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

[RKMBrown]

This mindless belief that there is "socialism" in the US is one of the fundamental fantacies of the rightwing nuts where every instance of cooperation and commom standards is erroneously thrown in this fantacy. And I have yet to see any actual proof or detailed examples of this "socialism" that they have created as an enemy to fight against.

It takes little effort for them to go outside, walk to the store, and count the number of examples of real "socialism" and real free market. This is an excercise that will go unattempted as it would yield no "socialism" in reality.

They do though regularly use "punishment" in interacting with others. If there is any fundamental source of punishing behavior, it comes from right wing nuts who are their own example.

real socialism, real free market? Is this some sort of adjective game?

 

[Uncensored2008]

And because they are natural monopolies.

Utilities?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Maybe when building a damn was the only means of electricity production, but in the era of solar panels it's a ridiculous claim.

 

[bripat9643]

This mindless belief that there is "socialism" in the US is one of the fundamental fantacies of the rightwing nuts where every instance of cooperation and commom standards is erroneously thrown in this fantacy. And I have yet to see any actual proof or detailed examples of this "socialism" that they have created as an enemy to fight against.

It takes little effort for them to go outside, walk to the store, and count the number of examples of real "socialism" and real free market. This is an excercise that will go unattempted as it would yield no "socialism" in reality.

They do though regularly use "punishment" in interacting with others. If there is any fundamental source of punishing behavior, it comes from right wing nuts who are their own example.

Government uses compulsion. It doesn't "cooperate." So-called "common standards" are government imposed standards. You are deliberately defining socialism so narrowly that nothing qualifies. That's a classic socialist tactic.

There are two ways to run an economy: private control or government control. The later method is what we call "socialism." As for the rest of your blather, it's meaningless gibberish.

 

[RKMBrown]

Where did I say I am against private property rights? ROFL. OMG you are an idiot. You said I said I am against private property and you qutoed this?? ROFL LMAO at you. LOL Please next time you say I said something, please do not lie

So you deny patents are personal property? You deny patent rights are property rights?

I find your blather amusing. You think you can say stupid shit like "the State should stay out of economics" and "Even though the government allows for patent rights, doesn't make it correct." Then emphasize that "[t]his is protectionism," and have your statements ignored completely?

If you did not mean by "[e]ven though the government allows for patent rights, doesn't make it correct," that government should not allow patent rights, rewrite your sentence.

If you did not mean by "the State should stay out of economics," that the government should not protect property rights, the cornerstone of economics, then rewrite your sentence.

If you did not mean by "[t]his is protectionism" that patent rights, which are property, should not be protected, then rewrite your sentence.

How did you think your sentences should be read?

No i meant all the things I said. But you are putting a meaning on them that is incorrect. I just started and New Thread- Capitalism and Patent Rights. Is it a contracdiction. Please come and debate it there.

The meanings I placed on the words are the book definitions of the terms. If you mean, you meant something else other than what you said, then I recommend you rewrite your sentence. You called me a liar and an idiot for reading your sentences in plain English, now you want me to debate the contradistinctions of protecting property while also ensuring said property is not given UN-due leverage to monopolize to large a portion of the entire economy? IMO this is what you two were discussing. That of granted and protected monopolies vs. splitting up monopolies as being fair in the context of the OP.

 

[itfitzme]

I don't ask to be master of the universe, just master of my own space in it. You are the one demanding to be my master. I am not your slave you POS.

"I don't ask to be master of the universe"

No. You believe that you are entitled to it because you work hard. You neglect the fact that almost everyone else does too, because if that were true, you'd have no claim to master of the universe.

I'm still waiting for the list of things that you feel entitled to do, that are now illegal, and therefore dents in your "liberty". In fact, I'd settle for a workable definition of "liberty".

When did you ever, EVER BEFORE, ask me for a list of things that I feel I'm entitled to?

Here's my list: Life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Life includes my labor. You touch the income I get from my labor without my permission, I consider that a violation against my Life. A personal threat. A stab in the back. Taking food from my family. Crossing my property line to take my assets. Trespassers will be fed to the dogs then shot. Do I make my self clear yet Karl?

And yet you continue to use and rely on the services and organizations afforded you by a democratic-republic, including the free market, and individual rights that allow you to maximize your pursuit of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. You are dedicated to this fantacy that you deserve, are entitled to what, in fact, you are not. And it is accomplished by usive vague references to abstract notions while avoiding any real content or examples.

 

[RKMBrown]

"I don't ask to be master of the universe"

No. You believe that you are entitled to it because you work hard. You neglect the fact that almost everyone else does too, because if that were true, you'd have no claim to master of the universe.

I'm still waiting for the list of things that you feel entitled to do, that are now illegal, and therefore dents in your "liberty". In fact, I'd settle for a workable definition of "liberty".

When did you ever, EVER BEFORE, ask me for a list of things that I feel I'm entitled to?

Here's my list: Life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Life includes my labor. You touch the income I get from my labor without my permission, I consider that a violation against my Life. A personal threat. A stab in the back. Taking food from my family. Crossing my property line to take my assets. Trespassers will be fed to the dogs then shot. Do I make my self clear yet Karl?

