- Joined
- Jan 28, 2012
- Messages
- 16,386
- Reaction score
- 7,793
- Location
- Where I am now
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Don't like it?Even cpwill admits that the term FAIR or FAIRNESS needs to be crushed and flushed in a discussion on taxes. It is a term which nobody agrees upon from either side. As such it is meaningless and is an obstacle in debate.
Voting and taxes are intimately related. Perhaps your ignorance of this is the problem? At the national level tax laws are passed by our elected representatives. We vote them into office to make most of our governmental decisions for us. If you don't like that system there are three options open to you as noted earlier.
Most taxes, sales and property taxes where I live for example, are such that The People vote on them directly. My state/county/city representatives can recommend a change in taxes but The People vote on those changes directly, which could include getting rid of them completely (if we all went collectively insane). There are also ways citizens can put changes on the ballot, including changes in taxes. So, no, I'm not avoiding anything. If anything you are avoiding your personal responsibility to government - in fact, you seem completely blind to it. You cannot separate voting and the laws that result from the outcome of that vote, including tax laws.
Ed:
BTW - In the past 15+ years here I have voted twice to raise property taxes and once not to raise them. They've been raised once. Voting works. If you don't vote then don't bitch about the outcome.
Even cpwill admits that the term FAIR or FAIRNESS needs to be crushed and flushed in a discussion on taxes. It is a term which nobody agrees upon from either side. As such it is meaningless and is an obstacle in debate.
I did address your points as I saw them. You are welcome to try again.That is what I thought some empty gibberish that is supposed to somehow face my argument by not even trying to counter any points made. We have a name for that and its called complete failure. I just recovered from my migraine that you caused me just for you to cause me another one. Thanks for that.
I did address your points as I saw them. You are welcome to try again.
Maybe it's that highfalutin way you'all have of speakin' that clogs the chute?
Communication is a two-way street. I've done my part, I responded to what I thought were your points. It is now your turn - and just saying "you didn't address my points" doesn't move the conversation any further down the road. If you feel I haven't addressed them then you should post them again with additional comments for clarity.Then you think the government coming up with what you can vote on actually has anything to do with what I posted? That doesn't exactly speak highly of your intelligence.
No, it only happens when around you stupid posts that fail on some unexplainable level,
This coming from the guy that used it as a key gear in his arguments for months until one day he wake up and just decided to drop it like a stone for no apparent reason.
Even cpwill admits that the term FAIR or FAIRNESS needs to be crushed and flushed in a discussion on taxes. It is a term which nobody agrees upon from either side. As such it is meaningless and is an obstacle in debate.[/QUOTE
you are making the rest of us conservatives look bad by dodging debate and eroding free speach.
Even cpwill admits that the term FAIR or FAIRNESS needs to be crushed and flushed in a discussion on taxes. It is a term which nobody agrees upon from either side. As such it is meaningless and is an obstacle in debate.[/QUOTE
you are making the rest of us conservatives look bad by dodging debate and eroding free speach.
....huh????? :shock::roll:
I'm sorry, did you miss the part below that I have now bolded for emphasis?Then you think the government coming up with what you can vote on actually has anything to do with what I posted?
If so,Most taxes, sales and property taxes where I live for example, are such that The People vote on them directly. My state/county/city representatives can recommend a change in taxes but The People vote on those changes directly, which could include getting rid of them completely (if we all went collectively insane). There are also ways citizens can put changes on the ballot, including changes in taxes. So, no, I'm not avoiding anything. If anything you are avoiding your personal responsibility to government - in fact, you seem completely blind to it. You cannot separate voting and the laws that result from the outcome of that vote, including tax laws.
That doesn't exactly speak highly of your intelligence.
Communication is a two-way street. I've done my part, I responded to what I thought were your points. It is now your turn - and just saying "you didn't address my points" doesn't move the conversation any further down the road. If you feel I haven't addressed them then you should post them again with additional comments for clarity.
I'm sorry, did you miss the part below that I have now bolded for emphasis?
