RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


mnottertail -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/5/2011 2:11:24 PM)

Ja, he'll be back cooking pizza before you know it.

If Romney doesn't say anything ULTRA stupid (he's said many stupid things) he's gonna get the nod.

How mortifying that must be for the Grand Old Party.

Man is only truely forlorn, when man gave up all hope.

Kant, or Schiller, ich weiss nicht.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/5/2011 2:14:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydawg


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

The 16th fundamentally took away taxation-representation guarenteed in the original constitution, so they could have the south pay war reparations. it has been extended in meaning since.



Mnot often concedes by writing silly nonsense like this. It doesn't mean anything, its just non grammatical jibberish.




Not to mention that he has the issue totally confused. The 14th Amendment includes a clause to prevent the US from paying war reparations TO the South.




HeatherMcLeather -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/5/2011 2:42:41 PM)

quote:

The 14th Amendment includes a clause to prevent the US from paying war reparations TO the South.
Not the way I read it. there is a clause saying that the USA won't pay any debts incurred by the CSA, but nothing to do with war reparations to the south.

quote:

But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.


I agree that Ron is off base regarding the reasoning for the 16th amendment, it was proposed in 1909, quite a while after the Civil War. The original income tax in 1861 <which expired in 1866> was to fund the war, but there was no attempt to make the south pay for it or anything like that, as far as I can find, the next income tax was passed in 1894.

My understanding is that it was passed because the SC had ruled <1895> the form of income tax instituted in 1894 unconstitutional, so the amendment was proposed and passed <1909> and finally ratified <1913> in order to allow that form of income tax. The issue has to do with if a tax is considered a direct or indirect tax and how it is apportioned, if at all.

This is an example of how the Constitution and system is supposed to work. A provision of the original is found to be impractical, so an amendment is made.

Edit: I LOVE these sorts of discussions about the Constitution. [:D]




luckydawg -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/5/2011 4:19:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Section 8 - Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

hmmmmmmmm.....nothing prohibiting an income tax, a flat tax or a tax on the size of your ass or lie or pretense.

Only a power to lay (impose) and collect (as in give me my fuckin money) .....

1861 there was an income tax. the 16th amendment was not ratified until like what? 1910?



actually the income tax was ruled unconstitutional by the USSC in 1895.

"1868, Congress again focused its taxation efforts on tobacco and distilled spirits and eliminated the income tax in 1872. It had a short-lived revival in 1894 and 1895. In the latter year, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that the income tax was unconstitutional because it was not apportioned among the states in conformity with the Constitution.

In 1913, the 16th Amendment to the Constitution made the income tax a permanent fixture in the U.S. tax system. The amendment gave Congress legal authority to tax income and resulted in a revenue law that taxed incomes of both individuals and corporations. In fiscal year 1918, annual internal revenue collections for the first time passed the billion-dollar mark, rising to $5.4 billion by 1920. With the advent of World War II, employment increased, as did tax collections—to $7.3 billion. The withholding tax on wages was introduced in 1943 and was instrumental in increasing the number of taxpayers to 60 million and tax collections to $43 billion by 1945.


Read more: History of the Income Tax in the United States — Infoplease.com http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005921.html#ixzz1Zx6ZN7wr


No 16th, no income tax, so no flat tax.


Your welcome for the education BTW.




Politesub53 -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/5/2011 4:43:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydawg

It doesn't mean anything, its just non grammatical jibberish



As opposed to "grammatical jibberish" huh. [8|




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/5/2011 5:14:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HeatherMcLeather

quote:

The 14th Amendment includes a clause to prevent the US from paying war reparations TO the South.
Not the way I read it. there is a clause saying that the USA won't pay any debts incurred by the CSA, but nothing to do with war reparations to the south.

quote:

But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.


I agree that Ron is off base regarding the reasoning for the 16th amendment, it was proposed in 1909, quite a while after the Civil War. The original income tax in 1861 <which expired in 1866> was to fund the war, but there was no attempt to make the south pay for it or anything like that, as far as I can find, the next income tax was passed in 1894.

My understanding is that it was passed because the SC had ruled <1895> the form of income tax instituted in 1894 unconstitutional, so the amendment was proposed and passed <1909> and finally ratified <1913> in order to allow that form of income tax. The issue has to do with if a tax is considered a direct or indirect tax and how it is apportioned, if at all.

