[GCFL-discuss] Prodigous!

[Discussion of the Good, Clean Funnies List]

The Supreme Court has been tip-toe through the tulips on that subject.

Every time congress gets sufficient spine to pass a campaign finance
reform, somebody goes to court to denounce the law as an infringement of
free speech. The basic idea being, if you have the money to project your
speech on everyone's TV set, the government is barred by the First
Amendment from restricting your right to do so. The Supreme Court has
generally agreed.

On the other hand, some campaign finance laws have been left intact, by
some reasoning or other. It is constitutional to tax rich peeps and
corporations at a higher tax rate. The Supreme Court tried to ban that as
unconstitutional, but the ultimate trump card is a constitutional
amendment, which congress and the states passed (Sixteenth Amendment)
saying that a graduated income tax is allowed.

What gets in the way, is that rich corporate executives donate money to
campaign funds to convince average working families that "higher taxes"
are going to primarily hit them. The point of a graduated income tax is,
the highest percentages are ONLY paid on income ABOVE a certain level: if
you don't make $250,000, you don't pay the top rate. I never pay more
than 10% on any of my income. Of course I'd prefer that the first $20,000
be tax exempt.

Siarlys

On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 17:31:18 -0700 "Discussion of the Good, Clean Funnies
List" <gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net> writes:
I'm all for Corporations and Rich peeps paying the bulk of the taxes. But
how do you do that when the Supreme Court has even ruled that Money is a
form of free speech?
~Lance


On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 7:44 AM, Discussion of the Good, Clean Funnies
List <gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net> wrote:

Lance, I ran across this again while cleaning out old emails. You
probably noticed that McCain is now openly advertising that one
difference between him and Obama is that he will LOWER corporate tax
rates, because he thinks that is the way to restore economic prosperity.
There are only three ways to do that: (1) put additional tax burdens on
all the rest of us, (2) borrow huge sums of money, most of it from
overseas, which taxpayers will have to repay with interest, (3) cut
federal spending by an amount equal to the lost revenue from corporate
tax -- and I want to see which budget lines he would cut. Any fool can
talk about cutting "wasteful spending" but nobody want to offer details.
Voters would say, no wait, that's someting I WANT the government to do.
                                                                         
      Siarlys

On Mon, 1 Sep 2008 23:59:15 -0700 "Discussion of the Good, Clean Funnies
List" <gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net> writes:
Is Obama as financially savvy as Clinton? Will the Democrats support such
a thing? Will they raise the taxes on Corporations and remove tax credits
so we can return to Corporations paying the bulk of taxes instead of the
lower and middle class?
~Lance
____________________________________________________________
Fast Computer Training. Click here.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mAUCvgwMnXy8chNt2FomeGMS7Z7ka6wFhNoLWDB8r0hcAzC/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://gcfl.net/pipermail/gcfl-discuss/attachments/20081004/fb6882af/attachment.htm