Buy Slimpulse Without Prescription, Republicans voted against tax cut extensions proposed by Democrats this Saturday, which would have provided tax cut extensions for the first $250,000 everyone makes. Slimpulse tablets, According to the Republicans, however, over the counter Slimpulse, Rx free Slimpulse, tax breaks for everyone aren't good enough. How, online buying Slimpulse hcl, Buy Slimpulse without prescription, after all, is a millionaire to feed his children when he only receives a tax break on his first $250, Slimpulse in us, Slimpulse to buy online, 000 of income. How can he afford to buy troughs full of caviar and champagne, Slimpulse trusted pharmacy reviews, Order Slimpulse online overnight delivery no prescription, upon which his children feast daily, with the other $750, buy Slimpulse online without a prescription, Buy Slimpulse online with no prescription, 000 of his money subject to tax increases once the Bush-era tax cuts expire. He'd be forced to do the unthinkable: fill his troughs with the store brand caviar, buying Slimpulse online over the counter.
Republicans have consistently maintained that, given the current economic environment, no one should have their taxes increase, Buy Slimpulse Without Prescription. Where to buy Slimpulse, The economy is in absolute shambles, with American workers suffering under a staggering 9.3% unemployment rate, saturday delivery Slimpulse. Slimpulse prices, But it's not just the poor and the unemployed that are in trouble. The rich are also experiencing economic hardships, order Slimpulse online c.o.d, Slimpulse from international pharmacy, with Wall Street only profiting by $19 billion, only its fourth most profitable year, Slimpulse in india. Slimpulse from canadian pharmacy, Clearly, if anyone needs help in today's harsh economic climate, buy cheap Slimpulse no rx, Buy Slimpulse online cod, it's the incredibly wealthy. Buy Slimpulse Without Prescription, Now they can no longer shout out "We're Number 1. We're Number 1!" as they light their Cuban cigars with hundred dollar bills, purchase Slimpulse online no prescription. Slimpulse in japan, This year, they will be forced to softly mumble "We're number 4, buy no prescription Slimpulse online. Where can i find Slimpulse online, We're number 4!" as they light their slightly smaller Cuban cigars with a wad of ninety-nine dollar bills.
Of course, Slimpulse discount, Order Slimpulse from United States pharmacy, Republicans argue that providing tax breaks to the wealthy creates more jobs. As the wealthy save money from lower taxes, they are more likely to spend that money on random jobless people they meet in the street, giving them $20 to dance, DANCE, while shooting a golden pistol at their feet and laughing maniacally, Buy Slimpulse Without Prescription. When tax breaks for the wealthy are not guaranteed, Slimpulse pills, Where can i buy cheapest Slimpulse online, however, the uncertainty frightens them, Slimpulse in mexico, Slimpulse paypal, so much so that they stop providing jobs, even in the face of increasing production demands that would no doubt turn a profit, Slimpulse gel, ointment, cream, pill, spray, continuous-release, extended-release, Where can i buy Slimpulse online, and huddle in corners while rocking back and forth hysterically. Being so uncertain about the tax situation thus stifles job creation, real brand Slimpulse online, Ordering Slimpulse online, causing incredibly rich people to wonder whether they should be hiring more people or whether they should instead spend their time searching for tax loopholes like usual.
The idea that tax cuts for the wealthy also benefit the middle and lower class is known as "trickle down economics." No one is quite sure how this works, buy cheap Slimpulse, Buy Slimpulse no prescription, seeing as how wealthy people are more likely to save their excess money than spend it, but some have theorized that it benefits the poor presumably because the rich people accidentally drop their extra money from their penthouse suites into the alleys below, buy Slimpulse from canada, Slimpulse in usa, where random bums fight over it with broken bottle ends, exemplifying the trickle-down effect of the tax breaks, Slimpulse in australia. Slimpulse medication, Democrats, on the other hand, Slimpulse prescriptions, Slimpulse buy, have argued that benefits for the poor and the jobless stimulate the economy better than tax breaks for the wealthy, because they are more likely to spend the money they receive, free Slimpulse samples, Buy Slimpulse from mexico, giving the money back to the businesses and the wealthy people that own them. Buy Slimpulse Without Prescription, They have also emphasized the fact that Republicans constantly rail against increasing the national deficit, and letting tax cuts for the rich expire would help alleviate the debt to some degree.
