Dem Tells Radio Host You Dont Deserve To Keep All The Money You Earn [Archive] - Debate Policy

beanerboy

09-15-2011, 09:27 AM

no one is suggesting that it is not appropriate to keep the money that you earn.... it is reasonable to expect to have to contribute SOME of what you earn to the common coffers. Do you really expect the military, for example to work for FREE? Police? The intelligent way to look at the issue is to realize that there will always be an ongoing debate as to how much stuff we will do in common and how much we will do separately.

Some people, for example, don't think that we should collect taxes in order to pay teachers. Others disagree with that. Some feel that healthcare should be nationalized, as it is in nearly every other developed nation in the world, and that healthcare professionals should be paid with money raised through taxes of some sort. Others disagree with that.

That is the very nature of the ongoing debate in the public square... those clashes of ideas and priorities are the very essence of the democratic process, imho.

jimnyc

09-15-2011, 09:33 AM

Also see: Someone who wants $0 spending on the Military, $0 spending on Road maintenance, $0 spending on R&D and so forth...

Then you go back to those of us who DO believe taxes should go to pay for these things - but believe everyone should be taxed equally. But no, the dems want to give the majority a free ride and steal money from the rich and other business owners to pay for their never-ending list of pet projects. While at the same time being able to keep a straight face as they triple the use of welfare claims and hand out unemployment on a forever basis, and find other reasons to give money to those who have no intention of working. If the dems stopped forcing the American taxpayers from paying for the American deadbeats to sit back and enjoy life, that alone would probably take a huge chunk out of the debt and tax problems.

beanerboy

09-15-2011, 09:39 AM

the progressivity of income tax has been accepted by republicans and democrats alike since its very inception. the debate has always centered around the marginal rates that are applied.

jimnyc

09-15-2011, 09:41 AM

the progressivity of income tax has been accepted by republicans and democrats alike since its very inception. the debate has always centered around the marginal rates that are applied.

And yet the dems still find a way to steal more and more and more and more and more from the rich, business owners and middle class in order to prop up the deadbeats of society who have no intention on working. A free meal, thanks to the democrats who needed their votes.

fj1200

09-15-2011, 09:44 AM

Also see: Someone who wants $0 spending on the Military, $0 spending on Road maintenance, $0 spending on R&D and so forth...

Those aren't the same people.

Noir

09-15-2011, 09:45 AM

Then you go back to those of us who DO believe taxes should go to pay for these things - but believe everyone should be taxed equally.

Which means you do not derseve to keep all the money you earn. Again i'mm repeat, anyone who does think they should keep all the money they earn is an idiot.

Now what the taxes taken should then be spent on is a totally different question, but as to the question "do you deserve to keep all the money you earn" the answer is most certainly no.

fj1200

09-15-2011, 09:53 AM

Which means you do not derseve to keep all the money you earn. Again i'mm repeat, anyone who does think they should keep all the money they earn is an idiot.

Now what the taxes taken should then be spent on is a totally different question, but as to the question "do you deserve to keep all the money you earn" the answer is most certainly no.

Your mindset is backward. Rather than individuals having to justify what they get to keep, government should have to justify what is necessary.

Noir

09-15-2011, 09:59 AM

Your mindset is backward. Rather than individuals having to justify what they get to keep, government should have to justify what is necessary.

My mindset is that we do not deserve to keep all the money we earn. As i said, what the taxes are then spent on is a matter for debate, but as regards the OP, its the first sentence that counts.

fj1200

09-15-2011, 10:17 AM

My mindset is that we do not deserve to keep all the money we earn. As i said, what the taxes are then spent on is a matter for debate, but as regards the OP, its the first sentence that counts.

Yup, statist mindset; the people do not deserve, government deserves. The Dem party has it in spades.

J.T

09-15-2011, 10:23 AM

Then you go back to those of us who DO believe taxes should go to pay for these things

Oh, so you don't believe you deserve to keep all the money you earn? It is the government's money? Your money belongs to the collective to do with as the collective decides?

give the majority a free ride and steal money from the rich
The bottom 50% controls 2.5% of the wealth. I'll tell ya what, we'll agree to your demand for 'fairness'; when we all control the same amount of wealth and have the same income, we can all pay the same tax rate.

And yet the dems still find a way to steal more and more and more and more and more from the rich, business owners

2439244124422443

jimnyc

09-15-2011, 10:30 AM

JT - How much of total taxes collected is paid by the top 2% of the richest people in America? I'd say they pay their fair share already. Tax should be based the same across the board on each dollar, not by who can give the government the most money to pay for their constituents to get a free ride.

ConHog

09-15-2011, 10:59 AM

J.T

09-15-2011, 11:04 AM

You are correct, it IS reasonable to expect to have to contribute some of what you earn to the common coffers. Please pass that along to the 47% of earners in this country who pay NOTHING in federal income tax.

You do know they pay other taxes, right?

Also, they control <3% of the wealth in the country. The top 5% controls ~85%. So stop crying. Nobody's buying your sob story.

Does your class warfare against the working man ever end?

LuvRPgrl

09-15-2011, 11:08 AM

Which means you do not derseve to keep all the money you earn. Again i'mm repeat, anyone who does think they should keep all the money they earn is an idiot.

Now what the taxes taken should then be spent on is a totally different question, but as to the question "do you deserve to keep all the money you earn" the answer is most certainly no.

Does that apply to everyone?
If not, how is that fair?
If it does, then why do so many"poor" people not pay any taxes? They keep all the money they earn.

fj1200

09-15-2011, 11:12 AM

It is the government's money?

That's a nice argument for gun control you've got right there. It's the government's money, it's the government's guns... Your right to guns should be controlled by those who have no guns. You're quite the statist when the state agrees with you.

fj1200

09-15-2011, 11:16 AM

You do know they pay other taxes, right?

Federally speaking right? Those were billed as "contributions" to retirement so not really taxes eh? I guess a statist like yourself is all for the state seizing wealth building income which inhibits the "working poor" from building wealth.

J.T

09-15-2011, 11:27 AM

That's a nice argument for gun control you've got right there. It's the government's money, it's the government's guns... Your right to guns should be controlled by those who have no guns. You're quite the statist when the state agrees with you.
You realize you're responding to jimnyc's argument, right?

Federally speaking right? Those were billed as "contributions" to retirement so not really taxes eh?
Right, you can call the capital gains tax a 'national sustainability contribution' too if you want, but it's still a tax.

Maybe we should call it a 'fee' (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?32479-What-is-the-Purpose-of-the-Concealment-Tax)?

Also, will you people please make up your minds? Half the time you people say I'm a communist (which would mean I seek the abolition of the nation-state and pursue a stateless and classless society) and the other half of the time you people claim I'm a statist (which would make one wonder why I'm always arguing against the USA PATRIOT act, the massive military, the worship of COTUS and SCTOUS, and federalism).

LuvRPgrl

09-15-2011, 11:46 AM

[QUOTE=J.T;493070]

The bottom 50% controls 2.5% of the wealth. I'll tell ya what, we'll agree to your demand for 'fairness'; when we all control the same amount of wealth and have the same income,

QUOTE]

1. there are alot of people who look to others for leadership. They dont want to invest their money in speculative ventures. They like the tried and true, slow but steady, life is fine as it is.
Then there are others who are always trying to improve things. They invest their money into speculative ventures.

2. If a person saves their money, instead of paying for things like big screen tv, beer, audacious 20" wheels, etc etc, and then invest it in a venture,, but it goes belly up, are the other taxpayers going to make sure he gets his money back? If he has to pay for potential losses, then he should collect potential profits. If he doesnt, nobody will invest and we will still be pulling plows with cows.

3. CLASS WARFARE? The idea the Dems are for the little guy is a joke. They get more from big corps than the Repubs. They represent the trial lawyers assoc. What they do is make it LOOK like they are fighting the Repubs bu t they arent.

4.One part of the solution is for the govt to run only things that the private section cant. When they start paying for things like college education, its bogus. I couldnt afford a college edu, but now they expect me to pay for someone elses? How is that fair. ANSWER THE QUESTION.
IS IT FAIR I PAY FOR THE COLLEGE EDU OF AN ILLEGAL ALIEN, BUT CANT AFFORD TO SEND MY OWN DAUGHTER TO COLLEGE?

5.They use the worn out excuse, well, instead of leeching off the govt, the illegal dude will get a better job with a college degree, and that will benefit everyone. GUESS WHAT? Anything can apply to that. If Im driving a new car, I dont pollute the air as much, therefore.....

6. When taxes go up, private charity donations go down. Guess who donates to those charities? NOT PEOPLE ON WELFARE. Very wealthy people set up foundations with their money to fund things that benefit everyone. That way the money is utilized much more effectively.

7. If those liberals/Dems were serious about the upper classes paying more, they would donate more of their money, but they dont. When asked, they say no.re

8.When the govt hands out freebies to the poor, they no longer have gratitude. They have the attitude that the govt owes them, like govt prints money for free or something. NONE of them understand how the economy works and how welfare is funded. They have the opportunity for a FREE education, but they throw it away. Guess what, most rich people got rich by becoming educated first.
. I see these dumb, ignorant people all the time, they dont work, they dont go to school, they do nothing to improve their economic status other than playing the lotto, and then they bitch how whitey is holding them down, and its not fair, they deserve more.

.....If they are given everything for free, they have no motivation to improve themselves thru education, but they try to improve by more taxes on the "rich"

Little-Acorn

09-15-2011, 11:55 AM

Imagine that, someone wanting to keep the money they work hard for and earn! :coffee:

Every now and then some leftist fanatic slips, and admits what they really want.

They really need to watch that stuff. People will start to get wise about them.

Oops.... too late.....

LuvRPgrl

09-15-2011, 12:03 PM

You realize you're responding to jimnyc's argument, right?

Right, you can call the capital gains tax a 'national sustainability contribution' too if you want, but it's still a tax.

Maybe we should call it a 'fee' (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?32479-What-is-the-Purpose-of-the-Concealment-Tax)?

Also, will you people please make up your minds? Half the time you people say I'm a communist (which would mean I seek the abolition of the nation-state and pursue a stateless and classless society) and the other half of the time you people claim I'm a statist (which would make one wonder why I'm always arguing against the USA PATRIOT act, the massive military, the worship of COTUS and SCTOUS, and federalism).

If you want a better term, how about INCONSISTENT SCHZOPRHENIC.

If people who earn money on captial gains, have their earnings sliced and diced , their risk is higher and they invest less. Less money means less businesses being ceated. But hey, insteadof creating a decent paying job for some "poor" people, lets just give them the money. That way they can continue sitting on their FAT asses remaining unproductive, remain ignorant, become diabetics, which drains more from the healthcare, but hey, who cares, they deserve free health care anyways.

They come to think that the only way to improve their lot in life is to play the lotto, take more from the rich, win on American idol, or sell drugs.

(just trying to get the subject back on taxes, and off of you.)

J.T

09-15-2011, 12:18 PM

invest it in a venture,, but it goes belly up, are the other taxpayers going to make sure he gets his money back?
If he's rich and corrupt enough, yes. Or have you not been paying attention during the last two administrations?

The idea the Dems are for the little guy is a joke.
:yawn:

Who said anything about the Democrats?
http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?32303-7-of-Congress-s-Ten-Richest-are-Democrats

That you go from class to political party as though a=b goes to prove you have no idea what you're talking about.

4.One part of the solution is for the govt to run only things that the private section cant

Right.. so that leaves...? Absolutely nothing? Let's disband the police (http://www.usmessageboard.com/3265249-post107.html) (why socialize it when companies like American Police Force exist?), the military (Xe can handle it), the fire department (history tells us what a smashing success that was)...

When they start paying for things like college education, its bogus
You'd rather America didn't have any substantial pool f educated professionals to compete in the world market? Methinks you fail to grasp the basic concept of investing in your people.

ILLEGAL ALIEN

Focus. We don't like herring.

6. When taxes go up, private charity donations go down.
:yawn:

If your mythical charities had been enough in the first place, programs like SNAP wouldn't have been needed to begin with. Do you have anything other than tired talking points?

7. If those liberals/Dems
What does party have to do with anything? Also, you can stop the whole 'Liberals' thing. I'm not a Liberal and I never have been. My refutations and condemnations of Liberalism are easily found via google. Just ask anyone from USMB.

:yawn:

just type my name into a search engine with each of your scripted lines

J.T

09-15-2011, 12:21 PM

I insteadof creating a decent paying job
people don't create jobs because they hanve money and say 'hey, I have money, let's pay someone to do something.'
http://blog.cagle.com/2011/06/the-rich-don%E2%80%99t-create-jobs-%E2%80%93-we-do/

http://news.yahoo.com/analysis-companies-churn-profits-jobs-dont-210015904.html

they create jobs because demand necessitates it in order to capitalize upon that demand.

This is business 101. Maybe you should learn how capitalism works before coming back.

LuvRPgrl

09-15-2011, 12:29 PM

If he's rich and corrupt enough, yes. Or have you not been paying attention during the last two administrations?

Who said anything about the Democrats?
http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?32303-7-of-Congress-s-Ten-Richest-are-Democ

just type my name into a search engine with each of your scripted lines

You dodged the one question I specifically asked you to answer. Why is it fair for me to pay for others college educations when I couldnt afford one for myself or my kids? Answer the question please.

J.T

09-15-2011, 12:40 PM

You dodged the one question I specifically asked you to answer. Why is it fair for me to pay for others college educations when I couldnt afford one for myself or my kids? Answer the question please.

I would, but it's not even a valid question. Weren't you one of the idiots screaming about how ~1/2 of Americans (thereby including those you're now pretending to care about) don't pay federal taxes (and therefore don't pay for Pel Grants and other aid acquired via FAFSA and the federal government)?

Interesting to see you now arguing in favour of that progressive taxation.

LuvRPgrl

09-15-2011, 01:00 PM

people don't create jobs because they hanve money and say 'hey, I have money, let's pay someone to do something.'.
Actually, thats exactly what happens, I DO IT ALL THE TIME.

http://blog.cagle.com/2011/06/the-rich-don’t-create-jobs-–-we-do/

http://news.yahoo.com/analysis-companies-churn-profits-jobs-dont-210015904.html

they create jobs because demand necessitates it in order to capitalize upon that demand..
THAT is one way, but not the only. Ever hear of venture capital? Was the internet a neccisity in 1985? Do you know how many people the internet employ

This is business 101. Maybe you should learn how capitalism works before coming back.
Thats funny, I AM CAPITALISM. I borrowed against my house, built a 2500 sq footer worth over a mil, & we hired alot of people, because we had the capital to do it.
Now we are getting set to build a four unit apt building and a 2000 sq ft house, and we will be hiring unemployed people.

