Aren't republicans the true moochers in this country by their disdain for paying taxes?

[bripat9643]

Apparently they expect the government to pay for everything for them. Is it that they are too dumb to realize revenue pays for our military, public schools and highways etc.?

The newest republican tax cut proposal would add 440 billion to our national debt. More proof republicans don't give a shit about the issue

The Republican Party s top priority is to raise taxes on the poor. Literally.

A battle over taxes divides Democrats. More to come - The Washington Post

To be a mooch you actually have to mooch something. The rich pay their taxes, so calling them "mooches" is pure slander.

Furthermore, the rich generally don't use government services. They put their children in private schools and they have their own private security.

Your claim is simply a bald faced lie.

Oh please. The rich don't use gov services? Are you kidding me? You really think private schools is the only services they don't benefit from?

Do the rich use welfare? Do they need Social Security? Aside from the courts and the military, is there any government service the rich benefit from?

They sure as hell benefit from the military.

That's debatable as well. They don't benefit anymore than you do.

 

[Flash]

first off there are many dim light bulbs on the Republicans chandelier too.........and there many greedy Republicans as well...........

It is obvious to me that the Democrats are the scum of America. They have a filthy coalition of all the despicable greedy special interest groups in America. They never get it right on anything and they have destroyed this country in many different ways.

The Republicans are Democrat Light for the most part. There is not that much difference. For instance, today the Republicans voted a funding bill that included funding for Obamacare. How stupid is that? Don't the idiots in Congress know they suppose to be against Obamacare? Has anybody bothered to tell them? Did they not get the message of the election last month?

The Republicans are always better than the Democrats but that isn't acceptable because the Democrats have set such a low bar. Just being better than the Democrats doesn't mean much.

I vote for neither of the butt pirates.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

The newest republican tax cut proposal would add 440 billion to our national debt. More proof republicans don't give a shit about the issue

So, Republicans propose to give back to Americans $440 billion of their own earnings. Wow what a concept.

You don't give a shit about bloated, corrupt, inefficient, wasteful government do you?

Lol you only demonstrate my point. Those earnings pay for government services. Quit being a parasite.

Gov services for who?

Um everyone...

I just want to pay for the basics. Like military,fire,police,schools and roads.
The rest of it is a rip off.

Scratch roads, fire and schools. In fact, scratch the police. Then you have the basics

It would be real interesting to see how long it took things to level off if you removed those services.
Got a feeling things would be better after the initial die off.

 

[bripat9643]

Do the rich use welfare? Do they need Social Security? Aside from the courts and the military, is there any government service the rich benefit from?

Do you even know how much we spend on defense? Obviously not. How about the FBI? CIA? Highways? Other infrastructure that republicans refuse to pay for?

Defense accounts for about 18% of the budget. The government has no business building highways. The Constitution doesn't authorize the government to create federal police forces, which is what the CIA and the FBI are.

lol, you want people and businesses to have to travel on a highway system built entirely by the private sector?

You must intentionally be acting stupid to make conservatives look bad.

Sure, why not. What does government do better than the private sector?

Answer: nothing.

Dogma, and wrong of course. Is national security private, for-profit? Nope.

That doesn't prove that government is better at it. It only proves that government doesn't allow anyone to compete with it. That's the case with most government enterprises. Look up "monopolist" in the dictionary and possibly you may begin to understand.

 

[bripat9643]

Lol you only demonstrate my point. Those earnings pay for government services. Quit being a parasite.

Gov services for who?

Um everyone...

I just want to pay for the basics. Like military,fire,police,schools and roads.
The rest of it is a rip off.

Scratch roads, fire and schools. In fact, scratch the police. Then you have the basics

It would be real interesting to see how long it took things to level off if you removed those services.
Got a feeling things would be better after the initial die off.

Why do you think there would be an initial "die off?" Plenty of towns have private fire service. Tempe AZ is a classic example. When did the police ever come to rescue from a bad guy?

 

[Flash]

It would be real interesting to see how long it took things to level off if you removed those services.
Got a feeling things would be better after the initial die off.

Ron Paul came up with a great plan to cut back federal spending a trillion a year. It included defense funding, social security and Medicare and other necessary items. it was a great plan that cut out many of the necessary spending of the Federal government.

It is a little less now but at the time the plan came out in 2012 a trillion dollars was the amount that the US was borrowing every year.

Nobody had the courage to take the plan serious.

