Natan, someone who actually works for a living, pays more in taxes (percentage wise) than someone who derives all or most of his income from capital gain. And that Natan, is a fact. If you do not agree with me, confer with Warren Buffet - he will confirm.

Lina
Tselovalas v zasos tol'ko our new Secretary of State with Suka Arafat (thats her name), if you remember

Regarding Walmart stores. First, I find it very amusing that liberals use Walmart as kind of "boogyman of retail" - probably because it is the most successful retailer in the history оf this country and because it continues to successfully resist attempts at unionization. Are there other corporations in this country that take advantage of governemnt sponsored financing, or is it only Walmart, the most evil of them all? Oops, I forgot, there is also ExxonMobil and the favorite of all times, Halliburton.
Now, would it surprise you that such liberal corporate icon as The New York Times Company recently built it's massive headquarters skyscraper in Manhatten - also using financing assistance from the government?

Da, ya ne prepominayu Mrs. Bush displaying such warm gestures towards members of these coutries. Can you refresh my memory please.

But let's for a moment assume that you're correct and a particular corporation does receive finance assistance from the goverment. Several questions arise - in addition to your comment about local schools and police not getting enough money presumably being diverted to pay for building financing.

Can someone, please, explain to libs, that when people invest money they have already paid tax on it???!!! now if they make profits, taking the risk of losing eveything, they have to pay more income tax????

The construction of the massive structure generate temporary (union) construction jobs, does it not?
The construction company along with many of its employees may taxes to the government that otherwise would not have been collected, does it not?
Once the store is built and open it because of it's scale is able to offer consumers products at better prices thus saving consumers money, does it not?
Corporation along with its employees pays income taxes to the government, does it not?
Corporation creates hundreds of permanent retail jobs which spurs other economic activity, does it not?
These new tax streams in fact are used by the goverment to support local schools, libraries, police and firefiters, do they not?

And lastly, these public/private finance arrangements exist in many states and municipalities, many of them (like New York or New Jersey) for decades have been run by successive democratic administrations. Presumably, these "progressive" democrats would look after a "little guy" and would not permit a big greedy corporation to take unfair advantage of the public finance arrangements, would they not?

Ok, and how does all of this explain or justify comparing an African American first lady to an ugly gorilla in a thread meant for extending congratulations to the new president?

Maria, you obviously failed to even look at the link I posted earlier. It described the connection between the Bush family and the Saudies. Heres a pic, just for you.
********dohiyimir.typepad.com/bush-abdulah.jpg

Mariya, when I'm talking about the wealthy, I am not referring to those making 150k, but rather to the upper 5% who own the majority of the wealth in this country. They are the ones receiving subsidies from the government.
Lina, how do you think 150K was picked? 5% of the nation working PEOPLE (read humans, not corporations) make that much or higher. The ave family income in US is 50K. Not because jobs are paying so little, but there are tons of families who make 0 (read: welfare) So its 5% of the nation carries the rest of the society on their shoulders ... I dont think they get subsidiaries from the government pretty much.... The companies get insentives, so that they can employ those 95% of the population. Wheter it is fair or not. Is not a part of this debate. Who do you think gave your Obama zillions of donations for the campaign. Obviosly not the corportations whom you think he is going to yank back into the reality of working for a living. :-D

"Can someone, please, explain to libs, that when people invest money they have already paid tax on it???!!! now if they make profits, taking the risk of losing eveything, they have to pay more income tax????"
Are you insane??? If you paid taxes on 100k, invested it and made millions on it, you shouldn't pay taxes? Why should people pay taxes for working overtime? Why should we reward and value risk taking above hard work?

Lina
LOLOLOLOLOL is that what you really got upset about? Us comparing Michelle Obama to a monkey. Nado bilo tak i skazat a ne privodit svoyi senseless dovodi.

