Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: doug from upland

Next time someone says there is no welfare for the rich, puke on their shoes.


4 posted on 02/28/2011 9:46:56 AM PST by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: org.whodat

At least with a flat tax, everybody pays the same.


7 posted on 02/28/2011 10:02:03 AM PST by BenKenobi (Don't expect to build up the weak by pulling down the strong. - Silent Cal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: org.whodat
Next time someone says there is no welfare for the rich, puke on their shoes.

So, if A-Rod were keeping his own money (actually, he is not), instead of handing it over to the Government, that would be "welfare"?

Are you one of those who believes that the money that someone else earns automatically belongs to the Government and that, if the Government does not take it, that is "welfare"?

Do you really belive that, in the Real World, "housing for the poor" gets built and A-Rod gets a tax break because the Money Fairy waved her Magic Wand?

Wise up.

Some liberal politicians came up with the idea that they would acquire "housing for the poor" by not charging $900 million in taxes they could legally charge in return for the builder constructing such housing.

Did it ever occur to you that the cost to the builder of constructing that unprofitable low income housing is recouped by the builder by charging a higher price to the buyers of his high end condos and that the higher price to that buyer is then offset by lower taxes to that buyer?

Did it ever occur to you that, therefore, in the end, the higher real estate purchase price paid by the buyer paid for the low income housing that the liberal politicians wanted built?

Why would a buyer be dumb enough to buy a property that is more expensive than another similar property if the cost were not offset by a rebate, a tax break, a free boat, whatever?

Did it ever occur to you that, financially, in the end, it is a wash and an example of the finacial fungibility of the higher purchase price and the lower tax burden?

If you have a problem with the deal that liberal politicians made with builders, blame the liberal politicians who wrote the law and not the real estate buyer that is affected by the law.

Once you egg on the Government to "soak the rich" that make more money than you do, the Government will then define you as "the rich" and start soaking you too.

If everybody had your mentality, the Democrats would always be in power by simply defining "the rich" as anybody that makes one dollar more than the 50.1% of the voters that are required to get them elected.

"If you rob Peter to pay Paul, you will always be assured of Paul's vote."

16 posted on 02/28/2011 11:02:43 AM PST by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson