[voodoochile78]

Originally Posted by rinthea

You said tax cuts to the ultra rich should not happen due to the fact that they can choose what they want to do with their money. Thats protectionism.

That's not protectionism you fucking retard. Protectionism is regulating trade through tariffs and the like.

You said your better off propping up the middle and working classes. This is welfare.

Tax cuts to the middle and working classes isn't welfare you fucking retard.

Sorry for the flaming, but that's the stupidest fucking shit I've heard in a long time. Tax cuts for the middle class is welfare? What the fuck must the world look like through your eyes, Jesus H. Fucking Christ, where a 2-income family with their own house, 2 kids in college, a dog and an SUV counts as motherfucking welfare. Either you're the richest motherfucker on earth to think this lifestyle counts as being on welfare, or you are an utter retard.

I don't even think you know what welfare fucking means. How does reducing the taxes people pay on the positive income they have earned count as welfare? This makes not fucking sense. They're making money. They're in the fucking black, and they're paying taxes on their income. Welfare is for people with ZERO income or income below the poverty line.

That said, yours and soriaks argument that tax cuts to the rich dont stimulate the economy is fallacious.

I don't think either of us made that point. This shit isn't even relevant to the discussion, and I'm reluctant to push this tangent forward, but here goes. Tax cuts for the rich does stimulate the economy, BUT, it does not stimulate it as much as tax cuts for the middle and working classes. In both Reagan's case, and George W. Bush's case, tax cuts to the rich provided very little stimulus to the economy while coming with a such a monsterous price tag (the National Debt) that it took ~10 years to clean up Reagan's shit and will probably take at least that long to clean up after Bush's shit.

Clinton raised the top marginal tax rates and cut taxes on the middle class and small businesses, and that provided a bigger stimulus to the economy AND eliminated the deficit and replaced it with a surplus.

Conservatives hate Clinton though, and that is why I am so generous in allowing you to say that at best, the performance of the Reagan and Bush economies compared to the Clinton economy shows that taxing the rich and economic performance are uncorrelated. That's my gift to you, giving you that out from this ridiculous "tricke down" corner you've painted yourselves into.

I've thought about this little tangent a bit, and I'm actually quite glad this unfolded the way it did. You know why? Because this whole "sales tax is fair to everyone, and especially the working class!" rhetoric quickly brings out the supply-siders and shows the "FAIR" tax for what it is - a boon to the rich and a pox on the middle and working classes.