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

To: Principled
THe kennedy example is not related. First, we're discussing an increase in rate, not a decrease.
Really? I thought we were discussing dropping the corporate income tax rate to 0%. Isn't that a reduction? What rate are we discussing is going to increase?
1,111 posted on 05/24/2005 8:27:45 AM PDT by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1108 | View Replies ]


To: Your Nightmare

In fact, the discussion was about ELIMINATING the rate, not decreasing it. It's like the Little Man (paraaphrased from Ogden Nash):

"I saw a man upon the stair
A little man who wasn't there.
He wasn't there again today--
Gee, I wish he'd go away!"

If it ain't there it can't be reduced - it's already gone.


1,116 posted on 05/24/2005 8:35:49 AM PDT by pigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1111 | View Replies ]

To: Your Nightmare
I thought we were discussing dropping the corporate income tax rate to 0%.

You thought wrong. ANother poster and I were discussing results of increasing it to 95%. You got it backwards. No surprise.

1,119 posted on 05/24/2005 8:41:41 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1111 | 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