RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates.

RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (Full Version)

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

Message

Arturas -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/25/2012 3:58:10 PM)
quote: Arturas I am not insulting you...imbecilic claptrap... (you) poster posits silly,un American right wing wet dream ridiculous the thinking of a certain flag waving right wing-nuts is...Your brand of patriotism is better suited for the asshole militias of Idaho.... I see. My mistake. I could have sworn you were making this about me. What was I thinking of?

Arturas -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/25/2012 4:08:13 PM)
Well. Time to summarize with facts. 1) The founding fathers did not let all Americans vote. They let only landowners because they were the taxpayers. 2) Somebody changed that along the way. 3) We now have non-tax payers voting in a number that controls how much is taxed and where it goes essentially enslaving tax payers. What do we do? Go back to 1) and let only taxpayers vote because voting ultimately controls how tax money is spent. There is no "government money" there is only tax money - Margaret Thatcher.

slvemike4u -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/25/2012 4:13:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas quote: Arturas I am not insulting you...imbecilic claptrap... (you) poster posits silly,un American right wing wet dream ridiculous the thinking of a certain flag waving right wing-nuts is...Your brand of patriotism is better suited for the asshole militias of Idaho.... I see. My mistake. I could have sworn you were making this about me. What was I thinking of? From the posts I read...you weren't/aren't [:)]

DesideriScuri -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/25/2012 4:54:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas quote: He's talking about the overall US economy, I suggest such a thing does not exist. What does that mean, overall economy? It does not exist in tangible terms. In reality, "the economy" is localized for every single soul. The economy in CA is not the same as that in Nashville, TN. The houseing bubble in parts of the country impacted my house values but only temporarilly and did not result in our houses going on the auction block because "our economy" was stronger, our personal, our local our city our state economies. The overall US economy is an aggregate of all the "localized" economies. Are you going to dispute that Ford is selling lots of vehicles if you and your neighbors have not bought a Ford? Are you going to dispute that GM is going under simply because you bought a Chevy? And, to your "localized" economy, you are correct when you look at the economy from an individual's eyes. But, not everyone can do that. Should Congress sit back and think to themselves, "what can we do to help Arturas gain from this economy?" Then, after they're done doing that, they'll sit back and think to themselves what they can do for your neighbor, and on down the street. Of course they can't do that. Nor should they. Congress should be thinking about the Nation as a whole, not each individual as an individual. That's where elected representatives get fucked around. Pelosi gets money back for some stupid ass frog something or other in her district. Republicans do it, too (Pelosi was just the first one that came to mind). So, just because your personal economy wasn't debt-fueled doesn't mean the aggregate of all the personal economies wasn't debt-fueled overall.

DesideriScuri -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/25/2012 4:59:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas quote: All of your flag waving support the troops(yet lets not pass any bills to support the veterans,eh?) I am a veteran. I did not know I needed anything more. Yes, I'm sure I don't need anything more. How about you, are you a veteran and if so, what did you need that somehow I did not seem to need? First: Thanks for your service. Second: Not all veterans are getting what they need. My cousin spent 3 tours in Iraq and isn't suffering any ill effects from the broken ankle he received from an IED. Some may question his mental status, but he's not a loose cannon and has matured from the quiet, artistic, shy, runner in High School to a hard working, in your face, good Father (his artistic side is fed by his jamming out jazz grooves on his guitar). There are others, though, who are having a tough time with injuries, physical and/or mental in nature. I, personally, hold the belief that we do not support our troops enough during or after duty (I have never been in the military). I am glad that you have your needs met, but there are plenty of others who do not, and can not on their own meet their needs. I thank you. Could you be more specific about the un-met needs? I was from the Nam era and that was a bad war. Today, there are nam vets still living in VA hospitals and homes around the country. There are a lot more suicides in the armed forces today than there were in the Nam and Korea eras. It is hard to head that kind of thing off I am thinking. I am also of a mind the suicides are not because the danger or seperation from loved ones is more intense that that in Nam or Korea but the outlook of the young men is different now and they have more trouble dealing with Military life and seperation from home and family, it was hard then during Nam and is hard now but not more so. Not every soldier gets the treatment(s) necessary from the VA in a timely fashion. I have a friend who got his honorable discharge from the Air Force after his 4-year enlistment. His brothers-in-law are current military and having difficulties with the VA in their locality. One has a physical injury and both have mental injuries. The way I see the VA, that's essentially "worker's comp" with the gov't. being the employer. There should be better treatment, IMO, for veterans who have willingly volunteered to be put in harm's way, whether or not they were harmed.

DesideriScuri -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/25/2012 5:15:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Rigth now those laws are being broken and ignored by one of the the nation's largest employers, WalMart, on a routine basis. They have been taken to court and lost cases dealing with not paying overtime, not giving breaks etc. So yes, if we were to repeal all the labor laws passed during the Progressive Era some businesses would definitely go back to abusing their workers exactly like they did during the Gilded Age. The key word is... "some." And, as you've already pointed out, there is at least one employer that has done this even within Union-age. But, no. We would not go back to that time. some would, but not every business would. And, I would be willing to bet that those that didn't treat their employees right would have a tougher time getting employees and staying in business. Same with businesses that discriminate. If a company were to discriminate against blacks, I would bet that they'd have all sorts of backlash against them, and rightly deserve it. I believe it would end up with their customers either paying more than necessary to keep them in business (which they are free to do), they would stop discriminating to replenish their customer base, or they'd go out of business.

