Howdy Rugg...

[Pudfark]

Take a gander at this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=xO ... r_embedded

The other part of the "conspiracy"......

[ruggbutt]

I've rallied against big gubmint my whole life.

[Pudfark]

Slick's opinion on the clip oughta be a hoot....

[fatman]

Sen Coburn from Oklahoma was on CSPAN in the last few days. He said that if those top 5% or so taxpayers were taxed at 100%, if we took every nickel they made, the Federal Government would still spend about $600 billion more that they took in. It's simple. We do not have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem and the sooner the tax and spend liberals get hold of that truth, the better.

Big governmants, big spending

[callmeslick]

the bit about the top 5% and taxes is just a flat out lie.

[Pudfark]

Uh.....whut about them other 95%?

[CUDA]

Consider the Internal Revenue Service’s income tax statistics for 2008, the latest year for which data are available. The top 1% of taxpayers—those with salaries, dividends and capital gains roughly above about $380,000—paid 38% of taxes. But assume that tax policy confiscated all the taxable income of all the “millionaires and billionaires” Mr. Obama singled out. That yields merely about $938 billion, which is sand on the beach amid the $4 trillion White House budget, a $1.65 trillion deficit, and spending at 25% as a share of the economy, a post-World War II record.

Say we take it up to the top 10%, or everyone with income over $114,000, including joint filers. That’s five times Mr. Obama’s 2% promise. The IRS data are broken down at $100,000, yet taxing all income above that level throws up only $3.4 trillion. And remember, the top 10% already pay 69% of all total income taxes, while the top 5% pay more than all of the other 95%.

[callmeslick]

as I pointed out elsewhere, CUDA, the key wording is 'TAXABLE INCOME'. My taxable income,according to my good friends at the IRS, is sometimes less than 40% of my gross. I am sort of certain that folks higher up the foodchain write down even farther. Heck, looking at that quote, someone came up with the top 1 million taxpayers(1%) only AVERAGING 900K per annum? You have to be joking, given the fact that I can find you at least 2000 publicly identified people making 50 Million, up to a high over over 3 Billion per year, that ought to, given common sense, shift an average whose bottom end is 350k up a bit past 900......

[Pudfark]

as I pointed out elsewhere, CUDA, the key wording is 'TAXABLE INCOME'. My taxable income,according to my good friends at the IRS, is sometimes less than 40% of my gross. I am sort of certain that folks higher up the foodchain write down even farther. Heck, looking at that quote, someone came up with the top 1 million taxpayers(1%) only AVERAGING 900K per annum? You have to be joking, given the fact that I can find you at least 2000 publicly identified people making 50 Million, up to a high over over 3 Billion per year, that ought to, given common sense, shift an average whose bottom end is 350k up a bit past 900......

Built in wiggle room....

Old Pudfark sez: " I not sure that mess would stay on a hook... "

[CUDA]

as I pointed out elsewhere, CUDA, the key wording is 'TAXABLE INCOME'. My taxable income,according to my good friends at the IRS, is sometimes less than 40% of my gross. I am sort of certain that folks higher up the foodchain write down even farther. Heck, looking at that quote, someone came up with the top 1 million taxpayers(1%) only AVERAGING 900K per annum? You have to be joking, given the fact that I can find you at least 2000 publicly identified people making 50 Million, up to a high over over 3 Billion per year, that ought to, given common sense, shift an average whose bottom end is 350k up a bit past 900......

SO what your saying is that their Taxable income is not good enough, and you want to be able to take away from them based upon their NON-taxable income. sounds like theft to me.