Why only a "progressive" income tax?

[frigidweirdo]

Is that why you want to end Medicaid and food stamps and housing assistance and energy assistance?

The reason I want to get rid of such programs is that I consider it unethical to take my neighbor's property in order to give it to other people. It's not right to take what belongs to others. Therefore, I can't very rightly ask someone to do so on my behalf.

The difference being that the funds aren't yours once collected by the government. They belong to the government. And the idea that we should never have to pay for anything we don't agree with is a steaming load of Ivory Tower horseshit.

We all pay for shit we don't agree with. Its the nature of democracy. Almost no one agrees with every decision made by our elected officials. Or the folks that elected them. Its a grand compromise.

If you don't have kids, why should you have to pay for schools? If you had kids but they'[re grown, why should you have to pay for schools? If you don't drive, why should I have to pay for roads? If you don't think we should have invaded a particular country, why should you have to pay for the military? If you live in a safe neighborhood, why should you have to pay for police?

Because you're not the only person that lives here. Nor are you the only one who votes. Why then would you expect our laws, programs, funding priorities, and policies to reflect only your personal tastes?

People like you think no one's income is their own but what the government leaves them after they take what they want

Maybe people think that stuff has to be paid for.

Rich people generally make more use of government services than poor people do.

A poor person will make use of their education and their children's education, of the roads they use and other infrastructure.

Businesses make use of the educations of many people, being able to pick and choose from many educated people, they use roads a lot more, using it to get their workforce to work, to get their goods around the country and so on and on.

Why shouldn't rich people pay for what they use?

I hear the claim that so called rich people use government services more

Yet no one has ever proven that

It's obvious that the poor use government services more than the rich

Rich people don't send their kids to public schools, don't get financial aid or default on government guaranteed student loans don't default on government backed mortgages don't use welfare or food stamps don't use public transportation etc etc and they pay the lion's share of taxes

Proven it? What do you need proving?

I work for you, I make use on MY education. You employee 200 people, you make use of 200 people's education. Most of them are likely to have gone through the public education system.

I drive 10 miles to work every day, I make use of 20 miles of road there and back. You employee 200 people you're going to be using 400 miles of road every day just to get your employees to work every day. On top of that the road you need to get your products from one place to another, on top of that the road required in making those products. Then if those products are sold in a shop you'll need to extra road other companies will use in selling those.

Do you need more proof than this?

I could go on and on about security and how much a businessman in Somalia would earn and how much an American businessman in the US would earn.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Well, there are 196 countries in the world of which 44 have a flat tax. Having said that, 44 out of 44 came up with identical solution and there is likely some solid practical reason behind it.

If progressive taxation, as you say, works, how come that class gap is getting bigger every year?

And by the way, most of western European countries have regressive tax code thanks to the VAT taxes in the place. And VAT is consumption tax that is hitting poor more than any other tax. Go figure.

Great logic. 44 countries have the same type of tax so it must be good. Er... perhaps those 44 countries are just countries that like to make it easier for the rich.

Then you don't give a figure for how many countries have progressive taxation, probably because it's more than the 44 with a flat tax, and therefore would blow your own argument away that if 44 countries have something it must work.

Why is the gap getting bigger each year? Because of the recession. Recessions are good for some rich people, money doesn't just disappear, it goes somewhere, and it's not in the pockets of the poor. This isn't to do with taxation.

But the recession is over

And? As if the recession ends and all of a sudden everything just goes back to how it was. It doesn't. Sorry, things aren't that simple.

It's been over for years

Yeah, let's pretend that this whole thing is really simple, and that when it finishes everything reverts back to normal, shall we?

Or maybe you could look into past recessions and see when the impact of the recession actually stops.

Unemployment is down. However someone decided that "real unemployment" is what matters now, for the first time ever, and that people who choose not to work are somehow "unemployed".

On the other hand there are issues which will never be solved, not because Obama or any other sucker is in the White House, but because politicians, in both the two leeching parties are unwilling to deal with such problems.

Excuses excuses that's the problem with this cuntry that and all the incessant whining

 

[Skull Pilot]

The reason I want to get rid of such programs is that I consider it unethical to take my neighbor's property in order to give it to other people. It's not right to take what belongs to others. Therefore, I can't very rightly ask someone to do so on my behalf.

The difference being that the funds aren't yours once collected by the government. They belong to the government. And the idea that we should never have to pay for anything we don't agree with is a steaming load of Ivory Tower horseshit.

