We went over this a lot during the stimulus discussion and I've got too much work to do to really rehash it, here's a source citing work by a couple of people including the Congressional budget office and the congressional research service. Kap will say it's more complicated and those people are wrong, I will say Kap is flat out wrong, Kap will say that we have one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, I'll respond "Yeah, if you assume that all of the deductions don't exist", I have to go worry about water-partitioning.

 

The funny part of that is that the same people who are saying the corporate tax rate doesn't do much are the same people running around for Barack giving the "jobs saved" number.

The funny part of that is that the same people who are saying the corporate tax rate doesn't do much are the same people running around for Barack giving the "jobs saved" number.

Yeah. Because he didn't cut the corporate tax rate. Otherwise he wouldn't have been saving jobs.

These people surely could use the public option. WOW!!!

 

 

 

http://www.drugfree.org/Portal/DrugIssue/M...aces/index.html

is this going to be a part of the new "obama's health care plan will force feed you meth" meme or something?

Obama wants to force feed me meth? Sweet, where do I sign up for this?

is this going to be a part of the new "obama's health care plan will force feed you meth" meme or something?

 

No, but these will be some of the people that we will all be forced to pay for under the "no one can be dropped" portion of the plan.

No, but these will be some of the people that we will all be forced to pay for under the "no one can be dropped" portion of the plan.

Which would in turn probably end up reducing certain medical costs, because more of them would get treatment, be put into programs, etc.

Drug rehab and treatment programs > mandatory stiff penalties, incarceration, etc. but that's an argument for another time, another day.

No, but these will be some of the people that we will all be forced to pay for under the "no one can be dropped" portion of the plan.

We are already forced to pay for them when they need emergency treatment and don't have money to pay the ER bills.

No, but these will be some of the people that we will all be forced to pay for under the "no one can be dropped" portion of the plan.

 

LOL

I tend to agree with kap on the slowing of bleeding, but perpetual tax cutting is s***ty budget policy.

Well, there certainly has to be an endgame. You can't just perpetually do it, duh... but in times of deep recession, it's something that has proven to work well IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, which is where jobs should be, not the damn government.

Well, there certainly has to be an endgame. You can't just perpetually do it, duh... but in times of deep recession, it's something that has proven to work well IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, which is where jobs should be, not the damn government.

I believe there's a sweet spot somewhere, that you can raise taxes to a certain point before it starts negatively affecting the economy. The problem is that tax increases are taboo to mention even when they're necessary.

 

I don't know why it's political suicide to suggest minor tax increases for people in my tax bracket. Seriously my entire family is not going to go bankrupt and die if I have to give an extra 600 dollars a year to the feds, after they give me multiple tax cuts over a decade or so.

I believe there's a sweet spot somewhere, that you can raise taxes to a certain point before it starts negatively affecting the economy. The problem is that tax increases are taboo to mention even when they're necessary.

 

I don't know why it's political suicide to suggest minor tax increases for people in my tax bracket. Seriously my entire family is not going to go bankrupt and die if I have to give an extra 600 dollars a year to the feds, after they give me multiple tax cuts over a decade or so.

When there's real economic growth, no one wants to talk about it except get those "evil, rich motherf***ers". In reality, everyone benefits, but that's taboo for Dems to admit as well. The problem is, the middle class is no longer going to be the middle class before too long.

yes, dem's wouldn't get elected if they ran on tax cuts.

For government revenues, sure. Because that means corporations get to keep more of their own money and invest it how they want to instead of handing it over to the government.

They just spend the money they save on Corporate Tax cuts to strengthen their lobbies and pay off election officials to make favorable policies for them.

Edited October 17, 200916 yr by DukeNukeEm

Obama wants to force feed me meth? Sweet, where do I sign up for this?

 

you, sir, are a drug addict. luckily for you that's covered in the Obama plan.

you, sir, are a drug addict. luckily for you that's covered in the Obama plan.

I actually forgot I was black so I don't do meth. Are coke addicts covered? I make enough money to not have to do crack.

I actually forgot I was black so I don't do meth. Are coke addicts covered? I make enough money to not have to do crack.

 

All those drugs you mentioned are covered.

 

'Magic Mushroom' addiction? not covered. sorry.

Starting to look like Health Insurers will lose their anti-trust exemption.

 

Starting to look like Health Insurers will lose their anti-trust exemption.

 

Good. Bring on the competition.

Starting to look like Health Insurers will lose their anti-trust exemption.

SWEET!

Good. Bring on the competition.

As long as it's not run by the government.

As long as it's not run by the government.

 

One entity putting the others out of business by selling a product artificially below cost is illegal for any other group in the country to do. It is anti-competitive.

One entity putting the others out of business by selling a product artificially below cost is illegal for any other group in the country to do. It is anti-competitive.

Or this...