LuvRPgrl

09-15-2011, 01:07 PM

I would, but it's not even a valid question. Weren't you one of the idiots screaming about how ~1/2 of Americans (thereby including those you're now pretending to care about) don't pay federal taxes (and therefore don't pay for Pel Grants and other aid acquired via FAFSA and the federal government)?.
hahhahahhaha, well..NO

Interesting to see you now arguing in favour of that progressive taxation.
see answer above.

You getting alzheimers, no worry, obamacare will help you.eal
You neednt accuse me of pretending to care for the poor, I work with them every day. And I dont mean just giving money, I mean going into a shit stinky guys apt and holding him, taking turns with my buddy, cuz he shaking so bad he's about to create an earthquake, and wants nothing more than a drink. Sometimes we get vomitted on. Sometimes we have to fend off a punch or two. Sometimes they even sue us.

so again you dodged the question.

If you want to go toe to toe, at least know what I said and didnt say.

J.T

09-15-2011, 01:15 PM

Ever hear of venture capital?
Again, the motivation if profit, not some charitable 'spread the wealth around' socialist desire on the part of the wealthy to pass out money. A sound investment is one made in a company that succeeds- and the company can only succeed if there is a market demand for the goods or services offered.

Now we are getting set to build a four unit apt building and a 2000 sq ft house, and we will be hiring unemployed people.
Are you making these jobs because you have money and want to pass it out? If so, you'd just give it away on the street corner. The motivation is profit (surplus value or capital).

fj1200

09-15-2011, 01:22 PM

You realize you're responding to jimnyc's argument, right?

Nope. Yours; yet another one of your contradictions.

Right, you can call the capital gains tax a 'national sustainability contribution' too if you want, but it's still a tax.

Maybe we should call it a 'fee' (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?32479-What-is-the-Purpose-of-the-Concealment-Tax)?

It's insurance. Ask FDR.

Also, will you people please make up your minds? Half the time you people say I'm a communist (which would mean I seek the abolition of the nation-state and pursue a stateless and classless society) and the other half of the time you people claim I'm a statist (which would make one wonder why I'm always arguing against the USA PATRIOT act, the massive military, the worship of COTUS and SCTOUS, and federalism).

You're a statist as you've demonstrated many times, you want the state to validate your priorities.

J.T

09-15-2011, 01:31 PM

Nope.

I made no arguments in the post you quoted, genius. Jim's the one who said you don't have a right to all the money you earn.

It's insurance. Ask FDR.

No, it's not. Ask the courts. That's why one doesn't have a right to benefits and congress can deny anyone or everyone SS benefits at any time. For all the rhetoric and 'insurance' sales pitch, they went out of their way to make sure that, legally, it was no such thing. This because of past rulings such as that on the RRA.

jimnyc

09-15-2011, 01:34 PM

I made no arguments in the post you quoted, genius. Jim's the one who said you don't have a right to all the money you earn.

Quote where I stated as much. I think people are entitled to every last cent they earn, but I also understand as a country we all need to chip in a bit for certain things. Stop misquoting me, Mr. Manson! :poke:

fj1200

09-15-2011, 01:41 PM

I made no arguments in the post you quoted, genius. Jim's the one who said you don't have a right to all the money you earn.

I know your position and I know your contradicitons.

No, it's not. Ask the courts. That's why one doesn't have a right to benefits and congress can deny anyone or everyone SS benefits at any time. For all the rhetoric and 'insurance' sales pitch, they went out of their way to make sure that, legally, it was no such thing. This because of past rulings such as that on the RRA.

I know. You're avoiding the wealth stealing effects of SS and that it's not supposed to be a tax, it's supposed to be a contribution.

LuvRPgrl

09-15-2011, 01:46 PM

Again, the motivation if profit, not some charitable 'spread the wealth around' socialist desire on the part of the wealthy to pass out money. A sound investment is one made in a company that succeeds- and the company can only succeed if there is a market demand for the goods or services offered.

Are you making these jobs because you have money and want to pass it out? If so, you'd just give it away on the street corner. The motivation is profit (surplus value or capital).

apparently you cant read.
Foundations are created by rich people, so yea, they make profits and give some to charity

Your last statement is so profusely stupid, if I even tried to answere it, I would get quarantined for possibility of being infected with idiotism

Try responding to what I actually post.
Replying to your own comments doesnt win you any debates.

You know, some people can multi task. It is possible that investments can be into companies that are meeting increasing demands, computers, and create something that doesnt exist, and create the market and demand. Thats what INVENTIONS are all about.

Now, really try hard to respond to what I or FJ are posting, and not just some sarcastic sly remark cuz you got nothing, zero, zilch, nada.

J.T

09-15-2011, 01:47 PM

Quote where I stated as much.

Then you go back to those of us who DO believe taxes should go to pay for these things

Where do taxes come from?

I think people are entitled to every last cent they earn, but I also understand as a country we all need to chip in a bit for certain things.
So taxes should be voluntary?

it's not supposed to be a tax, it's supposed to be a contribution.

And the concealment tax is a 'processing fee' :rolleyes:

fj1200

09-15-2011, 01:50 PM

And the concealment tax is a 'processing fee' :rolleyes:

Your tangent is stupid as per usual.

jimnyc

09-15-2011, 01:53 PM

Where do taxes come from?

Hard working people, mostly. How come you don't ask me where taxes DON'T come from? Illegals, welfare recipients, people who are unemployed forever - in other words, mostly Dem supporters who vote Dem to continue the free ride.

So taxes should be voluntary?

No, IF you REALLY read my posts you would know that I support an equal tax to all taxpayers. It can't be voluntary or we would never see another cent from the few Dems who do pay taxes.

ConHog

09-15-2011, 02:08 PM

I wish yall would quit fucking this thread up by quoting and responding to that baboon JT as if he were really here for an honest debate.

beanerboy

09-15-2011, 03:19 PM

You are correct, it IS reasonable to expect to have to contribute some of what you earn to the common coffers. Please pass that along to the 47% of earners in this country who pay NOTHING in federal income tax.

their tax dollars - usually from non-income tax, regressive taxes, find their way into the common coffers.

ConHog

09-15-2011, 03:27 PM

their tax dollars - usually from non-income tax, regressive taxes, find their way into the common coffers.

Oh, and the wealthy don't pay those other taxes on top of income taxes? Shut up .

beanerboy

09-15-2011, 03:30 PM

Oh, and the wealthy don't pay those other taxes on top of income taxes? Shut up .

of course they do... and for the wealthy, those taxes are a MUCH smaller portion of THEIR disposable income. THe point is: the common coffers are filled by taxes other than income taxes and the poor contribute to those tax revenues. YOU shut up.

jimnyc

09-15-2011, 03:33 PM

I wonder how much taxes the welfare recipients are paying, that have skyrocketed under McChimpy's administration?

beanerboy

09-15-2011, 03:35 PM

Oh, and the wealthy don't pay those other taxes on top of income taxes? Shut up .

an interesting read:

http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/pubs/wp/03-10-tax_incidence.pdf

and it even has paragraphs.

ConHog

09-15-2011, 03:48 PM

of course they do... and for the wealthy, those taxes are a MUCH smaller portion of THEIR disposable income. THe point is: the common coffers are filled by taxes other than income taxes and the poor contribute to those tax revenues. YOU shut up.

Look commie. How retarded are you?

Look at this

http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/united_states_total_revenue_pie_chart

and then explain to me how much of 25% of the government's revenue (that's the total amount covered by ANY revenue the poor could possibly be paying) you think the poor actually are paying? I would venture a guess that it is about 1% at the most.

So let's be generous and assume that the lower 47% of wage earners in this country are paying 10% of the total revenue . How is that fair?

beanerboy

09-15-2011, 04:16 PM

did you bother to read my link?

It has paragraphs and everything.

J.T

09-15-2011, 05:02 PM

No, IF you REALLY read my posts you would know that I support an equal tax to all taxpayers. It can't be voluntary

So you don't have a right to all the money you earn, after all?

So let's be generous and assume that the lower 47% of wage earners in this country are paying 10% of the total revenue . How is that fair?

They control ~2% of the wealth and they pay 10% of the total revenue? Interesting. The top 5% control ~85% of the wealth. I'm pretty sure they don't pay 425% of the total revenue. You're right, that's no fair at all. The tax burden is much to high on that 47%

People, I've come around. ConHog has convinced me that, to be fair, we must shift more of the tax burden onto the wealthy.

fj1200

09-15-2011, 06:43 PM

jimnyc

09-15-2011, 06:46 PM

JT - you and I cannot be friends anymore. When you are getting "thanked" by beanerboy aka MFM aka Virgil, you're obviously fucked in the head. :coffee:

ConHog

09-15-2011, 07:06 PM

JT - you and I cannot be friends anymore. When you are getting "thanked" by beanerboy aka MFM aka Virgil, you're obviously fucked in the head. :coffee:

BeanerBoy logic

"social security paid in by wealthy = contributions, but social security paid in by poor = taxes"

The only thing missing from this thread is OCA popping in and telling us that he supports raising the taxes on the wealthy but thinks the poor should keep receiving "refunds" that are more than what they paid in.

beanerboy

09-15-2011, 07:24 PM

BeanerBoy logic

"social security paid in by wealthy = contributions, but social security paid in by poor = taxes"

The only thing missing from this thread is OCA popping in and telling us that he supports raising the taxes on the wealthy but thinks the poor should keep receiving "refunds" that are more than what they paid in.

did you read my link?

yes or no

ConHog

09-15-2011, 07:36 PM

did you read my link?

yes or no

Yes, and I disagree with the conclusions.

No matter HOW you dress it up, trying to claim that 50% of the earners in this income paying 0% of the income tax is fair is ludicrous at best and stupid at worst.

beanerboy

09-15-2011, 08:47 PM

Yes, and I disagree with the conclusions.

No matter HOW you dress it up, trying to claim that 50% of the earners in this income paying 0% of the income tax is fair is ludicrous at best and stupid at worst.

The article was factual in nature, not an op-ed. trying to claim that those people do not pay taxes, most of which are extremely regressive in nature, is what is stupid. Idiot.

LuvRPgrl

09-15-2011, 09:20 PM

So you .

Avoiding my question eh.

And BEFORE YOU SAY IT, THE ANSWER IS NOOOOOOOOOO
YOU HAVENT ALREADY ANSWERED IT.

ConHog

09-15-2011, 09:23 PM

The article was factual in nature, not an op-ed. trying to claim that those people do not pay taxes, most of which are extremely regressive in nature, is what is stupid. Idiot.

listen moron, for the purposes of THIS discussion, we are talking about INCOME tax, nothing else. You want to discuss other taxes, by all means start a fucking thread about them. But in THIS thread, stick to the topic, 47% of earners pay NO income tax. Is that a fact or no?

SassyLady

09-15-2011, 09:52 PM

Which means you do not derseve to keep all the money you earn. Again i'mm repeat, anyone who does think they should keep all the money they earn is an idiot.

Now what the taxes taken should then be spent on is a totally different question, but as to the question "do you deserve to keep all the money you earn" the answer is most certainly no.

So, not only do I not get to keep all the money that I earn, are you advocating that I make up the difference for what you don't earn?

We both benefit from police, military and fire protection ... how does one that isn't working pay for their protection?

ConHog

09-15-2011, 10:07 PM

So, not only do I not get to keep all the money that I earn, are you advocating that I make up the difference for what you don't earn?

We both benefit from police, military and fire protection ... how does one that isn't working pay for their protection?

Well according to some of these idiots they pay for them by paying taxes OTHER than income taxes. Never mind that those taxes only make up 25% of the revenue stream, never mind that the wealthy also pay those other taxes........

J.T

09-15-2011, 10:14 PM

Avoiding my question eh.

And BEFORE YOU SAY IT, THE ANSWER IS NOOOOOOOOOO

So not only 'no', but 'NOOOOOOOOOO', you don't have a right to all the money you earn?

So, not only do I not get to keep all the money that I earn

Nope, not according to Luv and jim.

Well according to some of these idiots they pay for them by paying taxes OTHER than income taxes. Never mind that those taxes only make up 25% of the revenue stream, never mind that the wealthy also pay those other taxes........

You already said the lower 47% pay some five times in taxes (as a percent of total revenue) the amount of wealth they control (as a percent of total).

According to your numbers and your call for 'fairness', if anything, their tax burden is too high or that of the top 5% is too low if.

SassyLady

09-15-2011, 10:36 PM

JT....what is wrong with 3% controlling the majority of the wealth? Even if taxes were raised on the just the uber rich.... the politicians would then control it ... and what percent of the total are they?

LuvRPgrl

09-15-2011, 10:39 PM

an interesting read:

http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/pubs/wp/03-10-tax_incidence.pdf

and it even has paragraphs.
That article is so full of holes it would be declared unusable if it was a road. If it was a septic tank, it would be overflowing with shit.

So tell me oh master of dodgeball, if a person is collection welfare and food stamps, uses public transportation, and rents a furnished apt, (which is also paid by section 8) tell me what taxes they pay.

SassyLady

09-15-2011, 10:40 PM

That article is so full of holes it would be declared unusable if it was a road. If it was a septic tank, it would be overflowing with shit.

So tell me oh master of dodgeball, if a person is collection welfare and food stamps, uses public transportation, and rents a furnished apt, (which is also paid by section 8) tell me what taxes they pay.

:clap::clap:

Watch, some idiot will say the rent they pay goes to the landlord who uses it for property taxes, therefore, they are, in fact, paying taxes.

LuvRPgrl

09-15-2011, 10:46 PM

So not only 'no', but 'NOOOOOOOOOO', you don't have a right to all the money you earn?

Nope, not according to Luv and jim.

You already said the lower 47% pay some five times in taxes (as a percent of total revenue) the amount of wealth they control (as a percent of total).

According to your numbers and your call for 'fairness', if anything, their tax burden is too high or that of the top 5% is too low if.

