![]() |
|
Politics Where we learn not to think less of others who don't share our views |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 |
changed his status to single
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Right behind you. No, the other side.
Posts: 10,308
|
1) I don't support additional taxes on banks any more than I supported the bailouts to those same banks. Neither action will have the desired result. Massive future taxpayer funded bailouts didn't do anything but provide incentive for more future irresponsibility built upon current corruption. Additional taxes will merely be passed on to you and I through a series of hidden and transparent fees. Is there a -5% level of support?
2) My snarky reply to Spexx's initial post is meant as humor. I still think it is funny. His cut and dry statement that R's support banks more than individuals, while oversimplified, triggered a "well, du-uh" response in my head. R and D matters very little. These men and women are members of a club you and I simply aren't invited to join. Lobby groups climb over eachother to bribe today's senator or congressman who will be a lobbiest in 4-6 years bribing other politicians for similar causes. We - the individuals who elect them - are just a tool to get them into the club.
__________________
Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
I think this line's mostly filler.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 13,575
|
Well, the purpose of the bank taxes in question was to fix the bill's CBO scoring, so they probably would have had that desired result.
__________________
_________________ |...............| We live in the nick of times. | Len 17, Wid 3 | |_______________| [pics] |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|