How Do You Explain Tax Cuts For The Rich But No Domestic Spending?

1) How many poor people employ workers?

2) If you confiscated every penny from those who make more than 100 g's a year, you could pay for the guv for about 3 months.

It's a spending problem bud.

If by tax cuts for the rich you mean tax cuts for all Americans like the Republicans propose, it would mean more money in the hands of US citizens to buy things, things they like. And for them to save, or invest, or start up businesses, or invest in their business, etc., etc., Ultimately leading to a stronger economy.

As opposed to giving it to government to waste it on welfare, food stamps, useless government bureaucrat workers, and other non-productive expenditures.

There, tried to explain as simply as I could to libtards.

But the job creator argument has failed. Its been 10 years, shouldn't they now surrender their tax cuts?

It's their fucking money. What makes you think you have a right to it?

You libs are fucksticks. Give the govt your money, bitch. Maybe they'll buy someone a nice "sail fawn".

But if the government is reduced beyond a certain point it will be choked out of existence by private industry who will create a fee for services country based on profit. Like Shylocks.

A Black Market will grow up and the law of the corporate controlled Government will be subverted to stay above water and survive the high price of living.

Maybe choking this monster govt isn't such a bad deal.

What would replace it would be worse. "..a fee for services country based on profit.", which is exactly what the wealthy want. All their supporters are being duped into protecting their wealth so they can swoop down and crush America.

Göring: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.
Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.
Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.

Why would something have to replace it? How about we replace it with freedom. You can choose what you buy then, instead of the heavy boot of govt demanding it of you at gunpoint.

You didn't answer the questions, did you?

yeah dude on GLP, you're not going to find many who understand how large economies actually are supposed to work. all they know is; taxes bad! spending bad! investment in infrastructure and governmental support of manufacturing is something they can't even begin to comprehend.

How's that working for ya?

If tax and spend were such a great thing, why is California as fucked up as a soup sandwich?

They say it in a Frankenstein voice. Lol.

"Taxes Bad!!" "Spending...Bad"!

You want to replace the American Government with corporate fascism.

California is a State,America is a whole country.I hope that helps you.

You must be guv educated troll, an acorn plant or a cali unionite.
I won't even attempt at an explanation.
There is no help for you.