Nobody in government is serious about fiscal responsibility.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Gov services for who?

Um everyone...

I just want to pay for the basics. Like military,fire,police,schools and roads.
The rest of it is a rip off.

Scratch roads, fire and schools. In fact, scratch the police. Then you have the basics

It would be real interesting to see how long it took things to level off if you removed those services.
Got a feeling things would be better after the initial die off.

Why do you think there would be an initial "die off?" Plenty of towns have private fire service. Tempe AZ is a classic example. When did the police ever come to rescue from a bad guy?

The ghetto population would get thinned out in a real hurry. Then you'd have the survivors thinking it would be a good idea to see about displacing whitey out in the upper end burbs. Which would precipitate another die off of the surviving thugs leaving precious few on the welfare roles,improved crime rate,higher school test scores,fewer on food stamps..etc...etc...
I'm starting to like the idea of no police.

But all kidding aside the private sector could do all those things better.
Dont think I'd want a private sector military though.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

It would be real interesting to see how long it took things to level off if you removed those services.
Got a feeling things would be better after the initial die off.

Ron Paul came up with a great plan to cut back federal spending a trillion a year. It included defense funding, social security and Medicare and other necessary items. it was a great plan that cut out many of the necessary spending of the Federal government.

It is a little less now but at the time the plan came out in 2012 a trillion dollars was the amount that the US was borrowing every year.

Nobody had the courage to take the plan serious.

Nobody in government is serious about fiscal responsibility.

Not so sure it has to do with courage. I'm leaning towards "they dont give a shit because they know the whole thing is about to collapse" theory.
And of course all the politicians will come out of it swimmingly ...the general populace..? Not so much.

 

[Billy000]

Oh please. The rich don't use gov services? Are you kidding me? You really think private schools is the only services they don't benefit from?

Do the rich use welfare? Do they need Social Security? Aside from the courts and the military, is there any government service the rich benefit from?

Do you even know how much we spend on defense? Obviously not. How about the FBI? CIA? Highways? Other infrastructure that republicans refuse to pay for?

Defense accounts for about 18% of the budget. The government has no business building highways. The Constitution doesn't authorize the government to create federal police forces, which is what the CIA and the FBI are.

Not exactly. The CIA is part of the military, engaged in developing information on enemies abroad.

You could argue that, I suppose. However, there is no provision in the Constitution for a national police force. That makes the FBI unconstitutional.

The constitution was never a perfect document.

For instance, had the founding fathers known corporate America would become so powerful as it is today, they would have limited that power.

 

[Clementine]

Apparently they expect the government to pay for everything for them. Is it that they are too dumb to realize revenue pays for our military, public schools and highways etc.?

The newest republican tax cut proposal would add 440 billion to our national debt. More proof republicans don't give a shit about the issue

The Republican Party s top priority is to raise taxes on the poor. Literally.

A battle over taxes divides Democrats. More to come - The Washington Post

Big difference between paying reasonable taxes for things we need. There are legitimate functions of government. It's another thing to pay for useless programs that don't really work. Right now we are cutting military personnel. Benefits already cut. Yet we will pay billions to help illegal aliens. Congress needs to lower their own pay and benefits and no more private jets for congress members. We should house them in an apartment complex the way we do military people. They don't need such extravagant lifestyles and cushy retirements. The waste and pork spending is still as bad as ever and when people say lower taxes, they mean cut the crap.

 

[The Rabbi]

Do the rich use welfare? Do they need Social Security? Aside from the courts and the military, is there any government service the rich benefit from?

Do you even know how much we spend on defense? Obviously not. How about the FBI? CIA? Highways? Other infrastructure that republicans refuse to pay for?

Defense accounts for about 18% of the budget. The government has no business building highways. The Constitution doesn't authorize the government to create federal police forces, which is what the CIA and the FBI are.

Not exactly. The CIA is part of the military, engaged in developing information on enemies abroad.

You could argue that, I suppose. However, there is no provision in the Constitution for a national police force. That makes the FBI unconstitutional.

The constitution was never a perfect document.

For instance, had the founding fathers known corporate America would become so powerful as it is today, they would have limited that power.

Oh yeah? Had the Founding Fathers known about obesity they would have included dieting as a civil right!

 

[Listening]

Poor Billy000, still trying to start a thread that has credibility and failing once again.

Why doesn't it have credibility?

Uh you posted it.

