UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (77) | Ignore Thread Prev | Next
Author: Goofyhoofy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 745941  
Subject: Re: Bush May Meet Vow To Halve The Deficit Three Date: 6/14/2006 12:09 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 117
<<Those making over $200,000 now pay 46.6% of total income taxes, presidential adviser Karl Rove recently said. That's up from 40.5% — despite Bush's tax cuts.>>

I always like this kind of quote. The Wall Street Journal and Investor's Business Daily are so fond of it they repeat it endlessly. Surprisingly, they never mention that "those making over $200,000" also make more than 46.6% of all income - and that we tax "income."

I suspect that if we raised most of our taxes from gasoline, we would find that people who buy more gasoline would pay more taxes. Big surprise. Hey! I just figured out that the 33% of people who smoke pay 100% of tobacco taxes! Wow, is that ever unfair!

I tell you what. Give me an example, any example, of a time when the US was at war and did not have a deficit.

A rather silly demand, given that the country has been in deficit nearly every year since its founding 200 years ago, even in peacetime.

In the 2002 budget, the Bush administration projected a "surplus" of $1.288 trillion through 2004. Oops, in 2004 they "revised" that to show a deficit of $850 billion. What's the actual number? It's over a trillion dollars in the next few years. That's quite a swing.

Is that all due to "the war"? If it is, then we've been lied to about the cost of the war. If it isn't, then we were lied to about the projected surpluses making it "easy" to give out a tax cut. Which is it? Oh, it wasn't a lie? It was just simple incompetence? I feel so much better.

And don't even think about saying the US shouldn't be at war. We have a stark, simple, non-PC choice before us. We can fight a war in Irag, Afghanistan, and the middle east with soldiers and civilians dying there, or we can fight a war in the US with soldiers and civilians dying here.

Oh please. The number of Iraqis who have come and made attacks on American shores is precisely zero. Your heroic war has done nothing but radicalize the entire world against us, and put pictures of dead babies and women on Al Jazeera daily for the past 3 years. That's some strategy for containing militant Islam.

I vote that we do it over there.

I vote that we pick our targets based on actual threat. Crazy idea, I guess.
 

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post  
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (77) | Ignore Thread Prev | Next

Announcements

Pencils of Promise - Back to School Drive
"Pencils of Promise works with communities across the globe to build schools and create programs that provide education opportunities for children."
Managing Your Wealth
Our own TMFHockeypop from Rule Your Retirement fame on the TV show Managing Your Wealth.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Post of the Day:
Value Hounds

My Big Fat Greek Splat
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
Community Home
Speak Your Mind, Start Your Blog, Rate Your Stocks

Community Team Fools - who are those TMF's?
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and "#1 Media Company to Work For" (BusinessInsider 2011)! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.
Advertisement