• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

What is socialism?

Thats the point of having a military..


I don't mind most of the R&D research they do either....big government has always had a knack for using things like the patriot act...
 
Last edited:
128shot said:
you haven't heard that income tax is illegal ?

Umm... I don't know where you've heard this... but I suggest you check your sources because I'm thinking that the people you're listening to are feeding you mindless propoganda :\
 
Actually, I was shocked when I was told this..


Let me explain..

the 16th ammendment was not ratified by congress, and the 16th ammendment is what allows for income tax to happen..

Therefore, i do believe it is illegal.
 
cutting our military to much could cause high unimployment
 
128shot said:
the 16th ammendment was not ratified by congress, and the 16th ammendment is what allows for income tax to happen..

You're right! It wasn't ratified by congress!

Thankfully there's more than one way to ratify an amendment.
Here's the list that each state approved it, so it was ratified on March 7th, 1913 when New Hampshire gave their approval.

State
Date
*

Alabama
Aug 10, 1909

Kentucky
Feb 8, 1910

South Carolina
Feb 19, 1910

Illinois
Mar 1, 1910

Mississippi
Mar 7, 1910

Oklahoma
Mar 10, 1910

Maryland
Apr 8, 1910

Georgia
Aug 3, 1910

Texas
Aug 16, 1910

Ohio
Jan 19, 1911

Idaho
Jan 20, 1911

Oregon
Jan 23, 1911

Washington
Jan 26, 1911

Montana
Jan 30, 1911

Indiana
Jan 30, 1911

California
Jan 31, 1911

Nevada
Jan 31, 1911

South Dakota
Feb 3, 1911

Nebraska
Feb 9, 1911

North Carolina
Feb 11, 1911

Colorado
Feb 15, 1911

North Dakota
Feb 17, 1911

Kansas
Feb 18, 1911

Michigan
Feb 23, 1911

Iowa
Feb 24, 1911

Missouri
Mar 16, 1911

Maine
Mar 31, 1911

Tennessee
Apr 7, 1911

Arkansas
Apr 22, 1911

Wisconsin
May 26, 1911

New York
Jul 12, 1911

Arizona
Apr 6, 1912

Minnesota
Jun 11, 1912

Louisiana
Jun 28, 1912

West Virginia
Jan 31, 1913

New Mexico
Feb 3, 1913
*

Massachusetts
Mar 4, 1913

New Hampshire
Mar 7, 1913

Ratified in 1302 days


Again, I think the people that you're listening to are trying to sway your opinion by not giving you all the facts, or blatantly misleading you.

Use common sense. There's no way the law community would allow something THIS BIG to go thru a loophole. Question your sources because they have an agenda they're working for.
 
"The following is the text of a full-page ad in today's USA TODAY. If you have any questions call me on (518) 656-3578. My name is Bob Schulz. I'm the chairman of the Foundation that ran the ad."

FULL PAGE AD.

It's not a real article. It's an ad. It doesn't have to be confinded to certain things like truth or accuracy. Please think about what you're reading before you take them as truth.
 
My anti-taxation got the better of me.

you're right, but I'm still against income tax.....
 
128shot said:
My anti-taxation got the better of me.

you're right, but I'm still against income tax.....

Fair enough. Opinions are opinions and everyone's entitled to theirs :)
 
Agreed. I'd be all for the flat taxation....

I think there is enough evidence that this would work.
 
128shot said:
Agreed. I'd be all for the flat taxation....

I think there is enough evidence that this would work.


Yes, it would work. But it's horrible and less effective.

Flat taxation hurts the very priniples that they rest on. Taxation doesn't rest on equality of money given, it rests on equality of sacrifice.

Someone who makes 25,000 /yr needs all that money to survive at a basic level. Taxing 10% on a progressive tax and 25% on a flat tax is HUGE!

2,500 - 6,250 is -3,750. That's the difference between childcare and none. Between health care and none.

On someone who makes 100,000 or so, all of their basic needs are met with 40% taxation thru progressive systems. They have health care, childcare, cars, a home and not an apartment, and a college savings program for thier kids. WHY ARE THEY THE ONES WHO NEED TO KEEP MORE MONEY?

It's not like those making less than them are financially more well off just because they pay less taxes.

It boils down to a system of equality. The fairest way to judge eqality is thru sacrifice.
 
What about the idea of lock bracketed flat tax?

I know technically this isn't "flat tax", but its a much better idea..
 
