Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: The Failure


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The Failure Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Failure - 10/8/2010 10:16:50 PM   
Hippiekinkster


Posts: 5512
Joined: 11/20/2007
From: Liechtenstein
Status: offline 		I personally would happily let lockedup keep every single dime he makes.

He says he's a landlord, so I propose that next time a tenant trashes a property, he goes to court over it. But he has to pay for the court. He can't use the buildings my taxes paid for. He can't use the court reporter, or the clerks, or the judge. They are being paid for by me, and I don't share. He can't use the roads I paid for to get to his court. He can't call on the sheriff to evict a deadbeat tenant. He can't use the fire department if the tenant decides to have an indoor bonfire. He can't use the PO to send registered letters to the tenant.

In fact, he can't use any of the things the rest of us pay for as the price for living in a civilized society. If he wants to act the petulant child, I say we all go right ahead and let him. He just can't live with the rest of us.

_____________________________

"We are convinced that freedom w/o Socialism is privilege and injustice, and that Socialism w/o freedom is slavery and brutality." Bakunin

“Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished alone; therefore we are saved by love.” Reinhold Ne

(in reply to lockedaway)
Profile   Post #: 121
RE: The Failure - 10/8/2010 10:26:51 PM   
lockedaway


Posts: 1720
Joined: 3/15/2007
Status: offline 		 "personally would happily let lockedup keep every single dime he makes.

He says he's a landlord, so I propose that next time a tenant trashes a property, he goes to court over it. But he has to pay for the court. He can't use the buildings my taxes paid for. He can't use the court reporter, or the clerks, or the judge. They are being paid for by me, and I don't share. He can't use the roads I paid for to get to his court. He can't call on the sheriff to evict a deadbeat tenant. He can't use the fire department if the tenant decides to have an indoor bonfire. He can't use the PO to send registered letters to the tenant.

In fact, he can't use any of the things the rest of us pay for as the price for living in a civilized society. If he wants to act the petulant child, I say we all go right ahead and let him. He just can't live with the rest of us."

Typical, idiot, liberal response.  One way you know you are dealing with a liberal is when they take an argument and put it on the most extreme fringe.  This jack-wagon has been viewing this thread all night and so he saw my post to kbsub where I said that "most people don't dispute that the government should collect some measure of taxes."  See?  So where did Einstein get his thesis that I am opposed to any taxation?  The question is what is a reasonable amout of Federal Income Tax when taking into account that an individual will also pay a state income tax in many states and property taxes as well.  HippieKinkster is obviously not a HippieThinkster. :) ;) :) :)

Now...what will HippieKinkster say that when, in addition to all of the taxes we pay, we also get Cap and Trade (which will arguably be the biggest tax of all) and the Value Added Tax?  All of these liberal failures are pushing for these two extreme measures.  And what happens when they are enacted?  Well....HippieGenius....we have been at an "official" unemployment level of over 9% for 14 months.  We have not seen anything like that since the Great Depression.  (Google it, freakshow)

When the Bush tax cuts expire and payroll taxes go up by 33% and estate taxes go from 0 to 55% and capital gains taxes go from 15% to 20% and the bottom tax rate of 15% goes up to 20% and the 34% bracket becomes the 40% bracket AND we start funding for O'scumbag care, I predict that you will see "official" numbers for unemployment as high as 13%  Muuuuahahahahahahahaah!   I love it.  Talk about getting hoisted on your own pitard!

Oh...and remember this, liberals.  When the estate tax goes up to 55% the people that inherited the estate (perhaps you or your children) will HAVE TO SELL WHAT THEY INHERITED TO PAY THE TAXES!!!  So stupid.  Liberalism at work.  Remember this too, the people that bought the property that is the subject of the estate PAID TAXES on the income it took to amass the estate to begin with.  I'm sure HippiePinko thinks this is fair.  But for the rest of you, by the time the government collects the 55% estate tax on the house, they will have collected 20% to 34% on the money it took to buy it and 55% on the bequest.  So...75% to 84% of the money used to buy and bequeath the house went to the government.  Have a nice day.



Know your enemy.  Liberals lie.  Liberals deceive.  Liberals fight against liberty and against prosperity.  Do NO business with a liberal.  Don't rent to them, don't trade with them, don't refer clients to them...nothing.  Economic warfare is the only civilized strategy.

