Taxes suck!

[FactsOfLife]

spoken like a true communist.

[p8ntball1016]

Originally posted by FactsOfLife
spoken like a true communist.

spoken like a true facist.

[Python14]

This isn't about need. Need-based economys just seem like Socialism to me. If I earn $50, I want it to remain my $50 that I earned. Not Joe's $50s that he did not earn.

Just because someone needs something doesn't mean they get it. I NEEDed gasoline this morning, does that mean I got it? NO. I did not, because my last paycheck was divied out to other people. My needs were ignored in favor of other people's need, WITHOUT MY CONSENT. Last I checked, that's called stealing. The government stole my gas money, that I earned, and gave it to someone else who did not earn it.

Just because you think the upper class doesn't need anymore, doesn't mean they don't earn it. And plus, who is to say they don't need it? I mean, who determines who needs what? The government? No, because it's too big to determine what 300 million people need. You? No, because you jump to conclusions to easily. Me? No, because I think people need what they earn. Tom Kaye? No, because he is producing quality products when in fact we don't need quality products, we just need a gun that shoots. No one can determine what you and I need other than ourselves.

You need-based idea is now void.

[Sunshine]

they give MY money to someone who didn't earn it. I took the inisutive to go out and get a job (and keep it), what makes me different from them. Go paint a fence, be a buss person, do something other than take MY money from me.

i realy dont know if any of that made sence, but i don't have time to re-read it cuz i have to go to work and earn money for poor lazy people.

[Python14]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


Why should a lower class work hard to only tire himself out more and still not have enough to survive.

You will work harder as an upper class for you will make more money. Take away are tax system the way it is now and you will be back in the 1800's (hence revolutions all over Europe, the poor will bare the burden of the society will the rich get richer. The poor will revolt since they have nothing to lose. Work and die, or revolt and might live, kind of an easy choice.

I just thought I'd highlight some details. I am not an 19th century European. This is not 19th century Europe either. I earn my money legitamately whereas 19th century European upper classmen and women earned it by taxing the poor so heavily that they literally had NOTHING. Very few people today have NOTHING. I have seen the worst of the worst. I have helped people who you consider "the poor". I have met people who have families to support that are larger than most of ours, and they must do it on a paycheck smaller than mine, in an area that continually gets battered by the weather and elements. The only health care available is at a free clinic provided by the local Coal mine. However, you portray them like they are vicious little animals who will bite the hand who feeds them. I'm sorry but you are incorrect.

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by p8ntball1016
spoken like a true facist.

From the mouth of AO's premiere child.

Learn what the word means before you dare call me that.

Punk. And a scumbag New Jersey Punk at that.

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by FactsOfLife
spoken like a true communist.

You wouldn't know what communism is if it smacked you up side the head.

And no this isn't the idea of communism; the shear fact that I am advocating an uneven pay scale means that this is no where near communism. Man I thought that you in all your infinite wisdom would have been able to understand that.

Python, economies is economies, it is a basic fact that a people who have been subjugated for a long time, who have no other means of survival will rise up.

Joe did earn his $50 but he only got paid $5. can we afford to pay him $5, no. That is life, but while he is making $5 it takes 8 to live, so the Steve making $50 will contributed 3 dollars to allow Joe to make the 8 needed to live. Now Steven makes $50, but takes home $47, and gets to keep his job, and his $50 dollar salary. IN the end all win.

Do you see the hypocrisy in your post. If you cut your tax base, in order to fund the basic of the government, you will have to tax the poor to death. It is a two way street.

[Restola]

Originally posted by p8ntball1016
spoken like a true facist.

Spoken like someone who has yet to say anything of substance on these boards.

At least the other posters (including CB) have made some points in the past, and backed them up with evidence they believe. You jump into these conversations like a braty child and expect anyone to take what you say seriously?

Say something of substance and back it up, or stop trying to play with the grownups.

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


You wouldn't know what communism is if it smacked you up side the head.

And no this isn't the idea of communism; the shear fact that I am advocating an uneven pay scale means that this is no where near communism. Man I thought that you in all your infinite wisdom would have been able to understand that.

Please spare us your nonsense. Time and again you have advocated taking the hard earned monies away from the so called "rich" in this country for no other reason than they're rich.

As for understanding anything YOU have to say, I stopped trying months ago. All it did was make my head hurt.

[Restola]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
Joe did earn his $50 but he only got paid $5. can we afford to pay him $5, no. That is life, but while he is making $5 it takes 8 to live, so the Steve making $50 will contributed 3 dollars to allow Joe to make the 8 needed to live. Now Steven makes $50, but takes home $47, and gets to keep his job, and his $50 dollar salary. IN the end all win.

I have no problem with that. I have no problem with States putting those laws in place.

I have a problem with:
The federal government forcing it. The old saying goes, if you want more of something subsidize it. We've spent trillions to fight poverty, and we've seen zero return.

Although I honestly believe if the (productive) American people were able to keep basically all of their money, they would donate huge quantities of it to helping people who need help. I know CB wouldn't agree. Maybe some "rich" people are just greedy bastards who want to sleep on piles of money and never spend it. Even if some are, private organizations would do so much better on so much less, we wouldn't even notice the difference.

[FactsOfLife]

It's been shown time and again, that LOWERING tax rates INCREASES .....gasp.... REVENUES to the government.

Know why?

Because the people who pay the majority of taxes don't feel the need to hide their taxable incomes the same way they do when confiscatory rates are enacted.

I have NO doubt that The Boy will disagree with this.

after all, he's IN college while I've only got 3 lousy degrees...

[LockNLoad]

But wait

Some valid points.

But, I think that rich people usually do one thing very well-and that is make more money with the money they have.

If the tax brackets are held the same, higher revenues are achieved when they are taxed at the same rate.

However, it does seem that the laws are written so that the rich folks can always find a *loop-hole* and avoid the intent of the tax laws. Because, frankly, no rich person is willingly going to give away their money without a ROI.

The result is that the largest effect of higher tax burden is placed on the middle class. Even though the highest monetary percentage is placed on the richest, the largest per person percentage is placed on the middle class and has the greatest effect.

The middle class is the buffer between the haves and have nots. The result of this is a smaller middle class, which leads to the catastrpohic gap between those and top and those on the bottom.

[Sunshine]

ya what he said, i cant talk good but LockNLoad just said what i try to say when i get in these conversations.
(i realy have no right using the english language)

well put LockNLoad.

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by FactsOfLife


Please spare us your nonsense. Time and again you have advocated taking the hard earned monies away from the so called "rich" in this country for no other reason than they're rich.

As for understanding anything YOU have to say, I stopped trying months ago. All it did was make my head hurt.

Can you read, please learn if you can not.

I have said many reasons why it is necessary to take money away from the hard working rich and give it to the hard working poor, other then just because they are rich. Sometimes I think you just like to argue for arguing sake.

Restola, I beg for the day to come where people that have money will be willing to give up what is needed in order to help those survive that need it. But it didn't happen before we had the welfare programs, it will not happen now. I am normally a very optimistic person, but in this case I am very pessimistic.

I agree locknload. I think SNL did the best sketch of that idea. Bush Sr. (dana carvy) got up there and said we need to raise revenues so we need to raise taxes, we can not raise the rich for they can afford lawyers, we can not raise the poor, for they can not afford it, so it is left up to the middle class, for they do not keep receipts.

[einhander619]

While I generally refuse to speak to anyone about politics under almost any circumstance, I have got to say that p8ntball1016's little "fascist" stunt was completely out of line.

originally posted by FactsOfLife

Punk. And a scumbag New Jersey Punk at that.

sigged.

Gentlemen, continue with your debate.