 

[hadit]

Apparently they expect the government to pay for everything for them. Is it that they are too dumb to realize revenue pays for our military, public schools and highways etc.?

The newest republican tax cut proposal would add 440 billion to our national debt. More proof republicans don't give a shit about the issue

The Republican Party s top priority is to raise taxes on the poor. Literally.

A battle over taxes divides Democrats. More to come - The Washington Post

You sorry-ass deluded fuck.

I'd like for them to explain how the poor who pay no federal income taxes can have their taxes increased?

The same way a reduction in the rate of growth is called a "cut", by just redefining the meanings of words.

 

[JoeNormal]

Apparently they expect the government to pay for everything for them. Is it that they are too dumb to realize revenue pays for our military, public schools and highways etc.?

The newest republican tax cut proposal would add 440 billion to our national debt. More proof republicans don't give a shit about the issue

The Republican Party s top priority is to raise taxes on the poor. Literally.

A battle over taxes divides Democrats. More to come - The Washington Post

To be a mooch you actually have to mooch something. The rich pay their taxes, so calling them "mooches" is pure slander.

Furthermore, the rich generally don't use government services. They put their children in private schools and they have their own private security.

Your claim is simply a bald faced lie.

Oh please. The rich don't use gov services? Are you kidding me? You really think private schools is the only services they don't benefit from?

Do the rich use welfare? Do they need Social Security? Aside from the courts and the military, is there any government service the rich benefit from?

They sure as hell benefit from the military.

That's debatable as well. They don't benefit anymore than you do.

They have way more money, property and possessions to protect. Also, they benefit much more from the keeping-commerce-flowing aspects of military intervention.

 

[bripat9643]

To be a mooch you actually have to mooch something. The rich pay their taxes, so calling them "mooches" is pure slander.

Furthermore, the rich generally don't use government services. They put their children in private schools and they have their own private security.

Your claim is simply a bald faced lie.

Oh please. The rich don't use gov services? Are you kidding me? You really think private schools is the only services they don't benefit from?

Do the rich use welfare? Do they need Social Security? Aside from the courts and the military, is there any government service the rich benefit from?

They sure as hell benefit from the military.

That's debatable as well. They don't benefit anymore than you do.

They have way more money, property and possessions to protect. Also, they benefit much more from the keeping-commerce-flowing aspects of military intervention.

We all benefit from that. Just ask a former European Jew how much he benefits from having a military defense.

Even if the rich paid for all of the military, that would still be about an 80% cut in their taxes if we got rid of all the stuff they don't benefit from since they pay for the bulk of everything anyway. I'll bet they would take that deal any day of the week.

 

[JoeNormal]

Oh please. The rich don't use gov services? Are you kidding me? You really think private schools is the only services they don't benefit from?

Do the rich use welfare? Do they need Social Security? Aside from the courts and the military, is there any government service the rich benefit from?

They sure as hell benefit from the military.

That's debatable as well. They don't benefit anymore than you do.

They have way more money, property and possessions to protect. Also, they benefit much more from the keeping-commerce-flowing aspects of military intervention.

We all benefit from that. Just ask a former European Jew how much he benefits from having a military defense.

Even if the rich paid for all of the military, that would still be about an 80% cut in their taxes if we got rid of all the stuff they don't benefit from since they pay for the bulk of everything anyway. I'll bet they would take that deal any day of the week.

They benefit indirectly from public education since they're the 'job creators'. They benefit disproportionately from infrastructure and basically all the trappings of society. But we've already had this discussion many times before. I have to wonder why you are so pro-plutocracy. I'm sure you are no further up the social ladder than I am. Is your success based upon sucking up and that why you don't want to rock the boat?

 

[jc456]

Do the rich use welfare? Do they need Social Security? Aside from the courts and the military, is there any government service the rich benefit from?

They sure as hell benefit from the military.

That's debatable as well. They don't benefit anymore than you do.

They have way more money, property and possessions to protect. Also, they benefit much more from the keeping-commerce-flowing aspects of military intervention.

We all benefit from that. Just ask a former European Jew how much he benefits from having a military defense.

Even if the rich paid for all of the military, that would still be about an 80% cut in their taxes if we got rid of all the stuff they don't benefit from since they pay for the bulk of everything anyway. I'll bet they would take that deal any day of the week.