Natan, they may be saving consumers money(althogh their prices are not that competetive and merchandise is of less than superior quality), pay income taxes, provide jobs... Are they doing all this out of the goodness of their heart or to make a profit? Why should they be given an unfair advantage over the average mom and pop store? I thought you were against socialism?

Mariya, no offense, but you really should invest into a reading comprehension class. I did say that.

Lina,
I do not presume to be able to change your mind, nor can I keep up with your posts, only to present you facts as I see them. So I would respectfully point out to you the falsehood of your argument. Let's take the following:
"Natan, someone who actually works for a living, pays more in taxes (percentage wise) than someone who derives all or most of his income from capital gain. And that Natan, is a fact"
No, Lina it is not a FACT. Simply because you are attempting to compare, as they say, apples and oranges.

First, as was pointed out by other participants, capital gains tax is paid on the money for which income tax was already paid. In effect it is a double taxation.
Second, capital invested in a coproration (whether you are buying a share of stock or opening a new factory) - is capital placed at risk. You are liable to lose everything or almost everything and thus will have incentive to invest unless the taxation rates are low compared with other other, more stable ways of making money (like going to work).

Lina
From you DARLING None taken, I don't take offense from liberal idiots. And in terms of my reading comprehension level, I would be willing to bet that it's a bit higher than yours. Kak govoryat chto s duraka vozmesh krome analizov.

Third, capital investment is what drives this economy and this country. If, as you indicated, you're working for a living, you must be working for someone else, I presume some company or corporation. Frankly, if you are working for yourself, this does not change anything. If you work for a corporation in order for it to employ you and pay you salary someone else (that filthy rich, greedy guy) had to invest his money into plant and equipment - with no guarantee to ever see that money again.
And fourth, over 80 million americans (you probably included) participate in the stock market and thus benefit from low capital gains taxes, without probably even realizing it, through 401-k IRA and other investment plans. Think about it.

"Why should we reward and value risk taking above hard work?"
On that, Lina, I agree with you. Except your solution is to raise taxes on capital gains to match (or esceed) taxes on income, mine - is to lower taxes on income to match taxes on capital gains.

"I dont think they get subsidiaries from the government pretty much"
Alla, think again. And they do not carry the rest of the society on their shoulders... another thing they fail to do, is pay their fair share of taxes while using incentive dollars to take their companies (and therefore jobs) over seas.

Maria, considering you had great difficulty spelling the word imbecile - I would refrain from calling anyone an idiot. I have just 3 words for you: Hooked on Phonics.
Maria, I guarantee that you would lose that bet.

Natan, I did not come here to try to change anyone's mind... I was just disgusted by some of the comments that I had the misfortune of reading earlier in this thread.

"althogh their prices are not that competetive and merchandise is of less than superior quality), pay income taxes, provide jobs... Are they doing all this out of the goodness of their heart or to make a profit"
If their prices are not competitive then they would lose their customers to another store and go out of business, as they should. Ditto merchandise is of less than superior quality. If one is looking for superior quality one would visit Fortchunoffs or Gergdorf and Goodman, not Walmart. I am sorry, Lina, but I have to conclude that your argument is devoid of common sense. And, no they are not doing all this out of the goodness of their heart, but to make a profit. As I and most of us would expect them to do. After all this is still a capitalist country and companies are allowed to make a profit, no? Although this all may soon change.

Maria, just when I thought that you couldn't sink any lower, you proved that you obviously could. I know that you must deem yourself to be a great beauty... sorry to disappoint you... on second thought - ignorance is bliss... You must be familiar with the expression: "dumb is forever"...

Natan, if the Walmart store sells their "crap" for $10, and "mom and pop" sell the same "crap" for the same price... but ony Walmart gets various government incentives such as keeping the sales tax - which will go out of business first?

I don't deem myself to be a great beauty, but rather a person with common sense which you my friend obviously lack.

The only thing that is obvious here, Maria, is that you tend to overuse the word obvious.

