DIYbanter - View Single Post

Free Lunch

On Wed, 05 Jun 2013 20:48:01 -0400, wrote in alt.atheism:

On Wed, 05 Jun 2013 18:15:45 -0500, Free Lunch
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Jun 2013 16:28:56 -0500, The Daring Dufas
wrote in alt.atheism:

On 6/4/2013 6:23 PM, Free Lunch wrote:
On Mon, 03 Jun 2013 21:58:36 -0500, The Daring Dufas
wrote in alt.atheism:

On 6/1/2013 4:17 PM, Free Lunch wrote:
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 16:11:09 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 08:38:48 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote in alt.atheism:
...
All of which are doing exactly what I said. They are paying a hell of
a lot in total taxes. It's just that the effective rate gets reduced
from 35% to 15% or 20% through various tax exemptions.
So what? It has nothing to do with people getting all kinds of
free handouts from the govt who are PAYING NO INCOME
TAX at all. Capiche?

So it's okay with you if GE doesn't pay income tax, but if a person
living on $8,000/year doesn't pay any income tax, you are livid.

You must be very sad that Michele Bachmann decided not to run again.

Not a SINGLE corporate entity actually pays "income tax"
For the very simple reason that to a corporation a tax is just another cost
that is factored into the bottom line
The tax is ultimately paid by the consumer
Corporate tax is nothing but indirect citizen tax

Which is a great argument for a gross receipts tax, which is far harder
for corporations to dodge.

Like "The Fair Tax" which gives P.L.L.C.F. seizures whenever it's
brought up in any house of Congress. ^_^

Only because it is not remotely fair.

When there is fair income, then we can talk about the "fair tax". As
long as the poor are screwed by the rich, the rich can pay the countries
bills, since they are the ones benefitting.

Hey I know, there was a wonderful P.L.L.C.F. idea to make it law that
everyone must be paid a minimum of $100,000.00 per year. That way poor
people would have enough money to lead a good life. ^_^

TDD

What a foolish attempt at a response.

Give him the credit he disserves. He *was* attempting to communicate
with you. He still talked too far above you, obviously.

By attributing a silly, exaggerated claim to liberals. No, he was
trying, but failing, to mock what he ignorantly thinks liberals want.