We all pay for shit we don't agree with. Its the nature of democracy. Almost no one agrees with every decision made by our elected officials. Or the folks that elected them. Its a grand compromise.

If you don't have kids, why should you have to pay for schools? If you had kids but they'[re grown, why should you have to pay for schools? If you don't drive, why should I have to pay for roads? If you don't think we should have invaded a particular country, why should you have to pay for the military? If you live in a safe neighborhood, why should you have to pay for police?

Because you're not the only person that lives here. Nor are you the only one who votes. Why then would you expect our laws, programs, funding priorities, and policies to reflect only your personal tastes?

People like you think no one's income is their own but what the government leaves them after they take what they want

Maybe people think that stuff has to be paid for.

Rich people generally make more use of government services than poor people do.

A poor person will make use of their education and their children's education, of the roads they use and other infrastructure.

Businesses make use of the educations of many people, being able to pick and choose from many educated people, they use roads a lot more, using it to get their workforce to work, to get their goods around the country and so on and on.

Why shouldn't rich people pay for what they use?

I hear the claim that so called rich people use government services more

Yet no one has ever proven that

It's obvious that the poor use government services more than the rich

Rich people don't send their kids to public schools, don't get financial aid or default on government guaranteed student loans don't default on government backed mortgages don't use welfare or food stamps don't use public transportation etc etc and they pay the lion's share of taxes

Proven it? What do you need proving?

I work for you, I make use on MY education. You employee 200 people, you make use of 200 people's education. Most of them are likely to have gone through the public education system.

I drive 10 miles to work every day, I make use of 20 miles of road there and back. You employee 200 people you're going to be using 400 miles of road every day just to get your employees to work every day. On top of that the road you need to get your products from one place to another, on top of that the road required in making those products. Then if those products are sold in a shop you'll need to extra road other companies will use in selling those.

Do you need more proof than this?

I could go on and on about security and how much a businessman in Somalia would earn and how much an American businessman in the US would earn.

FYI YOU are using your education not your employer YOU are selling your labor to your employer Your free public education is worth more to you than to any employer and really a public HS education ain't worth that much

YOU are using the roads so YOU can make a living

And any company that ships products over the roads pays far far more in taxes for those roads
Excise and registration fees on every vehicle gas taxes, per mile taxes etc

So really business pays more for the roads than you do

If a businessman travels to Somalia he doesn't get an armed US escort

 

[NYcarbineer]

Is that why you want to end Medicaid and food stamps and housing assistance and energy assistance?

The reason I want to get rid of such programs is that I consider it unethical to take my neighbor's property in order to give it to other people. It's not right to take what belongs to others. Therefore, I can't very rightly ask someone to do so on my behalf.

The difference being that the funds aren't yours once collected by the government. They belong to the government. And the idea that we should never have to pay for anything we don't agree with is a steaming load of Ivory Tower horseshit.

We all pay for shit we don't agree with. Its the nature of democracy. Almost no one agrees with every decision made by our elected officials. Or the folks that elected them. Its a grand compromise.

If you don't have kids, why should you have to pay for schools? If you had kids but they'[re grown, why should you have to pay for schools? If you don't drive, why should I have to pay for roads? If you don't think we should have invaded a particular country, why should you have to pay for the military? If you live in a safe neighborhood, why should you have to pay for police?

Because you're not the only person that lives here. Nor are you the only one who votes. Why then would you expect our laws, programs, funding priorities, and policies to reflect only your personal tastes?

People like you think no one's income is their own but what the government leaves them after they take what they want

Maybe people think that stuff has to be paid for.

Rich people generally make more use of government services than poor people do.

A poor person will make use of their education and their children's education, of the roads they use and other infrastructure.

Businesses make use of the educations of many people, being able to pick and choose from many educated people, they use roads a lot more, using it to get their workforce to work, to get their goods around the country and so on and on.

Why shouldn't rich people pay for what they use?

I hear the claim that so called rich people use government services more

Yet no one has ever proven that

It's obvious that the poor use government services more than the rich

Rich people don't send their kids to public schools, don't get financial aid or default on government guaranteed student loans don't default on government backed mortgages don't use welfare or food stamps don't use public transportation etc etc and they pay the lion's share of taxes

You want to charge the poor for the government services that were legislated for the sole purpose of helping the poor, and because they were legislated for that purpose,

they were made free.