If so,
And where does that accusation leave us? Impasse because you can't reword your original point(s?) to make more sense?Oh ****ing please! I have no obligation to do anything here. You purposely avoided the points I brought up so you can continue to go on about voting. Don't pretend that its somehow my failure to commute here when it's clearly you own.
I don't know what the hell you "suggested". If you're expecting everyone to read between your hair-thin lines then I must tell you, I misplaced my magnifying glass - you'll have to be more obvious.As if I somehow suggested that is all you said? :roll:
And where does that accusation leave us? Impasse because you can't reword your original points to make more sense?
It wasn't the problem a moment ago? What part of vvv(this post)vvv or the one below it makes you believe otherwise?Looky there folks, its still my fault somehow. This time its all of a sudden that I didn't make sense when that clearly wasn't the problem a moment ago. Good times..
Communication is a two-way street. I've done my part, I responded to what I thought were your points. It is now your turn - and just saying "you didn't address my points" doesn't move the conversation any further down the road. If you feel I haven't addressed them then you should post them again with additional comments for clarity.
I don't know what the hell you "suggested". If you're expecting everyone to read between your hair-thin lines then I must tell you, I misplaced my magnifying glass - you'll have to be more obvious.
I know it's common for lawyers to use small print for those things they want to hide but that attitude doesn't really work for honest discussion.
I could care less about fair. I dont want to be raped on my taxes. Taking damn near half of what I earn is rape. I have a solution. Lets settle on a single rate and kind of tax and be done with it. No loop holes, no graduation, nothing. We set it, and we lock it and forget about it. Instead of limiting the spending we should limit the income. Lock it via the constitution. The single rate should cover ALL goverment, state, local, federal. Outlaw goverment borrowing. The only thing the goverment can spend is what it takes in no more. If there is a surpluss the goverment keeps it. If there is a shortage too bad, something gets cut. Most of what we argue about with goverment comes down to arguements about money. Make the money a moot point. I am tired of wondering if the goverment is going to take MORE of what I earn.
So we should cancel our military, social security, medicare, medicaid, welfare, and infrastucture programs so that we can get out of debt? That's highly irrational
The constitution was set up to have no military in time of peace. Only a standing militia, or in current times a national guard.. there should be no need to be the police of the world/freedom fighters/empire builders that we are.
That to me is unconstitutional.
So we should cancel our military, social security, medicare, medicaid, welfare, and infrastucture programs so that we can get out of debt? That's highly irrational
Whats irrational is spending more than we have. Thats irrational. Raping and pillaging your citizens can only go on for so long before officials start hanging from lamposts. We are close to it were I live.
So you want to disband our military and then magically regroup the srtongest fighting force in the modern world at the snap of a finger? That is also irrational. Furthermore, is it not in the Constitution that Congress has power over organizing the military? If they feel that we should always have a military, then explain how it may be unconstituional.
So you think that we can just make cuts and then the debt will go away and it will be happy days? You wanna know who did that? Andrew Jackson. You wanna know what happened? An awful recession. Arguably the worst of the 19th century.
International economics is vastly different from household economics. You cannot just spend no more than you take in. It would require ridiculous amounts of taxes to be able to spend as much as a superpower needs to stay functional. SImply, what you proposed is entirely impossible and indeed irrational
Really thats funny we well on our way before 9-11 to doing just that, living within our means. Under president Clinton no less. I have had the personal misfortune of seeing people hanging from lamposts for real. NOT pleasent. You obviously have no idea about money and what it is. Goverment debt is bad. Why is simple. Think of money as energy. Goverment debt is a storehouse of energy, that is not being used, it makes or produces nothing. For every loan the goverment takes out there is less money available for enterpeners and companies and individuals to borrow. The money has no velocity. Paying down the debt releases that energy. As less money is borrowed by the goverment that money is now available for investment elsewhere, that money is used to make value either in product or service which adds to the economy, to the pool of available money. Goverment debt is bad in another way as that debt has to be payed which increases the taxes required to sustain those payments. Those taxes increase the overhead a company requires to stay in business which in turn reduces the amount of money available for investment either in the company or other companies. Goverment debt is like household debt, it does not pay for itself and is a total and complete drag on economic production. Business debt is not a complete drag in that the debt is for pruducing more economic output.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?