< Message edited by lockedaway -- 10/8/2010 10:53:35 PM >

(in reply to Hippiekinkster)
Profile   Post #: 122
RE: The Failure - 10/8/2010 10:27:53 PM   
pyroaquatic


Posts: 1535
Joined: 12/4/2006
From: Pyroaquatica
Status: offline 		Oh, It looks as if I hit a soft spot in your character. Oh boo on me.

I do not attend coffee shops so I am unclear of what you mean by that. It is economically better to home brew the coffee. Rather than going out and spending the gas money, tip money, coffee money that is overpriced.

Oh, of course my training as a survivalist means nothing to you either. You carry a knife.
I make knives.
Get it? Got it? Good.

I am going to survive no matter what happens. go back to hunting and gathering. right. I am already there. Plants are amazing and i will only eat meat if I know I can turn the entire BODY of the creature in question into something productive or useful. There is no such thing as waste if you look at it that way.

Seagull tastes really bad though. Don't eat that. It will make you vomit because it tastes like vomit on the way down.

Did I actually SAY I was vegan or vegetarian or did you just assume that?

I hope you enjoy the fat in your arteries and the fall of your comfortable 'civilization'.

Now don't pitch a tizzy over a few words and uncomfortable thoughts. There is a greater plan that transcends duality.



_____________________________

You are what your deep, driving desire is.
As your desire is, so is your will.
As your will is, so is your deed.
As your deed is, so is your destiny.
-Brihadaranyaka Upanishad IV.4.5

(in reply to lockedaway)
Profile   Post #: 123
RE: The Failure - 10/8/2010 10:29:32 PM   
lockedaway


Posts: 1720
Joined: 3/15/2007
Status: offline 		Go make another pipe bomb, Ted. :)  I have some poison ivy in my backyard and you are welcome to eat to your heart's content.

(in reply to pyroaquatic)
Profile   Post #: 124
RE: The Failure - 10/8/2010 10:34:26 PM   
pyroaquatic


Posts: 1535
Joined: 12/4/2006
From: Pyroaquatica
Status: offline 		And you say I am off topic? The concept of going out to Starbucks does not appeal to me. Ever.

Clever endeavors and twists of words does anything come out of your mouth that is not absurd?

Are you saying that there is no failure?

EDIT: Don't answer that. I don't care what your answer is.

< Message edited by pyroaquatic -- 10/8/2010 10:39:00 PM >

_____________________________

You are what your deep, driving desire is.
As your desire is, so is your will.
As your will is, so is your deed.
As your deed is, so is your destiny.
-Brihadaranyaka Upanishad IV.4.5

(in reply to lockedaway)
Profile   Post #: 125
RE: The Failure of Conservatism - 10/9/2010 2:14:54 AM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I do want to make the real point that being conservative is simpler than economics, war, and welfare ...otherwise it is a part of your nature

Butch


Conservatives like to think they promote inidividualism.....lines such as 'the tyranny of the majority over the minority'....and 'liberals want the government to save you'.....and they really believe it....

Yet....all conservatives I know support a strong defence.....the idea that the government exists in large part to act as a buffer against external forces.....problem there is that an army requires tax.....so where's the tyranny here then? because I have no wish to plough my tax into an army....and I wouldn't have a choice under a conservative government....

The major difference between conservatives and liberals is that conservatives believe the government exists in large part for security against external forces....whereas liberals believe the government exists to promote education/health....both require tax....both require majority view.....

It's borne out of the opinion on one side....that where you don't have order and stability then you have nothing and the like of education can't flourish (conservative view).....and on the other side that where you don't have an educated population first and foremost then security from external foes is worthless as you will have internal divisions and a lack of social cohesion (liberal view).......

Has Conservatism failed? No. It's a system like any other with strengths and weaknesses depending upon what you want to see. Is Conservatism flawed? Absolutely. The evidence suggests that a strong defence does not provide peace and security...actually it inevitably leads to a major conflict....perhaps not today or tomorrow but definitely further down the line....

And....the reason why there is no such thing as a conservative (in the sense of what the term originally meant) government in the West.....and the reason why to all intents and purposes Western governments are liberal with varying degrees of state intervention....is because....the evidence tells us....that most people believe Liberalism is the better bet of the two.

Butch...are you saying being conservative is being simple?.....

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to kdsub)
Profile   Post #: 126
RE: The Failure - 10/9/2010 5:57:55 AM   
rulemylife


Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster

I personally would happily let lockedup keep every single dime he makes.

