102 Things NOT To Do If You Hate Taxes

[teamosil]

Poor people with liberals vote in and maintain these programs by electing officals like Obama that supports the policies behind them and wishes to establish new programs to further the influence of the mindset.

Of all the right wing conspiracy theories, and there are many, this is one of the most absurd... You realize that less than 1% of people in the US are on welfare right? And that they are less likely to vote than most people? Do you really think the entire goal of the Democratic party is around trying to get 1% of the vote? How do they win elections with only 1% of the vote? How come 2/3 of people with post graduate degrees vote for the Democrats? If it's just some kind of scheme to milk the state for money, why did the majority of people who make over $200k/year vote for Obama?

It's just moronic right wing rhetoric. People spin these conspiracy theories and you guys just eat them up without taking even a second to think "wait, is this plausible at all?"...

 

[TheDemSocialist]

I love the mentality that if I oppose a parasitic government that uses coercion

People coerce you to vote?
People force you to vote?

to buy the votes

The rich by the votes man....
Money walks in an electorate system like we have.
Second off we really dont "elect" our president an "electoral college"does.

of others with my and others wealth I am greedy or immoral.

:lamo

Liberals are so in love with government not only do they believe that the only charity comes from voting up the taxes of others,

Im sorry Turtle if taxes are raised on the rich are the rich going to struggle?
Are they going to be bumped down a class or two?
Its just common sense.

they also eschew private charity as well.

Do you have any sources or any facts that liberals do not give to charity?
My mom is a liberal and does a bunch of charity and gives a bunch to charity....

Its easy to be charitable using someone else's wealth but that is to be expected from the group that outsources so many responsibilities to the government

Your spot on with some accurate factual information!

 

[TheDemSocialist]

wrongo. "we" don't guarantee anyone the right not to live free from the fear of starvation. fear of starvation is what helped Oog the caveman evolve into Mr. von Braun the rocket scientist.

Yea also cavemen beat this **** out of each-other for food so they wouldnt starve.

We also evolved to maybe saying hey there should be some sort of program that gives people some sort of food...

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Liberals think that the only charity possible is one run by the government

No im pretty sure they dont....

and that means liberals believe they are "helping others" when they demand someone else pay more taxes

Liberals also pay taxes.

to supposedly help the allegedly helpless

Tax dollars help people.... They help you... They help me.... And they help many others...

we on the right tend to believe true compassion means actually helping others rather than forcing people to be taxed more so rich dems can get elected to office

Actually people who lobby congress with their millions like the Koch brothers on the right bye politicians as well (as long with Dems) throw money left and right....

and smug and arrogant liberals can pretend they did something for others merely by voting for more socialism

Ahhhh it socialism again... MORE SOCIALISM!!!

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Johnny Rico, Starship Troopers: "Kill them, kill them all"

see: 2 Thessalonians 3:10

Mark 12:13-17, “And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch him in his words. And when they were come, they say unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not? Shall we give, or shall we not give? But he, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye me? bring me a penny, that I may see it. And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Caesar’s. And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s. And they marvelled at him.”

Romans 13:1-7, “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.”

 

[TheDemSocialist]

restrict the government to its proper constitutional boundaries.

Where does it say we have crossed them?

handouts should be decided by the several states

Where does it say that social programs or "handouts" are unconstitutional?

 

[Actinium]

Hey...I didn't post the list....basically what I said was what's fair for one is fair for the other....did I hit a nerve?....Those of us that pay taxes are tired of seeing it spent where it doesn't need to be spent...tired of seeing my tax dollars spent on beer by someone who could work, but won't......there appears to be a lot of folks out there in that category....including large corporations that get to rob the treasurery....we may have to pay the taxes that support a lot of free-loaders, but there is no way you and yours are going to make the tax payers like it....I have absolutely no problem seeing tax dollars spent assisting those that are actually in need....but when it wasted building golf courses in Ireland, buying bass boats for the lazy, supporting those that could work, but won't, or lining the pockets of our elected criminals....I just don't have to like it....

Thing is, you can get more money via unemployment checks and begging than you can with minimum wage sometimes...

Personally, I dislike the idea of spoon-feeding people free money. It helps our GNP a lot more if we just put these people to work at Subway until we have decent jobs for them (and we need to let businesses start up if we want those, meaning we need rich people to invest, meaning nix on the Buffett Rule, thank you kindly).

 

[Henrin]

Of all the right wing conspiracy theories, and there are many, this is one of the most absurd... You realize that less than 1% of people in the US are on welfare right? And that they are less likely to vote than most people? Do you really think the entire goal of the Democratic party is around trying to get 1% of the vote? How do they win elections with only 1% of the vote? How come 2/3 of people with post graduate degrees vote for the Democrats? If it's just some kind of scheme to milk the state for money, why did the majority of people who make over $200k/year vote for Obama?