And yet you continue to use and rely on the services and organizations afforded you by a democratic-republic, including the free market, and individual rights that allow you to maximize your pursuit of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. You are dedicated to this fantacy that you deserve, are entitled to what, in fact, you are not. And it is accomplished by usive vague references to abstract notions while avoiding any real content or examples.

There is no "yet" in that. I gratefully volunteer to pay for said services. I do not recognize individual welfare through wealth distribution as a service, that is a bastardization of the term.

Yes, I am entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Do you disagree? Have you forfeited your right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? For what? Some token amount of security?

You are the one using vagaries. I've been quite explicit.

 

[PMZ]

I'm also demanding that those who decided that their bonuses and profits were more important than our joint success be held accountable for it.

And there it is, demanding Marxism be the law of the land.

If you're not able to distinguish between capitalism and Communism, you probably should remove yourself from economic discussions.

 

[PMZ]

I don't ask to be master of the universe, just master of my own space in it. You are the one demanding to be my master. I am not your slave you POS.

"I don't ask to be master of the universe"

No. You believe that you are entitled to it because you work hard. You neglect the fact that almost everyone else does too, because if that were true, you'd have no claim to master of the universe.

I'm still waiting for the list of things that you feel entitled to do, that are now illegal, and therefore dents in your "liberty". In fact, I'd settle for a workable definition of "liberty".

When did you ever, EVER BEFORE, ask me for a list of things that I feel I'm entitled to?

Here's my list: Life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Life includes my labor. You touch the income I get from my labor without my permission, I consider that a violation against my Life. A personal threat. A stab in the back. Taking food from my family. Crossing my property line to take my assets. Trespassers will be fed to the dogs then shot. Do I make my self clear yet Karl?

I asked for the things that you feel entitled to that are now illegal. As evidence for this loss of liberty that you constantly whine about.

The rest of your post is more of your demanding a free ride. More whining.

 

[RKMBrown]

I'm also demanding that those who decided that their bonuses and profits were more important than our joint success be held accountable for it.

And there it is, demanding Marxism be the law of the land.

If you're not able to distinguish between capitalism and Communism, you probably should remove yourself from economic discussions.

Yeah cause capitalism is "demanding that those who decided that their bonuses and profits were more important than our joint success be held accountable for it."

 

[PMZ]

" Most utilities are monopolies and can charge as they please."

This is all that I would challenge in your post.

In my experience utilities are highly regulated, necessarily so, in what they charge.

And because they are natural monopolies.

Then why do they need government to protect their monopoly?

What does the term "natural monopoly" mean to you?

 

[RKMBrown]

"I don't ask to be master of the universe"

No. You believe that you are entitled to it because you work hard. You neglect the fact that almost everyone else does too, because if that were true, you'd have no claim to master of the universe.

I'm still waiting for the list of things that you feel entitled to do, that are now illegal, and therefore dents in your "liberty". In fact, I'd settle for a workable definition of "liberty".

When did you ever, EVER BEFORE, ask me for a list of things that I feel I'm entitled to?

Here's my list: Life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Life includes my labor. You touch the income I get from my labor without my permission, I consider that a violation against my Life. A personal threat. A stab in the back. Taking food from my family. Crossing my property line to take my assets. Trespassers will be fed to the dogs then shot. Do I make my self clear yet Karl?

I asked for the things that you feel entitled to that are now illegal. As evidence for this loss of liberty that you constantly whine about.

The rest of your post is more of your demanding a free ride. More whining.

No you didn't you lying POS. As to the laws limiting life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness... my god man the effin list is in the millions. Are you not aware of the number of laws enacted by the state that limit our life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness? WTH is wrong with you?

 

[itfitzme]

When did you ever, EVER BEFORE, ask me for a list of things that I feel I'm entitled to?

Here's my list: Life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Life includes my labor. You touch the income I get from my labor without my permission, I consider that a violation against my Life. A personal threat. A stab in the back. Taking food from my family. Crossing my property line to take my assets. Trespassers will be fed to the dogs then shot. Do I make my self clear yet Karl?

And yet you continue to use and rely on the services and organizations afforded you by a democratic-republic, including the free market, and individual rights that allow you to maximize your pursuit of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. You are dedicated to this fantacy that you deserve, are entitled to what, in fact, you are not. And it is accomplished by usive vague references to abstract notions while avoiding any real content or examples.

There is no "yet" in that. I gratefully volunteer to pay for said services. I do not recognize individual welfare through wealth distribution as a service, that is a bastardization of the term.

Yes, I am entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Do you disagree? Have you forfeited your right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? For what? Some token amount of security?

You are the one using vagaries. I've been quite explicit.

Prove this entitlement to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. When you do, you will find that is a right afforded you by the government by the people.

That you "do not recognize individual welfare through wealth distribution as a service" is meaningless. Society doesn't run on your personal opinion. In fact, it must run with complete lack of recognition of your personal opinion.

And you still can't answer the question of what this so called "socialism" is by presenting actual examples from your real life. There is zero in your real life and the misconceptions that you have of government welfare programs are meaningless.

