Pat Toomey Debates Joe Sestak on Fox and Friends

No description available.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• pat
• toomey
• joe
• sestak
• pennsylvania
• senate
• race
• jobs
• economy
• stimulus
• republican
• arlen
• specter

[altosame]

@kenny99996565665 The question is how much these companies -- supposedly being driven out -- are currently invested in this country. The point to keep in mind: it's a global economy. Reagan raised the deficit, and Clinton taxed to level it out.

[altosame]

@kenny99996565665 I can't bring up the link even with the addition of "org" after "ntu.". BUt when I searched for "ntu.org" I got this in the description line: "America's oldest grassroots taxpayer organization working for lower taxes, smaller government, accountability from public officials, and economic freedom at ..." Despite their non-partisan claim, they have an agenda & likely a think thank -- an org. paid to maintain & argue on behalf of a particular view. Their findings may be doubtful.

[altosame]

@kenny99996565665 Have a good day. As for the Supreme Court, though, constitutionalist//constructio­nalists are terms that mainly mask party ideology. A constitutionalist typically is in favor of state rights, laissez faire economics, etc. -- what the Republican party favor. Constructionist, on the other hand, favor federal oversight among the three branches of government in reflection of changing times and values, as per Democrats. Stevens was nominated eras ago by a very different Rep. party.

[kenny99996565665]

@altosame Well, good sir, it was a priveledge. Ill be happy to continue this later if you'd like, however, I do have class to go to.

[kenny99996565665]

@altosame incentives need to be placed to keep companies here. I agree. Which is where I think Obama is going wrong. He's driving business OUT of this country like crazy.

Elder Bush raised taxes, but not nearly to what they were under, lets say, Clinton. Reagan cut taxes to a dangerously low level to get out of a terrible recession (which he did)...Let's not act like Bush raised them up to 39% on the top level, then 34%, etc.

[kenny99996565665]

I dont know why I cant post the link!

ntu./tax-basics/who-pays-incom­e-taxes.html

add an "org at the end of ntu....it would let me post it with it in there

[kenny99996565665]

@altosame Whats wealthy to you? The rich carry the income burden in this country. Thats not a debatable point. The top 25% pays over 86% of taxes. Stop acting like they dont pay Read for yourself please. They pay wayyyyy over what you think they pay. And im not arguing they shouldnt. Im just saying when you have the progressive system like we do with deductibles and things, they sometimes end up paying a LESS than they should

[altosame]

@kenny99996565665 It puts a lot of people in India to work. Recently Apple was discovered using third world countries to cheaply manufacture their iphone's. For supply-side ecomomics to work, privileges given to suppliers to pass down to manufacturers have to be restricted to this country for earnings to trickle-down. Also: supply-side side economics is comparable to big Rube Goldberg device. It would take at least 8 yrs for the process to work, and it didn't: Bush I had to raise taxes.

[kenny99996565665]

@altosame and you know damn well the Judicial Branch is suppose to stay away from all the "politics as usual" stuff. They read the law thats all they do. They are either strict constitutionalist or they are loose constructionists....they arent parties. And they dont vote down party lines, The most liberal justice that just retired was nominated by a Republican. Don't even try to pass this over on me. You know its not true

[altosame]

@kenny99996565665 This is what the flat tax as your proposed would have to take into account. The percentage taken from a poor person is more vital than the percentage taken from a wealthy person who "can afford it." For a flat tax to work, the wealthy would have to account for 50% and above of the tax burden since that's how much income they account for. Currently they only account for 40% of the tax burden. Sounds like a lot, but isn't due to the disparity.