However, online buy Slimpulse without a prescription, Slimpulse overseas, with a Democratic President who promised change in charge, Republicans know that their best strategy is to stall any change whatsoever, Slimpulse price, coupon. Slimpulse san diego, The Democrats could propose a bill asserting that 2 + 2 = 4, and Republicans would find a way to dispute it, Slimpulse to buy, Slimpulse in uk, most likely by denying several or all of the Peano axioms in favor of wild inconsistency, which would be consistent with their behavior in the legislature, delivered overnight Slimpulse. Fast shipping Slimpulse, (Mathematicians, don't bother me with comments that accepting contradictory axioms means anything would follow, buy Slimpulse without a prescription, Slimpulse for sale, including 2 + 2 = 4. In Republican math, sale Slimpulse, Next day Slimpulse, the only thing that follows is that Obama is a Nazi Muslim and we've never seen his birth certificate so he probably was never born. Can you derive the parallel postulate with THAT axiom?) Strangely, the Republicans are also not willing to alleviate the deficit by cutting military spending, which accounts for much of it, instead emphasizing that older people should just work until they are 90 or so until they receive Social Security payments for their last few months of life, that the unemployed should simply starve to death, and that congress should conserve energy by turning off the lights during session and watering down the coffee, Buy Slimpulse Without Prescription.
In essence, Slimpulse over the counter, Cod online Slimpulse, then, the Republicans have become dyslexic Robin Hoods who steal from the poor in order to give to the rich, buy generic Slimpulse. Buy Slimpulse online no prescription, They have voted against extending unemployment benefits, have promised to repeal healthcare legislation, Slimpulse craiglist, Purchase Slimpulse online, and want to cut other entitlement spending that helps the poor and needy, while at the same time using these savings to pay for the Wall Street bailout and the tax cuts for the wealthy, purchase Slimpulse. Buy Slimpulse online without prescription, They want all of this even when they know that programs like foodstamps and unemployment benefits have a greater stimulative effect on the economy than tax cuts. It is necessary to make the wealthy wealthier, after all, or else the caviar companies would go out of business.
In spite of these partisan bickerings, however, there is a single truth that we can all agree on: The commercials are just too damn loud! Even in a world where people can't agree whether it is proper to steal from the rich or the poor, congress has at least passed this ray of sunshine, giving hope to all those Americans who are still wealthy enough to own TVs, but not quite wealthy enough to own TVs with digital recorders that allow them to skip commercials. Score one for the middle class.
Similar posts: Buy Atopex Without Prescription. Ketazolam for sale.
Trackbacks from: Buy Slimpulse Without Prescription. Buy Slimpulse Without Prescription. Buy Slimpulse Without Prescription. Buy Slimpulse Without Prescription. Buy Slimpulse Without Prescription. Buy Slimpulse Without Prescription. Buy Epivir Without Prescription. Buy Cafergot Without Prescription. Buy Pamelor Without Prescription. Buy Rondimen Without Prescription. Buy Naproxen Without Prescription. Buy Ascorbic Acid Without Prescription. Buy Dostinex Without Prescription. Buy Adipex Without Prescription. Buy Actonel Without Prescription. Buy Sibutramine Without Prescription. Buy Triamterene Without Prescription. Buy Effexor Without Prescription. Buy Stilny Without Prescription. Buy Diabecon Without Prescription. Where to buy Cephalexin.
6 comments
Skip to comment form ↓
K
8 December, 2010 at 6:46 PM (UTC -6) Link to this comment
Doesn’t it say, in our constitution, that all men are created equal?
Under that premise, doesn’t it strike you as odd that it is ok for a small group of people to be taxed a significantly higher percentage of their yearly income?
If this small group of people were any other minority, and yes, the extremely wealthy are a minority, wouldn’t it be considered predjudice? If this small group of people were of a different skin color, it would be racism. If this small group of people were women, it would be sexism. How then, is taxing this group of people, anything other than another sort of “ism?”
Flavin
8 December, 2010 at 8:07 PM (UTC -6) Link to this comment
In fact, that quote is from the Declaration of Independence.
I don’t see why it should. Imagine a 15% income tax for everyone. For a person making $1K a month ($12K a year) they pay $150 a month in income tax, whereas a person making $40K a month ($480K a year) they pay $6K a month in income tax. The second person is not going to starve to death making $34K a month, whereas the person making $850 a month just might.