The simple facts are

1) You are afforded certain rights by the governed.
2) The taxes that are collected based on your employment have zero effect on your spending power.
3) You cannot provide any examples of this "socialism"
4) By your own personality, you are not even entitled to the inalienable rights afforded us by the Constitution.
5) These welfare payments, you whine about, are for the purpose of maintaining a functioning economy.
6) There is no such thing as "wealth distribution" as you perceive it. The reality is that the economy is about the redistribution of goods and services

It all comes down to this; like so many emotionally stunted individuals, you are simply saying "others cannot tell me what to do". The reality is, "yes they can." The very fact that you hold the position that you do means you have absolutely no right to consideration of your opinion. You don't like others opinions, no one need be concerned with yours.

 

[bripat9643]

And because they are natural monopolies.

Then why do they need government to protect their monopoly?

What does the term "natural monopoly" mean to you?

Utility monopolies are protected from competition by the government. It's against the law to setup a competing utility in the same service area. There is no "natural" about it.

 

[itfitzme]

Then why do they need government to protect their monopoly?

What does the term "natural monopoly" mean to you?

Utility monopolies are protected from competition by the government. It's against the law to setup a competing utility in the same service area. There is no "natural" about it.

They are protected BECAUSE they are regulated BECAUSE they are natural monopolies.

 

[RKMBrown]

Prove this entitlement to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. When you do, you will find that is a right afforded you by the government by the people.

When did you cede my right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness each of which are inherent rights, to the government?

Oh, and you and your kind can stick your due process clause of the 14th amendment up your ass with a red hot poker.

The rest of your post is nothing more than a straw-man argument that we are all slaves to the state and we should be thankful. I reject your reality and insert my own.

 

[itfitzme]

Prove this entitlement to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. When you do, you will find that is a right afforded you by the government by the people.

When did you cede my right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness each of which are inherent rights, to the government?

Oh, and you and your kind can stick your due process clause of the 14th amendment up your ass with a red hot poker.

They always have been right afforded you by the government. I can prove it. You just don't get it. You can't prove anything to the contrary.

You are also an abusive asshole as demonstrated above. When you don't get what you want, you get all angry because your emotionally stunted.

 

[kaz]

Prove this entitlement to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. When you do, you will find that is a right afforded you by the government by the people.

When did you cede my right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness each of which are inherent rights, to the government?

Oh, and you and your kind can stick your due process clause of the 14th amendment up your ass with a red hot poker.

They always have been right afforded you by the government. I can prove it. You just don't get it. You can't prove anything to the contrary.

You are also an abusive asshole as demonstrated above. When you don't get what you want, you get all angry because your emotionally stunted.

It's sad how few Americans understand their own Constitution. High School civics failed you, my friend.

 

[itfitzme]

When did you cede my right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness each of which are inherent rights, to the government?

Oh, and you and your kind can stick your due process clause of the 14th amendment up your ass with a red hot poker.

They always have been right afforded you by the government. I can prove it. You just don't get it. You can't prove anything to the contrary.

You are also an abusive asshole as demonstrated above. When you don't get what you want, you get all angry because your emotionally stunted.

It's sad how few Americans understand their own Constitution. High School civics failed you, my friend.

They are looking for some almighty authority that they can use to get what they want without regard for others. And they have this mistaken co-mingling of the Declaration of Independence with the Constitution. They think the Declaration of Independence is a legal document for running our country. It isn't, it is a message to everyone else, the rest of the world.

The Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

Even then, it plainly clarifies where the authority rests, "from the consent of the governed". "God", "the government", and "the people" are all the same thing.

They ignore the bold parts and the obvious fact that there really is no such thing as "endowed by their Creator". That is an agreed to definition. I love the Declaration of Independence and Constitution because they are so cleverly self-referencing as making for final authority.

So what have you got besides vague and unsubstantiated statements of opinion? Clearly you haven't understood the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.

 

[Uncensored2008]

They are protected BECAUSE they are regulated BECAUSE they are natural monopolies.

If I have the only well in a town with no springs or rivers, I have a natural monopoly.

If I am the only one allowed to sell water in a town with a dozen springs and a large river, there is nothing "natural" about the monopoly, it is simply a trust enforced by state.

Keeping utilities under the dominion of government hacks greatly adds to the power of the state. The compelling interest is power. Competition in the market keeps the state from having a boot on the throat of vital commodities such as power and water, thus the state prohibits competition in favor of a single, well connected concern that will unquestioningly do the bidding of the state.

Rather than a "natural monopoly," this is a classical trust, inclusive of contrived shortages to solidify the stranglehold on the captive customer base.

 

[PMZ]

Originally posted by Jason M
Thanks for the interpretation of each word !!!! However, by demoralizing civilization ( how about the fall of the Roman empire???) or expressing ones choice ( freedom of choice ) to gratify it's self without accountability is a fall waiting to happen. It's not a self righteousness comment ( as one might think ) , but it's a lack of knowledge between right and wrong.

where is there no accountability?

Nothing that is important to me to do is illegal.