Nice, always good to show sexism and racism when trying to debate, nice.

You are the reason everyone hates the Republican party.  We need to win the White House, which is hard to do when you represent it as dumb.

Join my pledge not to vote for McCain, traitor to conservatism and republican party.

So we can assume that you'll be the first one to send your stimulus check back to the gov? Some how I think not. Hot air, like the rest of the left-wing elite.

I judge them based on wehther they are asking for my money.

I probably pay more each year in taxes than you earn in your lifetime.

No. I support EVVIIIIIIIIIIL.  Right now, I'm eating a human heart.

Yes, Bush is worse than Hitler, Stalin, etc. Why? Because he, um, got congressional approval to remove Saddam Hussein and lowered taxes. The bastard.

Why does the left have such a problem understanding economics?  Tax cuts are not the problem.....it's out of control spending!!!!

Three cents?  Is that the liberal economics at work again? 

I would generally say people who refuse to work, stay home on welfare, etc.

Define "world". The US have a very good reputation in Albania, Kosovo, Kurdistan, Israel, southern Sudan, and many of the -stans (where people are demonstrating for George Bush to come and help them).

I assume you mean the US have a bad reputation among violent and loud people as well as among those who ignore calls for help.

But they are NOT the world.

Vegetables are not known for their mental acuity.

Sorry, but that is just plain stupid.  I support low taxes, and as Draginol said, I also don't support paying for unproductive people. 

It's not a matter of supporting Bush.  I would imagine the reality you live in is only relevant in places like the DailyKos.

Oh yea, I can definitely tell you have a real track on "reality".

I always love how the left-wing fringe assumes those who have different opinions are automatically stupid or evil or out of touch no matter how obvious it is that the person they're talking to is well educated and quite clearly in touch.

Um, no. They could also cut spending. It's not my job to pay for the unproductive of America. 

You could even say I'm pro-starvation of stupid poor people (though given the obesity rate, that's not likely to happen).

In reality, it's more like the democrat held Congress sending the bill for their outrageous spending.  All we need now is Obama/Hillary to give us government healthcare to tack on.

LOL.  Why do liberals care so much about what loons around the "world" think?  They didn't love us before. 

Healthcare is not the responsibility of the federal government, nor is it the responsiblity for citizens having to bear the burden for another persons responsibility.

As I said before, Obama is incapable of uniting or bringing this country together.  The same goes for the other candidates as well.  Obama wants government healthcare, higher taxes, and restrictive gun rights....he will never unite me.

Poor pay less taxes – Rich pay more taxes – Is this fair?

If rich pay more, shouldn’t they get more from the Govt.?

Analogy: Two people walk into a restaurant and order the same meal, say steak. One person gets a 16oz porterhouse with all the trimmings, the other person gets a 4oz. Salisbury steak and 3 french fries. The person that gets the chopped steak pays $60 (the waiter is also standing by for a tip) and the person with the porterhouse pays $0 and is told to come back next week for the same deal.

Now in my fantasy world, both poor and rich pay the same tax on the money they earn – Sound fair? Rich still pay more overall, because they make more.

Equal taxes = equal services provided

If everyone cannot receive the service, it is classified as an entitlement and eliminated.

For example: A Single father can’t get WIC then it’s gone.

The benefit is a lot of wasteful spending is cut, more money is available for defense and infrastructure, taxes for everyone is lower and everyone is treated the same – fair.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aPb7Gs_irWJk&refer=home

Don't worry the stimulus pakg will take care of that.

Your premise is flawed, so no analysis can be conducted.  Come back with a valid premise and we can debate it.  Throwing up heated - and false - rhetoric is not the way to open a debate on "what happened" especially when you are trying to figure out why oranges are orange by comparing different varieties of apples.

The correct quote is: "Where ignorance is bliss, 'Tis folly to be wise"

Not that ignorance is bliss.

Schools and Police are usually paid for, at least in part, by property taxes.  A town can not have police (I live in one- we just get patrolled by the county now and then) which also leads to poor 911 service. 

Schools can be the same way- they depend on millages.  Don't vote in a millage if you don't want to pay more.

But, if you want well educated kids and dependable 911, you might want to pay more

But, remember, the ones with the most land, and the businesses, pay the most.  So, the business man and the "rich" are still paying more than the "common" person.

Now, to the original post.  Let me ask you this- how does the the rich man keep all his apples?  Is this in a country that doesn't exist? 

The government wouldn't have to fund anything if everyone was employed and making a fair wage.  In Draginol's example, he is not able to employ as many people since the government is taking that money.  Therefore, the business doesn't grow so that it can employ more and somebody doesn't get a job from the start because of taxes.  I think there is a great misunderstanding of how much a COMPANY pays in taxes a year.  We could employ several well paid employees for what the government taxes us for.  Those people could have good jobs, good pay and good benefits.  Instead, the government takes the money and spends it on crap programs.  Doesn't help the company, doesn't help the unemployment rate.  Doesn't really help anyone at all.

Let's put some numbers to this to show a point:
Say a company grosses $10 million
Say out of that, they only net/and or get taxed on $2 million of that
The government takes at least 33% - that is $660,000!
How many employees could you hire with that and provide full benefits?
Is taxing the company really helping?  Or, would the country be better off having more people employed?

Of course, if you are a socialist, I guess it would make sense to just keep raising taxes on the people who are working hard and trying to get further ahead.  Heck, why should somebody who works 60+ hours a week have more money than those who work 40 or less?  Why should those who works their butts off to better themselves and their company make more than those who work the least amount of time and do the least?