This is an example of how the Constitution and system is supposed to work. A provision of the original is found to be impractical, so an amendment is made.

Edit: I LOVE these sorts of discussions about the Constitution. [:D]



It may not be the way you read it but that was the specific intent and isnt questioned by anybody else who knows the history of the Constitution. "debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States" is referring specifically to the costs the South incurred in the Civil War.







Arpig -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/5/2011 5:23:41 PM)

quote:

debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States" is referring specifically to the costs the South incurred in the Civil War.
Which are not the same thing at all as "war reparations", now are they?

Poor old Willbe, shown up by an 18 year old who hasn't got her high school yet.

That's gotta bruise the old ego a little. [:D]




Masta808 -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/5/2011 11:05:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
quote:

ORIGINAL: wittynamehere

That said, a proper education could certainly be free. The internet could have every college textbook uploaded to it and accessible by every person on the planet, for free. This would cost almost nothing to do. .



1. No one would write textbooks.
2. Very few can learn from books only, and even fewer can learn from books only without the motivation and structure of a school.
3. Proving your knowledge in order to get hired would be extremely difficult.


If I cant make money from I wont do it. No one ever does anything because of the kindness of their heart or to advance the knowledge of people of the world. Its not like schools are posting up free textbooks online or Libraries were designed to help people have a broader access to knowledge. Exactly those very few that can learn from books so it better of walling out the people who can learn from these "free" textbooks. They need remove all those do it yourself books from the Home Improvement section. We all know proving your knowledge to get hired is extremely hard. Employers never test, never interview, never ask for proof of knowledge when candidates for employment. They all look at a piece of paper with writing on it and decide if you fit or not. No one ever learns anything because they want to or provides knowledge because they can. They only do it for the money.




mnottertail -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/6/2011 6:49:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydawg


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Section 8 - Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

hmmmmmmmm.....nothing prohibiting an income tax, a flat tax or a tax on the size of your ass or lie or pretense.

Only a power to lay (impose) and collect (as in give me my fuckin money) .....

1861 there was an income tax. the 16th amendment was not ratified until like what? 1910?



actually the income tax was ruled unconstitutional by the USSC in 1895.

"1868, Congress again focused its taxation efforts on tobacco and distilled spirits and eliminated the income tax in 1872. It had a short-lived revival in 1894 and 1895. In the latter year, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that the income tax was unconstitutional because it was not apportioned among the states in conformity with the Constitution.

In 1913, the 16th Amendment to the Constitution made the income tax a permanent fixture in the U.S. tax system. The amendment gave Congress legal authority to tax income and resulted in a revenue law that taxed incomes of both individuals and corporations. In fiscal year 1918, annual internal revenue collections for the first time passed the billion-dollar mark, rising to $5.4 billion by 1920. With the advent of World War II, employment increased, as did tax collections—to $7.3 billion. The withholding tax on wages was introduced in 1943 and was instrumental in increasing the number of taxpayers to 60 million and tax collections to $43 billion by 1945.


Read more: History of the Income Tax in the United States — Infoplease.com http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005921.html#ixzz1Zx6ZN7wr


No 16th, no income tax, so no flat tax.


Your welcome for the education BTW.



Ja, and slavery was once ruled legal, look, the direct-indirect aspect of the taxation was the problem and cases went back and forth, some for some against, thats why the made the amendment to change the meaning of the word direct.

It just stopped the back and forth in court cases.

You are unqualified to educate anyone on anything.

Your mincing does not change the facts. (Oh, and there were income taxes off and on before the civil war as well).

For your education and edification. Your point is still pointless.

A flat tax would be constitutional by section 8 without the 16th. Think about that, you got time.




luckydawg -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/6/2011 6:58:29 AM)

Nope. You can get all silly and pretend so if you like though.


Theoretically after a new USSC ruling an income tax could be legal.






Nosathro -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/6/2011 7:07:02 AM)

I agree there are people out there working but the so called mimum wage is not enough they are still in the poor.




SternSkipper -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/6/2011 7:44:03 AM)

quote:

From Rushlimbaugh.com:

quote:

Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors


Proposed list of demands for the Occupy Wall Street movement.

..."Demand one: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending 'Freetrade' by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market ... Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals ... Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment." Why even go to school? Why care about education and why worry about employment if you're demanding "a guaranteed living wage"? "Demand number four: Free college education." Why? Why do you need free college education? If you're gonna get a living wage and you don't have to work, why go to college? Let's just ban college.


