You all miss the point. In a little over 2 years GW has trashed the economy, although he denies it. Trashed the treasury, trashed the dollar, trashed personal freedom. For most of you 20 somethings he has made your education, assuming you have one worthless becasue the best you will be able to do with that college degree is promote porn sites.


I will vote for anyone running against the guy.

35% in 2000
30% last year

whats your point?

Greenspan for pres!

Yes but I had a lot more money to pay taxes on before Bush!

Taxes are not everything. Prosperity is more important.

Not being apprehensive about an Attorney General who wants to shut you down is also rather important.

wow, you are a brilliant analyst!
Let the republicans pass a law that would prevent newbies and their free porn!!!

How to do that? ban free porn? No more TGP?
Or at least no more american TGPs?
WOw, that would be the greatest day ever for all non-americans!

Spamming? CC processor? What the hell does that have to do with the republicans???

On a side note, the republicans had a lot to deal with since they are in power... alot of issues havnt been adressed.... ALOT of Christian groups are now pushing for anti-porn laws.... And "W" will have to listen to them... they are reminding him everyday that they put him in office!

You are a fucking idiot. I say that to alot of people, but to you, I REALLY mean it. He trashed this and that blah blah blah- BULLSHIT. Where is your proof? Do you know how to read? Or do you just retype by some miracle whatever your hippie news source is? I am not a Bush lobbyist, but he has done just as well -- if not better -- than any other candidate could have, save McCain, he was the fucking man. Anyway. I don't know how he fucked up my education, maybe it was when his GM traded Sammy Sosa. I seem to remember college costing 40k a year and high school being complete pointless, I think that fucked up my education.

Stop bitching about the rich getting a tax break. The rich get a tax "break" under anyone's (yes even democrats give tax breaks to the rich) plan for a good reason. Take this example:

Billy makes 25 g's a year. He pays away 8 of it in taxes. That is 32%. (Pulling numbers out of my ass, I went from being under 18 to a nice comfy tax bracket).

Jack makes 3500 g's a year(3.5mil). If he pays that same percentage, or $1,120,000, thats money that either 1) he is going to move off shore or 2) he will make up for by cutting investment in other business to support his lifestyle. Shit? He's not investing that $1,120,000? Now if there are a million people not investing $1,120,000, the bottom just fell out of the economy, WAY TO GO. At least the government has more money to fuck around with, Billy was fired, now he can't pay any money. Dominoes!

Nobody refutes what I say for some reason, could it be because I am a fucking genius?

It's funny to read right wingers saying that everything bad that Bush does is Clinton's fault.

Whatever happened to personal responsibility that Republicans used to preach? It went out the window when Bush took over. I haven't hear any right winger mention personal responsibilty and Bush in the same sentence.

I guess they also give Jimmy Carter credit for the fall of Russia?

:1orglaugh

I personally think Clinton wasn't bad as a President, he certainly was loved by the people, but during the tech boom I think it would have been better to have the Republicans control the big seats, what legislation was passed had little to do with Clinton himself though.

Also, I haven't heard ANYONE mention personal responsibility since Clinton's office, right or left wing. Politics isn't about personal responsibility, its about blaming everything bad on someone else or another part of the government and taking all the glory for yourself.

You are very entertaining. If anything you said made sense I might resond to it.

So I take it you don't like Bush.

You are actually dumb!

YOu think you just have it all figured it out?!

But the democrats TOP economical experts didnt figured it out?
The TOP economical experts managing the economy of all the countries that impose higher taxes on the rich are clueless!?

So those countries, or the democrats are actually hurting their ecomomy with their politics, that will result in less money to give to the poor... So they are shooting themselves in the foot right?!

Actually both strategies can be viable...
But it is so complex that even TOP economical experts are not sure if their economical plan is the right one!

