He’s just mad because nobody with money is buying his cookbooks or his ad-free 10$ membership

Governor Christie pointed out that what is being discussed is not a “tax cut,” but a continuation of the current tax policy—in other words, whether or not a tax increase will be imposed, and if so, on whom.

What Kristof fails to understand in the article quoted above is that, yes, “the rich”—people who do not have to spend all of what they make to meet current needs—do not spend all of their money; they invest it. For a recovery to work, there must be both investment and spending, and currently we have people with money to invest who refuse to do so, and people who have less money to spend therefore spending less.

Ensuring that people have more money to spend on goods and services by taxing them less is a good thing, but if all that is done with money is spend it, there is still no growth; there needs to be investment as well as profit, and the only way that investment will increase is if people have more money to invest, and are not afraid that punitive tax policies will take away this money before they invest it.

I think Charles Marx workes better. Fucker doesn’t understand that I don’t care how rich the CEO of GM gets (just pulling a company out of the hat) as long as I am making a good, solifd comfortable living. When the people in housing projects have wide-screen HD TVs, and such, stirring up the class-warfare bullshit really only excites the Credentialed Elite (who have their trust funds to fall back on) and the welfare sucks (who can never scam enough from the system). Neither of these classes of parasite is in the driver’s seat now, and that is a good thing for our nation.

Why don’t we discuss just what percentage of the tax burden of this country is assumed by that “1%?” Or the fact that the average individual cannot just waltz in and run a Fortune 500 company.

Also, he doesn’t seem to want to make mention that nearly 50% of the population of this country pays absolutely NOTHING towards its upkeep and of those, a percentage not only pay no taxes, but through that welfare program known as Earned Income Credit, they actually receive a rebate for the taxes they didn’t pay. Where’s the outrage there?

I guess Kristoff fails to mention that if stockholders were upset over the salaries of the CEO’s, they’d do something about it, because they have the final say. Kristoff also fails to mention that $200,000 is NOT a lot of money in places like San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York, Boston and Chicago. It’s barely the salaray of a third-year associate at a law firm. Think they’re RiCH, Kristoff?

On, and by the way, where is the mention of the increased revenues during the Bush “tax cut years.” Another fact conveniently forgotten. Oh, and Kristoff, you might want to look at what high taxes and regulation have done to the great State of California through its Democrat legislature over the years.

How much muck could a Marx Chuck chuck if a Marx Chuck could chuck Marx?