Full transcript here


Please Amend this to "Actual Fraudulent List Produced By Well Known Drug Criminal and Propagandist Rush 'Constantly Jonsing" Limbaugh"._ that would make it instead accurate reporting and not hurt your STERLING <cough> reputation for honesty on this forum.

Okay since there's zero prayer of you listening, I'll address the rest of my friends and neighbors here. ...

I am in direct contact with the group... I can say for a FACT Sanity is being mislead BY A LIAR who's probably just gotten a nice honorarium for his PAC or whatever kind of phoney 'institute; Rush has set up to hide the 'donations' that come in ... from just regular guys... like you and me.. such as JAMIE DIMON.
    I reviewed the list and have been attending online GAs in both NYC and Boston for over 2 weeks now and there are discussions of a lot of stuff, but THE ONLY THING that is close to universal right now are elements that concern themselves directly with campaign finance and lobbying.
   And SURE based on what I hear emerging, IT OUGHT TO REALLY FUCKING SCARY TO GUYS LIKE LIMBAUGH WHO MAKE MOST OF THEIR INCOME OFF THE POLITICAL PROPAGANDA PROCESS... Cause if there are no lobby issues Rush needs to COLOR for the American People, he'll be down at the Plaza with a fucking sharpie and a poster board in his hand (not really of course because Rush has enough money and Oxycontin mattressed to have the party of the century in Bangkok for about 20 years.




[image]local://upfiles/18637/30070B8669AA40EAB396995BA316DE24.jpg[/image]




Hillwilliam -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/6/2011 7:45:51 AM)

Sooo, someone on the left thinks that Right wing media cherry picking to make the opposition look dumb is wrong.

I bet those on the Right also think that cherry picking by those in Left wing media to make them look dumb is wrong too.


This is supposed to be news?




Sanity -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/6/2011 7:51:15 AM)


Try again -  someone on the left (SURPRISE!!!) states that freedom of the press is a crime.

Dissent is a crime.

Old news, I know... been this way since before Stalin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Sooo, someone on the left thinks that Right wing media cherry picking to make the opposition look dumb is wrong.

I bet those on the Right also think that cherry picking by those in Left wing media to make them look dumb is wrong too.


This is supposed to be news?




Hillwilliam -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/6/2011 8:02:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Try again -  someone on the left (SURPRISE!!!) states that freedom of the press is a crime.

Dissent is a crime.

Old news, I know... been this way since before Stalin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Sooo, someone on the left thinks that Right wing media cherry picking to make the opposition look dumb is wrong.

I bet those on the Right also think that cherry picking by those in Left wing media to make them look dumb is wrong too.


This is supposed to be news?


Just for you Sanity.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/galleries/teabonics_the_flawed_language_of_protest/teabonics_the_flawed_language_of_protest.html




SternSkipper -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/6/2011 8:03:35 AM)

He's right... Though I would actually call it Journalistic FRAUD... But whatever, as hartman and many others are proving, it's fraud and it won't prevail... Propaganda of the kind Erin Burnett did the other night by deliberately picking a kid who was clueless (Remember Sanity, the tea Party has kept a seat warm for you... it's called inclusion and it's even for folks like you). It came up in yesterday morning's chat of the media group I am on. My friend Carie  said "yeah, Erin Burnett was here and she went up to and sort of screened a bunch of people till she came upon a kid who admitted he hadn't been staying there and had arrived earlier that day and really didn't know much. So she asks him to come on camera, and the rest as you know, is history" ... Heh try Anti-History ... so yeah, if they use new gathering tactics like that, it's a wrong. A crime? Maybe he was impassioned ... certainly not as bad as the Colostomy Baggers calling anyone who disagrees with them "Socialists" or "Commies".





SternSkipper -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/6/2011 8:07:05 AM)

Next Post..




SternSkipper -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/6/2011 8:08:50 AM)

quote:


Just for you Sanity


[image]local://upfiles/18637/18F129C41C114EC596F57639F79A7837.jpg[/image]




SternSkipper -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/6/2011 8:09:52 AM)

They Misspelled "Wickeht"




mnottertail -> RE: Idiotic Demands of the Wall Street Protestors (10/6/2011 8:15:27 AM)

But silently, to themselves, they SAID it right.




Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125