Why is wanting to keep what you earned greed, but wanting what you didn't earn isn't?

[bripat9643]

None of it is "invested." It's all pissed down the welfare sewer. With lefties the word "investment" is a euphemism meaning "spend like there's no tomorrow."

 

[bripat9643]

Listen, corporations want massive subsidies and bail-outs from the government. However, they don't want to pay for it. So they pump money into talk radio for the purpose of agitating morons about taxes.

Take Walmart for instance. Over 50% of their goods are manufactured in Third World countries or China. The reason for this is the cheap labor – ultra cheap labor. Ask a talk radio Republican what the military cost is for stabilizing the Third World which supplies corporations with labor and raw material and you will get a blank stare.

Walmart likes getting services like this from the government, but they don't want to pay for it. So they invest in the Rightwing-message-machine which uses its considerable media assets to confuse people about taxes.

"Get your government hands off my Medicare"

The military is not a business subsidy. lefties claim that because they have no rational arguments to justify the confiscatory taxes they demand. Walmart never spent a dime lobbying the government for more military spending or to intervene in foreign conflicts. That claim is just utter horseshit.

 

[Londoner]

To understand the value of your taxes, you need an itemized list of what you're paying for. Try asking someone who gets the majority of their information from the Rightwing media to list what they get from government, and they will just get angry - but they won't be able to provide anything even close to a comprehensive list. So I don't understand how they are so confident in their anger.

Taxes = infrastructure and protection of private property rights

Not = social entitlement.

You can be for one and not the other and not be anti-tax.

Actually, taxes = whatever was passed constitutionally through the legislative process.

But I agree with you. I don't want to subsidize offshore transnationals or provide Halliburton with anti-competitive no-bid contracts any more than you want to subsidize the lazy and unproductive. I was made sick by the 2003 Republican Drug Bill, which awarded Eli Lilly with a no-bid contract to charge the government "above market" rates for Medicare Drug Benefits. I was sickened by the degree to which Bush expanded Medicare without tightening costs. He just fed taxpayers into fully monopolized pharmaceutical pricing in much the same way Obama is feeding us all into fully monopolized heath insurance. Problem is, we have a party who literally can't identify the massive corporate entitlements that have been so masterfully created through lobbying. Your side has been trained only to worry about social entitlements, which is only the tip of an iceberg. Part of our job as citizens is to free FOX News viewers form their current servitude to the Republican Media... so that they can see the much larger universe of government waste... but they are so terribly conditioned to see only a small part of the nightmare. Anyway, we agree more than you think.

Also, your list proves my point. Do you know the public legal costs of running the stock market so that billions of transactions a month can take place? For investors to have confidence in a transaction, they have to have a massive legal apparatus to safeguard their investment. I took a course where we discussed the cost of running one futures market.

Also, do you know how much pressure the private sector puts on the nanny state for patent protection, so they can build a fence around anything they can get their hands on? You should be able to talk intelligently about what the patent system is, and what it provides to business, and how much it costs to run, and who pays for it. And lets not even talk about FDIC insurance, which the big financials not only beg for, but which significantly increases the money they can play with. You should be able to describe what this, who runs it, how the fiscal benefits shake out, and who pays for it. You have to try harder to match your anti-government rhetoric with facts. Again, we agree more than you think, but I have serious concerns about the degree to which your side has been manipulated to attack government without being able to describe what it does and who it really benefits. My brother in-law was drug lobbyist for 14 years. You have no clue how much the private sector craves help from big brother.

John Galt used to be a victim of government. Now he owns it.

 

[MikeK]

To understand the value of your taxes, you need an itemized list of what you're paying for. Try asking someone who gets the majority of their information from the Rightwing media to list what they get from government, and they will just get angry - but they won't be able to provide anything even close to a comprehensive list. So I don't understand how they are so confident in their anger.

Taxes = infrastructure and protection of private property rights

Not = social entitlement.

You can be for one and not the other and not be anti-tax.

Actually, taxes = whatever was passed constitutionally through the legislative process.