Ok, Lina, now that you used this line about Walmart "keeping sales taxes" twice, maybe it is time for you to actually show where you've got this information and back it up with a little more than just simply stating it. How about it?

Lina, people that make 150K and above, make it at work. (think Pilots, Doctors, Lawyers, Engeneers, Programmers, Politicians)
Now people like Warren Buffet, Angelina Jolie, Trump etc. those are < 0.01% and with all the money they make - do not pay for much of the societal needs in Taxes.
And as far as people who find enough nahal'stva to not pay taxes how about hm... IDK...oh: Timothy Geithner ;-)

I'll look for some more reputable sites later... but for now:
***********.rutherford.org/Oldspeak/articles/interviews/oldspeak-johnston.html
***********.smirkingchimp.com/thread/13666

Ladies, I know it can get personal. But let political differences be political differences. There is no point in eye scratching. Lina, whatever your hopes are for this presidency, they are based on no facts (except not liking Bush) If a person can create greatness as a president, he certainly can create goodness as a regular politician. There is absolutely no goodness that came from Obamas political life to make you and billions of others belive that something great will come out of his presidency. Beyond religion there is no room for blind faith (Think communism)

Alla, so to what do you attribute all the support that he has - hypnosis?
I don't know if Obama will be a great president - no one does... but he deserves a chance.
Obama promised to reverse the ban on stem cell research - perhaps it means nothing to you... but it means the world to millions - including me.
I don't understand why so much energy is wasted on bashing Obama and those who support him. We have a new president, we all live in the same country - lets make the best of the situation.

Lina, now I understand where your earlier posts came from. You simply quoted pieces of the from the interview - verbatim. While we are all trying to express our own opinions - in our own language.
On the premise of the article - I concur. I want less goverment. Not more goverment. Such an arrangement, by the way, would also remove the power of the goverment to grant special favors, including special tax rules - be it to local polititians, donors, or companies like Walmart. Walmart is simply taking advantage of the rules rigged by the all-powerful goverment.
Less government - less rules rigging (or breaking).

This is not to say that there is no role for the goverment. But it should be a limited role. And it should promote private enterprise.
"The goverment big enough to give you anything you want is big enough to take away everything you have" -- Gerald Ford, 1975.

LINA T: Вы им НИЧЕГО не докажите. (dt) На етом форуме есть здравомыслящие люди, но они появляются редко. Просмотрите прошлие посты. Где-то так страниц 20-30 назад. Другие люди уже пытались дискутировать. Бесполезно. Те с кем ви дискутируете не поймут Вас по 3 причинам: 1. Они Вас не слушают, а выбирают только то что на их взгляд они могут оспорить. 2. Даже если они Вас и читают , то все равно НЕ ПОНИМАЮТ о чем идет речь, благдаря своей неграмотности. (md) (md) (md) (md)3. Многие ( не все, а многие. Те к которым это не относится поймут) просто невежды. Так что Вы зря связались с ними. Хотя им конечно же полезно послушать здравые коментарии, и все Ваши доводы впечетляют. Может хоть чтo-то до них дойдет. Хотя я сильно сомневаюсь. (v)

Natan, I don't remember, but I believe that I only used one quote - hence the quote marks surrounding the statement. (ch) I thought that using direct quotes, would give more credence to my argument.

Vnimaniye vopros
Esle vas tut dol'ko dve zdravomislyashie tak pardon pochemy by vam ne otkrit sobstvenniy forum dlya dvoih? Mne kazhetsya vam budet priytnee obshatsya drug s drugom a ne s nami otmorozkami. Ne pravda li?

Lena
kak vy voobshe tut okazalis v Russkoy Amerike, u vaskazhetsya v Kanade u samih polnaya zh---pa ogurtsov. Ili vy nam pitayetes' privit' vashu CHUDNUYU meditsinu which is what Obama was proposing his entire campaign.

Maria, Vas zabili sprosit'.
Actually, I counted more than 2... but, whatever...