If the rich m*tha f*ckas can spend millions on a PAC, they can afford to pay more in

Here we go...

Quote:

---

Thu Nov 8, 2012, 07:14 PM
L0oniX

If the rich m*tha f*ckas can spend millions on a PAC, they can afford to pay more in taxes. In fact, I say tax the hell out of them (@90% for over 1 million net income) so they can't afford to donate to a PAC. Also ...make them continue to pay into SS ...no more limits!

---

The user name is perfect.:rolleyes:

If I had a cocaine habit, would you be sympathetic that I was starving?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Novaheart

If I had a cocaine habit, would you be sympathetic that I was starving?

---

It would depend on what I new about you at the time, if you were some stupid kid that got in trouble but had a good heart yeah I'd care.. If you were some hoodlum that who knows what you had done to people, no I wouldn't give a crap.

PACs buy advertisement time, generally from the mainstream (left-wing) media. They hire actors, and a director, and camera a crew... all to make political ads in Hollywood. What does the mainstream media and Hollywood do with this revenue? Support Obama with it.

This is like... buying oil from the Middle East and wondering how terrorists have the funds to wage war on us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m00

PACs buy advertisement time, generally from the mainstream (left-wing) media. They hire actors, and a director, and camera a crew... all to make political ads in Hollywood. What does the mainstream media and Hollywood do with this revenue? Support Obama with it.

This is like... buying oil from the Middle East and wondering how terrorists have the funds to wage war on us.

---

Good point.

BTW, I believe that someone making over $1 million by risking his fortune and security by investing it in a business should keep a greater percentage of it than someone making over $1 million by pretending to take a risk in a movie or TV show. Any thoughts on that, Mr. Maher?

90%?

And when jobs dry up, businesses shut down and millions are being thrown out of their homes, or even starving what will the Moonbats do?

Simple, they'll someone else.

The reasoning is sound on the surface. We often see corporations and individuals appear to spend more to fight a law or regulation than it would cost to comply with it. Now you can say that it's a matter of principle, but the bottom line is that the money they would spend on a tax or regulation goes to some media corporation instead, a media corporation which is probably owned by people the objector would never willingly give money to support.

Look at marriage equality laws. The Catholic Church, Baptist Churches, and Mormon Church have spent a fortune fighting gay equality, even though a lot of that money goes into the pockets of gay people who turn around and donate it to the HRC. Same for the war on women.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Novaheart

The reasoning is sound on the surface. We often see corporations and individuals appear to spend more to fight a law or regulation than it would cost to comply with it. Now you can say that it's a matter of principle, but the bottom line is that the money they would spend on a tax or regulation goes to some media corporation instead, a media corporation which is probably owned by people the objector would never willingly give money to support.

Look at marriage equality laws. The Catholic Church, Baptist Churches, and Mormon Church have spent a fortune fighting an agenda to redefine marriage by pretending that it is about gay equality, even though a lot of that money goes into the pockets of gay people who turn around and donate it to the HRC. Same for the war on women.

---

Had to fix that, since it couldn't stand on it's own. As for the war on women, ask Bill Maher how that's going.

The OP seems to have left out a very important part of his loony rant. That the millionaires who need to be taxed higher only need be conservative/Republicans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Novaheart

The reasoning is sound on the surface. We often see corporations and individuals appear to spend more to fight a law or regulation than it would cost to comply with it. Now you can say that it's a matter of principle, but the bottom line is that the money they would spend on a tax or regulation goes to some media corporation instead, a media corporation which is probably owned by people the objector would never willingly give money to support.

Look at marriage equality laws. The Catholic Church, Baptist Churches, and Mormon Church have spent a fortune fighting gay equality, even though a lot of that money goes into the pockets of gay people who turn around and donate it to the HRC. Same for the war on women.

---

Cool story bro...