But I agree with you. I don't want to subsidize offshore transnationals or provide Halliburton with anti-competitive no-bid contracts any more than you want to subsidize the lazy and unproductive. I was made sick by the 2003 Republican Drug Bill, which awarded Eli Lilly with a no-bid contract to charge the government "above market" rates for Medicare Drug Benefits. I was sickened by the degree to which Bush expanded Medicare without tightening costs. He just fed taxpayers into fully monopolized pharmaceutical pricing in much the same way Obama is feeding us all into fully monopolized heath insurance. Problem is, we have a party who literally can't identify the massive corporate entitlements that have been so masterfully created through lobbying. Your side has been trained only to worry about social entitlements, which is only the tip of an iceberg. Part of our job as citizens is to free FOX News viewers form their current servitude to the Republican Media... so that they can see the much larger universe of government waste... but they are so terribly conditioned to see only a small part of the nightmare. Anyway, we agree more than you think.

Also, your list proves my point. Do you know the public legal costs of running the stock market so that billions of transactions a month can take place? For investors to have confidence in a transaction, they have to have a massive legal apparatus to safeguard their investment. I took a course where we discussed the cost of running one futures market.

Also, do you know how much pressure the private sector puts on the nanny state for patent protection, so they can build a fence around anything they can get their hands on? You should be able to talk intelligently about what the patent system is, and what it provides to business, and how much it costs to run, and who pays for it. And lets not even talk about FDIC insurance, which the big financials not only beg for, but which significantly increases the money they can play with. You should be able to describe what this, who runs it, how the fiscal benefits shake out, and who pays for it. You have to try harder to match your anti-government rhetoric with facts. Again, we agree more than you think, but I have serious concerns about the degree to which your side has been manipulated to attack government without being able to describe what it does and who it really benefits. My brother in-law was drug lobbyist for 14 years. You have no clue how much the private sector craves help from big brother.

John Galt used to be a victim of government. Now he owns it.

Admirably informative.

Good stuff!

 

[Oldstyle]

Listen, corporations want massive subsidies and bail-outs from the government. However, they don't want to pay for it. So they pump money into talk radio for the purpose of agitating morons about taxes.

Take Walmart for instance. Over 50% of their goods are manufactured in Third World countries or China. The reason for this is the cheap labor – ultra cheap labor. Ask a talk radio Republican what the military cost is for stabilizing the Third World which supplies corporations with labor and raw material and you will get a blank stare.

Walmart likes getting services like this from the government, but they don't want to pay for it. So they invest in the Rightwing-message-machine which uses its considerable media assets to confuse people about taxes.

"Get your government hands off my Medicare"

We're stabilizing China? Really...

 

[Mertex]

The difference is that everything the investors receives is through voluntary exchanges, whereas the money the welfare parasite receives is taken by force from the people who earned it

Bullshit. Trust fund babies don't earn a penny. They inherit and then they sit on their asses and collect dividends. Not every rich person earned the money they have. Many people with income of over a million dollars don't pay any taxes at all.

The obsession that right wingers have with welfare recipients is ridiculous. Pay no attention to the rich paying no taxes, to the corporations shipping jobs overseas, or to the Wall Street bankers ripping you off at every turn. Pay no attention to the REAL issues causing poverty in the US, and blame it all on those who have the least.

And you think liberals are dumb.

I believe that you just proved that you are either dumb or ignorant. Blame your parents for their failure to leave you a trust fund, but don't blame the people whose parents did leave them a trust fund. They are fully entitled to keep it, sit on their ass, and collect dividends. And, you get to be envious, and wish you were in their shoes.

She didn't say they weren't entitled to keep it, but it debunks your party's idea that everyone that has a lot of money has worked hard to earn it, so I guess you're the one that is dumb. And just because she explains it to you doesn't mean she's jealous. You're idea that it's okay for them to pay lower rates and get to use all kinds of tax loopholes to escape paying more doesn't make you generous, just makes you dumb.

There are no wall street bankers ripping me off, and no corporation is shipping my job overseas. And, I don't give a tinker's damn whether corporations pay taxes or not.

Of course you don't give a tinker's damn whether corporations pay taxes or not, because you are bitching about a measly amount that goes out to the needy, but look the other way at the billions that go to corporate welfare. How does that add to your earnings?

You do not seem to have a clue as to what causes poverty in the US.

Since you think you do, why don't you explain it?

You have evil entities to blame it on, and that is all you care for. Poverty is caused by a multitude of factors, and most of those factors are personal to the people in poverty.

And you know this because Rush Limbaugh told you?

 

[kaz]

Listen, corporations want massive subsidies and bail-outs from the government

Please, the politicians wanted to give the bailouts as badly as the corporations wanted them. It was a chance for them to expand their power while at the same time swooning and bemoaning how OMG, we had to bail out corporations. And the legions of simpleton liberals to run around carrying the banner for that message.

The reality is that neither libertarians nor fiscal conservatives wanted government involved in the first place forcing companies to implement social policy, which was a huge role in why they were in trouble to begin with, nor did we want politicians bailing out the ones who failed.

What you do is blame us for the mandates we opposed, then blame us for the bailouts we opposed. Look in the mirror, sweet heart, and you'll see where the mess really came from.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

None of it is "invested." It's all pissed down the welfare sewer. With lefties the word "investment" is a euphemism meaning "spend like there's no tomorrow."

So when I buy a can of soda from my local grocery store, how does the money I spend "know" that its not a dollar coming from the lower half - and that it should go on to create a job?

Do business owners take all the revenue they get from the bottom half (all of which are welfare leaches of course since they pay no taxes) and throw it away at the end of the day? If so, why?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Private sector paid taxes paid for the government who built the infrastructure ....

Obviously

My point is this:

In order to identify how much of your paycheck is yours and how much goes to the "house" for its contribution, you have to be able to list exactly what you are getting from government. The problem is that most of the "followers" in the anti-tax movement can't list even 10% of what they get from government for their tax dollars, so they can't effectively answer the question.

To understand the value of your taxes, you need an itemized list of what you're paying for. Try asking someone who gets the majority of their information from the Rightwing media to list what they get from government, and they will just get angry - but they won't be able to provide anything even close to a comprehensive list. So I don't understand how they are so confident in their anger.

I'm just thinking of a few things that I pay for with my taxes (fed, state, + local) that have, have had, or will have, economic value to me:

1) Protection from foreign invaders
2) Protection from domestic criminals who want to harm me, my family, or property.
3) Subsidized universities
4) Roads highways interstates
5) Air travel safety
6) An underclass that has the option of applying for government benefits instead of breaking into my house and stealing my shit
7) A system that protects intellectual property, enabling businesses to obtain profit for their innovations without having to hide them in secret. This means more technology available for me to use.
8) City sewer&water
9) Mosquito control
10) The emergency broadcast system
11) public education and subsidized private education (in my state, the state pays for books and bussing for private school students)
12) City Park.
13) the 26 miles man made beach in Biloxi/Gulfport

 

[Pop23]

Why are those who work for a living penalized, and those who don't rewarded?

You're living in the wrong country if you consider taxes to be a penalty.

You should consider it a privilege to live in such a great country, but nope...you see it as being penalized. Perhaps it's time you looked for another country that has no taxation and is more to your liking.

So since its such a privilege why is it that some don't contribute while others are forced to contribute.

This privilege thing is a strange concept.

 

[Desperado]

I'm just thinking of a few things that I pay for with my taxes (fed, state, + local) that have, have had, or will have, economic value to me:

1) Protection from foreign invaders

Failure - Borders are wide open and we have more illegal immigrants than ever before

2) Protection from domestic criminals who want to harm me, my family, or property.

Failure - Our criminal justice system seem to work on the catch and release methodology. The criminals never seem to serve their full sentence.

3) Subsidized universities

Failure - If they were doing their job as far as subsidizing universities, student would not be paying off their student loans until they are in their 40's.

4) Roads highways interstates

Failure - They fail to include maintenance, which is why our infrastructure is crumbling. Throw the addition of Lexus Lanes (tolls) on Interstate Highways.

5) Air travel safety

They were bound to get one right or they have just been lucky.

6) An underclass that has the option of applying for government benefits instead of breaking into my house and stealing my shit.

Failure - Resorting to bribery to keep the criminals under control is not a success story.
This is just an extension of your number 2 failure.

7) A system that protects intellectual property, enabling businesses to obtain profit for their innovations without having to hide them in secret. This means more technology available for me to use.

Debatable - Since the inception of the Internet the government has no done much about hackers stealing corporate data and designs.

8) City sewer&water

No argument there.

9) Mosquito control

Actually, it has gone downhill in the last decade or so.

10) The emergency broadcast system

If you want to call that an accomplishment, I guess it does work lets hope we never have to use it. I would rather give credit to NOAH and the National Hurricane Center.

11) public education and subsidized private education (in my state, the state pays for books and bussing for private school students)

In South Florida I would have to say that the Public School System is a dismal failure.

