• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The haymarket challenge... Can you answer a q about a simple statement you made? (1 Viewer)

Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
So what? Those who control the most wealth should pay the most. This is not rocket science. At least to most of us who know the difference between the words TO and TOO.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/90108-truth-can-afford-pay-taxes-95.html#post1059531542
Click to expand...
Once again, for the forth time... answer the question in bold. I don't want to know anything about the Constitution per se, I do want to know your defense of your statement and where in the Constitution it is supported.
Click to expand...
For the fifth time, or is it sixth now as it jumped to another thread, as you were thread banned from the original... please answer the question to the statement you made. And... just to stop you from playing your little game... I am not interested in knowing anything about the Constitution. What I want to know is your defense/explanation of the statement and how it fits with the Constitution.

You have had a week to think about it, you have been PM'd... I await your reply.

I offer it to other Leftists who have similar beliefs too. Step up to the plate, and take a swing.

.
 
Click to expand...
Where did I mention the Constitution in the post you quoted?
 
Where did I mention the Constitution in the post you quoted?
 
you expect an honest answer from haymarket?

smiley-laughing024.gif
 
I am still waiting for my answer. Maybe Whovian can supply it?
 
This is yet another reason why the tax code should be simple, so people like Haymarket have a chance at accomplishing it without professional hand holders..

Haymarket, you made a claim, and I asked you to explain it in regards to the Constitution, and all you have done since that point is run away like a little girl.

Is it because you cannot clarify your statement above? The one in the blog's OP... in bold. Seems so.

.
 
Last edited:
What does my statement of opinion based on my observations of American society have to do with you asking about something in the Constitution?

Clarify? I could not be clearer than I was originally. Those who control the mot wealth should pay the most. That is crystal clear and always was.
 
Last edited:
Moderator's Warning:
All rules associated with the main board are in effect for the blog section. That means no call out threads, no personal attacks, no trolling, baiting or flaming. This will be the only warning.
 
nothing in the constitution supports his view of FROM EACH ACCORDING TO THEIR ABILITY
 
It's not just 'calling someone out'. He did so under false pretense. Demanding haymarket explain it in Constitutional terms AS IF Haymarket had used such.

Further, it's fallacious debate. As many things (like abortion, drugs, etc) not being mentioned in the Constitution doesn't prevent/preclude either laws or rational debate for or against them.

And FYI, the founders did have opinions on Concentrated wealth.. which Only Taxes could remedy.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...-redistribution-wealth-51.html#post1059549096

-
 
Last edited:
the founders opposed income taxes. They also only wanted landowners voting.
 
yeah - back in 1787

my calendar says it is not 1787 anymore.

a nod of thanks to mbig. :peace
 
Hey Haymarket... it's been 3 weeks. Craft an answer yet?

.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom