Skip to comments.
Going after Joe the Plumber & America
The Anchoress ^
| October 16, 2008
| The Anchoress
Posted on 10/16/2008 4:54:20 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-31 last
To: 2ndDivisionVet
HeeHee....watching Obama step all over his Johnson....and then the MSM trying to project his ineptness onto poor old Joe the Plumber is worth another round of PopCorn!!!!We need to buy JtP a six at least....hope McCain and Palin find a way to get him to the Inaugural!!!
21
posted on
10/16/2008 5:52:45 PM PDT
by
mo
To: No Income Tax
And who gets to decide what is hardship? If Joe makes $1 million, why should he be punished with a higher tax rate?
Two separate questions. Joe should not be punished for hard work and creating jobs...but I think it's clear that the incremental 3% isn't a hardship. It's government theft of property, it goes against everything I stand for--but it's not a hardship. That's the hyperbole part.
To: 2ndDivisionVet
More than being filth, they have not a bone nor corpuscle of strategy in their beings. They are doing exactly would I would advise them, as a strategist, NOT to do. They are going after him and what will happen is that it will blow up in their faces and even more droves of undecided will side with Joe the Plumber against Obama.
They are literally pissing in the wind. It is almost embarrasing to watch, I feel sorry for the amateurs running the Barack Obama campaign who are totally freaked out now; also, their internal poll numbers show trouble, so when their talking heads go on Fox, they start to lose it. Some dippy broad spokesbot for Obama was on there yesterday, and I think she has this grand, elite vision of herself as the next White House Press Secretary, and she was coming TOTALLY UNGLUED.They are in a panic. This is great psy war folks, play it to the hilt and they will go totally basket case by election day. This is like intellectually and tactically taking candy from a baby.
23
posted on
10/16/2008 6:42:28 PM PDT
by
AmericanInTokyo
(RINOs **BETRAY** us, since, if they ever DO take off the gloves vs. the Libs, they do so too late...)
To: itsPatAmerican
This just goes to show you that neither you or Obama have ever had a real job or tried to run a business. Besides, who the hell gave you or Obama any legitimate or moral right to that $9000?
If you had any business experience you would know that just like rent, raw materials, labor, and utilities, the cost of taxes and regulations is another element in the cost of goods and services and is passed along to the customers. So if you raise the taxes on Joe the Plumber or Exxon, the price they charge to Joe Sixpack will go up accordingly.
Lastly, Joe the Plumber may have gross billings for his S Corp or LLC, but from that he must pay his taxes, and other costs and maybe, just maybe he will have enough left to pay himself.
To: Prole
Expect a civil war to break out because of that possibility.
25
posted on
10/16/2008 7:50:19 PM PDT
by
Biggirl
(Throw The Bums OUT!=^..^==^..^==^..^==^..^=)
To: Natural Law
This just goes to show you that neither you or Obama have ever had a real job
Don't be silly. Nothing I've said would indicate I've never had a real job. More silly hyperbole. I will say it again, a tax increase from 36% to 39% sucks, and goes against everything I believe in...but in the grand scheme of things it is a small increase. Are you now going to extrapolate from this that I've never been a dad? LOL!@
To: itsPatAmerican
"...but in the grand scheme of things it is a small increase." A tax increase of $9000 is not a small increase. I will again assert that you know absolutely nothing about business and have never had to sign the front of a company check. It is not uncommon for an S Corp plumbing business to have gross billings in excess of $250K from three to five trucks and plumbers, as well as a bookkeeper on the payroll. After wages, vehicle and other expenses there isn't a whole lot left for the owner. That $9000 equates to $1500 per month.
Only you, Biden, and Obama (who also never had a real jobs) think that the guy who showed the initiative and accepted the risks should be happy to cough up another $9000 for a socialist redistribution vote buying scheme. But since you seem to have all of the answers, how should Joe pay for those additional taxes, should he lay-off a plumber, cut salaries across the board, or pass the increase on to the customers?
To: 2ndDivisionVet
28
posted on
10/18/2008 6:16:55 AM PDT
by
Grampa Dave
( Joe the plumber should provide his license right after Obama provides his real birth certificate)
To: Natural Law
You know, my math was wrong, at least have the sense to argue that $22,500 is not a small increase. You sound silly trying to claim that $9,000 is a large percent of $1,000,000. There is an argument here that tax increases are never right—that’s the one you should stick to. Arguing that a $9,000 increase on profits of a $1,000,000 is going to cause layoffs makes you sound like a nilly.
To: itsPatAmerican
Although a $1,000,000 profit was never discussed in an argument framed by Buffoon Obama's "making over $250,000 a year" assertion, I still contest any situation or concept in which any political slapdiq believes he has first dibs on anyone's money or assets, whether $22 or $22,000.
Here is a bit of irony for you. The tax code permits any individual to voluntarily contribute any amount in excess of their calculated taxes to the treasury in the event they believe that they are under taxed or have an obligation to spread their wealth around. When individuals like Joe Biden, Barak Obama, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid have contributed all wealth, income and assets above the national median I will listen to them when they ask me or guys like Joe the Plumber for more.
To: Natural Law
My argument is against chicken littleism--you keep wanting me to defend liberal tax policy--won't do it, can't do it. I just think it is silly that every tax increase ever proposed becomes "THE BIGGEST TAX INCREASE IN HISTORY". Tax increases are wrong in principle, and that is enough--but to falsely claim hardship makes our argument weak. See my point? We need to shift the argument to why ANY tax increase is bad rather than arguing about the scale of a specific tax increase.
If you'd like to discuss this without the mean spirited personal attacks of your past posts I'd love to discuss strategy and how we can correctly frame this issue.
If all you can do is attack my ability to hold a job or try to lump me in with Kerry or Biden then let's end this now.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-31 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
