What part of "spending should be cut" and "STOP the socialist welfare state agenda" didn't you understand? The problem isn't that people aren't taxed enough, it's that the government spends too much. But the default libtard position is for the "rich" to pay their "fair share" which is BS code for wealth redistribution because 47% of the sheeple paid ZERO federal income tax last year, while the higher income earners pay more than their fair share. Top 1% Paid More in Federal Income Taxes Than Bottom 95% in â07 http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2...in-federal-income-taxes-than-bottom-95-in-07/ As for us all having our POVs... yes we do, but it doesn't mean they're equally valid. Was that supposed to rebut the points I made? Did you get a trophy even when you lost when you were in school?
So why aren't you participating through the stock market? It's nobody's fault but your own if you're not. Stop desperately shilling for Obama and his socialist welfare state agenda and learn how to trade.
It's frustrating to me the republicans don't make this point. They run and hide when ever the media or some liberal starts spouting the "richest 1 percent" or "tax cuts for the richest". The richest are basically the only ones paying paxes in meaningful amounts. Raising taxes on the "richest" is just codetalk for taxing republican constituencies, eg small business, and giving the money to democrat ones, eg unionized government workers. Why is it considered unthinkable that no government employee, no matter how useless, can never lose their job? The democrats would raise tax rates to 100% if possible to prevent one overpaid, fat ass bureaucrat with a lavish beneifts getting laid off. If a city wants to pay its teachers, etc lavish salaries and benefits, fine. Just don't expect me, as a federla taxpayer to chip in for it.
Then dont expect liberals to pay for wars and corporate welfare. What exactly is the amount spent on wars and unnecessary weapon programs vs teachers and cops?