The answer NOOOOOOOO was to your anticipated statement that you have already answered the question that I have asked you repeatedly, but in fact you havent answered. Even a 7th grader would know that is what I was referring to, based on the other content of the post,

So, whats that question you ask, do you have a right to keep....what is that for? IF somebody says no, you dont, so what.
NOW ANSWER THE FREAKING QUESTION YOU COWARD.

LuvRPgrl

09-15-2011, 10:48 PM

:clap::clap:

Watch, some idiot will say the rent they pay goes to the landlord who uses it for property taxes, therefore, they are, in fact, paying taxes.

Yea, but they get renters tax credits, which actually entitles them to cash back from the govt.
Plus, like I said, a huge number of them are on section 8 which pays the rent.

So, in essence, the person paying the taxes to fund section 8, then have to pay taxes when their tax money is spent, double dip. And the guy who the money goes to, is taxed for it also, Triple dip.

J.T

09-15-2011, 10:59 PM

if a person is collection welfare and food stamps, uses public transportation, and rents a furnished apt, (which is also paid by section 8) tell me what taxes they pay.

sales tax

SassyLady

09-15-2011, 11:08 PM

sales tax

on what? if they are using food stamps then they are using tax money that's already been taxed. It's not money they've earned and then spent ... it's money I've earned and have taken away from me so someone else can spend and have my earnings taxed again.

J.T

09-15-2011, 11:11 PM

You know you can't buy underwear, soap, or other necessities with food stamps, right?

LuvRPgrl

09-15-2011, 11:11 PM

sales tax

Sales tax on what?

SassyLady

09-15-2011, 11:13 PM

You know you can't buy underwear, soap, or other necessities with food stamps, right?

says who? Those same people are probably getting some type of subsidy ... which comes from someone else's earnings...which have already been taxed.

So, tell me again how someone who doesn't have a job is actually contributing to the tax base with monies they've "earned" and not with monies that someone else has earned?

LuvRPgrl

09-15-2011, 11:14 PM

You know you can't buy underwear, soap, or other necessities with food stamps, right?

Their welfare check pays for it, so they are simply giving back what was already given to them.

J.T

09-15-2011, 11:21 PM

says who? Those same people are probably getting some type of subsidy ... which comes from someone else's earnings...which have already been taxed.

So, tell me again how someone who doesn't have a job is actually contributing to the tax base with monies they've "earned" and not with monies that someone else has earned?

So now they're unemployed, too?

2447

How 'bout telling us how you plan to tax the income of someone who's unemployed and looking for work?

SassyLady

09-15-2011, 11:23 PM

So now they're unemployed, too?

2447

How 'bout telling us how you plan to tax the income of someone who's unemployed and looking for work?

you can't ... which is my point ... not everyone, in reality, is putting their earnings in the tax base. It's just the same people over and over again who are really supporting the tax revenues.

beanerboy

09-15-2011, 11:26 PM

listen moron, for the purposes of THIS discussion, we are talking about INCOME tax, nothing else. You want to discuss other taxes, by all means start a fucking thread about them. But in THIS thread, stick to the topic, 47% of earners pay NO income tax. Is that a fact or no?

to suggest that income taxes exist somewhere in a vacuum is silly. Taxes are money that people cough up from the money that they earn. To suggest that, because some segment of the population does not pay one form of tax, they do not contribute to the common coffers is fucking ridiculous. The fact remains, and my link clearly proves it, that the poor pay taxes, and the taxes they pay are way more regressive than the taxes the rich pay.

SassyLady

09-15-2011, 11:27 PM

beanerboy

09-15-2011, 11:28 PM

you can't ... which is my point ... not everyone, in reality, is putting their earnings in the tax base. It's just the same people over and over again who are really supporting the tax revenues.

bullshit. everyone puts their earnings into the tax base. and the poor put more of theirs in as a percentage of their meager incomes, than the rich do.

SassyLady

09-15-2011, 11:29 PM

to suggest that income taxes exist somewhere in a vacuum is silly. Taxes are money that people cough up from the money that they earn. To suggest that, because some segment of the population does not pay one form of tax, they do not contribute to the common coffers is fucking ridiculous. The fact remains, and my link clearly proves it, that the poor pay taxes, and the taxes they pay are way more regressive than the taxes the rich pay.

but....are they paying their fair share .... is fair share calculated on how much they use a service or how much they earn....cause I have to tell you that those who aren't paying income taxes are probably using more of the services that are paid from the income taxes.

J.T

09-15-2011, 11:30 PM

you can't ... which is my point ... not everyone, in reality, is putting their earnings in the tax base. It's just the same people over and over again who are really supporting the tax revenues.

The top 5% control 85% of the wealth. How much of the taxes do they pay? conhog said the bottom 47% pay 10% of revenue; I doubt the 48-86th percentile pay less than 5%, so you really don't have much of a case if you intend to keep arguing the wealthy are being persecuted. If anything, the class war is clearly going in the favour of the richest americans.

SassyLady

09-15-2011, 11:31 PM

bullshit. everyone puts their earnings into the tax base. and the poor put more of theirs in as a percentage of their meager incomes, than the rich do.

not everyone is earning money to put into the coffers.....in any way, shape or form.

J.T

09-15-2011, 11:31 PM

not everyone is earning money to put into the coffers.....in any way, shape or form.
Then let's put America to work by stimulating economic growth. Step one: increasing demand

beanerboy

09-15-2011, 11:33 PM

but....are they paying their fair share .... is fair share calculated on how much they use a service or how much they earn....cause I have to tell you that those who aren't paying income taxes are probably using more of the services that are paid from the income taxes.

a biased opinion with no basis in fact.

You are "probably" pulling stuff from you ass and calling it truth.

SassyLady

09-15-2011, 11:33 PM

The top 5% control 85% of the wealth. How much of the taxes do they pay? conhog said the bottom 47% pay 10% of revenue; I doubt the 48-86th percentile pay less than 5%, so you really don't have much of a case if you intend to keep arguing the wealthy are being persecuted. If anything, the class war is clearly going in the favour of the richest americans.

Seriously, JT ... let's raise the taxes on the uber rich and put that money in the control of the politicians. Once again, what percentage of the total do the politicians make up? What you want to do is take the money and give it to the politicians who are still a minority who will still control the bulk of the wealth. Give me a break.

SassyLady

09-15-2011, 11:34 PM

Then let's put America to work by stimulating economic growth. Step one: increasing demand

What???? By raising taxes?

SassyLady

09-15-2011, 11:34 PM

a biased opinion with no basis in fact.

You are "probably" pulling stuff from you ass and calling it truth.

Can't help it if my ass is smarter than your brain.

J.T

09-15-2011, 11:42 PM

What???? By raising taxes?

That's part of it. You have to put together a system that increases the amount of wealth in the hands of the working class. That's why the 50s went so well- the working class had money to buy things.

SassyLady

09-15-2011, 11:49 PM

LuvRPgrl

09-15-2011, 11:54 PM

bullshit. everyone puts their earnings into the tax base. and the poor put more of theirs in as a percentage of their meager incomes, than the rich do.

Not everyone. People collecting welfare,
Illegal aliens
Construction workers working off the books
Waiter and waitresses are notorious for not declaring their tip money

LuvRPgrl

09-15-2011, 11:56 PM

The top 5% control 85% of the wealth. How much of the taxes do they pay? .

citation? You dont really think anyone here is going to take your word for anything, do you?

SassyLady

09-15-2011, 11:59 PM

Not everyone. People collecting welfare,
Illegal aliens
Construction workers working off the books
Waiter and waitresses are notorious for not declaring their tip money

Beanerboy is all pissed off because we won't acknowledge that those people are putting "sales tax" money into the coffers every time they buy something. Not only does he want them to not have to pay income taxes, he thinks it's unfair for them to pay sales taxes...because proportionately they are paying more of their "disposable" money (whether earned or entitlements) into the coffers than the wealthy people

SassyLady

09-16-2011, 12:01 AM

citation? You dont really think anyone here is going to take your word for anything, do you?

Even if we take his word ... I've asked him how taking the money from the 5% top wealthiest and giving it to the politicians to control is changing the situation from the fact a minority will still control all the wealth?

red states rule

09-16-2011, 02:47 AM

My mindset is that we do not deserve to keep all the money we earn. As i said, what the taxes are then spent on is a matter for debate, but as regards the OP, its the first sentence that counts.

So what if they earned it, what right do they have to keep it?

One of the basic foundations of liberalism. I have always said liberals have what it takes to take what you got

red states rule

09-16-2011, 02:51 AM

Beanerboy is all pissed off because we won't acknowledge that those people are putting "sales tax" money into the coffers every time they buy something. Not only does he want them to not have to pay income taxes, he thinks it's unfair for them to pay sales taxes...because proportionately they are paying more of their "disposable" money (whether earned or entitlements) into the coffers than the wealthy people

and we all know Virgil admitted keeping his Bush tax cut while bitching how bad it hurt the economy. He would not send HIS tax cut back to DC for the good of the collective

No, OTHERS must pay higher taxes

Sounds like other liberals who demand higher taxes yet do not want to pay taxes. Libs like John Kerry, Charlie Rangel, Warren Buffett, and Tim Geithner who are known tax cheats

red states rule

09-16-2011, 03:56 AM

her answer was reasonable. the marginal tax rates have always been an element in the political dialog... just as the extent of government funding for the programs she mentioned have also been an element in the political dialog. There ARE things that we, as a society, decide to accomplish collectively. Some of us want more government involvement in certain areas and some want less. That isn't news and it isn't rocket science.

Yea Virgil, I have posted many examples of how Obama and the Dems have WASTED HUNDERDS OF BILLIONS of dollars (possibly trillions)- yet you support working people giving Obama MORE MONEY to WASTE on polices that have been proven to have bombed

Meanwhile you keep your tax cuts and flee the country to avoid paying YOUR taxes

red states rule

09-16-2011, 04:01 AM

of course they do... and for the wealthy, those taxes are a MUCH smaller portion of THEIR disposable income. THe point is: the common coffers are filled by taxes other than income taxes and the poor contribute to those tax revenues. YOU shut up.

Spoken by the liberal hypocrite who did not send his Bush tax cut back to the government to help the poor and fled the country to avoid paying taxes

Why are you not in America paying "your fair share" Virgil?

red states rule

09-16-2011, 04:04 AM

to suggest that income taxes exist somewhere in a vacuum is silly. Taxes are money that people cough up from the money that they earn. To suggest that, because some segment of the population does not pay one form of tax, they do not contribute to the common coffers is fucking ridiculous. The fact remains, and my link clearly proves it, that the poor pay taxes, and the taxes they pay are way more regressive than the taxes the rich pay.

Where have I heard this song and and dance before?

Oh yea- from John Kerry, Charlie Rangle, Tom Daschel, and Tim Geithner. Virgil the tax evader sounds like the above mentioned tax cheats

Libs like Virgil do not mind rasing taxes since he has no intention of paying them

red states rule

09-16-2011, 04:20 AM

Can't help it if my ass is smarter than your brain.

A half-wit gave Virgil a piece of his mind, and he held on to it.

mudwhistle

09-16-2011, 06:04 AM

Stupid question was stupid.

Anyone who thinks they do deserve to keep all the money they earn are idiots.

Wasn't the question how much do you deserve to keep?

In Germany it's around 30%.

The question is a tough one to answer because it puts you in a bad position.

Course Democrats are telling us that we don't deserve whatever we earn.....they just don't want to say it out loud.

fj1200

09-16-2011, 07:46 AM

Then let's put America to work by stimulating economic growth. Step one: increasing demand

No.

That's part of it. You have to put together a system that increases the amount of wealth in the hands of the working class. That's why the 50s went so well- the working class had money to buy things.

and No.

beanerboy

09-16-2011, 09:13 AM

Spoken by the liberal hypocrite who did not send his Bush tax cut back to the government to help the poor and fled the country to avoid paying taxes

Why are you not in America paying "your fair share" Virgil?

expatriates still pay income tax on their income earned in the US, which in my case is every dime of it. I am paying my fair share, and then some. And I willingly, happily pay every single dime of taxes that Uncle Sam asks me to pay. I have never bitched about tax increases.

beanerboy

09-16-2011, 09:15 AM

Where have I heard this song and and dance before?

Oh yea- from John Kerry, Charlie Rangle, Tom Daschel, and Tim Geithner. Virgil the tax evader sounds like the above mentioned tax cheats

Libs like Virgil do not mind rasing taxes since he has no intention of paying them

again... I pay every dime of taxes that Uncle Sam asks me to.

beanerboy

09-16-2011, 09:17 AM

Meanwhile you keep your tax cuts and flee the country to avoid paying YOUR taxes

and again... you're wrong.

LuvRPgrl

09-16-2011, 10:15 AM

So now they're unemployed, too?

2447

How 'bout telling us how you plan to tax the income of someone who's unemployed and looking for work?ith

With Obama at the helm, why would you think otherwise

LuvRPgrl

09-16-2011, 10:17 AM

a biased opinion with no basis in fact.

You are "probably" pulling stuff from you ass and calling it truth.

what she pulls from her ass is more honest than what comes from your mouth

beanerboy

09-16-2011, 10:24 AM

what she pulls from her ass is more honest than what comes from your mouth

I would suggest you might take the time to read this:

http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/pubs/wp/03..._incidence.pdf

LuvRPgrl

09-16-2011, 10:33 AM

That's part of it. You have to put together a system that increases the amount of wealth in the hands of the working class. That's why the 50s went so well- the working class had money to buy things.

lets get this straight then. Take the money the rich earn, and give it to the poor, so they can buy things and stimulate the economy.
So you are saying when the rich buy things it doesnt stimulate the economy, but if the poor buy things, it does ????????????

LuvRPgrl

09-16-2011, 10:36 AM

I would suggest you might take the time to read this:

http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/pubs/wp/03..._incidence.pdf

Your link is just like your ideas, it aint working

beanerboy

09-16-2011, 10:49 AM

Your link is just like your ideas, it aint working

try again, please:

http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/pubs/wp/03-10-tax_incidence.pdf

ConHog

09-16-2011, 10:50 AM

beanerboy

09-16-2011, 10:55 AM

I see this thread is still all about MaineRetard being slapped around like the bitch he is because he refuses to admit that 47% of the workers in this country not paying any federal income tax is not just at all.

please pull a quote from my link that you disagree with. and let's call each other by our screen names, conhog, and both, perhaps, try to be a bit more cordial going forward. how about it?

