The case against global warming ... hell ... - Page 2

medicineman · #11 02-10-2007, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ViRedd

Yeppers, don't discuss the point of the post, just spout out nonsense instead. <Sheesh!>

Now then, lets talk about either the falicy of global warming, or the food industry's influence on the obesity and type-two diabetes epidemic we have had over the past thirty years in this country. Hey Med, you're an anti-profit kind of guy ... this should be right up your alley.

Vi

Pow, you shot right past me. I'm not anti profit, just anti-excessive profit. I believe everyone has a right to gainful employment and enterprenuers have a right to profit. Just don't let some be billionaires and others starve in the same country. I can agree that there will be rich people, I can't agree there should be poor people. The pay for CEOs are so far out of whack compared to the workers it's crazy. I believe in liberty for all, not just the rich. We are blessed in this nation with an abundance of wealth, It's just not spread around. It's in little pockets of wealth and pockets of poverty. This is not a just society. The super rich will have to take a hit for the country and give up some wealth, pay more taxes or we are headed for a dictatorship and grand insurection, Just my humble opinion!

ViRedd · #12 02-11-2007, 02:40 PM

Well, you are entitled to your humble opinion. BUT ... you want to increase federal taxes, right? The total estimated tax reciepts expected to come into the federal treasury for fiscal 2007 are estimated to be 2.4 TRILLION dollars. If that isn't enough Med ... then how much would satisfy you?

United States federal budget, 2007 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

medicineman · #13 02-11-2007, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ViRedd

Well, you are entitled to your humble opinion. BUT ... you want to increase federal taxes, right? The total estimated tax reciepts expected to come into the federal treasury for fiscal 2007 are estimated to be 2.4 TRILLION dollars. If that isn't enough Med ... then how much would satisfy you?

United States federal budget, 2007 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whatever it takes to solve the domestic shortcommings. Some rich "expletives" will have to cough up.

ViRedd · #14 02-12-2007, 09:35 AM

"Whatever it takes to solve the domestic shortcommings. Some rich "expletives" will have to cough up."

UmHmmmm ... I see. So, your answer is to just soak the producers for more of the fruit of their labors? I don't suppose that making the existing federal government more efficient and accountable ever crossed your mind, right?

Vi

medicineman · #15 02-12-2007, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ViRedd

"Whatever it takes to solve the domestic shortcommings. Some rich "expletives" will have to cough up."

UmHmmmm ... I see. So, your answer is to just soak the producers for more of the fruit of their labors? I don't suppose that making the existing federal government more efficient and accountable ever crossed your mind, right?

Vi

That could be an addendum, might work, especially if we cut the pentagons budget and paid congressmen by the hour, say 35.00 an hour, sounds fair to me, No more 500.00 hammers and 1200.00 toilet seats, bridges to nowhere, yeah cutting the govt.s spending might help, subsidies to billionaires, farmers, oil companies, auto mfgr.s, airlines, yeah I agree there is some pork that could be cut, construction projects to son-in law companies in home states, yeah I'm starting to see a pattern here. Squandering our money on rich people is pretty wasteful when there are so many needful people out there!