Re: What happens when big government interferes
|September 10 2012, 10:42 AM |
put that on a bumper sticker
These types of ventures are the first step in energy independence.
|September 10 2012, 11:12 AM |
and added national security. We as a nation are addicted to gas powered engines. Addiction is hard to overcome until death stares you in the face. Besides oil is not a unlimited source of fuel.
On a side note, I found this comment to a Yahoo article about the economy.
"If you look at the last 70 years of economic data there is a small positive correlation between tax rates for the rich and economic growth, which means that higher taxes for the rich historically resulted in higher economic growth. This leads to the conclusion that lowering taxes for the rich will most likely not create more jobs or boost the economy, but will result in higher deficits and/or higher burden on everybody else. Therefore to me it is absolutely mind boggling why somebody making less then 250,000 a year would even consider voting republican. Can anybody please explain what Mitt Romney is going to do that will things better for the average America (me)."
Is this true??
I'll telll ya why
|September 10 2012, 12:31 PM |
because I don't buy into the mantra about "tax the rich". I believe that a man is entitled to what he makes. Period. Granted we need to collect taxes but this whole tax the rich is a ploy by the dem's to make people envious of wealthy people. You yourself said it by asking why anyone making less than 250k would vote rep. well, I do make less but one day, hopefully will and I wouldn't want someone to come after me just because I have done well.
Oh and just so you get this straight, Romney doesn't want to give the rich a tax break, it's across the board, the dem's just say it that way so you will vote for them.
You ever wonder why the dem's are so against the fairtax, or similar tax system, it's because if it or a flat tax were implemented, they couldn't use "the rich don't pay thier fair share" arguement anymore to buy votes from the uneducated. Think about it.
First of all.....
|September 10 2012, 2:14 PM |
I did not make the comment. Some one else did and I was curious if the data and correlation were true? You obviously did not read the post or you would have seen that.
Second, I wasn't looking for an attack response, just some facts supporting or not supporting the statement. I though liberals were the only ones who attacked? They're not, but some seem to think so.
Thirdly, no where in the posted comment did anyone defend only "taxing the rich" as a valid option. The premise was that when the rich are taxed at a higher rate, economic growth increases. Is there some validity in this statement or not, was the quetion asked?
All you did was try to start and argument rather than offer information to clarify a question. An example of what is wrong with many politicians today.
Take a moment to read "Food for thought". I did, and there is a lot of good information that people can use to make rational and informed decisions and comments, rather than mindless attacks on others for posing a question.
please don't mis-understand
|September 10 2012, 2:40 PM |
In no way was my reply meant as an attack. I was replying to the quote that you attached and during my reply, I admit that I forgot that important fact and was just giving my point of view as to why I or someone that made under 25ok would vote for Romney. Sorry for the mistake.
Don't confuse "a small positive correlation" with cause and effect.
|September 11 2012, 10:19 AM |
Maybe it's just the opposite. That is, high economic growth has led to a more progressive tax code and the ability to tax the rich at higher rates.
that little known science
|September 11 2012, 1:09 PM |
statistics. It will give you a world of information, if you know how it works. As noted, correlation and causality are different animals.
|Current Topic - What happens when big government interferes|