From: goblues
If you don't understand the Democrats' version of tax cuts (and you are
not
alone), maybe this will help explain it for you:> 50,000 people
go to a
baseball game, but the game was rained out. A refund was then due.
The team was
about to mail refunds when the Congressional Democrats stopped them and
suggested that they send out refund amounts based on the Democrat National
Committee's interpretation of fairness. After all, if the refunds were
made based on the
price each person paid for the tickets, most of the money would go to the
ticket holders of the most expensive tickets. That would be unconscionable.
People in the $10 seats will get back $15, because they have less money
to spend.
Call it an "Earned" Income Ticket Credit." Persons "earn" it by demonstrating
little ambition,
few skills and poor work habits, thus keeping them at entry-level wages.
People in the $25 seats will get back $25, because that's only fair.
People in the $50 seats will get back $1, because they already make a lot
of money and don't
need a refund. If they can afford a $50 ticket, then they must not be paying
enough taxes.
People in the $75 luxury seats will have to pay another $50, because they have way too much to spend.
The people driving (or walking) by the stadium who couldn't afford to watch
the game will get $10 each, even though they didn't pay anything
in, because
they need the most help. (Sometimes known as Affirmative Action)
Now do you understand? If not, contact Representative Richard Gephardt,
Senator Tom Daschle or Senator Hillary Clinton for assistance.
He sent that to me and about twenty friends and relatives.
So I straightened him out in a mass "reply to all"
My good friend 'goblues' has it all wrong.
Bush says the purpose of the tax cut is to stimulate
the economy. But what happens when you give a
billionaire an extra $250,000 from Social Security?
He puts in in the bank, because he already owns
EVERYTHING he's ever wanted. He's super-rich!
But if you give $3000 to a family making $25,000,
they need LOTS of stuff. With that $3000, they might
buy carpeting for the house, a new dishwasher for
mom, some new furniture or maybe a down payment on
a used car. THAT will stimulate the economy.
Rich people won't hire new workers in Bush's
recession because there's no demand for their
products. Under Bush, everybody's broke.
But if ever taxpaying family got an extra $3000,
the carpet makers would hire, Whirpool and Kenmore
would hire, the furniture makers would hire and
people can get to these new jobs with that used
car they can now afford.
Bush plan does nothing but feed the super-rich.
How many people reading this got a tax cut last year?
We got $600 but we had to give it back on April 15.
Unless you're filthy rich, you got a $600 LOAN.
That's what Bush did for you
Last year, Enron got $700 million in tax breaks.
Did they hire anybody?
Last year, Ford got $5 BILLION in tax breaks.
Did they hire anybody?
Last year, GE got over $5 BILLION in tax breaks.
Did they hire anybody?
Last year, Microsoft got $7 BILLION in tax breaks.
Did they hire anybody?
Last year, Worldcom got $4 BILLION in tax breaks.
Did they hire anybody?
Clinton left a $5 TRILLION dollar surplus.
With Bush, we're $7 TRILLION in debt.
Clinton gave us 8 years of peace and prosperity.
Bush, like his Daddy, gave us war and recession.
There IS a difference.
Vote your wallet in 2004.
Vote Democrat.
One more thing: Clinton never sent a man into battle who didn't come home.
We're losing a soldier a day in Iraq, searching for Bush's imagined WMDs.
Bart
Will it do any good?
Of course not.
His friends and relatives are Catholics making less than $50K
a year.
They want to subsidize the super-rich, because they love their
Dubya.
But it serves notice to "GoBlues," that his horseshit will be countered with the truth.
(He might be playing poker with us, I can't be too mean to him :)