You're insane.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So? He also believed in public schools.

And that too is a Marxism.

And another offshoot of Marx, Woodrow Wilson, let the cat out of the bag about public schooling...
"The purpose of a university should be to make a son as unlike his father as possible. "
· “The University's Part in Political Life” (13 March 1909) in PWW (The Papers of Woodrow Wilson) 19:99.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So? He also believed in public schools.

And that too is a Marxism.

Great. So you believe that anyone who doesn't want to abolish the public school system is a Marxist.

Interesting. I guess that means Marx won...

...because practically every place on earth supports having public schools.

Marx has accomplished word domination!!!!!!!!!!

lol, retard.

"So you believe..."

Where have I said that? You sure like to put words in other people mouth. Shitstain at his best.

An ongoing tactic by the NYLiar

 

[Skull Pilot]

The reason I want to get rid of such programs is that I consider it unethical to take my neighbor's property in order to give it to other people. It's not right to take what belongs to others. Therefore, I can't very rightly ask someone to do so on my behalf.

The difference being that the funds aren't yours once collected by the government. They belong to the government. And the idea that we should never have to pay for anything we don't agree with is a steaming load of Ivory Tower horseshit.

We all pay for shit we don't agree with. Its the nature of democracy. Almost no one agrees with every decision made by our elected officials. Or the folks that elected them. Its a grand compromise.

If you don't have kids, why should you have to pay for schools? If you had kids but they'[re grown, why should you have to pay for schools? If you don't drive, why should I have to pay for roads? If you don't think we should have invaded a particular country, why should you have to pay for the military? If you live in a safe neighborhood, why should you have to pay for police?

Because you're not the only person that lives here. Nor are you the only one who votes. Why then would you expect our laws, programs, funding priorities, and policies to reflect only your personal tastes?

People like you think no one's income is their own but what the government leaves them after they take what they want

Maybe people think that stuff has to be paid for.

Rich people generally make more use of government services than poor people do.

A poor person will make use of their education and their children's education, of the roads they use and other infrastructure.

Businesses make use of the educations of many people, being able to pick and choose from many educated people, they use roads a lot more, using it to get their workforce to work, to get their goods around the country and so on and on.

Why shouldn't rich people pay for what they use?

I hear the claim that so called rich people use government services more

Yet no one has ever proven that

It's obvious that the poor use government services more than the rich

Rich people don't send their kids to public schools, don't get financial aid or default on government guaranteed student loans don't default on government backed mortgages don't use welfare or food stamps don't use public transportation etc etc and they pay the lion's share of taxes

You want to charge the poor for the government services that were legislated for the sole purpose of helping the poor, and because they were legislated for that purpose,

they were made free.

You're insane.

I want people with an income to pay income tax

Just like people who buy gas pay the gas tax

That is all I want so stop telling me what you think I want and fucking listen to what I say

 

[frigidweirdo]

Great logic. 44 countries have the same type of tax so it must be good. Er... perhaps those 44 countries are just countries that like to make it easier for the rich.

Then you don't give a figure for how many countries have progressive taxation, probably because it's more than the 44 with a flat tax, and therefore would blow your own argument away that if 44 countries have something it must work.

Why is the gap getting bigger each year? Because of the recession. Recessions are good for some rich people, money doesn't just disappear, it goes somewhere, and it's not in the pockets of the poor. This isn't to do with taxation.

But the recession is over

And? As if the recession ends and all of a sudden everything just goes back to how it was. It doesn't. Sorry, things aren't that simple.

It's been over for years

Yeah, let's pretend that this whole thing is really simple, and that when it finishes everything reverts back to normal, shall we?

Or maybe you could look into past recessions and see when the impact of the recession actually stops.

Unemployment is down. However someone decided that "real unemployment" is what matters now, for the first time ever, and that people who choose not to work are somehow "unemployed".

On the other hand there are issues which will never be solved, not because Obama or any other sucker is in the White House, but because politicians, in both the two leeching parties are unwilling to deal with such problems.

Excuses excuses that's the problem with this cuntry that and all the incessant whining

Excuses? I don't see excuses. Actually trying to find out what the reality is rather than playing silly beggers political partisan bullshit game is not making excuses.

But then passing off reality as "excuses" is an easy way of just passing off stuff you find inconvenient, isn't it?

 

[frigidweirdo]

The difference being that the funds aren't yours once collected by the government. They belong to the government. And the idea that we should never have to pay for anything we don't agree with is a steaming load of Ivory Tower horseshit.

We all pay for shit we don't agree with. Its the nature of democracy. Almost no one agrees with every decision made by our elected officials. Or the folks that elected them. Its a grand compromise.

If you don't have kids, why should you have to pay for schools? If you had kids but they'[re grown, why should you have to pay for schools? If you don't drive, why should I have to pay for roads? If you don't think we should have invaded a particular country, why should you have to pay for the military? If you live in a safe neighborhood, why should you have to pay for police?

Because you're not the only person that lives here. Nor are you the only one who votes. Why then would you expect our laws, programs, funding priorities, and policies to reflect only your personal tastes?

People like you think no one's income is their own but what the government leaves them after they take what they want

Maybe people think that stuff has to be paid for.

Rich people generally make more use of government services than poor people do.

A poor person will make use of their education and their children's education, of the roads they use and other infrastructure.

Businesses make use of the educations of many people, being able to pick and choose from many educated people, they use roads a lot more, using it to get their workforce to work, to get their goods around the country and so on and on.

Why shouldn't rich people pay for what they use?

I hear the claim that so called rich people use government services more

Yet no one has ever proven that

It's obvious that the poor use government services more than the rich

Rich people don't send their kids to public schools, don't get financial aid or default on government guaranteed student loans don't default on government backed mortgages don't use welfare or food stamps don't use public transportation etc etc and they pay the lion's share of taxes

Proven it? What do you need proving?

I work for you, I make use on MY education. You employee 200 people, you make use of 200 people's education. Most of them are likely to have gone through the public education system.

I drive 10 miles to work every day, I make use of 20 miles of road there and back. You employee 200 people you're going to be using 400 miles of road every day just to get your employees to work every day. On top of that the road you need to get your products from one place to another, on top of that the road required in making those products. Then if those products are sold in a shop you'll need to extra road other companies will use in selling those.

Do you need more proof than this?

I could go on and on about security and how much a businessman in Somalia would earn and how much an American businessman in the US would earn.

FYI YOU are using your education not your employer YOU are selling your labor to your employer Your free public education is worth more to you than to any employer and really a public HS education ain't worth that much

YOU are using the roads so YOU can make a living

And any company that ships products over the roads pays far far more in taxes for those roads
Excise and registration fees on every vehicle gas taxes, per mile taxes etc

So really business pays more for the roads than you do

If a businessman travels to Somalia he doesn't get an armed US escort

Okay, FYI, businessman in Somalia who has a very limited workforce when it comes to education, and a US businessman who has a wide variety of education and skills, who do you think is going to earn more money? Go on, tell me.

It doesn't matter whether an individual is selling their labor to you or not. You're able to buy it.

If you want to buy a car and you go to the local shop and you can only buy carrots and bananas, do you think your car is going to earn you as much money as the guy who can go to the local shop and buy all the parts a car usually uses? Do you?

I didn't say the individuals don't make money out of this. You've COMPLETELY missed the point.

And your comment about the businessman who travels to Somalia.... what the feck are you going on about?

If you don't understand what I say, I'd rather you just said you're incapable of understanding rather than pretend you do know and then write some drivel that has nothing to do with what I said.

 

[Skull Pilot]

But the recession is over

And? As if the recession ends and all of a sudden everything just goes back to how it was. It doesn't. Sorry, things aren't that simple.

It's been over for years

Yeah, let's pretend that this whole thing is really simple, and that when it finishes everything reverts back to normal, shall we?

Or maybe you could look into past recessions and see when the impact of the recession actually stops.

Unemployment is down. However someone decided that "real unemployment" is what matters now, for the first time ever, and that people who choose not to work are somehow "unemployed".

On the other hand there are issues which will never be solved, not because Obama or any other sucker is in the White House, but because politicians, in both the two leeching parties are unwilling to deal with such problems.

Excuses excuses that's the problem with this cuntry that and all the incessant whining

Excuses? I don't see excuses. Actually trying to find out what the reality is rather than playing silly beggers political partisan bullshit game is not making excuses.

But then passing off reality as "excuses" is an easy way of just passing off stuff you find inconvenient, isn't it?

