|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News |
![]() |
stevedeshazer
![]() |
Thu Mar-19-09 11:10 PM Original message |
Law for 90% tax rate could be hard to overturn |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BlooInBloo
![]() |
Thu Mar-19-09 11:12 PM Response to Original message |
1. Yup. It's just people making shit up saying otherwise. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
valerief
![]() |
Thu Mar-19-09 11:17 PM Response to Original message |
2. Boo hoo. I feel for them. NOT. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LynnTheDem
![]() |
Thu Mar-19-09 11:22 PM Response to Original message |
3. REPUBLICANS VOTED FOR the LARGEST TAX INCREASE in |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stevedeshazer
![]() |
Thu Mar-19-09 11:30 PM Response to Reply #3 |
4. Yes indeedy, Reagan doubled the FICA tax. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
aquart
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 02:27 AM Response to Reply #3 |
6. Enjoy, enjoy. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DUlover2909
![]() |
Thu Mar-19-09 11:49 PM Response to Original message |
5. Excellent. Taxes aren't punishment, even though Tweety tried like hell to say it is. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
aquart
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 02:28 AM Response to Reply #5 |
7. They're a just and patriotic duty to your country. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Zavulon
![]() |
Sun Mar-22-09 01:54 PM Response to Reply #7 |
63. They're a legal obligation. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NeoConsSuck
![]() |
Sun Mar-22-09 07:10 PM Response to Reply #63 |
69. Great post! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bobburgster
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 03:26 AM Response to Original message |
8. Unconstitutional..... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NorthernSpy
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 03:33 AM Response to Reply #8 |
10. Really? Then please cite the exact clause. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bobburgster
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 04:08 AM Response to Reply #10 |
11. Ex Post Facto.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pattmarty
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 08:34 AM Response to Reply #11 |
15. Well exactly what the fuck do you think the max rate should be? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Zavulon
![]() |
Sun Mar-22-09 01:58 PM Response to Reply #15 |
64. This is why I stray outside the Lounge less frequently every week. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
nolabels
![]() |
Sun Mar-22-09 07:38 PM Response to Reply #64 |
70. By the time you figure in all the the contributory taxes and government fees..... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NorthernSpy
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 06:29 PM Response to Reply #11 |
34. The ex post facto clause refers to criminal proceedings. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TwixVoy
![]() |
Sun Mar-22-09 03:09 PM Response to Reply #34 |
68. BS |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
melm00se
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 11:26 AM Response to Reply #10 |
18. Article 1, Section 9 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 12:00 PM Response to Reply #18 |
22. There is also an issue of whether that would be taking of property without due process. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
melm00se
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 12:21 PM Response to Reply #22 |
25. yup |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NorthernSpy
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 06:32 PM Response to Reply #22 |
36. No. The government has the undisputed authority to levy taxes. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NorthernSpy
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 06:30 PM Response to Reply #18 |
35. Again, ex post facto and bill of attainder do not refer to taxation. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SteelPenguin
![]() |
Sat Mar-21-09 07:47 AM Response to Reply #35 |
49. United States v. Carlton 1994 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NorthernSpy
![]() |
Sat Mar-21-09 11:25 AM Response to Reply #49 |
58. thank you, SteelPenguin! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bobburgster
![]() |
Thu Mar-26-09 02:22 PM Response to Reply #58 |
78. Hmmmm |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fascisthunter
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 11:48 AM Response to Reply #8 |
20. oh geez |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TankLV
![]() |
Sun Mar-22-09 09:40 PM Response to Reply #8 |
71. ahh - we have another one, folks...!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
David__77
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 03:33 AM Response to Original message |
9. Clearly a 90% tax rate is legal. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bobburgster
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 04:14 AM Response to Reply #9 |
12. I agree on retro... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 12:25 PM Response to Reply #9 |
26. Courts have upheld Congress making tax rates retroactive to the start of the year |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Angleae
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 01:32 PM Response to Reply #9 |
27. But is a 90% tax on employees of company X legal? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
closeupready
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 02:03 PM Response to Reply #27 |
28. That's not how this tax bill was written. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Flora
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 04:24 AM Response to Original message |
13. Any word yet |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 07:19 AM Response to Original message |
14. Saying that high tax rates are not novel misses the point. The issue is whether |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
twitomy
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 08:36 AM Response to Reply #14 |
16. I Agree with you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karynnj
![]() |
Fri Mar-27-09 12:37 PM Response to Reply #16 |
79. this sounds suspiciously like the RW version |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Romulox
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 03:05 PM Response to Reply #14 |
30. The answer is "yes" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GeorgeGist
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 11:11 AM Response to Original message |
17. U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Section 9 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Rwalsh
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 11:36 AM Response to Original message |
19. Why single out just AIG? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 12:14 PM Response to Reply #19 |
