take a look at an atlas some time, numbnuts.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Heh... Tax cuts for the rich! Tax cuts for the rich! Bah...

My post from the other thread...

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Tax cuts will always favor those with higher incomes when they are the only people paying taxes. The top 1% pay 34% of the income tax. The top 5% pay 55% of all income tax. And the top 10% pay nearly 66% of all the income tax.

We live in a country where half the wage earners pay almost no income tax.

Oh, and how rich do you have to be to get in the top 10%? Answer: An adjusted gross income of $51,000.

Link Scroll to the bottom... Last line.

People in the top 10% are pretty much the only people left to give a tax cut to!

Youre such a joke. Dumbyas cuts are meant for the start of his term through 2010. total percentages from 2006-2010:
top 1%, 44%.
lowest 20%, 1.4%

from 2001-2010:
top 1%, 36%
lowest 20%, 1.5%

Yes, this means that the top 1% are seeing HUGE reductions (not to mention that they hid the sh!t outta their money so they dont have to pay taxes on it) while the bottom 20% are seeing sh!t.

More numbers for the dope...

BTW, are you ever going to answer my question in the god/dinosaurs thread?

Dude, you're hillarious. I said that the top 10% were the only ones you could give a tax cut to and you post up numbers showing their tax cut. I also pointed out that half the wage earners in this country pay almost no income tax and you post numbers bearing out that fact as well. What's your point? Are you angrily agreeing with me?

As to the dinosaurs... Musta missed it. I'll go look for it.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: DennyD
Yeah, those kids are funny. Us in our mid 30s sure get a good laugh.
But I still don't see where the humor lies in Bush wanting people from the desert running security at seaports...

When I made the statement that his support/popularity is so low, I wasn't making it in connection to the impeachment; just a fact that the bush voters are realizing they screwed up.

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
DennyD you are so misinformed its laughable and pathetic at the same time...
In fact thats what I believe one of those 9/11 conspiracy theory wacko would say....
Bush should be impeached; he's got the lowest level of support/popularity ever now.

And he's not in his right mind either... getting a bunch of Arabs - FROM THE DESERT - to run SEAPORTS? Jeesh...

I`m am so glad they actually let these kids post in these forums to teach us adilts a thing or 3...lolol

I would rather deal with a kid whose posting garbage in these forums than to have to deal with an adult who doesn`t know better.........have a nice day!!

 

[MIDIman]

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: DennyD
But I still don't see where the humor lies in Bush wanting people from the desert running security at seaports...

Take a look at an atlas some time, numbnuts.

Here - I'll help: maps.google.com

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: DennyD
Yeah, those kids are funny. Us in our mid 30s sure get a good laugh.
But I still don't see where the humor lies in Bush wanting people from the desert running security at seaports...

ok, just for the record, you DO realize that the Arabs you're speaking of live next to the water, right? That their lands are by the Sea? And that they operate some of the world's largest and busiest ports, right? ok, just making sure...

for a minute there I thought you mistakenly assumed all Arabs live in endless fields of sand dunes or something...

duh.

 

[Zysoclaplem]

Mission Accomplished!

 

[J Heartless Slick]

Originally posted by: DennyD
So Clinton sees Lewinski shake her booty and think - "hey, I'd hit that!"
And he did.
And he got caught.
So what happens? The feces hit the fan and they're talking impeachment and it was almost bye-bye Billy.

Now we have a war mongering, oil-lovin', civillian killin', troop sacrificing sub-human that secretly wiretapped anyone he wanted to without permission.

And no one is batting an eye. It's a thousand times more than what Clinton did.
Bush should be impeached; he's got the lowest level of support/popularity ever now.

And he's not in his right mind either... getting a bunch of Arabs - FROM THE DESERT - to run SEAPORTS? Jeesh...

I'd like to see George Carlin as president; he'd take no crap and tell it like it is.



Oh, and you all know what Bush is another word for...

Differences?

Clinton and a Republican Congress

GWB and a Republican Congress

 

[DennyD]

Ok.
So it seems that I don't know my middle eastern geography very well; I stand corrected. But this thread has steered away from the original question:

Why is Bush getting away with murder (literally) and other crimes (illegal phone taps) with no talk of any type of retribution; what Clinton did does not compare and they almost impeached him.

Bush is bad man with a secret agenda...

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: DennyD
Why is Bush getting away with murder (literally) and other crimes (illegal phone taps) with no talk of any type of retribution

1. Bush is NOT guilty of "Murder," unless you know something that we don't know, or witnessed him killing someone. did you? I guess if you were reaching for a crime, he could be tried for "Conpiracy to commit Murder," but then again, I'd label that accusation as baseless.

2. As of today, Bush is also innocent of any other crimes, such as "illegal phone tapping."

3. No talk of retribution? Are you nuts?! That is all the anti's do talk about...every day...all day...without end...

Have you forgotten that in America all persons are innocent until proven guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt, in a court of law?

ya... that's right... you have!

judge much?

 

[HomerJS]

I just have three points...

1. Impeachment isn't necessarily a bad thing or the founders would not have included it. It's supposed to be for high crimes against the country.

2. People keep referring to Clinton and his impeachment. He was accussed of purjury, in a civil case , lying about sex. If that were a high crime there would be a lot more guys in jail who testified in their divorce cases.

3. As far as the UAE operation our ports. just as a matter of common sense none of the countries involved in 9/11 should run our ports.