ConHog

09-16-2011, 11:03 AM

Poke

09-16-2011, 11:31 AM

I love itr when libs are asked simple and sirect questions. They get angry, they spin, and they do all they can NOT to answer the question

Bottom line is, libs want to rape you for as much in taxes as they can possible get and never want to cut spending

<IFRAME height=315 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/fXS5fQebxV4" frameBorder=0 width=420 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>

Tyler Hensly asked a question. Is it just me, or did Wolf Blitzer look shocked when that question was asked? Almost as if it wasn't a question approved by the media censors. I also noticed that Mr Blitzer let only one person answer that question, then he quickly buried it and moved on.
The media doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to allow un-screened questions to be asked. They only want questions they determine are the "right questions" to ask.

beanerboy

09-16-2011, 11:33 AM

No thanks Virg.

no thanks to what, condog? being cordial with me or being able to read and understand and then find a single sentence from my link that you can intelligently disagree with and explain why?

I'm guessing both.

ConHog

09-16-2011, 11:39 AM

no thanks to what, condog? being cordial with me or being able to read and understand and then find a single sentence from my link that you can intelligently disagree with and explain why?

I'm guessing both.

Look here Vagisil you're entire argument hinges on "it's perfectly fair that 47% of the wage earners in this country pay 0 of the federal income tax and the well off should pay more than they do now."

The intelligent debate bus left you behind long ago.

Poke

09-16-2011, 11:48 AM

please pull a quote from my link that you disagree with. and let's call each other by our screen names, conhog, and both, perhaps, try to be a bit more cordial going forward. how about it?

no thanks to what, condog? being cordial with me or being able to read and understand and then find a single sentence from my link that you can intelligently disagree with and explain why?

I'm guessing both.

H and D are far enough apart on the keyboard that that isn't a simple typo. Just saying.

fj1200

09-16-2011, 12:33 PM

try again, please:

http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/pubs/wp/03-10-tax_incidence.pdf

A rather pointless link. Yup, there are regressive taxes and progressive taxes, not exactly groundbreaking but it's nice to see that you're now calling for the elimination of Social Security, it is the most regressive among them.

DragonStryk72

09-16-2011, 12:50 PM

Stupid question was stupid.

Anyone who thinks they do deserve to keep all the money they earn are idiots.

so then, we don't earn all the money we earned? What exactly has the government done to deserve our money?

ConHog

09-16-2011, 01:41 PM

A rather pointless link. Yup, there are regressive taxes and progressive taxes, not exactly groundbreaking but it's nice to see that you're now calling for the elimination of Social Security, it is the most regressive among them.

My point is he acts like the poor are the only ones who pay those other taxes and the so called uber rich only pay income tax. :laugh:

beanerboy

09-16-2011, 03:20 PM

Look here Vagisil you're entire argument hinges on "it's perfectly fair that 47% of the wage earners in this country pay 0 of the federal income tax and the well off should pay more than they do now."

The intelligent debate bus left you behind long ago.

you can mischaracterize my argument all you want, you can insult me all you want, and you can avoid reading scholarly papers that poke holes in your viewpoint. that's cool... and expected.

beanerboy

09-16-2011, 03:23 PM

A rather pointless link. Yup, there are regressive taxes and progressive taxes, not exactly groundbreaking but it's nice to see that you're now calling for the elimination of Social Security, it is the most regressive among them.

I have never called for the elimination of SS....

and of course there are both types of taxes.... my point is that the poor get hit with the more regressive varieties.

ConHog

09-16-2011, 03:40 PM

I have never called for the elimination of SS....

and of course there are both types of taxes.... my point is that the poor get hit with the more regressive varieties.

No they don't. That is just a flat lie. Imagine that, Maineman lying.

beanerboy

09-16-2011, 03:55 PM

No they don't. That is just a flat lie. Imagine that, Maineman lying.

clearly, you didn't read the article.

why am I not surprised?

fj1200

09-16-2011, 04:18 PM

I have never called for the elimination of SS....

and of course there are both types of taxes.... my point is that the poor get hit with the more regressive varieties.

But you don't like the regressive nature of those taxes, do you think the payouts should be in line with the contributions err, taxes then?

J.T

09-16-2011, 05:13 PM

How do you get wealth into the hands of the working class? By creating more jobs

How do you create jobs? By increasing labour-market demand. How do you do that? By increasing demand for goods and services and disincentivizing outsourcing. How do you increase demand for goods and services? By increasing the real income of the average worker so the working class has more buying power. How do you disincentivize outsourcing? By making it more expensive to evade labour and enviromental standards an import the resulting goods than it is to simply set up shop dometically, obey the rules, and sell te goods you manufacture here.

ConHog

09-16-2011, 05:21 PM

clearly, you didn't read the article.

why am I not surprised?

Cur, anyone can publish something on the internet, that doesn't make it factual.

beanerboy

09-16-2011, 05:35 PM

Cur, anyone can publish something on the internet, that doesn't make it factual.

so.. a scholarly document published by a prestigious university gets to be completely ignored by you because you don't THINK it's factual because it's on the internet? have I got that right. Tell ya what. find something in that article that is not "factual" and prove it is false. But wait... how would you do that, here on the internet? Why, you'd have to post some other document from the internet and we know what you think about that as a source. So... as far as you're concerned, everything on the internet that doesn't comport with your previously determined world view isn't "factual" and can therefore be dismissed out of hand without debate. got it.

jimnyc

09-16-2011, 05:58 PM

so.. a scholarly document published by a prestigious university gets to be completely ignored by you because you don't THINK it's factual because it's on the internet? have I got that right. Tell ya what. find something in that article that is not "factual" and prove it is false. But wait... how would you do that, here on the internet? Why, you'd have to post some other document from the internet and we know what you think about that as a source. So... as far as you're concerned, everything on the internet that doesn't comport with your previously determined world view isn't "factual" and can therefore be dismissed out of hand without debate. got it.

Regarding your beloved article, isn't it from 2003? I wonder how much it's changed since then, you know, with McChimpy running things into the ground? Why the need for an 8 year old document hidden deep into a website? How about something with current facts, and just facts, not what appears to be a college students thesis. Surely 2 different students with 2 different points of view, can make a thesis geared towards what they want to present. I'd find something current, solely tax stats, and post it instead of relying on a college student writing from 100 different books/links to make a paper.

I have one for you to find.... Take the top 10% of the richest people in the US - and what percentage of taxes do they pay? Wiggle all you want, but the top 10% already pay the majority of the taxes and certainly don't need to be raped further to fund the democrats constituents.

logroller

09-16-2011, 06:03 PM

bullshit. everyone puts their earnings into the tax base. and the poor put more of theirs in as a percentage of their meager incomes, than the rich do.

And the rich invest more, as a percentage of their incomes-- Is that a bad thing?

I have never called for the elimination of SS....

and of course there are both types of taxes.... my point is that the poor get hit with the more regressive varieties.

You're arguing the definition of regressive taxes. Just like the rich get hit with the more progressive varieties. It is defined to be this way. Do you have a problem with regressive taxes?

A regressive tax is one which is imposed upon every market participant, regardless of income. They may have a cap, but that just means that the additional tax burden wouldn't reflect any additional benefit to the taxpayer. Why should someone pay for something they get no benefit from? Do the poor pay a disproportionate amount of tax to the benefits they receive?

jimnyc

09-16-2011, 06:07 PM

To put it in numbers, according to the analysis, the top 1 percent of earners account for 20.3 percent of total personal income in the United States and pay 21.5 percent of all federal and state taxes. The middle 20 percent of households earn 11.6 percent of US income and pay 10.3 percent of taxes. The lowest 20 percent account for just 3.5 percent of income, and pay 2 percent of all taxes.

The top 1% already pay more than the lowest TWENTY percent. And they pay A LOT more. The lowest 20 might pay a "high" tax based on what little they make - but the richer shouldn't be forced to pay more and more and more so that the poor can live better.

J.T

09-16-2011, 06:38 PM

The top 1% already pay more than the lowest TWENTY percent. And they pay A LOT more.

How much wealth do each of those groups control? How do today's tax rates compare to historic rates? Go cry somewhere else. Nobody's buying your sob story.

ConHog

09-16-2011, 06:46 PM

Some of you idiots crack me up. How much of the wealth does such and such have? Who cares? Income tax is based on yearly income, not overall wealth. So who cares if a guy has $5B in the bank, if he made $200M last year, THAT is the number that should be considered when talking about taxes. So stop acting like we should punish the upper classes for having money in savings.

Sheesh.

Poke

09-16-2011, 06:57 PM

ConHog

09-16-2011, 06:59 PM

The same fools would probably advocate taxing wealth in addition to income. (But only on the rich of course)

here's what's crazy Poke. Some of these geniuses actually champion the lower income workers getting a "refund" that is more than they paid in, so not only do they not want them paying any taxes, they actually want them to EARN money off of the income tax system. How stupid is that?

jimnyc

09-16-2011, 07:05 PM

How much wealth do each of those groups control? How do today's tax rates compare to historic rates? Go cry somewhere else. Nobody's buying your sob story.

The top 1 percent of Americans earners already pay 20% of ALL taxes. I don't care if they control a trillion billion dollars - they still are paying 20 percent of ALL taxes. Sounds MORE than fair to me. Btw - :finger3:

ConHog

09-16-2011, 07:07 PM

The top 1 percent of Americans earners already pay 20% of ALL taxes. I don't care if they control a trillion billion dollars - they still are paying 20 percent of ALL taxes. Sounds MORE than fair to me. Btw - :finger3:

I guess I may as well take Just Trolling off ignore...................:poke:

jimnyc

09-16-2011, 07:10 PM

I guess I may as well take Just Trolling off ignore...................:poke:

I like JT. He's good comedy for when psychoblues isn't around. JT is a little angrier than psycho though. I think JT needs a 12 pack of Busch.

ConHog

09-16-2011, 07:14 PM

I like JT. He's good comedy for when psychoblues isn't around. JT is a little angrier than psycho though. I think JT needs a 12 pack of Busch.

I think he needs to get laid. It's been along time, but I remember being a virgin , it sucked. :laugh2:

jimnyc

09-16-2011, 07:17 PM

I think he needs to get laid. It's been along time, but I remember being a virgin , it sucked. :laugh2:

I won't pick on JT for that, I can feel his pain. My "love life" is about as active as a cinder block.

ConHog

09-16-2011, 07:21 PM

I won't pick on JT for that, I can feel his pain. My "love life" is about as active as a cinder block.

That's why you gotta marry a hot young Hispanic. They be horny.

Poke

09-16-2011, 07:21 PM

here's what's crazy Poke. Some of these geniuses actually champion the lower income workers getting a "refund" that is more than they paid in, so not only do they not want them paying any taxes, they actually want them to EARN money off of the income tax system. How stupid is that?

I've never fully understood the "earned income tax credit" that allows one to receive tax monies (as opposed to paying taxes) simply because they have income of their own. It's almost as crazy as paying welfare recipients to not work simply because they have offspring.
My parents raised me to be more responsible than that. My government wants to reward irresponsibility.

jimnyc

09-16-2011, 07:23 PM

That's why you gotta marry a hot young Hispanic. They be horny.

I don't think I'm allowed to do that since I'm already married, am I? I'll take a 19yr old one if so!

J.T

09-16-2011, 07:57 PM

The top 1 percent of Americans earners already pay 20% of ALL taxes.
Uh-huh. And? They don't seem to be hurting

. Sounds MORE than fair to me. Btw

Good to know you approve :thumb:

SassyLady

09-16-2011, 09:23 PM

How do you create jobs? By increasing labour-market demand. How do you do that? By increasing demand for goods and services and disincentivizing outsourcing. How do you increase demand for goods and services? By increasing the real income of the average worker so the working class has more buying power. How do you disincentivize outsourcing? By making it more expensive to evade labour and enviromental standards an import the resulting goods than it is to simply set up shop dometically, obey the rules, and sell te goods you manufacture here.

But you don't create jobs by increasing taxes. An employer can increase the real income of the average worker by raising their salary. How does raising taxes increase the "real income" of the average worker?

ConHog

09-16-2011, 09:26 PM

Uh-huh. And? They don't seem to be hurting

Good to know you approve :thumb:

Fine, you're off ignore, and guess what stupid. The purpose of taxes is not to hurt the wealthy.

SassyLady

09-16-2011, 09:29 PM

Uh-huh. And? They don't seem to be hurting

Good to know you approve :thumb:

why are you so hell bent on punishing the wealthy?

ConHog

09-16-2011, 09:35 PM

why are you so hell bent on punishing the wealthy?

2449

J.T

09-17-2011, 12:14 AM

But you don't create jobs by increasing taxes.
But you can through the right public works programs and investments in your people. And you need taxes to raise the revenue to fund investments in infrastructure and education and fund the regulatory agencies to enforce such a system as necessary to increase the buying power of the middle class and strengthen the overall economy. We also need tax revenues to fund programs which ensure that the sick, the lame, the elderly, and our nation's children are taken care of and the working poor are provided a hand-up that allows them to become real competitors in the labour market and further strengthen our nation's economic sector.

An employer can increase the real income of the average worker by raising their salary.
Which happens for the working class as a whole only when the union or the state forces them to. History has proven this in nation after nation.

The purpose of taxes is not to hurt the wealthy.

Good to see you finally realize that. Please pass that information on to all your Republican friends so they'll stop repeating that tired meme.

logroller

09-17-2011, 12:45 AM

I don't think I'm allowed to do that since I'm already married, am I? I'll take a 19yr old one if so!

Doesn't everything go in NY now???:laugh:

red states rule

09-17-2011, 01:51 AM

expatriates still pay income tax on their income earned in the US, which in my case is every dime of it. I am paying my fair share, and then some. And I willingly, happily pay every single dime of taxes that Uncle Sam asks me to pay. I have never bitched about tax increases.

So why not show your "patriotism" and send in a donation? Why do blowhard lefties like you (and tax cheat Warren Buffett) always want everyone else to pay more in taxes - but never lead by example?

red states rule

09-17-2011, 01:54 AM

again... I pay every dime of taxes that Uncle Sam asks me to.

But you whine it is not enough, deamnd others pay more while you flee the country with your dead mom's money

Another liberal who lives by the rule - don't do as I do just do as I say

red states rule

09-17-2011, 01:58 AM

The top 1% already pay more than the lowest TWENTY percent. And they pay A LOT more. The lowest 20 might pay a "high" tax based on what little they make - but the richer shouldn't be forced to pay more and more and more so that the poor can live better.

