Read about the Johnstown flood tax in PA.
US can afford it.
The Johnstown flood tax is not national. Not sure why he brought that up.
Read about the Johnstown flood tax in PA.
US can afford it.
The Johnstown flood tax is not national. Not sure why he brought that up.
Read about the Johnstown flood tax in PA.
US can afford it.
The Johnstown flood tax is not national. Not sure why he brought that up.
To show how a "temporary" (meant to help fund rebuilding after a disaster) tax became permanent.
Read about the Johnstown flood tax in PA.
US can afford it.
The Johnstown flood tax is not national. Not sure why he brought that up.
To show how a "temporary" (meant to help fund rebuilding after a disaster) tax became permanent.
No tax is EVER temporary.
Read about the Johnstown flood tax in PA.
US can afford it.
The Johnstown flood tax is not national. Not sure why he brought that up.
To show how a "temporary" (meant to help fund rebuilding after a disaster) tax became permanent.
No tax is EVER temporary.
That's exactly the point. The government said it would be temporary and some seventy nine years later we are still paying for it. Why would this compensation fund be any different?
No tax is EVER temporary.
That's exactly the point. The government said it would be temporary and some seventy nine years later we are still paying for it. Why would this compensation fund be any different?
It doesn't matter what they call the tax. Governments need x amounts of money to operate. If you remove the 18% tax then you have to add it somewhere else.
Edit: In this specific issue there is a need or do you think the first responders shouldn't be helped?
No tax is EVER temporary.
That's exactly the point. The government said it would be temporary and some seventy nine years later we are still paying for it. Why would this compensation fund be any different?
It doesn't matter what they call the tax. Governments need x amounts of money to operate. If you remove the 18% tax then you have to add it somewhere else.
Notice how spending is not the problem but too little taxing is the issue? All the government wants is more and more of our money. Realistically speaking, will the 9/11 fund be any different and actually end?
@Solaryellow: don't worry man. Those Regan era trickle down policies started in the 80s will start to kick in any day now
@Solaryellow: don't worry man. Those Regan era trickle down policies started in the 80s will start to kick in any day now
Keep spending, keep spending and when all else fails, spend more. Right?
@Solaryellow: don't worry man. Those Regan era trickle down policies started in the 80s will start to kick in any day now
Keep spending, keep spending and when all else fails, spend more. Right?
When it comes to coming to the aid of those who thoughtlessly came to the aid of others without concern for their own well being......fuckin' A. Fiscal responsibility is a secondary consideration in this instance, it shouldn't even be part of the equation.
Fiscal responsibility is a secondary consideration in this instance, it shouldn't even be part of the equation.
*facepalm*
Can we please not repeat the fiscal motto of the Soviet Union as though it was some kind of good thing?
@Solaryellow: don't worry man. Those Regan era trickle down policies started in the 80s will start to kick in any day now
Keep spending, keep spending and when all else fails, spend more. Right?
Trump Signs $1.5 Trillion Tax Cut
And that's after exploding the deficit with Reagan's and Bush's tax cuts. Your party's claims of fiscal responsibility are a sham and an embarrassment. I don't know why members think they can still brandish them with any credibility.
@Solaryellow: don't worry man. Those Regan era trickle down policies started in the 80s will start to kick in any day now
Keep spending, keep spending and when all else fails, spend more. Right?
Trump Signs $1.5 Trillion Tax Cut
And that's after exploding the deficit with Reagan's and Bush's tax cuts. Your party's claims of fiscal responsibility are a sham and an embarrassment. I don't know why members think they can still brandish them with any credibility.
Here's an idea for him to ponder. If I quit my job and can't pay my bills can I claim it's just a spending problem?
That's exactly the point. The government said it would be temporary and some seventy nine years later we are still paying for it. Why would this compensation fund be any different?
It doesn't matter what they call the tax. Governments need x amounts of money to operate. If you remove the 18% tax then you have to add it somewhere else.
Notice how spending is not the problem but too little taxing is the issue? All the government wants is more and more of our money. Realistically speaking, will the 9/11 fund be any different and actually end?
Then why are you supporting trump who increased spending?
It doesn't matter what they call the tax. Governments need x amounts of money to operate. If you remove the 18% tax then you have to add it somewhere else.
Notice how spending is not the problem but too little taxing is the issue? All the government wants is more and more of our money. Realistically speaking, will the 9/11 fund be any different and actually end?
Then why are you supporting trump who increased spending?
Lesser of two evils unfortunately. The debt ceiling needs to be raised yet again but a serious dialogue on out-of-control spending will not take place because each member of that club on the hill thinks their spending ideals are rational and worthy.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment