This is why you should never respond to him with anything more than, “Shut the fuck up, Jay.”

Let me update you on that. All that good stuff in the wrong country is worth diddly. Take all those qualities to Chad and see how well you do.

Hard to believe you think just working hard and being honest is all anyone needs to succeed. You should travel to a few other countries sometime. It will make you appreciate your own a little more, perhaps even enough to give something back without crying about it.

Ah yes, the halcyon days of the never-ending Whitewater Investigation.

Good times, good times.

As usual, you were wrong. Without the system put in place by the government, you couldn’t get ahead. Without safety nets in place, economic mobility is extremely limited. You would know this if you were educated in the topic at hand, but you are a Republican, and knowledge is your enemy.

Obama’s been investigated over and over and over again. Keep trying to make up shit is the only Right Wing attack left and they do it over and over again: he’s a Muslim, A communist, etc, etc.

Why, in Beverly Hills those making that little have to live on the street!

Something over 90% of the people in the US make less than $250k/year. Any line would be “arbitrary”, but I think drawing a line that less than 10% of the people are above is a pretty good reasonable place to start saying those above the line are “rich”.

Especially when you also consider those above the line have a combined wealth several times that of those below the line.

Gee, and all this time I thought it was my HARD WORK (you know, long hours, sacrifices, going without, being fiscally responsible, etc.) that was helping me move up the economic ladder. I had no idea it was our economic system graciously “allowing” me to better myself.

Thanks for clarifying things.

And according to Joe Biden, I’m already more patriotic than half of the country. Jeez, what more does he want from me?

Please tell me what happens to society when there are only very rich and very poor people, with no middle class and the very rich outnumbered hundreds to one by the poor.

This might be relevant if the argument was that rich people should pay less. Unfortunately, the actual question being asked is why should people in a higher tax bracket, already paying more than half of the country, be asked to give even more of their income to the government so that it can be given as basically free money to those currently paying NO taxes.

I think that part of the problem is that Obama has arbitrarily drawn a line at $250K and said “if you make more than this, you are rich and must therefore share your wealth with those making less”. I have shocking news for Obama, in many parts of the country making $250K puts you solidly in the middle class. Living here in Southern California (where we also pay hefty state income taxes on top of federal income tax) is a perfect example. How did this suddenly get to be “rich”?

but this is a democracy, and the poor people vote.

And those poor people will vote for whoever is going to throw the most money at them. Which appears to be Obama.

Exactly. And as for proof the argument is wrong (If we’re going to require you prove it’s right, you should be able to require we prove it’s wrong.) one doesn’t have to look much further than the “we’re assuming Obama would raise Joe’s income taxes from dollar one, not simply from dollar $250,001″ line.

If you start by making assumptions that have nothing to do with what’s actually been proposed just because you need those assumptions to “prove” the conclusion you want to reach, your argument falls apart pretty quick.

I’ve actually never understood this part of the conservative argument that taxes dampen the incentive to make more money.

I regularly take on freelance gigs in addition to my regular day job because by doing those jobs I can make a little extra money and further my career. At no point have I every thought, well, I’ll have to pay more in taxes at the end of the year so maybe I’ll pass on the extra money or career enhancement. Who thinks that way? I would guess no one, except conservative strawmen.

Yes. It’s not FAAAAAAIIIIRRRRR!!!

Which he should do, of course, but your attempt at a clever rejoinder fails on the concept of equivalent.

He did. That story’s old news.

I know, patriotism and gratitude for a system that allows you to get rich is overrated.

Please tell me what happens to society when there are only very rich and very poor people, with no middle class and the very rich outnumbered hundreds to one by the poor.

Marx thought the poor would storm the castle and kill the rich, but this is a democracy, and the poor people vote.

Do the math.

Hey Jay, I’ll let you in on a little secret. Obama’s not debating here. If you want to claim Obama is wrong, you will have to back it up.

“But since it’s Friday and I’m in a good mood, I’ll give your atypical intellectual dishonesty and asininity a break and provide you with this link:

http://patgray.com/home/?p=2489”

God damn it, Jay. You are such a fucking retard, you need to put away in a home.

That list was for gross, not net. You pay taxes on net.

Secondly, there’s no fucking evidence presented there that contradict Obama’s claim. It doesn’t mention how many business are under $250,000, just the maximum they could bring in and still be called a small business.

In fact, if you read the comment, you would have seen this link…

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/809/

Obama is right. You are a fucking moron.

You have proven yourself to be a fucking moron, again. Yet you insist on posting here like you are an actual human being with a functioning brain stem.

http://friendsofatr.blogspot.com/2008/10/joe-plumbers-new-tax-bill-is-10000.html

You mean including the parts where it says:

we’re going with the worst case-scenario.

Similarly, we’re assuming Obama would raise Joe’s income taxes from dollar one, not simply from dollar $250,001.

In other words, where it tries to stack the deck and then flat out states that, like you, it doesn’t understand the basic concept of marginal taxe rates.

But even there they end up somewhere near the truth: “Joe can expect to pay almost $10,000 more under the Obama tax hike under a worst case scenario.” when he makes $30,000 more in income.

Again, you going to turn down $3 just because you have to give 1 back?

They have and you guys still complain, because you guys are stupid.

Yeah. And his income would go up $30,000. So what’s your point?

That the more money you make the more you pay in taxes? That $10,000 more in taxes is enough of a burden that he’d turn down the opportunity to make $30,000 more in income?

Jay, I’ll give you $3 if you give 1 of them back. You going to walk away from the two bucks because you don’t get all three?

And since it’s Friday I just have to ask if your brain is taking a three day weekend and didn’t let you know.

The information at that link does not in any way prove your statement or disprove Obama’s. What you have there is the list of “the maximum average annual receipts by industry that a business can have and still be classified as a small business for Federal Government programs.” That is not a list of actual business receipts or a breakdown of receipts as a percentage of small businesses in the United States.

In other words Jay, you linked to someone who confused government definitions of small business with actual small businesses. You cannot determine anything about the number of small businesses making $250,000 a year or more based solely on the fact that the government says that all business that make under $750,000 are to be considered small businesses.

Are you really so stupid as to think so?

Here’s a fact that disproves both your statements:

Second, even using the broad definition of small business that McCain likes, very few owners would see their own taxes rise.

That’s because the lion’s share of taxable income comes from a small number of wealthy businesses. Out of 34.7 million filers with business income on Schedules C, E or F, 479,000 filers fall into the top two brackets, according to an analysis of projected 2009 filings by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.

The other 34.3 million – or 98.6% – would be unaffected by Obama’s proposed rate hike.

That includes Joe “The Plumber” Wurzelbacher, whom McCain invoked nearly two dozen times at the debate Wednesday night to illustrate the plight of the average worker and small business owner.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/15/smallbusiness/small_biz_taxes_factcheck.smb/index.htm?postversion=2008101612