You just jumped to an assumption on a claim I never made. They aren't doing it for the poor people, they are doing for themselves, they are doing for the people that want the government to provide them their needs, they are pleading into the hearts of people like you. You are only the instrument, the poor are merely the beat.

 

[teamosil]

You just jumped to an assumption on a claim I never made. They aren't doing it for the poor people, they are doing for themselves, they are doing for the people that want the government to provide them their needs, they are pleading into the hearts of people like you. You are only the instrument, the poor are merely the beat.

So you're saying they do it because some people want a government that does good. A moral government that treats even the least fortunate amongst us decently. Yeah, that's right. That is indeed a big part of why I vote for Democrats. I'm not following why you think that is some kind of scandal or something. That's how you should vote too- like a moral person.

 

[Henrin]

So you're saying they do it because some people want a government that does good. A moral government that treats even the least fortunate amongst us decently. Yeah, that's right. That is indeed a big part of why I vote for Democrats. I'm not following why you think that is some kind of scandal or something. That's how you should vote too- like a moral person.

Taking the moral high ground on someone is never effective. Ask religious conservatives about their success rate over the last 50 years. Ask them how well it went. This is all you are doing and just like them you are in fact failing to manage to take the high road. Using government legal authority on force to gain something you desire is not moral. Society does treat people plenty decently or fairly already without your programs. If you wish to gain more of the same you can't actually do so by treating some people unfairly to pay for advancement in life conditions of others. Its the exact opposite of moral.

Though history has shown these programs don't advance living conditions, but drag everything else down while keeping the people on them where they are.

 

[Henrin]

Yea also cavemen beat this **** out of each-other for food so they wouldnt starve.

We also evolved to maybe saying hey there should be some sort of program that gives people some sort of food...

Is it really evolution to use government force to do so or would it be evolution to give food to the needy yourself? Is really evolution to collectively beat someone by the use of government on the head to give up resources instead of personally doing it? I can't see how. Are you really using a different tactic than the caveman?

 

[teamosil]

Society does treat people plenty decently or fairly already without your programs.

That is the core of our disagreement right there. That isn't true at all. The US currently has the lowest intergenerational income mobility of any first world country. A person in the US currently has a 70% chance of retiring in the same economic bracket not just of their father, but of their GRANDFATHER. That means that less than 1 in 3 families is able to break out of poverty even over TWO GENERATIONS. The wealth of your parents is, by far, the biggest determinant of how you fare economically. Nothing else even comes close. The next biggest determinant is the color of your skin. A white job applicant with exactly the same resume as a black job applicant with exactly the same resume is 2.4 times more likely to get an interview. Imagine what your life today would be like if 3 out of every 5 jobs you've had you never even got an interview just because of the color of your skin. That could not possibly be described as fair. It's more or less just a winner take all birth lottery in this country.

As for decency, we fare even worse. This country is totally raping the poor and even the middle class. Since the 60s our per capita GDP has gone up 400%, but our median income has only gone up 40%. Where in the 60s families needed to have one person working 40 hours a week to cover their basic necessities, now they need to have two or more people working 50-60 hour weeks just to cover those same necessities. The rich and the corporations are taking more and more from us and giving about the same back in return. We're being used and abused. Not just the poor, but you. You personally are getting a totally raw deal from your employer whether you have enough access to the books to realize it or not. I've worked at a number of companies where I had access to the books and it matches exactly what you're expect given that our GDP per capita quadrupiled yet we only got a 40% bump. At most companies the rule of thumb is that you only hire a person if you can be confident that they will generate at least THREE TIMES their salary in revenue. Many people at the companies I've worked at have generated millions of dollars a year of profits for the company but only taken home $50k. The rest is just taken by the rich flat out. We have people who work two jobs living in literal shacks in this country struggling to get enough food for their kids. We have people who can't afford to go to the doctor that are generating $150k/year for their employer. No, it's not decent at all. It's a massive screw job. And it isn't getting better, it's getting worse. Over the last 10 years our median income has actually fallen while health insurance companies more than DOUBLED what they are charging us for the same care. 1 in 6 children in the US is currently listed as "food insecure", meaning they aren't getting enough food for their development. Here, in the richest country in the world. How is that possibly decent of us?

Though history has shown these programs don't advance living conditions, but drag everything else down while keeping the people on them where they are.

No, that's not remotely true. It's just one of those things right wingers say to each over over and over so many times that they start to think it must be true and requires no actual evidence... But the evidence is 100% clear that that stance is absolutely false. Safety net spending correlates directly to low poverty rates. It has correlated directly in our history and it correlates directly from country to country. The more a government spends on the safety net, the less poverty there is. Do you have any evidence whatsoever countering that? Or is it just something you heard said a lot from wingnuts?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Its easy to be charitable using someone else's wealth…

Actually, it's not at all.

It's easy to PRETEND to be charitable with someone else's money. It's even easy to convince those most ignorant among our countrymen that you are being charitable and generous that way.