He says he's a landlord, so I propose that next time a tenant trashes a property, he goes to court over it. But he has to pay for the court. He can't use the buildings my taxes paid for. He can't use the court reporter, or the clerks, or the judge. They are being paid for by me, and I don't share. He can't use the roads I paid for to get to his court. He can't call on the sheriff to evict a deadbeat tenant. He can't use the fire department if the tenant decides to have an indoor bonfire. He can't use the PO to send registered letters to the tenant.

In fact, he can't use any of the things the rest of us pay for as the price for living in a civilized society. If he wants to act the petulant child, I say we all go right ahead and let him. He just can't live with the rest of us.


Myself, I think gator boy has adopted a sock puppet.

Compare the wording and tone in their posts, especially the use of certain phrases.





< Message edited by rulemylife -- 10/9/2010 6:00:06 AM >

(in reply to Hippiekinkster)
Profile   Post #: 127
RE: The Failure of Conservatism - 10/9/2010 10:13:35 AM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline 		Hi NorthernGent

No I am saying being conservative is being cautious...pretty simple I think. Just as they say moderation in all things I believe most conservative people are cautious in all things.

A strong national defense is being cautious but this is not political...many liberal minded people want a national defense as well.

Most conservatives believe in fiscal responsibility..otherwise don't spend money you don't have... this means don't borrow from China to finance a war you don't want to raise taxes for... don't bail out poorly run businesses... don't raise taxes unnecessarily. Tax yes for education, our future, but carefully weigh all taxes for fairness, usefulness, and necessity, against the burden and ability to bare by the tax payer. Neither political party does this.

I don't think being conservative means promoting individuality but it does mean promoting personal responsibility.

I don't think being conservative means always needing order and stability although there is nothing wrong with desiring this...but it does mean law abiding and respect for yourself and others. This does not mean unfair laws should not be challenged.

I disagree with you on what a government should be. I do believe our government should reflect the wants and needs of the people period! As long as these needs are within our Constitution.

Butch

< Message edited by kdsub -- 10/9/2010 10:50:13 AM >

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 128
RE: The Failure of Conservatism - 10/9/2010 12:45:12 PM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Sure. Their incomes soar, their taxes rise.

Other incomes stagnate or drop, so do their taxes.

Vote for it if you like it.

There's a difference in taxes going up fairly for everyone and taxes being carried on the backs of those who actually do something to get to a higher bracket of wealth.  Actually...here is a little more detail...

Tax cuts enacted in the past decade have been generous to wealthy taxpayers, too, making them a target for President Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress. Less noticed were tax cuts for low- and middle-income families, which were expanded when Obama signed the massive economic recovery package last year.
The result is a tax system that exempts almost half the country from paying for programs that benefit everyone, including national defense, public safety, infrastructure and education. It is a system in which the top 10 percent of earners – households making an average of $366,400 in 2006 – paid about 73 percent of the income taxes collected by the federal government.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 129
RE: The Failure of Conservatism - 10/9/2010 12:55:21 PM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

Would that be that Top 1 -2 % that pay 40 - 50% of the taxes?  Who ironically enough, happen to be the "powerfully wealthy elite"...those like W. Buffet, Bill Gates, John Kerry and his wife, etc., etc.


I have to first ask whether it was necessary for you to quote the entirety of both posts so that I had to spend three minutes deleting everything to respond to what you said?

But in regard to what you said, let's ask Warren:

US should tax the rich more: Warren Buffett - The Economic Times

TAXES: Warren Buffett - Rich Taxed Too Little ...

Warren Buffett says TAX THE RICH, TAX ME!


But you see...I didn't ask for the opinion of someone who's so far left that many centrist progressives avoid him. 

He wants to be taxed at that rate?  Good for him.  I seriously doubt that anyone in the Federal Government would turn him down if he wishes to pay more than his fair share...if he wants to pay more than they ask of him.  But that's his choice. 

Taxation should still be based on the ideas that what is fair for one is fair for all and on the idea that if you earn an income that enables you to not live off the public dole, then you should contribute your share to the payment of what the government provides for you.

(in reply to rulemylife)
Profile   Post #: 130
RE: The Failure of Conservatism - 10/9/2010 12:58:49 PM   
rulemylife


Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

Would that be that Top 1 -2 % that pay 40 - 50% of the taxes?  Who ironically enough, happen to be the "powerfully wealthy elite"...those like W. Buffet, Bill Gates, John Kerry and his wife, etc., etc.