24. The bill passed in the House would apply to any company that recieved over $5 billion in TARP money |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dreamer Tatum
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 06:01 PM Response to Reply #24 |
32. I think all you need is a DVR to prove the intent of the tax |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GinaMaria
![]() |
Sat Mar-21-09 08:07 AM Response to Reply #32 |
51. what if the American Tax payer funded those Tarantino movies? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dreamer Tatum
![]() |
Sat Mar-21-09 10:52 AM Response to Reply #51 |
56. Has not squat to do with the Constitution |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster
![]() |
Sat Mar-21-09 10:01 AM Response to Reply #32 |
53. The way I look at it seems simple to me |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
B2G
![]() |
Sat Mar-21-09 11:49 AM Response to Reply #53 |
59. Bingo. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
christx30
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 08:44 PM Response to Reply #19 |
41. Or better yet |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TankLV
![]() |
Sun Mar-22-09 09:44 PM Response to Reply #41 |
72. Gee - you're from texASS, what a surprise... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Irish Girl
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 11:59 AM Response to Original message |
21. Legalities questioned ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 12:05 PM Response to Reply #21 |
23. I agree. Who is baiting us this time, though? Not Bush. I think the media is |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
happyslug
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 10:57 PM Response to Reply #21 |
45. Congress has the power to pass and collect this tax. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dorian Gray
![]() |
Sat Mar-21-09 06:57 AM Response to Reply #21 |
48. They're rushing to pass the law? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Romulox
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 03:03 PM Response to Original message |
29. LOL at all of those saying "Unconstitutional" as if it were a magic word. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Irish Girl
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 05:39 PM Response to Reply #29 |
31. How I would argue the point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dreamer Tatum
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 06:05 PM Response to Reply #29 |
33. I don't think the "LOL" argument is admissible in federal court |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
amandabeech
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 07:20 PM Response to Reply #33 |
38. I don't think that this will be necessarily catch fewer than 100. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
amandabeech
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 07:17 PM Response to Reply #29 |
37. My recollection is that "ex post facto" may also refer to civil laws, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
christx30
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 08:47 PM Response to Reply #29 |
42. Let's hit you up |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TankLV
![]() |
Sun Mar-22-09 09:46 PM Response to Reply #42 |
73. again - "logic" from texASS... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
CAcyclist
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 07:43 PM Response to Original message |
39. I've been saying for years we need a new 90% tax bracket |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Zavulon
![]() |
Sun Mar-22-09 02:10 PM Response to Reply #39 |
66. This makes me less comfortable with the idea. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Generator
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 08:00 PM Response to Original message |
40. I have fucking had it on this AIG bullshit |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
B2G
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 09:16 PM Response to Original message |
43. You all do realize |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Thor_MN
![]() |
Sat Mar-21-09 04:58 AM Response to Reply #43 |
47. If true, that would shoot down that whole "bill of attainder" arguement |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
B2G
![]() |
Sat Mar-21-09 09:20 AM Response to Reply #47 |
52. Interesting thought process there |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Thor_MN
![]() |
Sat Mar-21-09 10:48 AM Response to Reply #52 |
55. You really consider those to be equivalent outcomes? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
B2G
![]() |
Sat Mar-21-09 11:23 AM Response to Reply #55 |
57. You don't seem to get it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Thor_MN
![]() |
Sat Mar-21-09 06:11 PM Response to Reply #57 |
60. I know exactly what it is about. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
B2G
![]() |
Sat Mar-21-09 06:53 PM Response to Reply #60 |
61. I'm not in favor of paying for poor performance |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TankLV
![]() |
Sun Mar-22-09 09:49 PM Response to Reply #57 |
75. And WE have already been screwed for YEARS by the REPUKE CONGRESS!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TankLV
![]() |
Sun Mar-22-09 09:47 PM Response to Reply #52 |
74. The REPUKE congress has ALREADY passed punative tax legislation on me..this just CORRECTS that WRONG |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
treestar
![]() |
Mon Mar-23-09 12:38 PM Response to Reply #52 |
77. If I get rich enough for it to affect me |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
high density
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 09:18 PM Response to Original message |
44. It's never going to pass the senate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Alhena
![]() |
Fri Mar-20-09 11:37 PM Response to Reply #44 |
46. That's what Stephonapolous said today- no chance it becomes law |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ellie
![]() |
Sat Mar-21-09 07:52 AM Response to Original message |
50. WOO HOO! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProgressIn2008
![]() |
Sat Mar-21-09 10:11 AM Response to Original message |
54. Empty theater. "Obama Uneasy About Tax on Bonuses" now. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect
![]() |
Sat Mar-21-09 11:16 PM Response to Original message |
62. Windfall profits tax . . . and it should also be on ExxonMobil's huge earnings . . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Staneck
![]() |
Sun Mar-22-09 02:07 PM Response to Original message |
65. We the people should demand that the bonuses be returned |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Zavulon
![]() |
Sun Mar-22-09 02:13 PM Response to Original message |
67. To me, this is really scary. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Summermoondancer
![]() |
Mon Mar-23-09 12:05 PM Response to Original message |
76. If it were |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Fri Jun 14th 2024, 04:45 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC