[POLL] - Liberals, how much is a "fair share?" - Taxes

[RKMBrown]

I agree that that applies to both of us. But, I would add that people are people. Businesses and government draws from the same deck. In that deck are dueces and aces and mostly in betweens.

We get the most done when we work together.

I act like an extremeist as an example to tea party extremists who don't see that they are and why. It seems to get through to those whose minds are not completely closed.

Given all of that, I think that, in terms of achievement, Obama will go down in history as one of the best, Bush as one of the worst.

I am a product of the 50s when American government was regarded by Americans as the best in the world. It wasn't, of course, but I'm hooked on that attitude.

The question isn't should we work together or not the question is what should we work toward. If working toward a society where no one works and no one gives a shit because no matter what they do or how hard they try the majority of the country will screw them over, well that plan just won't cut meat with me. I have no desire to live in the country you are screaming for, as an extremist in disguise, where freedom is a thing of the past and we get retaliation on the 49% for being more successful than the 51%.

Assuming government workers are better and more trustworthy than non-government workers is a gross fallacy. Assuming the government is gonna spend your income more carefully than you would is a joke. Handing out freebies as a bonus for not working hard by taking money from workers is a policy proven to fail throughout history. Even the communists have given up socialism for capitalism.

" The question isn't should we work together or not the question is what should we work toward."

How about adequate but not excessive pay for everyone capable of producing wealth?

" Assuming government workers are better and more trustworthy than non-government workers is a gross fallacy."

No evidence. It's another thing that would be convenient to what you wish to be true.

Capitalism is only made productive by competition.

Government services are always less expensive and better where competition can't be maintained.

Your insistence that we eliminate screws because all you have is a hammer is not a solution to anything.

>> How about adequate but not excessive pay for everyone capable of producing wealth?

I like earning a decent wage... Who doesn't? Why would anyone argue people should not have the ability to earn an adequate wage? I don't know anyone who does not have adequate pay, other than off-shored jobs and some on-shored illegals. I know of plenty of examples of situations where I would agree someone is getting excessive pay at the cost of the consumer through a government protected and/or ignored monopoly. Break up the monopolies and oligopolies on said excessive situations, punish exporting of our jobs and importing of goods produced by slave like labor rates, and the issue of American wage rates will get fixed on it's own through capitalist markets.

I said " Assuming government workers are better and more trustworthy than non-government workers is a gross fallacy." In response you said "No evidence, It's another thing that would be convenient to what you wish to be true."

In response I would say that you are just acting stupid. If I've learned one thing in my life it is that people are people no matter where you go. Some people assume their leaders are better than they are. Heh, I know your leaders, I can tell you with experience people are people at all levels of all types of caste systems. Good and bad people everywhere you go, in every group, at every level of income, in every job imaginable.

>> Capitalism is only made productive by competition.

On this statement of yours we are in 100% agreement. Kudos, for recognizing this as a basic fact. The reason capitalism works is due to the competition. Take away the competition through socialist programs, government mandates, government provided and ignored monopolies and capitalism regresses into cronyism and enslavement of the consumer by monopolies.

>> Government services are always less expensive and better where competition can't be maintained.

Government, is a monopoly, there is no competition for government. Just as competition makes capitalist markets work, giving an industry to government forever ensures that industry will be screwed up.

>> Your insistence that we eliminate screws because all you have is a hammer is not a solution to anything.

Your ignorant statements won't lead to cooperation.

Look at Obama's health care web site, for example. I could have done all of the web content and software portions of that web site by myself in 6-9m, and it would have worked well beyond expectations. The hard part would have been the hosting, but it was the software that failed not the hardware setup. Why did it fail? Cronyism. Instead of hiring the right team to do the job they hired a friend of Obama's wife.

 

[PMZ]

The question isn't should we work together or not the question is what should we work toward. If working toward a society where no one works and no one gives a shit because no matter what they do or how hard they try the majority of the country will screw them over, well that plan just won't cut meat with me. I have no desire to live in the country you are screaming for, as an extremist in disguise, where freedom is a thing of the past and we get retaliation on the 49% for being more successful than the 51%.

Assuming government workers are better and more trustworthy than non-government workers is a gross fallacy. Assuming the government is gonna spend your income more carefully than you would is a joke. Handing out freebies as a bonus for not working hard by taking money from workers is a policy proven to fail throughout history. Even the communists have given up socialism for capitalism.

" The question isn't should we work together or not the question is what should we work toward."

How about adequate but not excessive pay for everyone capable of producing wealth?

" Assuming government workers are better and more trustworthy than non-government workers is a gross fallacy."

No evidence. It's another thing that would be convenient to what you wish to be true.

Capitalism is only made productive by competition.

Government services are always less expensive and better where competition can't be maintained.

Your insistence that we eliminate screws because all you have is a hammer is not a solution to anything.

>> How about adequate but not excessive pay for everyone capable of producing wealth?

I like earning a decent wage... Who doesn't? Why would anyone argue people should not have the ability to earn an adequate wage? I don't know anyone who does not have adequate pay, other than off-shored jobs and some on-shored illegals. I know of plenty of examples of situations where I would agree someone is getting excessive pay at the cost of the consumer through a government protected and/or ignored monopoly. Break up the monopolies and oligopolies on said excessive situations, punish exporting of our jobs and importing of goods produced by slave like labor rates, and the issue of American wage rates will get fixed on it's own through capitalist markets.

I said " Assuming government workers are better and more trustworthy than non-government workers is a gross fallacy." In response you said "No evidence, It's another thing that would be convenient to what you wish to be true."

In response I would say that you are just acting stupid. If I've learned one thing in my life it is that people are people no matter where you go. Some people assume their leaders are better than they are. Heh, I know your leaders, I can tell you with experience people are people at all levels of all types of caste systems. Good and bad people everywhere you go, in every group, at every level of income, in every job imaginable.

>> Capitalism is only made productive by competition.

On this statement of yours we are in 100% agreement. Kudos, for recognizing this as a basic fact. The reason capitalism works is due to the competition. Take away the competition through socialist programs, government mandates, government provided and ignored monopolies and capitalism regresses into cronyism and enslavement of the consumer by monopolies.

>> Government services are always less expensive and better where competition can't be maintained.

Government, is a monopoly, there is no competition for government. Just as competition makes capitalist markets work, giving an industry to government forever ensures that industry will be screwed up.

>> Your insistence that we eliminate screws because all you have is a hammer is not a solution to anything.

Your ignorant statements won't lead to cooperation.

Look at Obama's health care web site, for example. I could have done all of the web content and software portions of that web site by myself in 6-9m, and it would have worked well beyond expectations. The hard part would have been the hosting, but it was the software that failed not the hardware setup. Why did it fail? Cronyism. Instead of hiring the right team to do the job they hired a friend of Obama's wife.

Let's start with specific examples.

Tell us how you would set up competitive militaries. Or Air Traffic Control. Or law enforcement. Or FDA. Or CDC. Or Interstate Highways.

Just to name a few.

 

[PMZ]

" The question isn't should we work together or not the question is what should we work toward."

How about adequate but not excessive pay for everyone capable of producing wealth?

" Assuming government workers are better and more trustworthy than non-government workers is a gross fallacy."

No evidence. It's another thing that would be convenient to what you wish to be true.

Capitalism is only made productive by competition.

Government services are always less expensive and better where competition can't be maintained.

Your insistence that we eliminate screws because all you have is a hammer is not a solution to anything.

>> How about adequate but not excessive pay for everyone capable of producing wealth?

I like earning a decent wage... Who doesn't? Why would anyone argue people should not have the ability to earn an adequate wage? I don't know anyone who does not have adequate pay, other than off-shored jobs and some on-shored illegals. I know of plenty of examples of situations where I would agree someone is getting excessive pay at the cost of the consumer through a government protected and/or ignored monopoly. Break up the monopolies and oligopolies on said excessive situations, punish exporting of our jobs and importing of goods produced by slave like labor rates, and the issue of American wage rates will get fixed on it's own through capitalist markets.

I said " Assuming government workers are better and more trustworthy than non-government workers is a gross fallacy." In response you said "No evidence, It's another thing that would be convenient to what you wish to be true."

In response I would say that you are just acting stupid. If I've learned one thing in my life it is that people are people no matter where you go. Some people assume their leaders are better than they are. Heh, I know your leaders, I can tell you with experience people are people at all levels of all types of caste systems. Good and bad people everywhere you go, in every group, at every level of income, in every job imaginable.

>> Capitalism is only made productive by competition.

On this statement of yours we are in 100% agreement. Kudos, for recognizing this as a basic fact. The reason capitalism works is due to the competition. Take away the competition through socialist programs, government mandates, government provided and ignored monopolies and capitalism regresses into cronyism and enslavement of the consumer by monopolies.

>> Government services are always less expensive and better where competition can't be maintained.

Government, is a monopoly, there is no competition for government. Just as competition makes capitalist markets work, giving an industry to government forever ensures that industry will be screwed up.

>> Your insistence that we eliminate screws because all you have is a hammer is not a solution to anything.

Your ignorant statements won't lead to cooperation.

Look at Obama's health care web site, for example. I could have done all of the web content and software portions of that web site by myself in 6-9m, and it would have worked well beyond expectations. The hard part would have been the hosting, but it was the software that failed not the hardware setup. Why did it fail? Cronyism. Instead of hiring the right team to do the job they hired a friend of Obama's wife.

Let's start with specific examples.

Tell us how you would set up competitive militaries. Or Air Traffic Control. Or law enforcement. Or FDA. Or CDC. Or Interstate Highways.

Just to name a few.

" I don't know anyone who does not have adequate pay"

Here's definite head in the sand.

 

[PMZ]

The question isn't should we work together or not the question is what should we work toward. If working toward a society where no one works and no one gives a shit because no matter what they do or how hard they try the majority of the country will screw them over, well that plan just won't cut meat with me. I have no desire to live in the country you are screaming for, as an extremist in disguise, where freedom is a thing of the past and we get retaliation on the 49% for being more successful than the 51%.

Assuming government workers are better and more trustworthy than non-government workers is a gross fallacy. Assuming the government is gonna spend your income more carefully than you would is a joke. Handing out freebies as a bonus for not working hard by taking money from workers is a policy proven to fail throughout history. Even the communists have given up socialism for capitalism.

" The question isn't should we work together or not the question is what should we work toward."

How about adequate but not excessive pay for everyone capable of producing wealth?

" Assuming government workers are better and more trustworthy than non-government workers is a gross fallacy."

No evidence. It's another thing that would be convenient to what you wish to be true.

Capitalism is only made productive by competition.

Government services are always less expensive and better where competition can't be maintained.

Your insistence that we eliminate screws because all you have is a hammer is not a solution to anything.

>> How about adequate but not excessive pay for everyone capable of producing wealth?

I like earning a decent wage... Who doesn't? Why would anyone argue people should not have the ability to earn an adequate wage? I don't know anyone who does not have adequate pay, other than off-shored jobs and some on-shored illegals. I know of plenty of examples of situations where I would agree someone is getting excessive pay at the cost of the consumer through a government protected and/or ignored monopoly. Break up the monopolies and oligopolies on said excessive situations, punish exporting of our jobs and importing of goods produced by slave like labor rates, and the issue of American wage rates will get fixed on it's own through capitalist markets.

I said " Assuming government workers are better and more trustworthy than non-government workers is a gross fallacy." In response you said "No evidence, It's another thing that would be convenient to what you wish to be true."

In response I would say that you are just acting stupid. If I've learned one thing in my life it is that people are people no matter where you go. Some people assume their leaders are better than they are. Heh, I know your leaders, I can tell you with experience people are people at all levels of all types of caste systems. Good and bad people everywhere you go, in every group, at every level of income, in every job imaginable.

>> Capitalism is only made productive by competition.

On this statement of yours we are in 100% agreement. Kudos, for recognizing this as a basic fact. The reason capitalism works is due to the competition. Take away the competition through socialist programs, government mandates, government provided and ignored monopolies and capitalism regresses into cronyism and enslavement of the consumer by monopolies.

>> Government services are always less expensive and better where competition can't be maintained.

Government, is a monopoly, there is no competition for government. Just as competition makes capitalist markets work, giving an industry to government forever ensures that industry will be screwed up.

>> Your insistence that we eliminate screws because all you have is a hammer is not a solution to anything.

Your ignorant statements won't lead to cooperation.

Look at Obama's health care web site, for example. I could have done all of the web content and software portions of that web site by myself in 6-9m, and it would have worked well beyond expectations. The hard part would have been the hosting, but it was the software that failed not the hardware setup. Why did it fail? Cronyism. Instead of hiring the right team to do the job they hired a friend of Obama's wife.

" Look at Obama's health care web site, for example. I could have done all of the web content and software portions of that web site by myself in 6-9m, and it would have worked well beyond expectations."

It was done by a highly regarded Web site design firm. You're just talking like a slick salesman now.

 

[bripat9643]

I agree that that applies to both of us. But, I would add that people are people. Businesses and government draws from the same deck. In that deck are dueces and aces and mostly in betweens.

We get the most done when we work together.

I act like an extremeist as an example to tea party extremists who don't see that they are and why. It seems to get through to those whose minds are not completely closed.

Given all of that, I think that, in terms of achievement, Obama will go down in history as one of the best, Bush as one of the worst.

I am a product of the 50s when American government was regarded by Americans as the best in the world. It wasn't, of course, but I'm hooked on that attitude.

The question isn't should we work together or not the question is what should we work toward. If working toward a society where no one works and no one gives a shit because no matter what they do or how hard they try the majority of the country will screw them over, well that plan just won't cut meat with me. I have no desire to live in the country you are screaming for, as an extremist in disguise, where freedom is a thing of the past and we get retaliation on the 49% for being more successful than the 51%.

Assuming government workers are better and more trustworthy than non-government workers is a gross fallacy. Assuming the government is gonna spend your income more carefully than you would is a joke. Handing out freebies as a bonus for not working hard by taking money from workers is a policy proven to fail throughout history. Even the communists have given up socialism for capitalism.

" The question isn't should we work together or not the question is what should we work toward."

How about adequate but not excessive pay for everyone capable of producing wealth?

" Assuming government workers are better and more trustworthy than non-government workers is a gross fallacy."

No evidence. It's another thing that would be convenient to what you wish to be true.

Capitalism is only made productive by competition.

Government services are always less expensive and better where competition can't be maintained.

Your insistence that we eliminate screws because all you have is a hammer is not a solution to anything.

There is no such place, genius. Private enterprise is always cheaper than government. If you think eliminating competition is bad, then what do you think putting the government in charge does?

 

[PMZ]

" >> Your insistence that we eliminate screws because all you have is a hammer is not a solution to anything."

"Your ignorant statements won't lead to cooperation."

Why would you even attempt to deny your allegiance to one economic system fits all? Capitalism.

 

[Contumacious]

Unabridged Socialist Dictionary:

fair
fe(&#601r/

share
SHe(&#601r/

adjectives

1. In accordance with the Communist Manifesto , the total amount of wealth that the Parasites can expropriate, steal and plunder.

.

 

[PMZ]

Unabridged Socialist Dictionary:

fair
fe(&#601r/

share
SHe(&#601r/

adjectives

1. In accordance with the Communist Manifesto , the total amount of wealth that the Parasites can expropriate, steal and plunder.

.

According to this definition, the wealthy are fair.

 

[bripat9643]

" The question isn't should we work together or not the question is what should we work toward."

How about adequate but not excessive pay for everyone capable of producing wealth?

" Assuming government workers are better and more trustworthy than non-government workers is a gross fallacy."

No evidence. It's another thing that would be convenient to what you wish to be true.

Capitalism is only made productive by competition.

Government services are always less expensive and better where competition can't be maintained.

Your insistence that we eliminate screws because all you have is a hammer is not a solution to anything.

>> How about adequate but not excessive pay for everyone capable of producing wealth?

I like earning a decent wage... Who doesn't? Why would anyone argue people should not have the ability to earn an adequate wage? I don't know anyone who does not have adequate pay, other than off-shored jobs and some on-shored illegals. I know of plenty of examples of situations where I would agree someone is getting excessive pay at the cost of the consumer through a government protected and/or ignored monopoly. Break up the monopolies and oligopolies on said excessive situations, punish exporting of our jobs and importing of goods produced by slave like labor rates, and the issue of American wage rates will get fixed on it's own through capitalist markets.

I said " Assuming government workers are better and more trustworthy than non-government workers is a gross fallacy." In response you said "No evidence, It's another thing that would be convenient to what you wish to be true."

In response I would say that you are just acting stupid. If I've learned one thing in my life it is that people are people no matter where you go. Some people assume their leaders are better than they are. Heh, I know your leaders, I can tell you with experience people are people at all levels of all types of caste systems. Good and bad people everywhere you go, in every group, at every level of income, in every job imaginable.

>> Capitalism is only made productive by competition.

On this statement of yours we are in 100% agreement. Kudos, for recognizing this as a basic fact. The reason capitalism works is due to the competition. Take away the competition through socialist programs, government mandates, government provided and ignored monopolies and capitalism regresses into cronyism and enslavement of the consumer by monopolies.

>> Government services are always less expensive and better where competition can't be maintained.

Government, is a monopoly, there is no competition for government. Just as competition makes capitalist markets work, giving an industry to government forever ensures that industry will be screwed up.

>> Your insistence that we eliminate screws because all you have is a hammer is not a solution to anything.

Your ignorant statements won't lead to cooperation.

Look at Obama's health care web site, for example. I could have done all of the web content and software portions of that web site by myself in 6-9m, and it would have worked well beyond expectations. The hard part would have been the hosting, but it was the software that failed not the hardware setup. Why did it fail? Cronyism. Instead of hiring the right team to do the job they hired a friend of Obama's wife.

Let's start with specific examples.

Tell us how you would set up competitive militaries. Or Air Traffic Control. Or law enforcement. Or FDA. Or CDC. Or Interstate Highways.

Just to name a few.

Militaries and the police would be replaced with insurance companies who would do the policing. To understand how this would work refer to any number of books by Hans Herman Hoppe.

There's no reason that there can't be competing air-traffic control companies with airlines paying whichever one they preferred. The federal government has considered selling off our air traffic control system several times.

We don't need an FDA. Drug companies would continue to perform their own studies to determine the safety and efficacy of their products, just as they do now. A company like consumer reports would evaluate their results and methodology and provide doctors and consumers with the necessary information to make informed decisions.

Toll highways existed long before the interstate system. Furthermore, Railroads perform intercity transportation much more efficiently and cheaply than interstate highways. Without boondoggle government highways we would probably have a much more limited system of interstates with railroads taking up the slack. If you want to travel across the country you could either fly or probably drive your car onto specially designed trains that would take you can your car to whatever city you liked.

 

[bripat9643]

" >> Your insistence that we eliminate screws because all you have is a hammer is not a solution to anything."

"Your ignorant statements won't lead to cooperation."

Why would you even attempt to deny your allegiance to one economic system fits all? Capitalism.

You can't have multiple economic systems in a single country, nimrod. Either you respect private property or you engage in organized plunder.

 

[PMZ]

" >> Your insistence that we eliminate screws because all you have is a hammer is not a solution to anything."

"Your ignorant statements won't lead to cooperation."

Why would you even attempt to deny your allegiance to one economic system fits all? Capitalism.

You can't have multiple economic systems in a single country, nimrod. Either you respect private property or you engage in organized plunder.

Identify a country that does not employ both capitalism and socialism.

 

[bripat9643]

" >> Your insistence that we eliminate screws because all you have is a hammer is not a solution to anything."

"Your ignorant statements won't lead to cooperation."

Why would you even attempt to deny your allegiance to one economic system fits all? Capitalism.

You can't have multiple economic systems in a single country, nimrod. Either you respect private property or you engage in organized plunder.

Identify a country that does not employ both capitalism and socialism.

They have a mixture of capitalism and socialism. The two system don't operate side-by-side. You don't get to choose whether you participate in a socialist economy or a capitalism economy. You have no choice but to choose a single economic system for everyone, however hobbled and corrupted by socialism it may be.

 

[Contumacious]

" >> Your insistence that we eliminate screws because all you have is a hammer is not a solution to anything."

"Your ignorant statements won't lead to cooperation."

Why would you even attempt to deny your allegiance to one economic system fits all? Capitalism.

You can't have multiple economic systems in a single country, nimrod. Either you respect private property or you engage in organized plunder.

Identify a country that does not employ both capitalism and socialism.

You show me first a country where women get half pregnant.

.

 

[PMZ]

You can't have multiple economic systems in a single country, nimrod. Either you respect private property or you engage in organized plunder.

Identify a country that does not employ both capitalism and socialism.

You show me first a country where women get half pregnant.

.

Why can't you answer a simple question with a simple answer and not with a completely unrelated question?

 

[PMZ]

You can't have multiple economic systems in a single country, nimrod. Either you respect private property or you engage in organized plunder.

Identify a country that does not employ both capitalism and socialism.

They have a mixture of capitalism and socialism. The two system don't operate side-by-side. You don't get to choose whether you participate in a socialist economy or a capitalism economy. You have no choice but to choose a single economic system for everyone, however hobbled and corrupted by socialism it may be.

Identify a country that does not employ both capitalism and socialism.

 

[Contumacious]

identify a country that does not employ both capitalism and socialism.

you show me first a country where women get half pregnant.

.

why can't you answer a simple question with a simple answer and not with a completely unrelated question?

because there is no such thing as half socialism and half capitalism.

.

 

[bripat9643]

Identify a country that does not employ both capitalism and socialism.

They have a mixture of capitalism and socialism. The two system don't operate side-by-side. You don't get to choose whether you participate in a socialist economy or a capitalism economy. You have no choice but to choose a single economic system for everyone, however hobbled and corrupted by socialism it may be.

Identify a country that does not employ both capitalism and socialism.

That obviously went right over your head. Show me a country were each citizen gets to choose whether he operates under socialism or capitalism.

 

[bripat9643]

you show me first a country where women get half pregnant.

.

why can't you answer a simple question with a simple answer and not with a completely unrelated question?

because there is no such thing as half socialism and half capitalism.

.

Sure there is. What do you think the United States is?

 

[PMZ]

you show me first a country where women get half pregnant.

.

why can't you answer a simple question with a simple answer and not with a completely unrelated question?

because there is no such thing as half socialism and half capitalism.

.

Both are merely tools. One works well in markets where significant cost, quality and features competition can be maintained, but not otherwise. Nobody in their right mind would do business in a capitalist market without competition. Make more money regardless of the cost to others would eat them alive.

Socialism, at least in a democracy, solves that problem in those markets. If we don't like what we're getting in a noncompetitive socialist market, we fire the management.

Under competitive capitalism, our control is to go to the competition. Under a democratic socialist noncompetitive market our control is to fire the management.

I think that the denial of the fact and value of socialist (the means of production are owned by all of us) markets stems from their use in non democratic countries where some minority imposes on the majority.

That's simply not the same as in a democracy.

 

[Contumacious]

why can't you answer a simple question with a simple answer and not with a completely unrelated question?

because there is no such thing as half socialism and half capitalism.

.

Sure there is. What do you think the United States is?

A FASCIST REGIME.

When the governmnet regulates and taxes the economy fascism prevails.

Karl Mark defined fascism as an interim process towards socialism.

.