12) City Park.

Parks, City, State and Federal - Great concepts but seems that the again the funding for maintenance is not taken into account even though admission fee and User fees have been implemented in the last decade when they used to be free.

 

[bripat9643]

Private sector paid taxes paid for the government who built the infrastructure ....

Obviously

My point is this:

In order to identify how much of your paycheck is yours and how much goes to the "house" for its contribution, you have to be able to list exactly what you are getting from government. The problem is that most of the "followers" in the anti-tax movement can't list even 10% of what they get from government for their tax dollars, so they can't effectively answer the question.

To understand the value of your taxes, you need an itemized list of what you're paying for. Try asking someone who gets the majority of their information from the Rightwing media to list what they get from government, and they will just get angry - but they won't be able to provide anything even close to a comprehensive list. So I don't understand how they are so confident in their anger.

I'm just thinking of a few things that I pay for with my taxes (fed, state, + local) that have, have had, or will have, economic value to me:

1) Protection from foreign invaders
2) Protection from domestic criminals who want to harm me, my family, or property.
3) Subsidized universities
4) Roads highways interstates
5) Air travel safety
6) An underclass that has the option of applying for government benefits instead of breaking into my house and stealing my shit
7) A system that protects intellectual property, enabling businesses to obtain profit for their innovations without having to hide them in secret. This means more technology available for me to use.
8) City sewer&water
9) Mosquito control
10) The emergency broadcast system
11) public education and subsidized private education (in my state, the state pays for books and bussing for private school students)
12) City Park.
13) the 26 miles man made beach in Biloxi/Gulfport

The issue isn't whether these items have "value." The issue is whether their "value" is equal to their cost. Almost everyone one of the things you list can be done by private corporations at less cost, and if not, then they shouldn't be done at all. The interstate highway system is a perfect example of the later.

The bottom line is this: The money for everything you list was taken from the taxpayers at gunpoint. When the means are so brutal, then you have a very high bar to get over to justify them.

You may think welfare is a good deal, but I don't. Why should I pay for it?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Obviously

My point is this:

In order to identify how much of your paycheck is yours and how much goes to the "house" for its contribution, you have to be able to list exactly what you are getting from government. The problem is that most of the "followers" in the anti-tax movement can't list even 10% of what they get from government for their tax dollars, so they can't effectively answer the question.

To understand the value of your taxes, you need an itemized list of what you're paying for. Try asking someone who gets the majority of their information from the Rightwing media to list what they get from government, and they will just get angry - but they won't be able to provide anything even close to a comprehensive list. So I don't understand how they are so confident in their anger.

I'm just thinking of a few things that I pay for with my taxes (fed, state, + local) that have, have had, or will have, economic value to me:

1) Protection from foreign invaders
2) Protection from domestic criminals who want to harm me, my family, or property.
3) Subsidized universities
4) Roads highways interstates
5) Air travel safety
6) An underclass that has the option of applying for government benefits instead of breaking into my house and stealing my shit
7) A system that protects intellectual property, enabling businesses to obtain profit for their innovations without having to hide them in secret. This means more technology available for me to use.
8) City sewer&water
9) Mosquito control
10) The emergency broadcast system
11) public education and subsidized private education (in my state, the state pays for books and bussing for private school students)
12) City Park.
13) the 26 miles man made beach in Biloxi/Gulfport

The issue isn't whether these items have "value." The issue is whether their "value" is equal to their cost. Almost everyone one of the things you list can be done by private corporations at less cost, and if not, then they shouldn't be done at all. The interstate highway system is a perfect example of the later.

The bottom line is this: The money for everything you list was taken from the taxpayers at gunpoint. When the means are so brutal, then you have a very high bar to get over to justify them.

You may think welfare is a good deal, but I don't. Why should I pay for it?

The interstate highway system WAS built by private companies and I think they did a great job. Private companies also do things like build parks open to the public and I'm fine with that. More often, however, we see private companies sponsoring improvements to public parks in a public-private cooperative effort. Other than reputation and good will, however, there is no profit-motive for a private company to build a park open to the public without charge!

