[Mr 5 0]

Originally posted by RBatson :

What took you so long?

Real life sometimes interferes with the time I have to spend posting on the net.

As I said earlier, they have most of the money. They should be paying more than 64.89%. Let's not talk about what percentage of the American tax bill they pay, lets talk about what percentage of thier personal income they pay. Did you look at the link I posted?

Yes. The usual leftist skewing of reality. Rick, the top marginal tax rate is now at 39%. That's the U.S. government taking, by force of law, almost 40% of a man or womans income - right off the top. We're not even counting the FICA tax here, which is 7.65%. That's legal robbery. Then, a majority of states have some state income tax, usually around 5% and the big cities, such as New York, have a city income tax, not to mention the property taxes every town and city has in place and of course, state sales tax in many localities. Most of these taxes cannot be escaped and a high-income person could well pay 50% of their income in taxes. Still, you think that's 'not enough?. You're dead wrong. If you think socialism is a great idea then you may favor this kind of taxpayer abuse but most of us know better. It's punishing success.

I'm not surprised that you don't want to talk about how much of the total income tax bill the rich actually pay as it undercuts your premise that the middle class 'pay all the taxes' while the 'rich' pay little. That's hogwash and always has been but the socialist/liberals in this country have been selling that class-envy routine for decades and many folks - who should know better - eat it up, as it makes them feel put-upon and gives them an 'enemy' to resent (the rich). Too bad it's based on false assumptions.

How some folks mishandle thier money is not the issue.

Neat sidestep Rick but you're not getting away that easily. It's me, remember? You complained about the fact that banks (who, I assume, represent 'the rich' to you) charge interest for loans and you seem to be saying that they shouldn't? That's absurd Rick and you know it. Banks today are mostly owned by stockholders, ordinary people for the most part, who simply want to make a profit. Profit is not a dirty word, Rick. It drives the fabulous American economy, the envy of the world. What you want is socialism. Oh, you may not say it or even realize it but your animus toward the wealthy makes it clear that you want others ('the rich') to pick up your tab and you want to call that 'fair' to make it seem better. It isn't. We have a progressive tax system and the more you make, the more you pay in taxes. The 'rich' pay plenty. Trouble is, congress spends more than we can pay. That isn't the fault of 'the rich' You seemed to want to just ignore that fact.

Jim, mortage rates are not the lowest in modern history because things are going so great, its because things are going so bad. People are out of work. The car companies are enticing people with low to no interest rates because they are trying to sell cars, cars that would otherwise just sit on the lots.

That's another absurdity. Where do you get this gloom-and-doom nonsense from? DU? Mortgage rates are the lowest in history because the economy is expanding rapidly, interest rates on bank funds is low and plenty of money is available to loan for homes and cars. The U.S. median income for a family of four is a bit over $42,000. The U.S,. is doing great and you try to pretend as if it's the Great Depression. That may play with the uninformed here Rick but you're simply wrong and on this 'declining economy' pose you choose to adopt. Very wrong.

While I stand to benefit from the capital gains tax cut, who do you think benefits the most from it? The folks with the extra money to invest. The little bit I'm saving is nothing compared to the savings that those who really own America get. You know, the folks that own your house and car... not you specifically.

Yes, people with big incomes see more savings when tax rates are lowered. You've found us out! Duh! Really, Rick, your class-envy is rather sad. Capitalism works beautifully and even the 'poor' in America are far better off than the poor in any other country. We have a huge middle class, living a life of luxury that other nations can only wish for and we have a large wealthy population,, the majority of them self-made people (not inherited wealth). Yet you want to whine that you have to pay taxes and that the 'rich' don't pay enough, even at 39%? That's unrealistic in the extreme.

I'm not against big business except when they get away with not paying thier share of taxes (loopholes), are screwing someone out of thier retirement, or unnecessarily polluting the environment that we have to live in. Maybe I do have a couple issues.

More than 'a couple'. You look at America: land of the free, home of the brave and one of the richest countries on earth and see nothing but 'problems'. How sad for you.

I don't know any millionaires, that I know of. The only way financing a car makes since to me is if its a zero rate. Financing anything that you can pay cash for makes no sense to me .

Unless the interest rate is less than what you could receive on the money in an investment, I can't understand that. I'm still going over it in my head.. it will bother me until I understand.

Most people don't have $20 - 25,000. or more in cash to lay out for a new car. I didn't say that it always makes sense to finance but with the very low-to-no interest rates on car loans, one would do well to take advantage of the deal. Millions have.

I'm going to throw one that you like to use back at you.. How do you know this? The media?(Rush maybe?)

It was in all the papers and on TV just days ago, Rick. Try to keep up.

Why do the Republicans always point the finger at the Democrats and vise-versa? I don't take offense either way because as I've said before, I'm neither. I make up my own mind on issues.

Because the two parties represent two very different political philosophies. When one party is in power, the other wants to find fault and blame it for anything negative in order to convince people that the party in power is wrong, corrupt and/or dangerous and must be replaced. That's partisan politics.

When was the last time anyone complained about gas prices being low? I must have missed that..

Apparently you miss a lot. The Democrats were trying to infer that President Bush is using increased Saudi oil exports to the U.S. to keep gas prices low so he'll be re-elected. Of course most Americans have no problem with that, only Democrat politicians.

Alot of people think we are crazy so I guess its ok if China sees fit to start bombing America because we are invading another country or because we have WMD. I guess my main question is, 'When are we going to stop being the world's police?'.

You seem to be ignoring the reality of the dire situation in Kuwait that I described. Rick, wake up. Please. America was attacked by Muslim terrorists on September 11, 2001. Almost 3,000 innocent people died. Since then, the Bush administration has been fighting back and doing so on many fronts, the invasion of Iraq being only one of them. The notion that we invade countries because we feel like it or want to play 'policeman' is ridiculous. America responded to an attack. What part of that do you still refuse to get?

Hindsight? I don't know anyone who didn't think we should have finished what we started, back in 1991. I do know people that didn't think we should have been involved in the first place, at the time. To tell you the truth, I'm actually glad people have opposing views.. it helps us see things from all angles.

Yes, hindsight. The same people who now claim that they would have supported taking Saddam Hussein out in 1991 were many of the same folks who lobbied against invading Iraq in 2003. "Oh, but that's different" they claim. No way. As for opposing views, yes, they help define issues and in Ameriac, we're free to express them. Works for me.

It wouldn't have been anywhere near as bad back then as now. As far as there being an outcry, people demostrate in other countrys now.. they didn't want us there to start with. I realize there is evil in the world but I have a problem with the idea of us knowing what is best for everyone. Thinking our way of life is right and forcing it on the rest of the world, I don't understand that. Maybe its right for us but who is to say its right for everyone else? That being said, I believe we live in the greatest country in the world.

Glad you think so but I still believe you want socialism in America, even if you don't realize it. In any case, this 'forcing our way of life on the rest of the world' line is bogus, Rick. Really. The vast majority of the world's countries are non-democratic. Many are run by dictators or communist thugs (China, Cuba, Viet Nam to name just a few). Democracy is a rare commodity in most of the world. In case you missed it: the U.S.-led Coalition is planning to turn the Iraqi government back over to Iraqis on June 30th. We do not covet land or 'force' democracy on anyone. When we bailed out on South Viet Nam in 1975, 2 million Vietmanese later died at the hands of the communist dictatorship we left intact. Somehow, I doubt the 2 million dead would have objected to democracy in their homeland. If Iraq doesn't want democracy, they will ultimately go back to a dictatorship, rape rooms, torture chambers and mass graves. Feel better? I hope not. Democracy represents what speaks to the heart of mankind: freedom. With real freedom (and a form of capitalism) the world would be a much safer and freer place, Rick.

Why would they say that if they knew the UN mandate didn't include removing him? Because we should have or because we pretty much do what we want anyhow?

We should have but we didn't because President Bush had no U.N. mandate to remove Saddam Hussein, only to drive the Iraqi army from Kuwait, which we did. That fact alone cuts down your premise that 'we do what we want, anyhow'. The liberals didn't think we should have been in Kuwait in the first place (Senator Kerry voted against it, remember?) and as the Democrats then controlled congress they would have made big problems for President Bush if he had sent our military into Baghdad to remove Saddam. Should we have? Of course. Few disagree on that....now.

I agree

Good. There's hope for you, yet.

I have full confidence in our military, I know we can handle it. Anyone who doesn't is delusional, in my opinion. I thank the military for the job they are doing and think they are doing great!

I agree.

Jim, your hatred for Democrats is apparent. When was the last time you, yourself, ever agreed with anything a Democrat said or did? I'm just curious.

1968, when LBJ declined to run for a second term.

Seriously; I find the liberal wing has taken over the Democrat party, they are becoming very leftist and I think that bodes poorly for America should a Democart be elected president again. They want ever-higher taxes, hate tax cuts (always 'for the rich') and seem to like to punish success. They try to solve every social 'problem' in sight and make most things worse when then try. Democrats vigorously supported a corrupt, lying (under oath) president - Bill Clinton - and still do. They are anti-capitalistic and want a socialist government in America. The Democrats are weak on defense and seem to actually be embarrassed at Americas wealth and military might, which I find ridiculous - and frustrating.

I could go on but you get the point, I trust. While I actually 'hate' no one, I believe the Democrat party is bad for this country should they ever attain power again, which is doubtful. Their leftist tilt has turned off many Americans; Democrat voter enrollment is declining (Republican enrollment is up) and I think we're headed for another four years of a Bush administration. Thank God.