Tell me this is all a bad dream...

[Arrian]

Yeah, Sava, it's just a dream. Go back to sleep.

-Arrian

[Alex]

ooh, now you have insulted me. I demand a financial help, otherwise I won't be screaming "USA! USA!" in front of a TV camera to show how I support this lovely war.

[SlowwHand]

[Sava]

History book... in regards to Iraq? Oh... do you mean how the Reagan adminstration sold them all their WMD's? And then sold weapons to Iran... and then sold weapons to Iraq again? Or how about how Iraq invaded Kuwait with US weapons? My history's quite good. I could recite all the US sponsored dictatorships and their estimated casualty rates, but it would be a broken record because you approve of the US and it's murdering of peoples.

[David Floyd]

David, it's one thing to be against taxes. It's another to give free money (that doesn't exist yet... i.e. deficits) to a bunch of rich corporations.

I oppose taxes in general, and just because only one group is getting tax cuts doesn't mean I oppose those tax cuts. Granted, we all should be getting them, but I'm not gonna oppose any tax cut, no matter where it is or if it directly affects me or not.

But Bush is cutting welfare programs for the poor, and increasing welfare programs for the rich.

I strongly oppose both social and corporate welfare. I don't oppose social or corporate tax cuts.

[Sava]

Then don't cheer for these cuts David. Sure, I like tax cuts. I pay a sh!tload of taxes on a lot of my investments. But this is simply wealth distribution and that the type of non-taxation that would make your nipples hard.

[SlowwHand]

Check messages, Sava.

[David Floyd]

Then don't cheer for these cuts David. Sure, I like tax cuts. I pay a sh!tload of taxes on a lot of my investments. But this is simply wealth distribution and that the type of non-taxation that would make your nipples hard.

No, wealth distribution would be a welfare program. Granted, those exist, and should be abolished.

What this is, is a tax cut, at least according to your post. I can't be bothered to check the article, of course, so I'll take your word that it's a tax cut. And a tax cut is never, ever a negative thing, regardless of what other wrongs are being committed.

If the government steals more from me to make up for lost revenue for other tax cuts, that act is wrong, but that act doesn't make those other tax cuts wrong.

[Sava]

If I call a cow a "rabbit"... it's still a cow David. Bush only disguises his pork-barrel gifts to corporations and the rich "tax cuts".

Sloww: ?? none

[David Floyd]

If I call a cow a "rabbit"... it's still a cow David. Bush only disguises his pork-barrel gifts to corporations and the rich "tax cuts".

Again, if it's corporate welfare, which means keeping tax rates the same and giving my money to corporations, I oppose it. If it is simply lowering taxes for a certain group, I am for it, no matter who that group is. If my taxes are correspondingly raised to cover the difference, that is wrong, but the two are separate and distinct actions - the tax cut is good, the tax increase is bad.

[SlowwHand]

:Hmmm:

It was about an organization I saw called "Patriots For Peace".
David may have an interest, too.
I saw it on the television when my mother was watching Oprah. The show about differing viewpoints on Iraq.

[Sava]

Well that's the thing David. The taxes are collected. And instead of just giving back taxes to the rich from the pool that they contributed. Bush is just giving them money and calling it a tax cut. Most of the corporate tax cuts go to corporations that move to their "official address" to Bermuda and pay no taxes in the first place.

That's why I get so pissed off. Not because I'm against tax cuts. But because this is corporate welfare.

[David Floyd]

Quoting from the article:

If enacted, they would end for the vast majority of Americans the taxation of inheritances and eliminate taxes on interest, capital gains and dividends. Those are tax changes Ronald Reagan could only dream of.

So it sounds like the tax cuts are an elimination of the death tax, capital gain taxes, and interest taxes. All of those things are methods of double taxation, and all of them have the potential to affect people of every income. Granted, richer people tend to invest more, and receive more money in inheritance and interest, but so what?

I didn't want to go in and read the article, much less quote from it - I just wanted to make a quick comment about how I support any and every tax cut. But I guess I had to, and quoting directly from the article shows that this is not corporate welfare, but rather a virtual elimination of a system of double taxation.