You can only really be charitable with your own resources. Being “charitable” with someone else's resources isn't charity; it's theft and fraud.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Is it really evolution to use government force to do so or would it be evolution to give food to the needy yourself?

Lets see here.. Where was charity in the early 20th century when our economy went to ****?
Charity really helped out then right?
I think along the line we decided hey maybe its a good idea to have some sort of government food program that gave food and some sort of medical care to people that really need it and the impoverished, because hey we are the USA we give some sort of minimal care (even tho its really not that much) to the needy. I mean if its really the "forceful" and "oppressing" us then man you have some sort of weak definition of force and oppression.

Is really evolution to collectively beat

Wait you are being "beaten"?

someone by the use of government on the head to give up resources instead of personally doing it?

Is it really the use of government to take taxes and give it to the military?
You make it sound like you are going broke paying taxes?
Are you? I doubt it... I mean i highly doubt it....
Go ahead move to Somalia or some sort of country in Africa.. We all know charity is taking care of everyone there right?
No taxes there!

I can't see how. Are you really using a different tactic than the caveman?

No im using the same tactic...

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Actually, it's not at all.

It's easy to PRETEND to be charitable with someone else's money. It's even easy to convince those most ignorant among our countrymen that you are being charitable and generous that way.

You can only really be charitable with your own resources. Being “charitable” with someone else's resources isn't charity; it's theft and fraud.

Soooo....
Tell me please are any of these programs unconstitutional? And if they are how?
Sooooo..... Tell me what is wrong with taxes....
Sooo.., Please tell me what programs you would get rid of on this list....
Soooo... Please tell me where the rich "oppressed" back from the 40's to the late 80's sense taxes were higher? Were there no rich people back then?
Sooooooo.... Please tell me one time in the history of this rock we call the world where any country got out of hard economic times like the ones we are in now by lowering taxes.. Tell me one time please...(Ive never got an answer to this question by the way P.S. TD ive asked you so many times and you just seem to ignore me every time.)

 

[Pinkie]

Once again, not your money. Taxes are not "yours".

 

[jambalaya]

Why would you not use some of the things for which the government forced you to pay? If a lot of those things weren't there, we would have to take care of them ourselves. 99% of the people who hate taxes don't really expect there to be no taxes. They hate excess taxes and spending. The list and premise for it in this case is pretty weak.

 

[OscarB63]

Once again, not your money. Taxes are not "yours".

semantics, but I do agree...once the govt forcibly removes it from your possession, it ceases to be "your money".

 

[Pinkie]

semantics, but I do agree...once the govt forcibly removes it from your possession, it ceases to be "your money".

Well, yes...but it wasn't "all yours" to begin with. You owe a debt to your fellow citizens, which you pay via taxes.

How much, when it is collected, etc. are all areas of legitimate dispute...but the legitimacy of taxation itself is not, IMO.

 

[OscarB63]

Well, yes...but it wasn't "all yours" to begin with. You owe a debt to your fellow citizens, which you pay via taxes.

How much, when it is collected, etc. are all areas of legitimate dispute...but the legitimacy of taxation itself is not, IMO.

so when are "the poor" going to start paying their debt to their fellow citizens instead of always being on the receiving end? or is this debt to your fellow citizens only incurred by the middle class and the rich?

 

[Pinkie]

so when are "the poor" going to start paying their debt to their fellow citizens instead of always being on the receiving end?

I was poor, after my parents died. I guess I was still poor in college. I borrowed money, went to law school, bought a house, paid property and income taxes, raised a child and she is now also a taxpayer.

I realize not every poor person can do all this...but some can. Poor is not (or should not be) a life sentence.

 

[OscarB63]

I was poor, after my parents died. I guess I was still poor in college. I borrowed money, went to law school, bought a house, paid property and income taxes, raised a child and she is now also a taxpayer.

I realize not every poor person can do all this...but some can. Poor is not (or should not be) a life sentence.

I've said that a dozen times on this forum. I too was born poor, grew up poor, and worked my way out of it. not every poor person has to become a lawyer or a rocket scientist, but opportunity exists for them to get out of poverty.

 

[Pinkie]

I've said that a dozen times on this forum. I too was born poor, grew up poor, and worked my way out of it. not every poor person has to become a lawyer or a rocket scientist, but opportunity exists for them to get out of poverty.

It does for some, but not for all. Meanwhile, some formerly middle class people become poor, through no fault of their own.

 

[TurtleDude]

Well, yes...but it wasn't "all yours" to begin with. You owe a debt to your fellow citizens, which you pay via taxes.

How much, when it is collected, etc. are all areas of legitimate dispute...but the legitimacy of taxation itself is not, IMO.

what crap half of the citizens are using more than they pay

 

[Pinkie]

what crap half of the citizens are using more than they pay

I agree, but I bet we don't pick the same half.