You're making excuses as why a new simplified fair tax system won't work when it clearly would

 

[Skull Pilot]

People like you think no one's income is their own but what the government leaves them after they take what they want

Maybe people think that stuff has to be paid for.

Rich people generally make more use of government services than poor people do.

A poor person will make use of their education and their children's education, of the roads they use and other infrastructure.

Businesses make use of the educations of many people, being able to pick and choose from many educated people, they use roads a lot more, using it to get their workforce to work, to get their goods around the country and so on and on.

Why shouldn't rich people pay for what they use?

I hear the claim that so called rich people use government services more

Yet no one has ever proven that

It's obvious that the poor use government services more than the rich

Rich people don't send their kids to public schools, don't get financial aid or default on government guaranteed student loans don't default on government backed mortgages don't use welfare or food stamps don't use public transportation etc etc and they pay the lion's share of taxes

Proven it? What do you need proving?

I work for you, I make use on MY education. You employee 200 people, you make use of 200 people's education. Most of them are likely to have gone through the public education system.

I drive 10 miles to work every day, I make use of 20 miles of road there and back. You employee 200 people you're going to be using 400 miles of road every day just to get your employees to work every day. On top of that the road you need to get your products from one place to another, on top of that the road required in making those products. Then if those products are sold in a shop you'll need to extra road other companies will use in selling those.

Do you need more proof than this?

I could go on and on about security and how much a businessman in Somalia would earn and how much an American businessman in the US would earn.

FYI YOU are using your education not your employer YOU are selling your labor to your employer Your free public education is worth more to you than to any employer and really a public HS education ain't worth that much

YOU are using the roads so YOU can make a living

And any company that ships products over the roads pays far far more in taxes for those roads
Excise and registration fees on every vehicle gas taxes, per mile taxes etc

So really business pays more for the roads than you do

If a businessman travels to Somalia he doesn't get an armed US escort

Okay, FYI, businessman in Somalia who has a very limited workforce when it comes to education, and a US businessman who has a wide variety of education and skills, who do you think is going to earn more money? Go on, tell me.

It doesn't matter whether an individual is selling their labor to you or not. You're able to buy it.

If you want to buy a car and you go to the local shop and you can only buy carrots and bananas, do you think your car is going to earn you as much money as the guy who can go to the local shop and buy all the parts a car usually uses? Do you?

I didn't say the individuals don't make money out of this. You've COMPLETELY missed the point.

And your comment about the businessman who travels to Somalia.... what the feck are you going on about?

If you don't understand what I say, I'd rather you just said you're incapable of understanding rather than pretend you do know and then write some drivel that has nothing to do with what I said.

SO tell me why do businesses consistently set up shop in other countries if the workforce is so poorly educated? obviously your education that the business is supposedly exploiting isn't enough to keep that business here is it? And you mentioned security and somalia not me

You equate you using government roads to make a living to the business getting more out of it than you do the business pays far more for roads via all the additional taxes it pays compared to what you pay to use the same roads

And yet somehow you think businesses are getting more than you from government?

 

[NYcarbineer]

And? As if the recession ends and all of a sudden everything just goes back to how it was. It doesn't. Sorry, things aren't that simple.

It's been over for years

Yeah, let's pretend that this whole thing is really simple, and that when it finishes everything reverts back to normal, shall we?

Or maybe you could look into past recessions and see when the impact of the recession actually stops.

Unemployment is down. However someone decided that "real unemployment" is what matters now, for the first time ever, and that people who choose not to work are somehow "unemployed".

On the other hand there are issues which will never be solved, not because Obama or any other sucker is in the White House, but because politicians, in both the two leeching parties are unwilling to deal with such problems.

Excuses excuses that's the problem with this cuntry that and all the incessant whining

Excuses? I don't see excuses. Actually trying to find out what the reality is rather than playing silly beggers political partisan bullshit game is not making excuses.

But then passing off reality as "excuses" is an easy way of just passing off stuff you find inconvenient, isn't it?

You're making excuses as why a new simplified fair tax system won't work when it clearly would

You have no evidence it works.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The difference being that the funds aren't yours once collected by the government. They belong to the government. And the idea that we should never have to pay for anything we don't agree with is a steaming load of Ivory Tower horseshit.

We all pay for shit we don't agree with. Its the nature of democracy. Almost no one agrees with every decision made by our elected officials. Or the folks that elected them. Its a grand compromise.