128shot said:
What about the idea of lock bracketed flat tax?

I know technically this isn't "flat tax", but its a much better idea..

I don't know if I've ever heard of that before...

I'm assuming that it's something like

25k-30k a year pay 15%
30k-40k pay 20%
40k-55k pay 25%

I guess there are good aspects to this, like a smaller IRS. If everything is put into 4 (random #) catagories then it would make it much more mainstream. Plus make it more difficult to cheat on taxes.

But then you'd need sub brackets too. Like people with children in college, or the actual kids in college.

hmm... I'm not ready to give a support or not support that. It'd take some thinking about.
 
I guess it could be okay as long as there was an option to have your specific case reviewed and an individual price given for people with special circumstances.

good question tho :)
 
I was thinking something much more wide, that is too much interval for me..


15% 25% and 35%....
 
TJS0110 said:
Ok yes your right, however wouldn't this entire system make people to reliant on the government to support them with a living wage? What i mean is that people have to feel like they have a stake in society if you just give them there job and wage they don't make there way in society. Also, what i meant by people would mess it up is that we would be entering a socialist system with so many x factors that it would be very dangerous. We have lived in this system fir what like 60-100 yrs(i mean the way the system works not the time of America conceptionWe have been able to learn about our system. If we entered the socialist system we would probably find some serious loop holes(like in our tax system). Thats all i meant.
Aren't individual today 'reliant' on businesses to support them? Personally, I'd much rather be 'supported' by an organization over which I have considerable power: a democratically elected government.

Actually, with some very minor modifications, I think any graduated tax system (like we have) could easily be used in socialism. Basically, we'd just make it more graduated.
 
So, I'm punished under socialism for my ambition,

and under Capitalism, I get some type of reward for bringing my ambition to light.

What are you fighting here? corruption or capitalism?
 
The only the nation that comes remotely close to socialism, as described by the socialists, would probably have to be Sweden.


As for capitalism, you can only make a profit, if you are producing what people want. Supply and demand. So both capitalism and socialism share the virtue, of what does the public need? The real difference comes down, to whether you believe individuals should be allowed to follow their own financial goals, or whether they are dictated by the state.

As a Libertarian I believe that people should have social and economic freedom.
 
Libertarians unite!
 
128shot said:
So, I'm punished under socialism for my ambition,

and under Capitalism, I get some type of reward for bringing my ambition to light.

What are you fighting here? corruption or capitalism?
Where did I say you are 'punished' for your ambition? There is certainly a graduated tax system, yes, but a rich man will still rake in considerably more than a poor man. The fact that your taxes will be higher does nothing to lower your social status. Those with higher skills will morel ikely make it to the top with the abolishment of inheritance, so I'd say that you are rewarded for ambition, and it's easier to be rewarded. I'm fighting capitalism, certainly even a libertarian should see this!
 
haha..


Just wondering is all. Some people turn to socialism as a way of trying to stop corruption. Just wanted your angle..


Anyway, taxation is punishment, and thats the libertarian view.
 
Originally Posted by Kelzie
I realize you weren't saying that. But a lot of people think that welfare is corrupt and taking care of a bunch of lazy people, and I have never seen any numbers that support it.

You must have never meet anyone on welfare before.
 
jamesrage said:
You must have never meet anyone on welfare before.
Kelzie said:
Food stamps FED me and my family when I was a kid, and it is really disturbing to me that some people think that we didn't deserve to eat. And it wasn't easy for my mom to get them either. She had to check in once a month, so they could make sure she was still going to school. It is NOT that easy to mooch off of welfare.

I need ten characters (outside of quotes) to post this message. But I didn't need them. The quotes speak for themselves.
 
ncallaway said:
I need ten characters (outside of quotes) to post this message. But I didn't need them. The quotes speak for themselves.

Hmm. Thanks. Was going to post it myself but you did it for me.:lol:
 
Originally Posted by Kelzie
Hmm. Thanks. Was going to post it myself but you did it for me.

I appologize, I did not read the whole thread.
I knew people who actually needed welfare and foodstamps and I knew alot more people who only abused welfare and foodstamps.
I remember this woman was complaining that the people at her child's school kept asking when she was going to get a job.She had the audacity to state that
welfare gives her the opportunity to not have to work and that it was her right to work.I also knew other women actually had more children just so they can get more money.
I beleave welfare should only be a helping hand and not a hand out.Hand outs only create dependancy.
 
Back
Top Bottom