VideoAdminGamma -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/25/2012 5:46:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Nothing you say holds any value and certainly it holds no interest for me. Then feel free to put each other on hide. Sometimes that is better than forced self control of posting. Thank you for being a part of CollarMe, VideoAdminGamma

BitaTruble -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/25/2012 6:01:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas 1) The founding fathers did not let all Americans vote. They let only landowners because they were the taxpayers. What do we do? Go back to 1) and let only taxpayers vote because voting ultimately controls how tax money is spent. And what of those who are left alone because their spouses went off to war and were returned to their loved ones in a body bag? Are they just shit out of luck because they are not invested in our country? Giving up blood, a son, daughter, husband or wife isn't good enough.. not invested enough whether or not they pay taxes? That's one of the coldest, most fucked up ideas I have ever seen on these forums. I feel ill.

slvemike4u -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/25/2012 6:24:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VideoAdminGamma quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Nothing you say holds any value and certainly it holds no interest for me. Then feel free to put each other on hide. Sometimes that is better than forced self control of posting. Thank you for being a part of CollarMe, VideoAdminGamma Sorry Gamma,I probably worded that wrong.I actually have an abiding interest in folks who seek to abridge my right to vote. Best to keep a wary eye on that foolish segment of society that dares to assume that us un-washed masses will sit by silently while they try to strip us of our right to vote. lol,I'm sure that would go over real easy....lol

slvemike4u -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/25/2012 6:25:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas 1) The founding fathers did not let all Americans vote. They let only landowners because they were the taxpayers. What do we do? Go back to 1) and let only taxpayers vote because voting ultimately controls how tax money is spent. And what of those who are left alone because their spouses went off to war and were returned to their loved ones in a body bag? Are they just shit out of luck because they are not invested in our country? Giving up blood, a son, daughter, husband or wife isn't good enough.. not invested enough whether or not they pay taxes? That's one of the coldest, most fucked up ideas I have ever seen on these forums. I feel ill. She says it so much nicer than I do...and with much more civility...yet I'm almost sure her blood boils as hotly as mine over this silly notion [:)]

DomKen -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/25/2012 8:30:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas If you think the safety net is not financed by a captialist society then tell me where the funds to support it came from? A pecentage of your welfare check, assuming you were on welfare? If you think these are socialist programs produced by socialist then produce a viable historic reference supporting your position or you are guilty of doing what you accuse me of doing. I already addressed the picture of the coal miners. Go upthread. You seem to not understand the concept. America has not been a purely capitalist society since these programs were initiated 80 years ago. The US has been a hybrid capitalist/socialist system. Just like every other western democracy. Paul Ryan callin Social Security socialist http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPXPT_aPsvY FDR on the issue May 1935 quote: “A few timid people, who fear progress, will try to give you new and strange names for what we are doing. Sometimes they will call it "Fascism", sometimes "Communism", sometimes "Regimentation", sometimes "Socialism". But, in so doing, they are trying to make very complex and theoretical something that is really very simple and very practical. I believe in practical explanations and in practical policies. I believe that what we are doing today is a necessary fulfillment of what Americans have always been doing -- a fulfillment of old and tested American ideals.” http://crywolfproject.org/ The Republican party outright called FDR a socialist in the 2936 campaign and afterwards.

DomKen -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/25/2012 8:32:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas Well. Time to summarize with facts. 1) The founding fathers did not let all Americans vote. They let only landowners because they were the taxpayers. NO. The Founders did not do that. I'm still waiting for you to present any evidence of the Founders wanting the franchise limited in that way.

Yachtie -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/26/2012 5:24:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas Well. Time to summarize with facts. 1) The founding fathers did not let all Americans vote. They let only landowners because they were the taxpayers. NO. The Founders did not do that. I'm still waiting for you to present any evidence of the Founders wanting the franchise limited in that way. 1790 Only white male adult property-owners have the right to vote. The evidence to your question is implicit in the original voting scheme. The founders could have made it everyone. BUT THEY DIDN'T! I await your [sm=lalala.gif] reply. [sm=popcorn.gif]

tazzygirl -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/26/2012 5:30:58 AM)
Something they quickly changed

Yachtie -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/26/2012 5:34:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Something they quickly changed True, but the original intent was the question, now wasn't it. As to changes, something that was warned about... A Republic, if you can keep it.

tazzygirl -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/26/2012 5:43:10 AM)
If the founding fathers changed the intent... ahem.... your argument holds no water. They are, after all, only human.

Yachtie -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/26/2012 5:46:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl If the founding fathers changed the intent... ahem.... your argument holds no water. They are, after all, only human. Took 20 years, and it wasn't the founders now was it? It was Congress. [8\|]

DesideriScuri -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/26/2012 6:23:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas Well. Time to summarize with facts. 1) The founding fathers did not let all Americans vote. They let only landowners because they were the taxpayers. NO. The Founders did not do that. I'm still waiting for you to present any evidence of the Founders wanting the franchise limited in that way. I do believe the initial ideas were that landowners would be the only ones to be able to vote when the Founders were discussing things. But, if I recall my reading correctly, that idea was opposed when it was presented, and then, through much debate and discussion, put to rest. I'm fairly certain that what came out of the Constitutional meetings was that all non-slave men could vote.

mnottertail -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/26/2012 7:33:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl If the founding fathers changed the intent... ahem.... your argument holds no water. They are, after all, only human. Took 20 years, and it wasn't the founders now was it? It was Congress. [8\|] Some of those founders were in congress, or the senate, or the presidency, and most of them were politically active whether they wanted to be or not. Additionally, I will point out that those 'founders' no more founded this country than Obama actually killed Osama bin Laden.

tazzygirl -> RE: FYI : Real data about tax rates. (9/26/2012 7:35:25 AM)
Gotta love how they move the goal posts when it suits their purposes... even when they are wrong.

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875