If you don't have kids, why should you have to pay for schools? If you had kids but they'[re grown, why should you have to pay for schools? If you don't drive, why should I have to pay for roads? If you don't think we should have invaded a particular country, why should you have to pay for the military? If you live in a safe neighborhood, why should you have to pay for police?

Because you're not the only person that lives here. Nor are you the only one who votes. Why then would you expect our laws, programs, funding priorities, and policies to reflect only your personal tastes?

People like you think no one's income is their own but what the government leaves them after they take what they want

Maybe people think that stuff has to be paid for.

Rich people generally make more use of government services than poor people do.

A poor person will make use of their education and their children's education, of the roads they use and other infrastructure.

Businesses make use of the educations of many people, being able to pick and choose from many educated people, they use roads a lot more, using it to get their workforce to work, to get their goods around the country and so on and on.

Why shouldn't rich people pay for what they use?

I hear the claim that so called rich people use government services more

Yet no one has ever proven that

It's obvious that the poor use government services more than the rich

Rich people don't send their kids to public schools, don't get financial aid or default on government guaranteed student loans don't default on government backed mortgages don't use welfare or food stamps don't use public transportation etc etc and they pay the lion's share of taxes

You want to charge the poor for the government services that were legislated for the sole purpose of helping the poor, and because they were legislated for that purpose,

they were made free.

You're insane.

I want people with an income to pay income tax

Just like people who buy gas pay the gas tax

That is all I want so stop telling me what you think I want and fucking listen to what I say

People with income, who currently pay no tax and receive government assistance, under your plan, would start paying income tax.

They would be receiving assistance from the government that was once free but now is costing them the amount of their income tax.

Therefore, yes, you do want the poor to start paying for their government assistance,

which is insane at every level.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Maybe people think that stuff has to be paid for.

Rich people generally make more use of government services than poor people do.

A poor person will make use of their education and their children's education, of the roads they use and other infrastructure.

Businesses make use of the educations of many people, being able to pick and choose from many educated people, they use roads a lot more, using it to get their workforce to work, to get their goods around the country and so on and on.

Why shouldn't rich people pay for what they use?

I hear the claim that so called rich people use government services more

Yet no one has ever proven that

It's obvious that the poor use government services more than the rich

Rich people don't send their kids to public schools, don't get financial aid or default on government guaranteed student loans don't default on government backed mortgages don't use welfare or food stamps don't use public transportation etc etc and they pay the lion's share of taxes

Proven it? What do you need proving?

I work for you, I make use on MY education. You employee 200 people, you make use of 200 people's education. Most of them are likely to have gone through the public education system.

I drive 10 miles to work every day, I make use of 20 miles of road there and back. You employee 200 people you're going to be using 400 miles of road every day just to get your employees to work every day. On top of that the road you need to get your products from one place to another, on top of that the road required in making those products. Then if those products are sold in a shop you'll need to extra road other companies will use in selling those.

Do you need more proof than this?

I could go on and on about security and how much a businessman in Somalia would earn and how much an American businessman in the US would earn.

FYI YOU are using your education not your employer YOU are selling your labor to your employer Your free public education is worth more to you than to any employer and really a public HS education ain't worth that much

YOU are using the roads so YOU can make a living

And any company that ships products over the roads pays far far more in taxes for those roads
Excise and registration fees on every vehicle gas taxes, per mile taxes etc

So really business pays more for the roads than you do

If a businessman travels to Somalia he doesn't get an armed US escort

Okay, FYI, businessman in Somalia who has a very limited workforce when it comes to education, and a US businessman who has a wide variety of education and skills, who do you think is going to earn more money? Go on, tell me.

It doesn't matter whether an individual is selling their labor to you or not. You're able to buy it.

If you want to buy a car and you go to the local shop and you can only buy carrots and bananas, do you think your car is going to earn you as much money as the guy who can go to the local shop and buy all the parts a car usually uses? Do you?

I didn't say the individuals don't make money out of this. You've COMPLETELY missed the point.

And your comment about the businessman who travels to Somalia.... what the feck are you going on about?

If you don't understand what I say, I'd rather you just said you're incapable of understanding rather than pretend you do know and then write some drivel that has nothing to do with what I said.