Actually what the producers are paying to the Feds is numbing compared to how much of the income they earn. Libs see these people as a renewable money source

http://cdn.financialsamurai.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/toptaxes.jpg

fj1200

09-17-2011, 07:43 AM

J.T

09-17-2011, 07:50 AM

tax rates have zero to do with revenue.

Really? So a 2% tax rate, a 10% and a 20% tax rate result in the same revenue?

And you expect to be taken seriously?

fj1200

09-17-2011, 08:01 AM

Really? So a 2% tax rate, a 10% and a 20% tax rate result in the same revenue?

And you expect to be taken seriously?

Look at tax revenues and tax rates post-war and tell me what the optimal tax rate is.

J.T

09-17-2011, 08:19 AM

Look at tax revenues and tax rates post-war and tell me what the optimal tax rate is.

Contrary to what the Republicans would have you believe, there is no magic number. Even Laffer himself said their misconception of his premise is just plain wrong. How much revenue any given tax structure brings in is determined by the overall economic climate (since that is what determined how much wealth is generated and taken in as income by those taxed). yet the tax structure itself can be one of the many factors influencing fiscal decisions by individuals within the economic system (for instance, whether to invest here or elsewhere or whether to accept a raise if it bumps me into the next tax bracket). Furthermore, the goal should never be to try to find any such mythical number (but then, you're an idiot so you try anyway); the entire point is to find a structure which raises the revenue you need to pay for government expenditures, not to find raise the maximum revenue possible (unless expenditures already exceed the maximum possible revenue, in which case you already have a serious problem that no tax structure can solve alone).

This is all pretty basic stuff, dude. If you can't grasp such simple matters, perhaps you shouldn't be interrupting the discussion.

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 08:32 AM

So why not show your "patriotism" and send in a donation? Why do blowhard lefties like you (and tax cheat Warren Buffett) always want everyone else to pay more in taxes - but never lead by example?

"Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as
possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the
treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes.
Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister
in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone
does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any
public duty to pay more than the law demands." Judge Learned Hand

And here I thought that you would have understood that philosophy, given the fact that Learned Hand was a famous republican.

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 08:36 AM

But you whine it is not enough, deamnd others pay more while you flee the country with your dead mom's money

Another liberal who lives by the rule - don't do as I do just do as I say

I pay every dime that Uncle Sam asks of me, and my location has no impact on the tax I pay. I would gladly pay more if asked to and I would and have voted for politicians that want to increase my taxes. I walk the walk regarding my beliefs about taxes.

You're so stupid you thought that expatriates didn't even PAY taxes.

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 08:43 AM

bottom line: there is a difference of opinion about the legitimacy of progressive tax systems. Unfortunately, that argument has been decided a century ago. Both republicans and democrats alike have agreed to a tax system that says that the greater your income, the greater your tax burden. The ONLY things that are continually debated are the starting point of the curve, the slope of the curve, and the maximum marginal rate at the top of the curve... and that debate will go on ad infinitum.

ConHog

09-17-2011, 12:10 PM

I pay every dime that Uncle Sam asks of me, and my location has no impact on the tax I pay. I would gladly pay more if asked to and I would and have voted for politicians that want to increase my taxes. I walk the walk regarding my beliefs about taxes.

You're so stupid you thought that expatriates didn't even PAY taxes.

Your arguments are childlike. You pay what is asked of you, and that's fine, no one has demanded that you pay more, but then you turn right around and demand that others pay more than they are asked for?

There IS a procedure for donating to the government if you wish. There is NO procedure for FORCING others to donate though.

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 04:06 PM

Your arguments are childlike. You pay what is asked of you, and that's fine, no one has demanded that you pay more, but then you turn right around and demand that others pay more than they are asked for?

There IS a procedure for donating to the government if you wish. There is NO procedure for FORCING others to donate though.

actually RSR has claimed I am NOT patriotic because I do not pay more than is asked of me, so you're wrong there.... but hey, he's your buddy so that doesn't count, I guess.

And I have NEVER demanded that anyone pay more than they are asked for. I have suggested that, the amount that people are asked to pay has gone up and down over the course of the years, and suggesting - as the teabaggers do - that the ONLY part of that process that can happen is the going down part is ridiculous. Marginal tax rates have gone up and down and, throughout it all, the rich have survived and thrived.

ConHog

09-17-2011, 04:12 PM

actually RSR has claimed I am NOT patriotic because I do not pay more than is asked of me, so you're wrong there.... but hey, he's your buddy so that doesn't count, I guess.

And I have NEVER demanded that anyone pay more than they are asked for. I have suggested that, the amount that people are asked to pay has gone up and down over the course of the years, and suggesting - as the teabaggers do - that the ONLY part of that process that can happen is the going down part is ridiculous. Marginal tax rates have gone up and down and, throughout it all, the rich have survived and thrived.

No jackass RSR intimated that under your OWN belief that some people aren't paying enough that you aren't patriotic if you aren't following through and donating money.

Anyone who has followed this thread can clearly see that RSR only wants the 47% who are paying nothing now to start paying more.

red states rule

09-17-2011, 05:37 PM

No jackass RSR intimated that under your OWN belief that some people aren't paying enough that you aren't patriotic if you aren't following through and donating money.

Anyone who has followed this thread can clearly see that RSR only wants the 47% who are paying nothing now to start paying more.

When libs whine about shared sacrifce, they should be talking about those who pay NO federal income taxes not the ones who are currently paying 40% of all federal income taxes collected

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 05:41 PM

When libs whine about shared sacrifce, they should be talking about those who pay NO federal income taxes not the ones who are currently paying 40% of all federal income taxes collected

ran away from your ridiculous assertions about expatriates and taxes, I see. Pretty common stuff for you. Again... throughout our history, the marginal tax rate has gone up and gone down under republican and democratic administrations alike, and somehow, the rich just seem to keep getting richer. imagine that.

ConHog

09-17-2011, 05:41 PM

red states rule

09-17-2011, 05:43 PM

ran away from your ridiculous assertions about expatriates and taxes, I see. Pretty common stuff for you. Again... throughout our history, the marginal tax rate has gone up and gone down under republican and democratic administrations alike, and somehow, the rich just seem to keep getting richer. imagine that.

You have fled to avoid taxes Virgil. You also refuse to donate more money in taxes. As usual you are all talk and no action

The only epople who are happy about you leaving your small town in Maine are the parents of young children and your boss at the Church who know the real Virgil Bozeman III

red states rule

09-17-2011, 05:43 PM

But RSR THAT is their voter base. Gotta take care of your voter base don't ya know.

You mean this base?

http://images.onset.freedom.com/ocregister/gallery/lrml7v-b78848805z.120110916100916000g2n123q2a.1.jpg

ConHog

09-17-2011, 05:47 PM

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 05:48 PM

You have fled to avoid taxes Virgil. You also refuse to donate more money in taxes. As usual you are all talk and no action

The only epople who are happy about you leaving your small town in Maine are the parents of young children and your boss at the Church who know the real Virgil Bozeman III

again... I pay federal income tax on every dime I make... from my various retirement income sources and from my investment earnings.

you claimed that I moved to mexico to avoid paying income tax and that is just plain wrong. but, I know that I would die holding my breath waiting for YOU to EVER admit a mistake.

moron.

red states rule

09-17-2011, 05:49 PM

I would imagine those young boys are happy to see him go to.

Now the parents in whatever town Virgil is living in are the ones who have to worry and are sad to see him in their neighborhood

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 05:49 PM

I would imagine those young boys are happy to see him go to.

how classy. what a total loser you are....my Lord.

red states rule

09-17-2011, 05:50 PM

again... I pay federal income tax on every dime I make... from my various retirement income sources and from my investment earnings.

you claimed that I moved to mexico to avoid paying income tax and that is just plain wrong. but, I know that I would die holding my breath waiting for YOU to EVER admit a mistake.

moron.

Lets see, you are not paying state and local taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, taxes on your car, the local porn shops and strip clubs are no longer getting your business.

So yea, alot of taxes are no longer being collected Virgil

You are now spending and living off your dead Moms money. IOW you are being a leech like you have always been

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 05:50 PM

gosh...that sort of personal insults seem against the rules of the board. maybe a mod should examine that?

ConHog

09-17-2011, 05:51 PM

again... I pay federal income tax on every dime I make... from my various retirement income sources and from my investment earnings.

you claimed that I moved to mexico to avoid paying income tax and that is just plain wrong. but, I know that I would die holding my breath waiting for YOU to EVER admit a mistake.

moron.

Actually, i just went and read the posts from RSR and he said TAXES, not income tax. Or are you denying that there are taxes you no longer pay since yo don't live in the US?

red states rule

09-17-2011, 05:52 PM

how classy. what a total loser you are....my Lord.

Speaking of classy Virgil - rememebr this PM you sent me on another board?

Once again Virgil is exposed for living a life of double standards

As I have always said, red... you are an ignorant parrot. Health care passed. Financial reform will pass soon... and by the time that the next presidential election comes along, I'll be voting by absentee ballot from Mexico living quite nicely on a retirement check from you. Thanks so much. Enjoy the mutual masturbation that you sorry losers call debate on DP.com... I wonder why Jim puts up with you all. It is clear to me that you all are incapable of going head to head with someone who is not beholden to others to form their thoughts for them. My life has never been better than it is right now. ANd you... well, you have the spectre of recurrence of cancer hanging over your head. I must say that I have known many good and honorable people who have been struck down by that disease, but I cannot think of anyone more deserving of it than you. Now... get ready to get back into your daily pathetic, miserable grind trying to make ends meet, for what little time you have left. I am sure that your butt buddies at DP.com will mourn your passing, but KNOW that I certainly will not. Considering that you will probably be struck down by that disease after I am in Merida, I will toast your passing there, and piss in my own urinal and symbolically think it is your grave. You are certainly not worth the trip to Pennsylvania to go to the actual site. Adios Motherfucer... I will live a long and happy life, and hopefully, you will not. Post THIS back to your pals. Jim knows he will always be welcome in Mexico. None of THEM will and you will not live long enough to get there in any case, and couldn't afford the airfare regardless. See ya sucker...

red states rule

09-17-2011, 05:53 PM

gosh...that sort of personal insults seem against the rules of the board. maybe a mod should examine that?

I am a mod and I see nothing wrong with it

ConHog

09-17-2011, 05:54 PM

Lets see, you are not paying state and local taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, taxes on your car, the local porn shops and strip clubs are no longer getting your business.

So yea, alot of taxes are no longer being collected Virgil

You are now spending and living off your dead Moms money. IOW you are being a leech like you have always been

Some little town in Maine probably went bankrupt after losing the steady income of tax revenue from Virgil buying booze, Vaseline and porn after he moved out of town.

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 05:55 PM

Lets see, you are not paying sate and local taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, taxes on your car, the local porn shops and strip clubs are no longer getting your business.

So yea, alot of taxes are no longer being collected Virgil

You are now spending and living off your dead Moms money. IOW you are being a leech like you have always been

the issue was your claim that I was avoiding federal income taxes. Every expatriate avoids paying property taxes and sales taxes in America... but they do pay them in their resident country, as I do. And I live off my retirement incomes... from my career in the military as well as my work for a decade at a public utility... plus my own IRA and 401ks... any other income is just mad money.

And like I have said a lot of times, I put my ass in harm's way to protect YOUR sorry ass for 25 years.... I DESERVE the retirement a grateful nation pays me... even if you chose to disavow it.

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 05:56 PM

Some little town in Maine probably went bankrupt after losing the steady income of tax revenue from Virgil buying booze, Vaseline and porn after he moved out of town.

how tacky. got anything of value to add to this thread or is is all just silly shit like this? really. grow the fuck up.

red states rule

09-17-2011, 05:58 PM

how tacky. got anything of value to add to this thread or is is all just silly shit like this? really. grow the fuck up.\

Speaking of tacky

Hey Pastor Bozeman remember this PM you sent me on another board?

Once again Virgil is exposed for living a life of double standards

As I have always said, red... you are an ignorant parrot. Health care passed. Financial reform will pass soon... and by the time that the next presidential election comes along, I'll be voting by absentee ballot from Mexico living quite nicely on a retirement check from you. Thanks so much. Enjoy the mutual masturbation that you sorry losers call debate on DP.com... I wonder why Jim puts up with you all. It is clear to me that you all are incapable of going head to head with someone who is not beholden to others to form their thoughts for them. My life has never been better than it is right now. ANd you... well, you have the spectre of recurrence of cancer hanging over your head. I must say that I have known many good and honorable people who have been struck down by that disease, but I cannot think of anyone more deserving of it than you. Now... get ready to get back into your daily pathetic, miserable grind trying to make ends meet, for what little time you have left. I am sure that your butt buddies at DP.com will mourn your passing, but KNOW that I certainly will not. Considering that you will probably be struck down by that disease after I am in Merida, I will toast your passing there, and piss in my own urinal and symbolically think it is your grave. You are certainly not worth the trip to Pennsylvania to go to the actual site. Adios Motherfucer... I will live a long and happy life, and hopefully, you will not. Post THIS back to your pals. Jim knows he will always be welcome in Mexico. None of THEM will and you will not live long enough to get there in any case, and couldn't afford the airfare regardless. See ya sucker...

ConHog

09-17-2011, 05:59 PM

how tacky. got anything of value to add to this thread or is is all just silly shit like this? really. grow the fuck up.

this thread has long since devolved into anything but a serious discussion. It is impossible to have a serious discussion with an idiot who believes that 47% of the workers in this country should pay NO income tax (and in fact some should MAKE money from income tax) while 20% should pay more than 30% of the income tax.

You grow up.

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 06:06 PM

this thread has long since devolved into anything but a serious discussion. It is impossible to have a serious discussion with an idiot who believes that 47% of the workers in this country should pay NO income tax (and in fact some should MAKE money from income tax) while 20% should pay more than 30% of the income tax.

You grow up.

again... the progressivity of the federal income tax has been a part of US tax policy for a century. THe argument about what the marginal rates should be rightfully belong in the public arena.

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 06:07 PM

\

Speaking of tacky

Hey Pastor Bozeman remember this PM you sent me on another board?

Once again Virgil is exposed for living a life of double standards

As I have always said, red... you are an ignorant parrot. Health care passed. Financial reform will pass soon... and by the time that the next presidential election comes along, I'll be voting by absentee ballot from Mexico living quite nicely on a retirement check from you. Thanks so much. Enjoy the mutual masturbation that you sorry losers call debate on DP.com... I wonder why Jim puts up with you all. It is clear to me that you all are incapable of going head to head with someone who is not beholden to others to form their thoughts for them. My life has never been better than it is right now. ANd you... well, you have the spectre of recurrence of cancer hanging over your head. I must say that I have known many good and honorable people who have been struck down by that disease, but I cannot think of anyone more deserving of it than you. Now... get ready to get back into your daily pathetic, miserable grind trying to make ends meet, for what little time you have left. I am sure that your butt buddies at DP.com will mourn your passing, but KNOW that I certainly will not. Considering that you will probably be struck down by that disease after I am in Merida, I will toast your passing there, and piss in my own urinal and symbolically think it is your grave. You are certainly not worth the trip to Pennsylvania to go to the actual site. Adios Motherfucer... I will live a long and happy life, and hopefully, you will not. Post THIS back to your pals. Jim knows he will always be welcome in Mexico. None of THEM will and you will not live long enough to get there in any case, and couldn't afford the airfare regardless. See ya sucker...

whoever wrote that seems to have you figured out pretty well.

red states rule

09-17-2011, 06:09 PM

whoever wrote that seems to have you figured out pretty well.

So are you saying you did not write it Virgil? Remember, you got busted here when you tried to deny you posted under other names

Do you really want to be humilated again or will you tell the truth for one of the few times in your worthless life?

ConHog

09-17-2011, 06:12 PM

again... the progressivity of the federal income tax has been a part of US tax policy for a century. THe argument about what the marginal rates should be rightfully belong in the public arena.

That may be so , but only a fucking idiot would contend that it is reasonable for half the people to pay NOTHING to support the government.

ConHog

09-17-2011, 06:13 PM

whoever wrote that seems to have you figured out pretty well.

Whomever wrote that (meaning you Virg) is a douchebag. Taking joy in the pain of another person Virg? Seriously?

What a tool you are.

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 06:18 PM

That may be so , but only a fucking idiot would contend that it is reasonable for half the people to pay NOTHING to support the government.

are we in a circular loop? NOBODY pays NO taxes.... everyone contributes... and for some, who work at minimum wage jobs with no healthcare, they contribute a great deal, simply by their poorly compensated effort, to this economy.

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 06:19 PM

So are you saying you did not write it Virgil? Remember, you got busted here when you tried to deny you posted under other names

Do you really want to be humilated again or will you tell the truth for one of the few times in your worthless life?

you got some way to prove that I am the guy who wrote that? show it, or shut the fuck up.

I'll wait.

ConHog

09-17-2011, 06:19 PM

are we in a circular loop? NOBODY pays NO taxes.... everyone contributes... and for some, who work at minimum wage jobs with no healthcare, they contribute a great deal, simply by their poorly compensated effort, to this economy.

That's why a conversation with you is impossible. We are discustting income tax ONLY you dishonest piece of shit. Unless you know of some tax that the wealthy don't pay while the not wealthy do?

ConHog

09-17-2011, 06:20 PM

you got some way to prove that I am the guy who wrote that? show it, or shut the fuck up.

I'll wait.

You wrote it. You've already proven yourself to be a man with no qualms about lying. Just admit you wrote it and move on.

red states rule

09-17-2011, 06:23 PM

you got some way to prove that I am the guy who wrote that? show it, or shut the fuck up.

I'll wait.

You really are stupid Virgil. Is Jim's email to you awhile back when you were begging to come back good enough for you?

You know I love exposing the REAL Virgil Bozeman for all to see

Virgil,

First and foremost, Happy Holidays to you as well!

You have my apologies for the delayed response. I did in fact receive your email almost instantly, but you know I generally give the other staff members input on such decisions. And while staff was pretty much all against allowing your return once again, that was not my deciding factor. I've let so many people back, so many times, and especially those who take the time to email me in a polite and respectful manner in which you have.

But I have to be honest, my deciding factor is my Mom. Well, her and a good friend of mine who posts as Red, aka Red States Rule. Right off the bat I'm sure your pissed that he might have something to do with you not returning. But that's not the case here, it's actually you who did yourself in this time.

As you are aware, my Mom passed away 7/4 of this year due to a pretty long battle with Cancer. It's not something I will lose memory of anytime soon. But there are things people can write or say that will bring it back to the forefront once again. In this case, it was your PM to Red from another board that he shared with me, in which you wrote:

**********//////// As I have always said, red... you are an ignorant parrot. Health care passed. Financial reform will pass soon... and by the time that the next presidential election comes along, I'll be voting by absentee ballot from Mexico living quite nicely on a retirement check from you. Thanks so much. Enjoy the mutual masturbation that you sorry losers call debate on DP.com... I wonder why Jim puts up with you all. It is clear to me that you all are incapable of going head to head with someone who is not beholden to others to form their thoughts for them. My life has never been better than it is right now. ANd you... well, you have the spectre of recurrence of cancer hanging over your head. I must say that I have known many good and honorable people who have been struck down by that disease, but I cannot think of anyone more deserving of it than you. Now... get ready to get back into your daily pathetic, miserable grind trying to make ends meet, for what little time you have left. I am sure that your butt buddies at DP.com will mourn your passing, but KNOW that I certainly will not. Considering that you will probably be struck down by that disease after I am in Merida, I will toast your passing there, and piss in my own urinal and symbolically think it is your grave. You are certainly not worth the trip to Pennsylvania to go to the actual site. Adios Motherfucer... I will live a long and happy life, and hopefully, you will not. Post THIS back to your pals. Jim knows he will always be welcome in Mexico. None of THEM will and you will not live long enough to get there in any case, and couldn't afford the airfare regardless. See ya sucker... ///////////***********

While I appreciate you sticking up for me while you wished death upon Red, I feel that having you back may be a bit of a conflict of interest. I know you wrote this likely just to piss off Red, but you unwittingly pissed me off too. What would happen in the future if you and I had a flame fest, would you send the same to me via PM about my Mom? And seeing how easily you can mock someone who has Cancer, I don't think I can be comfortable with this situation. Every time you post I will remember what you wrote.

So in defense of my friend, RSR, and more importantly, my respect for my Mom and others who have lost the battle with Cancer, I am going to have to respectfully deny your request.

And quite frankly, why would you want so badly to return to a board full of "losers"?

Best wishes!

-Jim

ConHog

09-17-2011, 06:29 PM

You really are stupid Virgil. Is Jim's email to you awhile back when you were begging to come back good enough for you?

You know I ove exposing the REAL Virgil Bozeman for all to see

BOOM!!!!!

Virgil, that's low man, even from a scumbag like you.

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 06:46 PM

That's why a conversation with you is impossible. We are discustting income tax ONLY you dishonest piece of shit. Unless you know of some tax that the wealthy don't pay while the not wealthy do?

and I am saying that to limit the discussion to income tax, as if that is the only tax that people pay is silly. and MAN... you do seem to be limited to ad hominem vulgar attacks. that is a sure sign you've lost the high ground.

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 06:48 PM

You really are stupid Virgil. Is Jim's email to you awhile back when you were begging to come back good enough for you?

You know I love exposing the REAL Virgil Bozeman for all to see

I did not, in any email to jim or anyone else, ever admit to being this fellow, as smart and witty and accurate as he may be. I am beanerboy, living in Mexico. any resemblance between me and any past poster is simply coincidental and totally unprovable. sorry. Like I said, if you got something that proves that I am this guy. show it. If not, shut the fuck up.

red states rule

09-17-2011, 06:52 PM

I did not, in any email to jim or anyone else, ever admit to being this fellow, as smart and witty and accurate as he may be. I am beanerboy, living in Mexico. any resemblance between me and any past poster is simply coincidental and totally unprovable. sorry. Like I said, if you got something that proves that I am this guy. show it. If not, shut the fuck up.

Folks this is beanerboy - Virgil - maineman - manfrommaine- retiredman- and moderate democrat

http://capital.villagesoup.com/media/VillageNetMedia/1/FC/130110/VirgilBozeman.jpg

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 07:01 PM

I'm a retired guy living in the yucatan... you got NOTHIN' that ties me to that guy other than unprovable innuendo.

When you get some proof. Let me know.

J.T

09-17-2011, 07:30 PM

again... the progressivity of the federal income tax has been a part of US tax policy for a century.
1- you can have a progressive tax without nearly half paying zero
2- http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Appeal_to_tradition

Whomever wrote that (meaning you Virg) is a douchebag
http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/who-versus-whom.aspx

If you're going to set out to try to use 'whom', learn to do so correctly. Else you just look like you're trying way too hard to appear more educated that you are- and failing.

jimnyc

09-17-2011, 07:30 PM

I'm a retired guy living in the yucatan... you got NOTHIN' that ties me to that guy other than unprovable innuendo.

When you get some proof. Let me know.

When you go to ANY website, you reveal more than just your IP address, and some sites place cookies and other cool files on your computer to remember you on your return visit. That, coupled with the PM exchange you and I had just a few short days ago - I think I can make a damn good case for the identities being one and the same. AND, being I am friends with just about every political board owner - I'm confident I can have IP's, machine types, OS's Browsers, cookies and all kinds of other goodies tied to the same computer. While your IP may have changed when you went to Mexico, the identifying features from your computer remain the same.

Pour some water down your pants, grow a set of balls & just admit it.

ConHog

09-17-2011, 07:43 PM

1- you can have a progressive tax without nearly half paying zero
2- http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Appeal_to_tradition

http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/who-versus-whom.aspx

If you're going to set out to try to use 'whom', learn to do so correctly. Else you just look like you're trying way too hard to appear more educated that you are- and failing.

Stop being a shit head, there is absolutely no reason to be the grammar police. It makes it look like YOU are trying appear smarter than you really are.

beanerboy

09-17-2011, 08:08 PM

jimnyc

09-17-2011, 08:10 PM

what a bunch of assholes.

I'm an asshole for simply writing a post containing FACTS?

ConHog

09-17-2011, 08:10 PM

it seems that everyone here want to make this about WHO you think I might be instead of WHAT I have to say. Like I said... if you have PROOF that I am someone you think I MIGHT be, who gives a shit... why not, instead, concentrate on what I have SAID. It seems that is something you all seem to want to avoid. Like RSR who incorrectly stated that I do not pay income taxes in America... what a bunch of assholes.

RSR did NOT say you didn't pay income tax in America you lying sack of shit. What he DID say was that you don't have to pay certain taxes since you don't live in the US. Is that not true?

LuvRPgrl

09-17-2011, 08:42 PM

How do you create jobs? By increasing labour-market demand. How do you do that? By increasing demand for goods and services and disincentivizing outsourcing. How do you increase demand for goods and services? By increasing the real income of the average worker so the working class has more buying power. How do you disincentivize outsourcing? By making it more expensive to evade labour and enviromental standards an import the resulting goods than it is to simply set up shop dometically, obey the rules, and sell te goods you manufacture here.

PSssssssssss WE HAVE A NET GAIN OF JOBS FROM OUTSOURCING, AND BETTER PAYING ONES AT THAT

And you are still harping that when poor or middle class buy things it stimulates the economy but if a rich person. buys something it does nothing for the economy?

flagulation

LuvRPgrl

09-17-2011, 09:23 PM

so.. a scholarly document published by a prestigious university gets to be completely ignored by you because you don't THINK it's factual because it's on the internet? have I got that right..

Tell ya what. find something in that article that is not "factual" and prove it is false..
Is this hypothetical family really almost tax- free under the new legislation? Of course not
– if the administration were being precise, they would note that this family only sees their
While the Bush administration claims its

reforms make taxes fairerfederal income taxes
decline by 96%, not their overall tax burden. The Jobs and Growth
Act of 2003, along with the Economic Recovery and Tax Relief Act of 2001, have
focused on the reduction of federal income tax rates. However, households pay many
other taxes besides federal income taxes. The administration’s hypothetical family still
directly pays over $3,000 per year in federal social insurance taxes
3, and likely pays
thousands of dollars a year in property taxes, sales taxes, and excise taxes as well.
YOUR BOY WHO WROTE THAT PIECE OF CRAP, SAID THIS
really almost tax- free under the new legislation?
REFERRING TO THE BUSH TAX REFORMS
BUT BUSH ONLY CLAIMS THEY WOULD BE "FAIRER", NOT "ALMOST TAX FREE"
SO HE IS ATTACKING A CLAIM THAT WAS NEVER MADE.
And he bitches about unfair taxes, saying that property, sales, and excise taxes arent reduced by the BUSH TAX REFORMS, but guess what?

Those are State and local taxes which the president haas no power over.
So, either your writer boy is being a liar, or is just plain stupid, or both

YOUR BITCH BOY HAS JUST BEEN PUNKED

J.T

09-17-2011, 09:31 PM

And you are still harping that when poor or middle class buy things it stimulates the economy but if a rich person. buys something it does nothing for the economy?

Marginal utility. When a millionaire gets a thousand dollars more in income, it's a lot less likely to be pout back into the economy than when a working-class family earning 60k/yr with two kids to provide for does. In extreme cases, this can contribute to a liquidity trap and cause economic stagnation.

ConHog

09-17-2011, 09:34 PM

Marginal utility. When a millionaire gets a thousand dollars more in income, it's a lot less likely to be pout back into the economy than when a working-class family earning 60k/yr with two kids to provide for does. In extreme cases, this can contribute to a liquidity trap and cause economic stagnation.

And THAT is not supposed to be the purpose of taxes. Taxes are meant solely to fund the government. Nothing more, certainly not as a tool to manipulate the economy.

Its a simply question. Do you think people should be able to live in this country without helping to pay for the services provided by the government. It's a yes or no question.

J.T

09-17-2011, 09:48 PM

And THAT is not supposed to be the purpose of taxes.
That's nice. We're not talking about taxes, though. Luv asked about income, spending, and the effects of consumer spending ( market demand) on economic activity. Try to keep up.

Its a simply question. Do you think people should be able to live in this country without helping to pay for the services provided by the government. It's a yes or no question.

Who does that other than illegals and those below the poverty line?

You want us to take part of a starving man's sandwich to fund our next military excursion?

