Neil Boortz tells the truth

Let's go back to basics.

Our newest member of the Ayn Rand Fan Club is saying that that taxes represent the force of government to take property away from the people who earn it and give it to people who do not

Is that what you're saying?

Just need clarification on your opinion--as opposed to facts.

 

Oh, so it's your house too, America that is, and as a liberal, you're not going to offer any solutions? OK, And thanks for the "warnings" dating back to Psuedo-Hubbie of Che's reign.

 

Taxes are very useful. They're needed to pay police to keep minorites away from my home. Also very necessary for Border Patrol. Without them, who knows how many terrorist ragheads would be trying to sneak into the country to do us harm. But they're not a handout for lazy people. Get a job, hippies. Or pray, if you atheists know how, for the reign of Che Clinton.

 

Shut. The. Fuck. Up.

 

In the case of someone receiving more money from the government than they pay in taxes that most certainly is the case. We can argue whether that is right or wrong (obviously some level of taxation is required in any society) but the fact is if I don't pay my taxes the government will confiscate my property (and rightfully so). That is a fact. It's easy to be charitable with other peoples money. Maybe the Salvation Army should try this tactic and brandish weapons during the next kettle drive, oh wait, that would be illegal for them to do.

BTW, Yawn you aren't helping my case.

 

No, we cite these things to prove that your contention that "the American Republic was alive and well for 150 years" before the advent of the income tax is complete hooey, and that your history is as bad as your economics.

 

So by personally insulting me you PROVE your point? Wow.

 

Personally insulting you?
You have a personal stake in those days?
You're Mark Hanna?
And, yes, by changing the country from a rampant plutocracy to a place where something resembling a middle-class could exist, progressive taxation did lead to economic and then political freedom.

 

Bill Frist could have used that Ohio Machine . . .

. . . but probably not. Nothing could have salvaged his sorry behind.

And how's Harry?

 

JR? JR?
You OK?
Did he go to the Castle Arrrrggggghhh...?
(Maybe he was dictating.)

 

I was about to post an article about the decline of the middle class in Canada but then thought, what the hell, why waste my breath? I didn't realise I hit "post".

But since you asked, here it is:

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/186972

The report, titled "The Rich and the Rest of Us," shows that the richest 10 per cent of families with children – those with incomes more than $131,200 in 2004 – earned 82 times the amount earned by the poorest 10 per cent. In 1976, the richest families earned 31 times the amount of the poorest families

 

I would argue that the westward expansion of the country during the late 19th and early 20th century and the subsequent creation of a new class of land owners did far more for the middle class than progressive taxation.