Uncivil Rights
A BLOG rife with wit, sarcasm, and the endless joy which comes from taunting the socialistic and unpatriotic liberal left. Logical thoughts and musings ONLY need reply...unless you're really, really funny. You have the Uncivil Right to be an IDIOT.
"Give me LIBERTY, or give me DEATH!"
Saturday, December 17, 2005
Derrick Jackson
Derrick Jackson is a writer for the Boston Globe (ediorialist), and he is one of my favorites. It is not becaue he is such a good writer; it is because he continuously writes stupid things. He never stops, no matter how bad he sounds. He reminds me of the guys on "JackASS".
Here is just another example from the Boston Globe:
DERRICK Z. JACKSON
Scrooge in the House
By Derrick Z. Jackson December 10, 2005
'Twas two weeks before Christmas, and all through the House, $50 billion was cut for those considered a mouse. Tax breaks instead hung by the chimney with care, for investors and CEOs, hands already there. America's rich nestled all snug in their beds as $95 billion danced in their heads.
IT WAS expected, of course, that the House of Representatives would do the deed they promised to do before Thanksgiving. They cut $50 billion last month from programs serving low-income Americans. This week they passed the final part of what amounts to $95 billion in tax cuts. It represents a height of taking from the poor to give to the rich.
(Take a class on economics Derrick. Tax cuts mean the wage earner keeps more of HIS money. I is not GIVING to the rich; they EARNED IT, and they get to keep what they earned – reap the benefits of their hard work.)
Out went billions for student loans, Medicaid, and food stamps. In came billions for stock dividends and capital gains.
Regardless of political leanings, economists know where the money is going.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that $70 billion of the $95 billion in tax cuts will go (How about “will stay with”) to households making over $100,000. That category accounts for 14 percent of households. According to the center, that 14 percent will get 74 percent of the money.
(Those households pay 2/3 of the total federal income tax collected Derrick – why wouldn’t they receive more?)
The Brookings Institution's and the Urban Institute's Tax Policy Center calculate that the top 20 percent of American households would get 88.9 percent of the House's tax-cut benefits while the bottom 20 percent would get only 11.1 percent.
(The top 20% income earners pay over 80% of the income taxes, are you seeing a pattern here Derrick? The bottom 20% of wage earners pay NOTHING – in fact, they RECEIVE MONEY! That 11.1% DOES NOT BELONG TO THEM – THEY DID NOT EARN IT. THAT IS INCOME REDISTRIBUTION COMMRAD!?)
Twenty-four percent of the benefits would go to Americans who make more than $1 million a year. Such people make up only 0.2 percent of the population.
(But they pay 35% of the taxes.)
This is not only Scroogian, it is, ''unmoral, uncaring and without compassion," said Georgia Representative John Lewis.
(Here is where liberals get in trouble. Is it moral to steal from someone and give to another? That is what is going on here. The government is stealing from the wage earners and giving to those that do not earn. Is that moral?)
I could only cover half of the article since the incompetence was overwhelming.
Here is just another example from the Boston Globe:
DERRICK Z. JACKSON
Scrooge in the House
By Derrick Z. Jackson December 10, 2005
'Twas two weeks before Christmas, and all through the House, $50 billion was cut for those considered a mouse. Tax breaks instead hung by the chimney with care, for investors and CEOs, hands already there. America's rich nestled all snug in their beds as $95 billion danced in their heads.
IT WAS expected, of course, that the House of Representatives would do the deed they promised to do before Thanksgiving. They cut $50 billion last month from programs serving low-income Americans. This week they passed the final part of what amounts to $95 billion in tax cuts. It represents a height of taking from the poor to give to the rich.
(Take a class on economics Derrick. Tax cuts mean the wage earner keeps more of HIS money. I is not GIVING to the rich; they EARNED IT, and they get to keep what they earned – reap the benefits of their hard work.)
Out went billions for student loans, Medicaid, and food stamps. In came billions for stock dividends and capital gains.
Regardless of political leanings, economists know where the money is going.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that $70 billion of the $95 billion in tax cuts will go (How about “will stay with”) to households making over $100,000. That category accounts for 14 percent of households. According to the center, that 14 percent will get 74 percent of the money.
(Those households pay 2/3 of the total federal income tax collected Derrick – why wouldn’t they receive more?)
The Brookings Institution's and the Urban Institute's Tax Policy Center calculate that the top 20 percent of American households would get 88.9 percent of the House's tax-cut benefits while the bottom 20 percent would get only 11.1 percent.
(The top 20% income earners pay over 80% of the income taxes, are you seeing a pattern here Derrick? The bottom 20% of wage earners pay NOTHING – in fact, they RECEIVE MONEY! That 11.1% DOES NOT BELONG TO THEM – THEY DID NOT EARN IT. THAT IS INCOME REDISTRIBUTION COMMRAD!?)
Twenty-four percent of the benefits would go to Americans who make more than $1 million a year. Such people make up only 0.2 percent of the population.
(But they pay 35% of the taxes.)
This is not only Scroogian, it is, ''unmoral, uncaring and without compassion," said Georgia Representative John Lewis.
(Here is where liberals get in trouble. Is it moral to steal from someone and give to another? That is what is going on here. The government is stealing from the wage earners and giving to those that do not earn. Is that moral?)
I could only cover half of the article since the incompetence was overwhelming.
totalkaosdave, 8:40 AM
|