LuvRPgrl

09-17-2011, 09:50 PM

But you can through the right public works programs and investments in your people. And you need taxes to raise the revenue to fund investments in infrastructure and education and fund the regulatory agencies to enforce such a system as necessary to increase the buying power of the middle class and strengthen the overall economy. We also need tax revenues to fund programs which ensure that the sick, the lame, the elderly, and our nation's children are taken care of and the working poor are provided a hand-up that allows them to become real competitors in the labour market and further strengthen our nation's economic sector..

Govt jobs are only temporary jobs, as proved by Obamas economic stimulis plan

SASSYLADY SAID
An employer can increase the real income of the average worker by raising their salary.

Which happens for the working class as a whole only when the union or the state forces them to. History has proven this in nation after nation..

When the employers are forced to give raises, that is what leads to companies to being able to compete with foreign companies.
To truly EARN a raise, the employee has to make themselved more valuable to the company by getting, more educated, more on job experience sometimes, or learning a new skill.

If the person doesnt somehow cause the company to increase profits, then they decrease, if they decrease the company has to raise its prices to maintain a profit, if they increase their prices, then other companies will drive them out of business by outpricing theml;

YOU GOT ANY MORE THEORETICAL BRILLIANT IDEAS THAT DONT WORK IN THE REAL WORLD?

ConHog

09-17-2011, 10:02 PM

That's nice. We're not talking about taxes, though. Luv asked about income, spending, and the effects of consumer spending ( market demand) on economic activity. Try to keep up.

Who does that other than illegals and those below the poverty line?

You want us to take part of a starving man's sandwich to fund our next military excursion?

It would be nice if that starving man would go to the store and buy bread and meat and cheese and make his own sandwiches rather than going to mcdonalds so he can pitch in a few bucks. Why should I have to pay HIS share of the expenses so that he can have McDonalds?

J.T

09-17-2011, 10:04 PM

Govt jobs are only temporary jobs

And? We need roads and levies built. It damn well better not take forever.

When the employers are forced to give raises

We left the sweatshops and slums and saw the rise of the middle class. All-in-all, I'd say it was a smashing success.

To truly EARN a raise, the employee has to make themselved more valuable to the company by getting, more educated, more on job experience sometimes, or learning a new skill.

Uh-huh. And then get paid two dollars an hour instead of one. Only when the working class has organized and collective action has been taken (through the unions or the government) has the standard of living improved for the working class. That's wages remain lower even for persons of comparable or even superior skill in regions lacking string unions or regulation.

You keep repeating you mythical 'magic hand of the market' nonsense and I'll just point to the real world. Why do people come to America for a better opportunity, if their skills alone will raise their income through the magic of the mythical anarchy-capitalist market?

J.T

09-17-2011, 10:06 PM

It would be nice if that starving man would go to the store and buy bread and meat and cheese and make his own sandwiches rather than going to mcdonalds so he can pitch in a few bucks. Why should I have to pay HIS share of the expenses so that he can have McDonalds?

Uh-huh. He has no money, so he should go to the store?

Or he has a few bucks now and you want him to 'pitch in'? You know McDonald's is taxed while bread at the grocery store is not, right?

So you want him to pay taxes or not? Make up your mind.

Missileman

09-17-2011, 10:15 PM

And? We need roads and levies built. It damn well better not take forever.

We left the sweatshops and slums and saw the rise of the middle class. All-in-all, I'd say it was a smashing success.

Uh-huh. And then get paid two dollars an hour instead of one. Only when the working class has organized and collective action has been taken (through the unions or the government) has the standard of living improved for the working class. That's wages remain lower even for persons of comparable or even superior skill in regions lacking string unions or regulation.

You keep repeating you mythical 'magic hand of the market' nonsense and I'll just point to the real world. Why do people come to America for a better opportunity, if their skills alone will raise their income through the magic of the mythical anarchy-capitalist market?

Not true...if you account for cost of living, I make more than a unionized employee in Vegas.

(Added) And I make nearly twice what most of the other techs in town make as opposed to a union shop where the lesser skilled get the same pay.

ConHog

09-17-2011, 10:18 PM

Uh-huh. He has no money, so he should go to the store?

Or he has a few bucks now and you want him to 'pitch in'? You know McDonald's is taxed while bread at the grocery store is not, right?

So you want him to pay taxes or not? Make up your mind.

Do you ALWAYS have to be such an obtuse retard?

LuvRPgrl

09-17-2011, 10:25 PM

... throughout our history, the marginal tax rate has gone up and gone down under republican and democratic administrations alike.

LIAR.

Marginal tax rates for the top earners has almost steadily gone down since the 1944, except 1950, 67-68, 1990 & 1993,
PLUS,,,,In 91 & 93, under Cllinton I might add, the income of those in that bracket went from $86,000 to 250,000

Under Reagan, the amount of income went down drastically, then Under Clinton it went up radically and has stayed about the same since.

J.T

09-17-2011, 10:40 PM

Not true...if you account for cost of living, I make more than a unionized employee in Vegas.

And you have the threat of unionization, past union actions, and the government for improving the lot of the working class in the first place and making that possible today.

Missileman

09-17-2011, 10:42 PM

And you have the threat of unionization, past union actions, and the government for improving the lot of the working class in the first place and making that possible today.

Tell that to the shlubs making half what I make.

DragonStryk72

09-17-2011, 10:43 PM

How do you create jobs? By increasing labour-market demand. How do you do that? By increasing demand for goods and services and disincentivizing outsourcing.

We can help with that by lowering business taxes for US businesses, so that they we do not have the second highest in the world.

How do you increase demand for goods and services? By increasing the real income of the average worker so the working class has more buying power.

You can accomplish this by getting the government spending down to a rational, stable level, so that inflation can stabilize, thus allowing businesses to further compete with each other, and lower the price.

How do you disincentivize outsourcing? By making it more expensive to evade labour and enviromental standards an import the resulting goods than it is to simply set up shop dometically, obey the rules, and sell te goods you manufacture here.

The biggest problem contributing to outsourcing is our taxation policies, combined with over-inflated wages continuing to increase overhead. When it becomes cheaper to ship a product from the far reaches of china, then it does to make the same object a block from the store it would be sold in, that is not businesses' fault.

LuvRPgrl

09-17-2011, 10:43 PM

Marginal utility. When a millionaire gets a thousand dollars more in income, it's a lot less likely to be pout back into the economy than when a working-class family earning 60k/yr with two kids to provide for does. In extreme cases, this can contribute to a liquidity trap and cause economic stagnation.

So, your gripe isnt that the wealthy are making more money than the poor, but rather that they spend it differently

Who the hell are you to determine what people should spend their money on?

And if the millionaire doesnt spend it on consumer goods, then it often gets invested in his own company which improves the economy

so dont rat trap me with liquidity issues, unless you can prove a substantial amount of money becomes stagnant, you got nothing

DragonStryk72

09-17-2011, 10:47 PM

But you don't create jobs by increasing taxes. An employer can increase the real income of the average worker by raising their salary. How does raising taxes increase the "real income" of the average worker?

Actually, lowering taxes, both on income and on businesses would have a double effect on increasing the "real income" which is basically the amount that you actually see each pay check. Like here's a question: Why are we getting taxes off people who are in jobs that clearly will not break the poverty line, when basically alls we're doing is wasting the government's time getting money they have to give back anyway?

LuvRPgrl

09-17-2011, 10:47 PM

You want us to take part of a starving man's sandwich to fund our next military excursion?cou

Oh crap, you didnt really just say that did you? I could expect a 20 year old niave college student to say something as ignorant as that, but not someone as old as you who really knows better

J.T

09-17-2011, 10:50 PM

We can help with that by lowering business taxes for US businesses, so that they we do not have the second highest in the world.

This tired meme again? Tell me how much GE paid in corporate taxes last year (hint: it's a negative number). Stop repeating that lie already. The effective tax rate approaches nil for many large corporations and isn't much higher for most others, thanks to lobbyists and our convoluted system of tax breaks, credits, and loopholes (and that's before you even hide the profits offshore since America's too stupid to do anything about that).

government spending
http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?32555-Let-s-talk-cuts

J.T

09-17-2011, 10:52 PM

Why are we getting taxes off people who are in jobs that clearly will not break the poverty line, when basically alls we're doing is wasting the government's time getting money they have to give back anyway?

People not knowing what box to check and the entire system being stupidly convoluted?

DragonStryk72

09-17-2011, 11:07 PM

This tired meme again? Tell me how much GE paid in corporate taxes last year (hint: it's a negative number). Stop repeating that lie already. The effective tax rate approaches nil for many large corporations and isn't much higher for most others, thanks to lobbyists and our convoluted system of tax breaks, credits, and loopholes (and that's before you even hide the profits offshore since America's too stupid to do anything about that).

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?32555-Let-s-talk-cuts

Yeah, so why do we keep using a tax system that is clearly littered with those loopholes. Who do you think are building those loopholes? Our own government is doing this, then they bitch and piss and moan about the "evil" corporations.

LuvRPgrl

09-17-2011, 11:10 PM

And? We need roads and levies built. It damn well better not take forever.?

Oh pathetic. Needing infrastructure has nothing to do with this topic. So, try addressing the problem, govt jobs are temp so increasing taxes and making govt jobs doesnt help the economy

We left the sweatshops and slums and saw the rise of the middle class. All-in-all, I'd say it was a smashing success.?
And again, what does that have to do with taxing the rich more, rise of the middle class and unions wasnt from increasing the tax on rich people.

Uh-huh. And then get paid two dollars an hour instead of one. Only when the working class has organized and collective action has been taken (through the unions or the government) has the standard of living improved for the working class. That's wages remain lower even for persons of comparable or even superior skill in regions lacking string unions or regulation.?
I cant even figure out what you are trying to say there.

You keep repeating you mythical 'magic hand of the market'? jPlease quote where I said that or stop making things up

You keep repeating you mythical 'magic hand of the market' nonsense and I'll just point to the real world.?
Its funny when someone trys to say Im not living in the real world.

Why do people come to America for a better opportunity, if their skills alone will raise their income through the magic of the mythical anarchy-capitalist market?[/QUOTE] Now you want to start discussing other countries economies??

J.T

09-17-2011, 11:33 PM

Yeah, so why do we keep using a tax system that is clearly littered with those loopholes.
Because we allow campaign donations instead of paying for all qualified (getting enough signatures) candidates' campaigns from a common fund to which people can donate, thereby allowing politicians to be bought off by lobbyists and corporate interests much more easily?

Who do you think are building those loopholes?
Politicians who know who funds their reelection campaigns and (now) donates to super pacs?

LuvRPgrl

09-17-2011, 11:36 PM

The biggest problem contributing to outsourcing is our taxation policies, combined with over-inflated wages continuing to increase overhead. When it becomes cheaper to ship a product from the far reaches of china, then it does to make the same object a block from the store it would be sold in, that is not businesses' fault.

outsourcing isnt a problem, it is just perceived that way

J.T

09-17-2011, 11:49 PM

So jobs elsewhere instead of here isn't a problem but you want us to 'be more competitive' to bring those jobs here?

Make up your minds. Is it a problem or not that jobs and production leave the country?

logroller

09-18-2011, 05:51 AM

I've never fully understood the "earned income tax credit" that allows one to receive tax monies (as opposed to paying taxes) simply because they have income of their own. It's almost as crazy as paying welfare recipients to not work simply because they have offspring.
My parents raised me to be more responsible than that. My government wants to reward irresponsibility.

EIC makes a hell of lot more sense than the AMT. People always make this about the rich vs the poor. The social downfall of our tax code is its effect on the well-off middle class; whose tax burden prevents them from retaining earnings which would add to the wealth of the financial sector.

But you can through the right public works programs and investments in your people. And you need taxes to raise the revenue to fund investments in infrastructure and education and fund the regulatory agencies to enforce such a system as necessary to increase the buying power of the middle class and strengthen the overall economy. We also need tax revenues to fund programs which ensure that the sick, the lame, the elderly, and our nation's children are taken care of and the working poor are provided a hand-up that allows them to become real competitors in the labour market and further strengthen our nation's economic sector.
Which happens for the working class as a whole only when the union or the state forces them to. History has proven this in nation after nation.

You seem hell-bent on causing inflation. Money is fiat, ie not real. Real growth isn't about $ earned through buying and selling, but that which results from production. If someone wants to earn more , they need to produce more. Simply selling a product for more $ will benefit one for a short-time, but eventually the price of all goods and services will rise. Same thing with labor; simply raising the wage will benefit the laborer for a while, but producers will raise the price of goods sold, then consumers will need more money to afford their purchases--this is inflation. Long term, buying power is, at best, stagnant; while the reality of inflation is a decrease in buying power.

I'm all for a hand-up, but labor interventionalism better typifies a hand-out, which results in the inflationary situation I just described. Income taxes are far too complex to tackle IMO; as the changes necessary to right the wrongs of a free-market aren't easily quantified in graphs and tables. Its plain to see the inequity of taxes paid; the fact the wealthy pay less tax (as a %) of what they earn is because they have more wealth, ie means of production, and therefore produce more with the money they spend. It's circular; if you tax them more, the market will produce less; if you tax them less, the market will produce more. The poor spend less than the rich, right? THEN tax spending, not earnings. Grow the pie!

red states rule

09-18-2011, 06:30 AM

When you go to ANY website, you reveal more than just your IP address, and some sites place cookies and other cool files on your computer to remember you on your return visit. That, coupled with the PM exchange you and I had just a few short days ago - I think I can make a damn good case for the identities being one and the same. AND, being I am friends with just about every political board owner - I'm confident I can have IP's, machine types, OS's Browsers, cookies and all kinds of other goodies tied to the same computer. While your IP may have changed when you went to Mexico, the identifying features from your computer remain the same.

Pour some water down your pants, grow a set of balls & just admit it.

Jim, I am sorry for derailing my own thread but I enjoy shining the ioght of truth on Virgil anytime I get the chance

This is a "man" who on Sunday stood before his gullible flock and preached the word of God then returned here and posted his vile hate

Of course Virgil posted the same stuff denying he was "moderatedemocrat" and you proved beyond a shadow of a doubt Virgil picked that name when he signed up

Here are threads where Virgil was using the same script to deny the truth

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?21030-Pelosi-quot-It-felt-like-a-10-pound-anvil-was-lifted-off-my-head-quot&p=343490#post343490

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?23379-Hurricanes-should-be-Given-quot-Black-Sounding-quot-Names

I am only sorry I can only shine the light on Vorgil here and not have his posts run in the local paper in Maine. I would enjoy his flock and those who hold this piece of trash in high esteem see the real Virgil Bozeman. I wonder how those people would react reading the comments Paster Virgil made about the female posters here?

