The fact is that increasing capital gains and income tax rates DECREASES actual revenues. It discourages the investment necessary to grow the economy. Without investment, companies don’t expand their operations, don’t create more jobs, and can’t expand their sales force. All of which results in stagnant or reduced output when adjusted for inflation. Why is it so hard for people to understand the concept of compounding? The more people have to spend, the more that they can buy. The more that person “A” buys the more all of the people in the production and sales chain for those items can make, and the more people that can be in that supply chain.

Both Robert and Sasha back up my little note on Obamas political strategery regarding CG taxes.

The only one smoking crack here is the one who thinks a play like this won’t go over well with Democratic voters. Or, degenerates and dope smokers as Robert calls them.

You know, Pam (SFL — don’t fall over), I can see what SFL’s saying, and in large measure understand what he’s talking about. Obama and Clinton are naturally going to talk up the sticking it to the “wealthy” — unaware just how far down the ladder you can be and still be considered wealthy. But what is never considered is that I don’t work for the government, so why does the gov’t have its hands so deep in my pocket? Also, no matter how much money gets thrown at a problem, we always end up with the same proportion of people who who views the safety net as a hammock.

If all it took was throwing money at problems, why do the problems still exist?

Democrats, generally speaking, want a nominee who will talk about taxing those who have wealth and then use that money for social services and the environemtn. Which is exactly what Obama said.

Naturally, conservatives and republicans disagree. That’s why you have your guy to vote for and we have ours come November.

What many be idiocy to some, is wisdom to others.

Truth is truly in the eye of the beholder.