Can Voters For The Poodle Be Dangerous?
re: Point 3. Would that be a tax-and-spend liberal like the one that gave us three straight years of budget surpluses and the environment Microsoft thrived in? If the business environment was decent, they would still be using that money to invest in new ventures instead of a disbursement to shareholders. I worked and paid my way through a state school and can tell the difference between a thriving economy that throws off a budget surplus and this so-called conservative regime that gives the wealthiest 1% a tax cut and goes on insane nation building missions that drain our tax money into a black hole and starves productive sectors of the economy of funds.
Posted by Cary Allen
07/27/2004 at 06:00 PM
Man, someone’s really brainwashed you, eh?
Did you ever stop to think that those surplusses were generated by a super-bloated stock market generating taxable dividends paid to the treasury through usurious rates on income taxes?
Microsoft thrives because people like their product. They buy their stock to make more money to live a better life. So now MSFT has shitloads of money which they are giving back to those faithful investors.
What part of capitalism do you not understand?
As for the wealthiest getting tax cuts--hey--Earth to Cary---message just arived for you. EVERYONE got a tax cut (except those who already do NOT pay ANY taxes whatsoever!)
Just because the rich got more actual dollars is a simple function of the fractions and percentages portion of the math you so obviously failed in high school.
When the rich get to keep more of their money they then have more money to invest (and make even more from) in small business, other ventures and other risky endeavors.
Just for shits and giggles, name for me one business person you know who got his start-up cash from a poor person.
I’ll check back in about 20 years to see if you’ve found one.
Meanwhile, go away. You irritate me with your socialist drivel.
"When the rich get to keep more of their money they then have more money to invest (and make even more from) in small business, other ventures and other risky endeavors”
Right on Vilmar! I’ve never had a poor person’s signature on any paycheck of mine since retiring from the military. People don’t realize that it’s the wealthy who create jobs and they create these jobs when government gives them reason to invest their money. Hell, I’m not wealthy by any means but I got a tax cut too because I pay taxes. Maybe the wealthy didn’t need a tax cut but I sure as hell did and it doesn’t bother me on bit that they, the wealthy, got one too. After all, they pay more per year in taxes than I will make in 5 years.
“If the business environment was decent, they would still be using that money to invest in new ventures instead of a disbursement to shareholders”
Are you for real??? Why do you think people invest in stocks? Take some of your money and invest it in stocks or mutual funds and when you get no return on your investment because the company is investing all its profits in new ventures instead of paying its investors dividends, how long will you keep that stock?
Posted by Bob
07/27/2004 at 08:12 PM
Hey Vilmar I know that you call Kerry the Poodle. I would like you to consider Chameleon. Kerry changes his stances the way a chameleon changes his color.
Posted by Alan S.
07/28/2004 at 01:03 AM
Alan, chameleon is good but Poodle SO much better describes him: something we connote with France and it’s a rich woman’s toy.
Plus, The Poodle and his Puppy has a nice ring to it.
-
Posted by Anthony L.
07/28/2004 at 08:39 AM