Oh well, again to the rest of the folks here - I am sorry for derailing this thread. Virgil has been exposed and the job is done

beanerboy

09-18-2011, 09:46 AM

The definition of “Tax” from Websters:

1tax verb \ˈtaks\
Definition of TAX
transitive verb
1: to assess or determine judicially the amount of (costs in a court action)
2: to levy a tax on
3obsolete : to enter (a name) in a list <there went out a decree … that all the world should be taxed — Luke 2:1(Authorized Version)>
4: charge, accuse <taxed him with neglect of duty>; also : censure
5: to make onerous and rigorous demands on <the job taxed her strength>
— tax·able adjective
— tax·er noun

for the purposes of discussion, let’s concentrate on definition number 5. “To make onerous and rigorous demands on”. In America, we pay people primarily for what they do with their brains. Those citizens with higher degrees of education and higher levels of intelligence are paid more than those citizens with low levels of education and lower than average intellects. We reward people for BRAIN power, not MUSCLE power.I would suggest that most people with the intellectual abilities to read and post their own thoughts on internet message boards probably fall above the 100 IQ AVERAGE.

But that only highlights the fact that there are millions of Americans who have less than a 100 IQ... people for whom math is hard, making change is difficult, reading and comprehending simple instruction manuals beyond their capability, no matter how many times they try to learn how. For the smart folks, we pay them dearly for their wisdom and their insightfulness and ability to comprehend complex thoughts and concepts, their facility with difficult mathematical calculations.

For the not so smart folks, we make rigorous and onerous demands on their bodies. Busboys carrying heavy trays of food for hours and hours every day. Dishwashers cleaning solid food waste off dishes and shoving tray after tray of dirty dishes into hot steaming Hobart dishwashing machines for hours and hours every day. Stockboys lifting tray after tray of tomato sauce cans onto grocery store shelves. Gardeners who toil bended over in the hot sun day after day making our yards lovely. They do these jobs because, in most cases, they do not have the mental capabilities to do other, less TAXING jobs.

And, for the most part, we pay these people who wash our clothes and dishes and cook our french fries and clean our bedpans and sweep and wash the floors of our office buildings the bare minimum wage. Many of them have to work two or more of these TAXING onerous jobs in order to make ends meet, and in many cases they NEVER actually make the ends meet. They are forever having to decide between necessities as to which one they can afford to purchase this week or this month.

But hey, we certainly NEED those folks in our society. Our economy relies on the people who pick vegetables and stock shelves and cook french fries and wash dishes and clean hotel rooms and mow lawns and wait tables. We couldn’t get along without them, but nonetheless, we pay them next to nothing for their TAXING efforts on our behalf. As employers, we provide them with no health care or other benefits provided to other, more intelligent, well educated workers. We exploit them and we make onerous and rigorous demands on them because we can.

These folks do not really pay a lot of INCOME tax, but to suggest that they are not TAXED by our economic and governmental system is really not an honest assessment.

red states rule

09-18-2011, 09:51 AM

Bottom lin is Virgil, the very people who are demanding others pay higher taxes - Charlie Rangel, John Kerry, Warren Buffett, and others - are the same ones who are known tax cheats

Perhaps if liberal Dems paid all the taxes they woed, and the Dems did not WASTE trillions on BS stuff like Solyndra, Obamacare, and the "stimulus" - the very talk of tax increases would never happen

The government does not have a revenue problem - it does have a serious spending problem

Missileman

09-18-2011, 10:10 AM

The definition of “Tax” from Websters:

1tax verb \ˈtaks\
Definition of TAX
transitive verb
1: to assess or determine judicially the amount of (costs in a court action)
2: to levy a tax on
3obsolete : to enter (a name) in a list <THERE Version) 2:1(Authorized Luke taxed be should world the all that decree a out went — …>
4: charge, accuse <TAXED with duty of neglect him>; also : censure
5: to make onerous and rigorous demands on <THE taxed strength her job>
— tax·able adjective
— tax·er noun

for the purposes of discussion, let’s concentrate on definition number 5. “To make onerous and rigorous demands on”. In America, we pay people primarily for what they do with their brains. Those citizens with higher degrees of education and higher levels of intelligence are paid more than those citizens with low levels of education and lower than average intellects. We reward people for BRAIN power, not MUSCLE power.I would suggest that most people with the intellectual abilities to read and post their own thoughts on internet message boards probably fall above the 100 IQ AVERAGE.

But that only highlights the fact that there are millions of Americans who have less than a 100 IQ... people for whom math is hard, making change is difficult, reading and comprehending simple instruction manuals beyond their capability, no matter how many times they try to learn how. For the smart folks, we pay them dearly for their wisdom and their insightfulness and ability to comprehend complex thoughts and concepts, their facility with difficult mathematical calculations.

For the not so smart folks, we make rigorous and onerous demands on their bodies. Busboys carrying heavy trays of food for hours and hours every day. Dishwashers cleaning solid food waste off dishes and shoving tray after tray of dirty dishes into hot steaming Hobart dishwashing machines for hours and hours every day. Stockboys lifting tray after tray of tomato sauce cans onto grocery store shelves. Gardeners who toil bended over in the hot sun day after day making our yards lovely. They do these jobs because, in most cases, they do not have the mental capabilities to do other, less TAXING jobs.

And, for the most part, we pay these people who wash our clothes and dishes and cook our french fries and clean our bedpans and sweep and wash the floors of our office buildings the bare minimum wage. Many of them have to work two or more of these TAXING onerous jobs in order to make ends meet, and in many cases they NEVER actually make the ends meet. They are forever having to decide between necessities as to which one they can afford to purchase this week or this month.

But hey, we certainly NEED those folks in our society. Our economy relies on the people who pick vegetables and stock shelves and cook french fries and wash dishes and clean hotel rooms and mow lawns and wait tables. We couldn’t get along without them, but nonetheless, we pay them next to nothing for their TAXING efforts on our behalf. As employers, we provide them with no health care or other benefits provided to other, more intelligent, well educated workers. We exploit them and we make onerous and rigorous demands on them because we can.

These folks do not really pay a lot of INCOME tax, but to suggest that they are not TAXED by our economic and governmental system is really not an honest assessment.

Nice try, but definition #5 has nothing to do with taxation.

beanerboy

09-18-2011, 10:10 AM

that is only YOUR bottom line, and God knows you repeat it often enough. Our problems are not simple either/or sorts of things. We DO have a spending problem AND a revenue problem. We need to address both. And moaning about how the guys at the bottom of the socioeconomic spectrum do not pay income tax is silly. The distribution of wealth and, therefore, power, in the US over the past thirty years is frightening.

from wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth

In the United States at the end of 2001, 10% of the population owned 71% of the wealth and the top 1% owned 38%. On the other hand, the bottom 40% owned less than 1% of the nation's wealth.[13] According to this 2006 study by the Federal Reserve System, from 1989 to 2004, the distribution in the United States had been changing with indications there was a greater concentration of wealth held by the top 10% and top 1% of the population.[1] A PBS report by Solman on Aug. 16, 2011 now found that financial gains over the last decade in the United States have been mostly made at the "tippy-top" of the economic food chain as more people fall out of the middle class. The top 20 percent of Americans now holds 84 percent of U.S. wealth.[2], the 2nd 20 % holds 11%, the third 20 % 4 %.

beanerboy

09-18-2011, 10:11 AM

Nice try, but definition #5 has nothing to do with taxation.

wrong. it has nothing to do with monetary taxation, and I never said it did.

red states rule

09-18-2011, 10:14 AM

beanerboy

09-18-2011, 10:34 AM

red states rule

09-18-2011, 10:36 AM

there are plenty of sites documenting the increasing disparity in the distribution of wealth and power in the US. I chose wiki for your benefit.... because they use smaller words that you might more easily understand.

Virgil, not only do you lie every chance you get - you run away like a coward from facts you can't refute

Some things never change Virg'

beanerboy

09-18-2011, 10:39 AM

red states rule

09-18-2011, 10:42 AM

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

http://www.businessinsider.com/15-charts-about-wealth-and-inequality-in-america-2010-4

http://www.good.is/post/americans-are-horribly-misinformed-about-who-has-money/

these have bigger words, but you might try wading through them...

who am I kidding? You will NEVER allow yourself to consider other viewpoints.

I will try again Virgil

Yea, ignore the waste and jack up the rates. Also, listen to the tax cheats demand others pay more

Funny how you have ignored the threads on the wasted money Virgil. You were always a big greenie yet you have nothing to say about the failures and wasted money

I am sure you would support giving a drug user more drugs to solve his "problem" like you are with the spending problem the nation has

Obama was wasted TRILLIONS on Obamacare, the stimulus, Cash for Clunkers, and green energy

Yet you ignore these facts and demand others pay more in taxes

Like a loyal liberal drone you ignore these facts and simply support bigger and more costly government

Why? Who the hell knows

beanerboy

09-18-2011, 10:46 AM

I will try again Virgil

Yea, ignore the waste and jack up the rates. Also, listen to the tax cheats demand others pay more

Funny how you have ignored the threads on the wasted money Virgil. You were always a big greenie yet you have nothing to say about the failures and wasted money

I am sure you would support giving a drug user more drugs to solve his "problem" like you are with the spending problem the nation has

Obama was wasted TRILLIONS on Obamacare, the stimulus, Cash for Clunkers, and green energy

Yet you ignore these facts and demand others pay more in taxes

Like a loyal liberal drone you ignore these facts and simply support bigger and more costly government

Why? Who the hell knows

As I have said, and you have ignored, I agree completely that we have both a revenue problem AND a spending problem.

And true to form, as predicted, you responded to a post with three articles discussing the growing inequity in wealth distribution in the US without bothering to read any of them.

red states rule

09-18-2011, 10:48 AM

As I have said, and you have ignored, I agree completely that we have both a revenue problem AND a spending problem.

And true to form, as predicted, you responded to a post with three articles discussing the growing inequity in wealth distribution in the US without bothering to read any of them.

So BEFORE we give the government MORE money they MUST fix the spending problem Virgil

Like with most libs they will take the extra money but wil NEVER CUT SPENDING

Cut first then we can talk about revenue afterwards

Yea Virg you "talk" about spending problems but never offer any specifics. Much like Obama does everyday

beanerboy

09-18-2011, 10:56 AM

So BEFORE we give the government MORE money they MUST fix the spending problem Virgil

Like with most libs they will take the extra money but wil NEVER CUT SPENDING

Cut first then we can talk about revenue afterwards

Yea Virg you "talk" about spending problems but never offer any specifics. Much like Obama does everyday

why not do both at the same time? I am perfectly willing to see us stop wasting billions each and every week in Afghanistan going after the three dozen or so AQ members left there. I would be perfectly willing to stop wasting billions in subsidies to oil companies. I would be perfectly willing to stop giving tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas. I would be perfectly willing to see across the board cuts at all levels of the federal government. I would be perfectly willing to see us slash spending for congressional salaries. I would be perfectly willing to see us raise the retirement age for social security. I would be perfectly willing to see us do a lot of similar things to reduce government spending. What taxes would YOU be willing to raise? Oh... let me guess.... you'd be willing to make the busboys and dishwashers and gardeners and housekeepers pay more income tax. Now THAT will certainly raise a ton of dough! LOL

and be honest... did you read those links of mine? yes or no

red states rule

09-18-2011, 11:01 AM

why not do both at the same time? I am perfectly willing to see us stop wasting billions each and every week in Afghanistan going after the three dozen or so AQ members left there. I would be perfectly willing to stop wasting billions in subsidies to oil companies. I would be perfectly willing to stop giving tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas. I would be perfectly willing to see across the board cuts at all levels of the federal government. I would be perfectly willing to see us slash spending for congressional salaries. I would be perfectly willing to see us raise the retirement age for social security. I would be perfectly willing to see us do a lot of similar things to reduce government spending. What taxes would YOU be willing to raise? Oh... let me guess.... you'd be willing to make the busboys and dishwashers and gardeners and housekeepers pay more income tax. Now THAT will certainly raise a ton of dough! LOL

You can't trust libs to CUT SPENDING Virgil. They are all like you. Liars and party ahead of country at all times. Libs will always take the increased taxes but NEVER get around to the cuts

Obama and the Dems had unchecked power for 2 years and we see the results. You were so proud of Obama in your death wish email to me Virgil - I posted it on this thread

Now libs want to officialy make SS a welfare program by screwing over those who pump the most money into the ponzi scheme. More liberal compassion Virgil?

When libs talk about "shared sacrifice" I want them to talk about having thr 50% of earners pay more then 3% of all federal income taxes

Of course you will now go into liberal meltdown over how heartless that is. This from the lib who fled Amercia to avoid paying HIS fair share of taxes

fj1200

09-18-2011, 11:03 AM

Contrary to what the Republicans would have you believe, there is no magic number.

You haven't a clue what you're talking about. I never said that there was a number and I don't recall any Republicans deciding on a number either. So your assignment remains as you're the one calling for higher rates.

beanerboy

09-18-2011, 11:07 AM

You can't trust libs to CUT SPENDING Virgil. They are all like you. Liars and party ahead of country at all times. Libs will always take the increased taxes but NEVER get around to the cuts

Obama and the Dems had unchecked power for 2 years and we see the results. You were so proud of Obama in your death wish email to me Virgil - I posted it on this thread

Now libs want to officialy make SS a welfare program by screwing over those who pump the most money into the ponzi scheme. More liberal compassion Virgil?

When libs talk about "shared sacrifice" I want them to talk about having thr 50% of earners pay more then 3% of all federal income taxes

Of course you will now go into liberal meltdown over how heartless that is. This from the lib who fled Amercia to avoid paying HIS fair share of taxes

didn't read those links of mine yet, I see. ah well. And I didn't flee America to avoid anything. I moved to Mexico to enjoy the warm climate, wonderful culture, lovely people and great healthcare. I still pay my fair share of taxes in America. I pay every single dime that Uncle Sam asks me to pay, and if he asks me to pay more, I will gladly, patriotically do so. The only taxes I don't pay in the US are those that do not apply to me. I don't own any property, so I don't pay any US property taxes. I don't buy goods and services in the US so I don't pay any sales taxes in the US.