SO tell me why do businesses consistently set up shop in other countries if the workforce is so poorly educated? obviously your education that the business is supposedly exploiting isn't enough to keep that business here is it? And you mentioned security and somalia not me

You equate you using government roads to make a living to the business getting more out of it than you do the business pays far more for roads via all the additional taxes it pays compared to what you pay to use the same roads

And yet somehow you think businesses are getting more than you from government?

You've already conceded that you think it's fair that the rich pay more than the not-rich, therefore,

from that point, it's only an argument over how much they should pay.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The difference being that the funds aren't yours once collected by the government. They belong to the government. And the idea that we should never have to pay for anything we don't agree with is a steaming load of Ivory Tower horseshit.

We all pay for shit we don't agree with. Its the nature of democracy. Almost no one agrees with every decision made by our elected officials. Or the folks that elected them. Its a grand compromise.

If you don't have kids, why should you have to pay for schools? If you had kids but they'[re grown, why should you have to pay for schools? If you don't drive, why should I have to pay for roads? If you don't think we should have invaded a particular country, why should you have to pay for the military? If you live in a safe neighborhood, why should you have to pay for police?

Because you're not the only person that lives here. Nor are you the only one who votes. Why then would you expect our laws, programs, funding priorities, and policies to reflect only your personal tastes?

People like you think no one's income is their own but what the government leaves them after they take what they want

Maybe people think that stuff has to be paid for.

Rich people generally make more use of government services than poor people do.

A poor person will make use of their education and their children's education, of the roads they use and other infrastructure.

Businesses make use of the educations of many people, being able to pick and choose from many educated people, they use roads a lot more, using it to get their workforce to work, to get their goods around the country and so on and on.

Why shouldn't rich people pay for what they use?

I hear the claim that so called rich people use government services more

Yet no one has ever proven that

It's obvious that the poor use government services more than the rich

Rich people don't send their kids to public schools, don't get financial aid or default on government guaranteed student loans don't default on government backed mortgages don't use welfare or food stamps don't use public transportation etc etc and they pay the lion's share of taxes

You want to charge the poor for the government services that were legislated for the sole purpose of helping the poor, and because they were legislated for that purpose,

they were made free.

You're insane.

I want people with an income to pay income tax

Just like people who buy gas pay the gas tax

That is all I want so stop telling me what you think I want and fucking listen to what I say

A person with a child, a household of 2, making 20,000 a year pays no income tax and is eligible for roughly 200 a month in foodstamps, give or take. That's 2400 a year in food stamps.

Under your plan, at a 10% flat tax, that person would pay 2000 in income tax, thus effectively PAYING FOR 80+% of the food stamps the household is getting.

That is insane by every measure.

 

[NYcarbineer]

And? As if the recession ends and all of a sudden everything just goes back to how it was. It doesn't. Sorry, things aren't that simple.

It's been over for years

Yeah, let's pretend that this whole thing is really simple, and that when it finishes everything reverts back to normal, shall we?

Or maybe you could look into past recessions and see when the impact of the recession actually stops.

Unemployment is down. However someone decided that "real unemployment" is what matters now, for the first time ever, and that people who choose not to work are somehow "unemployed".

On the other hand there are issues which will never be solved, not because Obama or any other sucker is in the White House, but because politicians, in both the two leeching parties are unwilling to deal with such problems.

Excuses excuses that's the problem with this cuntry that and all the incessant whining

Excuses? I don't see excuses. Actually trying to find out what the reality is rather than playing silly beggers political partisan bullshit game is not making excuses.

But then passing off reality as "excuses" is an easy way of just passing off stuff you find inconvenient, isn't it?

You're making excuses as why a new simplified fair tax system won't work when it clearly would

If the same tax rate for all is the only fair way, how about the same food stamp allotment for all as the only fair way?
Or the Medicaid benefit for all, regardless of income?

 

[Redfish]

Making money go round in a circle isn't going to prove anything.

It already does, you and I get paid, taxes are taken from our paychecks, some of that money goes to people on food stamps and welfare, much is consumed by the govt beaurocracy.

And lots and lots of it is used to convince the simpleminded that the welfare system does any thing but maintain poverty encourage the habits that produce poverty.

Is that why you want to end Medicaid and food stamps and housing assistance and energy assistance?

What do you think the recipients of that help will do after it's gone?

Would it be pointless to wait for you to tell the truth?


Seems that anything beyond "vote Democrat" is too nuanced for you.

I'm asking you what will happen to the recipients of the welfare system after you've managed to fulfill your desire of ending all of their assistance?