They benefit indirectly from public education since they're the 'job creators'. They benefit disproportionately from infrastructure and basically all the trappings of society. But we've already had this discussion many times before. I have to wonder why you are so pro-plutocracy. I'm sure you are no further up the social ladder than I am. Is your success based upon sucking up and that why you don't want to rock the boat?

It's because we believe in what the founders mapped out for us. You're just afraid of smarter people. You can't stand you're not them! Me, I'm proud of who I am, I don't have to be a rich person. Others do! Not my problem. But it affends the ba-jesus out of you!!! right?

 

[JoeNormal]

They sure as hell benefit from the military.

That's debatable as well. They don't benefit anymore than you do.

They have way more money, property and possessions to protect. Also, they benefit much more from the keeping-commerce-flowing aspects of military intervention.

We all benefit from that. Just ask a former European Jew how much he benefits from having a military defense.

Even if the rich paid for all of the military, that would still be about an 80% cut in their taxes if we got rid of all the stuff they don't benefit from since they pay for the bulk of everything anyway. I'll bet they would take that deal any day of the week.

They benefit indirectly from public education since they're the 'job creators'. They benefit disproportionately from infrastructure and basically all the trappings of society. But we've already had this discussion many times before. I have to wonder why you are so pro-plutocracy. I'm sure you are no further up the social ladder than I am. Is your success based upon sucking up and that why you don't want to rock the boat?

It's because we believe in what the founders mapped out for us. You're just afraid of smarter people. You can't stand you're not them! Me, I'm proud of who I am, I don't have to be a rich person. Others do! Not my problem. But it affends the ba-jesus out of you!!! right?

I don't care about being rich. I've got more stuff than I have time to enjoy it. Nobody should be jazzed about the outright theft that these people perpetrate however. It's not jealousy, it's anger and disgust.

 

[jc456]

That's debatable as well. They don't benefit anymore than you do.

They have way more money, property and possessions to protect. Also, they benefit much more from the keeping-commerce-flowing aspects of military intervention.

We all benefit from that. Just ask a former European Jew how much he benefits from having a military defense.

Even if the rich paid for all of the military, that would still be about an 80% cut in their taxes if we got rid of all the stuff they don't benefit from since they pay for the bulk of everything anyway. I'll bet they would take that deal any day of the week.

They benefit indirectly from public education since they're the 'job creators'. They benefit disproportionately from infrastructure and basically all the trappings of society. But we've already had this discussion many times before. I have to wonder why you are so pro-plutocracy. I'm sure you are no further up the social ladder than I am. Is your success based upon sucking up and that why you don't want to rock the boat?

It's because we believe in what the founders mapped out for us. You're just afraid of smarter people. You can't stand you're not them! Me, I'm proud of who I am, I don't have to be a rich person. Others do! Not my problem. But it affends the ba-jesus out of you!!! right?

I don't care about being rich. I've got more stuff than I have time to enjoy it. Nobody should be jazzed about the outright theft that these people perpetrate however. It's not jealousy, it's anger and disgust.

I am, I am angry that after fifty years the inner cities are still what they are!!!! Thanks to liberal minded dependencies. Makes me want to barf!!!!!

 

[JoeNormal]

They have way more money, property and possessions to protect. Also, they benefit much more from the keeping-commerce-flowing aspects of military intervention.

We all benefit from that. Just ask a former European Jew how much he benefits from having a military defense.

Even if the rich paid for all of the military, that would still be about an 80% cut in their taxes if we got rid of all the stuff they don't benefit from since they pay for the bulk of everything anyway. I'll bet they would take that deal any day of the week.

They benefit indirectly from public education since they're the 'job creators'. They benefit disproportionately from infrastructure and basically all the trappings of society. But we've already had this discussion many times before. I have to wonder why you are so pro-plutocracy. I'm sure you are no further up the social ladder than I am. Is your success based upon sucking up and that why you don't want to rock the boat?

It's because we believe in what the founders mapped out for us. You're just afraid of smarter people. You can't stand you're not them! Me, I'm proud of who I am, I don't have to be a rich person. Others do! Not my problem. But it affends the ba-jesus out of you!!! right?

I don't care about being rich. I've got more stuff than I have time to enjoy it. Nobody should be jazzed about the outright theft that these people perpetrate however. It's not jealousy, it's anger and disgust.

I am, I am angry that after fifty years the inner cities are still what they are!!!! Thanks to liberal minded dependencies. Makes me want to barf!!!!!

Sounds like you're jealous that they're getting a free ride.