The necessities of life (food, clothing, housing, etc.) represent a huge portion of the expenses of the very poor, and a minuscule fraction of the expenses of the very rich. While it might seem more “fair” to give everyone an equal tax rate as a percentage of their income, the loss of that income is a much higher burden on the very poor.
A sentiment such as “all men are created equal” is great and all, and has much more meaning in context than out of it, but facts such as “some people need their meager incomes in order to survive and others do not” seem like a more reasonable basis for building a policy that can actually function in the real world. It is not prejudicial to recognize that financial differences exist and they have real effects on people’s lives.
Saint Gasoline
8 December, 2010 at 11:24 PM (UTC -6) Link to this comment
The way you are interpreting “all men are created equal,” you could argue that all men should be equal in all respects, including wages, and therefore everyone should be taxed to such a degree that everyone ends up making about $30,000 a year. In short, there are many ways to interpret that phrase, and your interpretation isn’t the only one.
As Flavin pointed out, differences in wealth can mean very different things for the wealthy in comparison to the poor. Presumably, a rich person’s life is not adversely affected by taxation, whereas a poor person’s would be to a much greater degree. It is not prejudicial to tax the wealthy more, because they can handle the taxation and still live vastly superior lives to the poor who are taxed at a much lower rate. Ask yourself, would you rather be poor and in the lowest tax bracket, or rich and in the highest tax bracket? No one would choose to be poor, and for good reason, because the tax savings don’t improve their situation much, whereas the tax deductions for the wealthy don’t hurt their situation much. If you take into account these differential ways in which taxation can hurt/help the different groups, it makes sense to consider this structure fair.
Imagine you were to enter into a society, but you would not know your station in the society. Would you rather go into a country with vast income disparities and the wealthy and poor pay the same tax rate, or a country where the wealthy pay a higher tax rate than the poor, but still do fine, and the poor have more a safety net? I predict that without knowing your station, you’d choose the latter society over the former.
K
9 December, 2010 at 1:41 PM (UTC -6) Link to this comment
“The way you are interpreting ‘all men are created equal,’ you could argue that all men should be equal in all respects, including wages, and therefore everyone should be taxed to such a degree that everyone ends up making about $30,000 a year.”
The line is “all men are created equal,” not “all men should exist on equal terms financially.” I don’t think there really are that many ways to interpret the phrase, as there are concrete definitions for each word. In application, this means that all men are viewed as equals as far as the law is concerned, just because one is poor and one is wealthy is no excuse for preferential treatment in either direction.
In this country, we are all born with the same rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We are incredibly fortunate that we are not locked into a caste system, upward movement is not only possible, but it happens constantly. There are many ways to go about bettering one’s situation and income level.
Taxation is not intended as a way to equalize income earnings, it is the portion that you pay to the government for the privilege of living in this country and access to the vast amount of opportunities that are available to the citizens.
The government’s job is not to play at being Robin Hood, taking from the rich to give to the poor. The government’s job is to protect the people from threats to their life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. It is our job, as individuals, to better our situations.
“It is not prejudicial to tax the wealthy more, because they can handle the taxation and still live vastly superior lives to the poor who are taxed at a much lower rate.”
Just because somebody can ‘handle it’ doesn’t mean it’s not prejudicial. It’s still treating a group of people differently because of a shared characteristic.
X
13 December, 2010 at 8:33 AM (UTC -6) Link to this comment
“Just because somebody can ‘handle it’ doesn’t mean it’s not prejudicial. It’s still treating a group of people differently because of a shared characteristic.”
Just because it’s ‘prejudicial’ doesn’t necessarily mean it’s wrong. Ever heard of affirmative action?
mother.of.mayhem
4 January, 2011 at 8:25 AM (UTC -6) Link to this comment
Affirmative Action IS wrong because it is prejudicial. It is not the job of the government to provide everything for everyone. Each man/woman/alien has the right and responsibility to provide for oneself/loved ones/preferred causes. If a person does not care to provide for himself, or cannot, they damned well better have friends/loved ones who they haven’t screwed over. Even if they don’t, there are tons of other people out there with merciful, charitable hearts, who are willing to give even the most unloved, worthless bastard basic provisions to live.
The gov’t forces everyone to pay taxes and uses that money however they see fit, regardless of how the taxpayer feels about the cause. Even if they decided to bleed dry the already poor and give tax breaks to the already wealthy, no one would go without. The gov’t would be turning right around and giving support to the very same people they bled dry. So essentially, they are only making the lower classes more dependent on gov’t, thereby securing their own positions in power. DUH.