How will that magically make their lives better?

what happened to them before the welfare system? They found jobs. No one wants to eliminate help for the truly needy, those who are physically or mentally unable to care for themselves, but able bodied people should not be given a free meal ticket, free housing, and free energy.

Able bodied people receiving any form of welfare should be required to do public service work before getting their payments-----------clean the streets, paint public buildings, collect the trash, clean the ditches, etc. AND, they should have to pass a drug test before even getting on the list and another one before collecting each payment.

 

[Redfish]

People like you think no one's income is their own but what the government leaves them after they take what they want

Maybe people think that stuff has to be paid for.

Rich people generally make more use of government services than poor people do.

A poor person will make use of their education and their children's education, of the roads they use and other infrastructure.

Businesses make use of the educations of many people, being able to pick and choose from many educated people, they use roads a lot more, using it to get their workforce to work, to get their goods around the country and so on and on.

Why shouldn't rich people pay for what they use?

I hear the claim that so called rich people use government services more

Yet no one has ever proven that

It's obvious that the poor use government services more than the rich

Rich people don't send their kids to public schools, don't get financial aid or default on government guaranteed student loans don't default on government backed mortgages don't use welfare or food stamps don't use public transportation etc etc and they pay the lion's share of taxes

You want to charge the poor for the government services that were legislated for the sole purpose of helping the poor, and because they were legislated for that purpose,

they were made free.

You're insane.

I want people with an income to pay income tax

Just like people who buy gas pay the gas tax

That is all I want so stop telling me what you think I want and fucking listen to what I say

A person with a child, a household of 2, making 20,000 a year pays no income tax and is eligible for roughly 200 a month in foodstamps, give or take. That's 2400 a year in food stamps.

Under your plan, at a 10% flat tax, that person would pay 2000 in income tax, thus effectively PAYING FOR 80+% of the food stamps the household is getting.

That is insane by every measure.

all flat tax plans have a floor under which no taxes are paid. the people in your example would not pay any income tax under any of the flat tax plans.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It already does, you and I get paid, taxes are taken from our paychecks, some of that money goes to people on food stamps and welfare, much is consumed by the govt beaurocracy.

And lots and lots of it is used to convince the simpleminded that the welfare system does any thing but maintain poverty encourage the habits that produce poverty.

Is that why you want to end Medicaid and food stamps and housing assistance and energy assistance?

What do you think the recipients of that help will do after it's gone?

Would it be pointless to wait for you to tell the truth?


Seems that anything beyond "vote Democrat" is too nuanced for you.

I'm asking you what will happen to the recipients of the welfare system after you've managed to fulfill your desire of ending all of their assistance?

How will that magically make their lives better?

what happened to them before the welfare system? They found jobs. No one wants to eliminate help for the truly needy, those who are physically or mentally unable to care for themselves, but able bodied people should not be given a free meal ticket, free housing, and free energy.

Able bodied people receiving any form of welfare should be required to do public service work before getting their payments-----------clean the streets, paint public buildings, collect the trash, clean the ditches, etc. AND, they should have to pass a drug test before even getting on the list and another one before collecting each payment.

Millions of people eligible for Medicaid and food stamps etc. HAVE jobs.

 

[Redfish]

And lots and lots of it is used to convince the simpleminded that the welfare system does any thing but maintain poverty encourage the habits that produce poverty.

Is that why you want to end Medicaid and food stamps and housing assistance and energy assistance?

What do you think the recipients of that help will do after it's gone?

Would it be pointless to wait for you to tell the truth?


Seems that anything beyond "vote Democrat" is too nuanced for you.

I'm asking you what will happen to the recipients of the welfare system after you've managed to fulfill your desire of ending all of their assistance?

How will that magically make their lives better?

what happened to them before the welfare system? They found jobs. No one wants to eliminate help for the truly needy, those who are physically or mentally unable to care for themselves, but able bodied people should not be given a free meal ticket, free housing, and free energy.

Able bodied people receiving any form of welfare should be required to do public service work before getting their payments-----------clean the streets, paint public buildings, collect the trash, clean the ditches, etc. AND, they should have to pass a drug test before even getting on the list and another one before collecting each payment.

Millions of people eligible for Medicaid and food stamps etc. HAVE jobs.

yes, and if they earn less than the minimum they would pay zero under any of the flat tax plans, and they would keep getting Medicaid and food stamps.