BUt you know it all! Dimwit


again:
http://money.cnn.com/2003/05/20/news..._tax/index.htm


BUt how can this Buffett guy be credible? He is just ready to give up is money for what he believes!

man, i wish i could dig out all the old threads where most of the american webmasters, including the biggest names in the industry, were arguing with me when i told them not to vote for bush and their reply was :

"but he will lower our taxes"


damn what a lack of brains:Graucho

Can you read? I was explaining why the rich get a tax break on ANY plans, I wasn't saying THIS IS A REVOLUTIONARY TAX PLAN that is the way it is, on any tax plan, and I explained why. Buffett is the second richest man in the US... 310 million isn't anything to him, he wouldn't be giving up shit. Also his company isn't a public company, Berkshire Hathaway wouldn't ever pay a dividend, and the situation would never happen, I don't know how that article is supposed to magically discredit anything I say... the point still stands, the rich get a tax break under ANY plan for a reason, whether or not Warren Buffett thinks it is right that his secretary has to pay a larger percent of her paycheck away.

Perhaps giving $310m to a private business owner who is a cutthroat and destroys companies just so he can clean up when they sell assets off for bankruptcy isn't a best way to stimulate the economy, but giving less than 1% of the population a thousand dollar break on taxes wouldn't do any better.

Political advice from the French? There's a concept. :winkwink:

And the biggest names in the industry are doing just fine under Bush's tax plans, in fact, everyone who makes semi-decent money is doing better than before, the poor are doing the same, and some people who make really decent money are getting fucked, and rich rich people are doing nicely.

I know a guy on this board, one of the youngest, makes more money than 99% of the other guys on here, and pays more than 50% away in taxes, even after very creative write-offs.

Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Moldavians, Ukrainians, East Germans, Czechs, Poles, and Hungarians were fearful of the "Red threat" too. There's something about thousands of nuclear ICBMs pointed at your country that is a little unsettling, especially when they are moved to 90 miles away from your shore.

Me, cannot read?
What the hell are you talking about!?

I just explained to you that bigger tax cut for the rich is not the only way to go to build a strong economy...

Isnt what you meant by "Stop bitching about the rich getting a tax break."!??

Since nobody here ever questionned the fact that even the rich should get tax breaks....

Maybe you didnt read the thread with your glasses on!?


As for the Buffett exemple, it is just to show you that LARGE tax cut for the rich is not automatically good for the economy...
Im not saying that Buffett hold the thruth but that just prove my point that even the TOP experts cannot agree on what good for the economy!

i'm not Chirac i have my own brain, i speak for myself, not for "the french"

tksss tkssss take out your blindfold and look at the world outside of cnn and fox news :warning

OUch! You just made him feel so dumb!

:1orglaugh

I think the resume is old. His latest is appoint 25 new DAs to prosecute adult webmasters

No that is not true. It is only a" leftist " democrat rumor. LOL...

George W. Bush will reduce the US adult webmasters taxes .... to nil, nothing, nada.... no more business ... in the name of GOD he invokes every sentence, as much if not more that the religious muslims invoke theirs....

Too bad. America was a nice place to go, and Americans were jolly folks to hang with.

If I have a choice of putting in my back a "bullseye " or a "US flag", I choose the bullseye....

Now what the heck does what you say have to do with.

Three (3) things Bill Clinton did for the economy just three (3).

That's all you can think of, NOT good.:Graucho
Looks like welfare to me.:1orglaugh

I ain't NO christian.
I ain't NO socially AND fiscally conservative poster.

I'm wierd to the fucking extreme.
One out 3 shit your cook'n big girl. :Graucho

1. Under Clinton, the US Treasury sanctioned a limited intervention in foreign currency markets to save the yen from a catastrophic decline.

2. The Fed's interest rate under Clinton in 1998 helped stabilise the world financial system and prevent the Asian crisis from spilling over into a global catastrophe.

3. In 1999, Clinton delivered a balanced budget. Name a single Republican president who has done that in the last 30 years?

Here's 3, name ONE thing Bush has done except cut taxes which we have seen doesnt do shit.



1. 1996 - Telecommunications Reform Act.
Among other things created competition in the telco industry forcing them to reengineer and upgrade their network facilities which in turn created more/better internet backbones and data facilities which set the stage for the Internet explosion.

2. Minimum wage increase.
Raised minimum wage in 1996 from $4.25 to $5.15 even though Republicans argued raising the minimum wage would cause unemployment. 3 years later the unemployment rate was the lowest it had been in 30 years at 4.2 %.

3. Welfare Reform.
Aspects included funds for new job training and for day care which
helped welfare recipients become more employable, and to actually have the ability to work without abandoning their kids.


This doesnt include balancing the budget, ratifying NAFTA, etc and the fact that people felt confident investing in a Clinton economy.