I have to first ask whether it was necessary for you to quote the entirety of both posts so that I had to spend three minutes deleting everything to respond to what you said?

But in regard to what you said, let's ask Warren:

US should tax the rich more: Warren Buffett - The Economic Times

TAXES: Warren Buffett - Rich Taxed Too Little ...

Warren Buffett says TAX THE RICH, TAX ME!


But you see...I didn't ask for the opinion of someone who's so far left that many centrist progressives avoid him. 

He wants to be taxed at that rate?  Good for him.  I seriously doubt that anyone in the Federal Government would turn him down if he wishes to pay more than his fair share...if he wants to pay more than they ask of him.  But that's his choice. 

Taxation should still be based on the ideas that what is fair for one is fair for all and on the idea that if you earn an income that enables you to not live off the public dole, then you should contribute your share to the payment of what the government provides for you.


You didn't ask for his opinion yet you used him as an example?

Maybe you should have been aware of his opinion prior to that.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 131
RE: The Failure of Conservatism - 10/9/2010 1:01:58 PM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

Would that be that Top 1 -2 % that pay 40 - 50% of the taxes?  Who ironically enough, happen to be the "powerfully wealthy elite"...those like W. Buffet, Bill Gates, John Kerry and his wife, etc., etc.


I have to first ask whether it was necessary for you to quote the entirety of both posts so that I had to spend three minutes deleting everything to respond to what you said?

But in regard to what you said, let's ask Warren:

US should tax the rich more: Warren Buffett - The Economic Times

TAXES: Warren Buffett - Rich Taxed Too Little ...

Warren Buffett says TAX THE RICH, TAX ME!


But you see...I didn't ask for the opinion of someone who's so far left that many centrist progressives avoid him. 

He wants to be taxed at that rate?  Good for him.  I seriously doubt that anyone in the Federal Government would turn him down if he wishes to pay more than his fair share...if he wants to pay more than they ask of him.  But that's his choice. 

Taxation should still be based on the ideas that what is fair for one is fair for all and on the idea that if you earn an income that enables you to not live off the public dole, then you should contribute your share to the payment of what the government provides for you.


You didn't ask for his opinion yet you used him as an example?

Maybe you should have been aware of his opinion prior to that.

I used him as an example of the "powerfully wealthy elite", not as an example of any sound taxation policy. 

(in reply to rulemylife)
Profile   Post #: 132
RE: The Failure of Conservatism - 10/9/2010 1:26:32 PM   
rulemylife


Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

I used him as an example of the "powerfully wealthy elite", not as an example of any sound taxation policy. 


Ok, fair enough, but then let's talk about the wealthy elite Buffet who believes that he should be taxed more and why you believe that he should not.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 133
RE: The Failure of Conservatism - 10/9/2010 1:46:55 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

I used him as an example of the "powerfully wealthy elite", not as an example of any sound taxation policy. 


Ok, fair enough, but then let's talk about the wealthy elite Buffet who believes that he should be taxed more and why you believe that he should not.



Buffett talks out of both sides of his ass. He knows damn well that if he were taxed at the confiscatory rates we will be facing if we continue down the road the way we are that BH never would have accomplished what it did. That he has given so much to charity is great, but he seems to have lost track of the difference between charity and theft by ballot box.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to rulemylife)
Profile   Post #: 134
RE: The Failure of Conservatism - 10/9/2010 4:40:30 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

There's a difference in taxes going up


Again, I'm talking about income going up, not tax rates.

At the same rate, or even at a lower rate, if your income rises substantially, you'll pay more in taxes.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 135
RE: The Failure of Conservatism - 10/9/2010 5:27:51 PM   
masterdstar


Posts: 160
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline 		OH too good! Just tooo good! LMAO

Enjoy your wonder-filled day

(in reply to AnimusRex)
Profile   Post #: 136
RE: The Failure - 10/9/2010 11:01:41 PM   
Hippiekinkster


Posts: 5512
Joined: 11/20/2007
From: Liechtenstein
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife


Myself, I think gator boy has adopted a sock puppet.

Compare the wording and tone in their posts, especially the use of certain phrases.




You may very well be right. We have certainly heard this tired horseshit, aggressively offered up as brilliant thinking by the new right, so many times that I am coming to think that there are only a few, who are more or less clones, who are paid to post the same drivel all over the net. There is never any original thought, merely the same garbage repeated ad infinitum.

An example is the meme, "cutting taxes on the wealthy results in economic growth." There is never any proof for this asinine assinsertion. Never. One can post all the data one wants to show that either the reverse is the case, or that the results of tax cuts on the rich are growth and revenue neutral, but they ignore actual data as it results in cognitive dissonance (which I have previously discussed). The data conflicts with their beliefs; ergo, the data is wrong. It never occurs to them that their beliefs are wrong. They have too much of their Weltanschauung invested in their beliefs.

That's what they don't get about us Progressives. We appear to be at odds with each other simply because we debate the best way to go about things with each other. They march in lockstep according to a political dogma which they let others define for them. It's political "revealed truth" just like their religious beliefs are "revealed truth". Question it and one is a heretic - a "RINO".

It's really sad to see them buy into the whole dogma without question.


_____________________________

"We are convinced that freedom w/o Socialism is privilege and injustice, and that Socialism w/o freedom is slavery and brutality." Bakunin

“Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished alone; therefore we are saved by love.” Reinhold Ne

(in reply to rulemylife)
Profile   Post #: 137
RE: The Failure - 10/10/2010 12:04:55 AM   
NewOCDaddy


Posts: 134
Joined: 1/26/2008
Status: offline 		***

< Message edited by NewOCDaddy -- 10/10/2010 12:05:26 AM >

(in reply to Hippiekinkster)
Profile   Post #: 138
RE: The Failure - 10/10/2010 9:59:25 AM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster

An example is the meme, "cutting taxes on the wealthy results in economic growth." There is never any proof for this asinine assinsertion. Never. One can post all the data one wants to show that either the reverse is the case, or that the results of tax cuts on the rich are growth and revenue neutral, but they ignore actual data as it results in cognitive dissonance (which I have previously discussed). The data conflicts with their beliefs; ergo, the data is wrong. It never occurs to them that their beliefs are wrong. They have too much of their Weltanschauung invested in their beliefs.


The Macroeconomic Effects of Tax Changes:Estimates Based on a New Measure of Fiscal Shocks
By Christina D. Romer and David H. Romer*

The key result ... is in panel C, which shows the behavior of real GDP following an innovation of one percentage point to our series of exogenous tax changes ... The estimated maximum effect is a decline of 2.93 percent after ten quarters ... the effect falls to -1.84 percent after 15 quarters, and then remains roughly at that level."

Effect on GDP of a Tax Increase of 1% of GDP



"This study was done by Christina and David Romer. Christina was President Obama's first chair of his Council of Economic Advisers. David, her husband, is on the recession dating committee of the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), the outfit that everyone relies on to say when recessions start and stop. (The date of this study's release was June 2010. Ms. Romer announced her resignation from Obama's administration in August 2010.)

First, a decline of 2.93% of GDP means recession. And even after the recession is over (two and a half years after the tax increase), GDP remains 1.84% below where it would have been without the tax increase.

So while the government might collect 1% of GDP more than it used to, GDP becomes smaller. Thus, the government does not really collect as much as it thought it would using "static" scoring of tax changes. In fact, if we put it all together... the result is a Laffer Curve, which I will call the Romer-Laffer Curve.

Christina Romer and her husband not only confirmed both the Laffer Curve and the "dynamic" scoring of tax changes, but they effectively specified them for us."

Firm


_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to Hippiekinkster)
Profile   Post #: 139
RE: The Failure - 10/10/2010 11:00:39 AM   
Hippiekinkster


Posts: 5512
Joined: 11/20/2007
From: Liechtenstein
Status: offline 		Firm, your graph fails to show that cutting taxes on the wealthy results in GDP growth. While it shows that an across-the-board tax increase results in a GDP decline, it's important to note that that is an across-the-board increase, and not an increase on the top 1% income bracket. One would expect to see decreased spending by the lower 4 quintiles, as that is where most spending occurs.

That curve is an argument for decreasing the tax burden on the lower 4 quintiles. Note I said tax burden, and not tax rates. I argue for increasing the tax burden on the wealthy, as they use proportionately more government services than lower earners.

_____________________________

"We are convinced that freedom w/o Socialism is privilege and injustice, and that Socialism w/o freedom is slavery and brutality." Bakunin

“Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished alone; therefore we are saved by love.” Reinhold Ne

(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 140
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The Failure Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109