Taxation occurs only by the consent of the governed. I don't think you get that. The fact that you don't personally consent because you're a cheap bastard doesn't mean We the People's voice as a whole does not count. We elect Senators and Representatives, they go to Congress, they decide what we pay. Would you prefer it instead if government functioned as a charity?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I'm just thinking of a few things that I pay for with my taxes (fed, state, + local) that have, have had, or will have, economic value to me:

1) Protection from foreign invaders
2) Protection from domestic criminals who want to harm me, my family, or property.
3) Subsidized universities
4) Roads highways interstates
5) Air travel safety
6) An underclass that has the option of applying for government benefits instead of breaking into my house and stealing my shit
7) A system that protects intellectual property, enabling businesses to obtain profit for their innovations without having to hide them in secret. This means more technology available for me to use.
8) City sewer&water
9) Mosquito control
10) The emergency broadcast system
11) public education and subsidized private education (in my state, the state pays for books and bussing for private school students)
12) City Park.
13) the 26 miles man made beach in Biloxi/Gulfport

The issue isn't whether these items have "value." The issue is whether their "value" is equal to their cost. Almost everyone one of the things you list can be done by private corporations at less cost, and if not, then they shouldn't be done at all. The interstate highway system is a perfect example of the later.

The bottom line is this: The money for everything you list was taken from the taxpayers at gunpoint. When the means are so brutal, then you have a very high bar to get over to justify them.

You may think welfare is a good deal, but I don't. Why should I pay for it?

The interstate highway system WAS built by private companies and I think they did a great job. Private companies also do things like build parks open to the public and I'm fine with that. More often, however, we see private companies sponsoring improvements to public parks in a public-private cooperative effort. Other than reputation and good will, however, there is no profit-motive for a private company to build a park open to the public without charge!

Taxation occurs only by the consent of the governed. I don't think you get that. The fact that you don't personally consent because you're a cheap bastard doesn't mean We the People's voice as a whole does not count. We elect Senators and Representatives, they go to Congress, they decide what we pay. Would you prefer it instead if government functioned as a charity?

Oh boy, is this another point whereby you simultaneously argue that taxation is voluntary as you refer to it as money owed?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

I'm just thinking of a few things that I pay for with my taxes (fed, state, + local) that have, have had, or will have, economic value to me:

1) Protection from foreign invaders

Failure - Borders are wide open and we have more illegal immigrants than ever before

I'm not sure you get what I meant by "foreign invader". I would suggest you read about Germany's invasion of Poland for reference. You don't really know how good you have it here.

Failure - Our criminal justice system seem to work on the catch and release methodology. The criminals never seem to serve their full sentence.

Maybe instead you'd prefer to live in Honduras, where if you're wealthy enough you can afford an armored car and body guards to protect you from the thugs that government does not. Rates of property crime are relatively low in the U.S. compared to the rest of the world - and places where it is lower are generally either places with higher taxation and/or draconian laws. You don't really know how good you have it here.

Failure - If they were doing their job as far as subsidizing universities, student would not be paying off their student loans until they are in their 40's.

Do understand that it takes longer and/or requires higher payments to pay off a loan of a given principal amount if the interest rate is higher? Do you understand that interest rates on student loans would be absurd if government did not back them? Who would want to give an uncollateralized loan to an 18 year old with no job or credit history? What exactly is the government's "job" here, to provide interest free loans to students? That will require more taxes, you understand that, right? The vast majority of the world has no access to higher education, and the nations that have higher access tend to have higher taxes as well. You don't really know how good you have it here.

Failure - They fail to include maintenance, which is why our infrastructure is crumbling. Throw the addition of Lexus Lanes (tolls) on Interstate Highways.

Have you ever driven on the highway system of a nation with lower taxation than the U.S.? Have you ever even driven on any highway system other than ours? Do you have any point of reference at all? You don't really know how good you have it here.

Failure - Resorting to bribery to keep the criminals under control is not a success story.
This is just an extension of your number 2 failure.

What's the longest you've gone without eating? What's the longest your children have gone without eating? Do you even have children? Just curious.

Debatable - Since the inception of the Internet the government has no done much about hackers stealing corporate data and designs.

Debatable, really? How many drug companies can't protect their patents? How

No argument there.

Actually, it has gone downhill in the last decade or so.

Compared to what?

Parks, City, State and Federal - Great concepts but seems that the again the funding for maintenance is not taken into account....

You're really just speaking out your ass.

even though admission fee and User fees have been implemented in the last decade when they used to be free.

New Orleans City Park is free admission and so is New York.



BTW - "failure" is soooo 2000-aughts.