Friday, November 26, 2010


Baxter my Republicans friends beat me up all the time with the retort" You never got a Job from a poor man", I need a snappy comeback!! The whole thing sounds like a class warfare to me but I am unable to comeback with anything to answer them.
I realize I got a job because I was qualified and fulfilled the requirements of the job opening, but somehow the point they are trying to make is jobs are created by the rich in this country so please let them continue to be rich! help help!!!


Eric Martin said...

Not all rich people are employers. Not all employers are rich. But apparently all the pseudo-wanna-be-rich people are crabby and don't care who starves while they sit on their fat asses complaining about taxes.

Have you noticed that the real wealthy types like Buffett, Gates, Bloomberg are in favor of taxes going up on the "rich", while it's the pseudo wanna be rich, and their dumbest employees, that are complaining about a 5% tax hike.

The main reason to complain about the tax hike in public is that your telling everyone you make more than $250,000.

Jim G. said...

Wow, how silly Mr. Eric. Bad day?

Perhaps Mr. Buffett et al don't need the extra 5%, but those at the lower levels of rich sure do.

And no it is not, it is because taxing one group higher is immoral and counter productive.

Terry, the rich in this country are the suscessful and the leaders who by their work create opportunities.

Whether you and Mr. Eric wish to admit it, we are in a creation strike. The suscessful, attacked at the onset of the great "O" presidency have sat on their hands.

The rich pay most of the taxes, the rich earn their money just like anyone else, so who are you or Baxter or Mr. Eric to say how to distribute their income?

Baxter said...

The Good Doc thinks a progressive income tax is immoral? Wow - that's all we have had since the tax was introduced 93 years ago. What an un-American sentiment. Shame on you!

Rich people provide jobs. Working people provide labor. Neither is doing the other a favor. Tax policy should bring in the necessary revenue in the most efficient manner. That adds up to a progressive income tax.

Clinton proved the rich can pay more - in particular a top rate of 39.6% - without damaging the incentive to earn. Facts is facts and recent history damns the Republican tripe on this topic.

Many are rich in the USA because they inherited the money. Many others because they were raised in wealthy zip codes surrounded with wonderful role models. Its not that they hit a double or a triple - they were born on base.

I'm not sure how Obama policies have attacked the rich. In fact, the rich have fared very well under this administration. Whole industries have been rescued. Otherwise worthless debt has been paid in whole or part. If you are fretting over a little campaign rhetoric, calm down. The adults are in charge.

Anonymous said...


If they need the 5%, then they aren't rich; they are just upper middle class pudknockers.

Like me and my family, my neighbors, and most of the people I hang around. Doctors, lawyers, retired types that golf too much. Most are inappropriately arrogant. Usually white. Lots of bad taste in furniture and Botox -- endless whining about the government.

Sorry, Jim. Just Pudknockers.

If you want to really be chic, you have to say, "Go ahead and tax me, I don't care. I don't need the money."

riegels rant said...

Hey Eric...then why did the state of Washington vote down a tax on the rich...maybe they know something that you don't...instead of expanding and increasing tax's why not expand the tax base...meaning lower tax's so that people have more money to invest and spend and hire workers so that the revenue expands to the government so they can use it to reduce debt...which by the way would be a new concept to your idea of the rich sitting on their ass and being crabby...take a look what would you do without the people that make the money and hire the the way how much extra are you going to send in this year above what you owe in tax's?????

Baxter said...

The Washington voters did vote down the state income tax, which reflects poorly on them. This was not the year of the bright or enlightened voter.

We've heard you tout the supply side argument time and again, Riegel. It is as though you have not figured out yet that is an utterly discredited policy. Supply Side economics, as enacted by GW Bush & Reagan, brought us $10T in debt during growing economies. If you want to hollow out America, stick with your failed theories.

riegels rant said...

Baxter I give up...I guess I am wrong when we try to give people more money to spend, help the economy grow, help business expand, allow the tax revenue as well as the tax base grow...must be missing something. guess in the end we shall see who is correct.

Baxter said...

Al -

How much more proof do you need? How much more supply side failure can we afford? You have $10T of proof and counting...

Supply side economics is "Free Lunch Economics". It's something for nothing. 2 + 2 = 4 no matter how many times George W Bush tells you otherwise.