Taxation as Theft!

EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3132
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Taxation as Theft!

What is the moral justification for taxation? Why do people have an intrinsic sense in other relationships(business, consumer and personal) that there needs to correlation between benefits and cost for the relationship to be sustained. Why isn't there a corresponding sense when it comes to government? With modern technology, why can't all payment for government services be converted to either user fees or insurance premium payments?

Our government has been described as an insurance company with an army. The difference is you don't have to pay the premiums and security fees if you can't or you're politically connected. The 'army' is used to force extra payment from the rest. This is essentially the cause of the deficits and fiscal crises. People are going to change their behavior to stop any theft, no matter how they are filled with the 'patriotic duty' propaganda.

The entire concept of taxation is irrational and unsustainable. But yet the fiscal collapse of many major world governments and societies will occur before people realize this.

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4275
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is onlineOnline
 Tell me about it. I just

 Tell me about it. I just paid the balance I owe for my 2010 taxes, and I am sure I am picking up the tab for many right here on this site. So for those of you who say "The rich need to pay their 'fair share'" 

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3177
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
meanwhile, i live in a

meanwhile, i live in a european social state with universal healthcare, university education that's free for most and extremely cheap for everyone else, a rising standard of living, and a flat tax rate.

that's right, a flat tax rate.

on top of that, i live on main street in a village that's a mere 25 minute commute from the second largest city in the country.  how much did i pay in property taxes this year?  less than $30.  for the whole freakin' year. 

but i actually agree, taxation is ultimately only a stopgap.  i've always had a different alternative.  it's called expropriation.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
 OK iwebeck, you clearly

 

OK iwebeck, you clearly don't see the point. There are things that we can use and things that we need. There is a large gap between those.

 

Your country is doing well simply because you buy what you can actually use. The USA has to buy stuff that we need apart from what we can actually use.

 

I live in the great state of Connecticut and several of the largest employers are defense contractors. If we were to stop making things that would be proof against the Soviet Union (we must ignore the fact that only nukes would have been used), then my state would have the employment level of a third world dictatorship.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:What is the moral

EXC wrote:

What is the moral justification for taxation? Why do people have an intrinsic sense in other relationships(business, consumer and personal) that there needs to correlation between benefits and cost for the relationship to be sustained. Why isn't there a corresponding sense when it comes to government? With modern technology, why can't all payment for government services be converted to either user fees or insurance premium payments?

Our government has been described as an insurance company with an army. The difference is you don't have to pay the premiums and security fees if you can't or you're politically connected. The 'army' is used to force extra payment from the rest. This is essentially the cause of the deficits and fiscal crises. People are going to change their behavior to stop any theft, no matter how they are filled with the 'patriotic duty' propaganda.

The entire concept of taxation is irrational and unsustainable. But yet the fiscal collapse of many major world governments and societies will occur before people realize this.

 

This is utopia absurdity.

You can argue better for waisted taxes, or less taxes. But there would be no government to protect your rights if the money wasn't raised somehow to keep the peace.

Any social structure is going to require some sort of order to maintain civility. Taxes are the way we pay to insure our civility. Otherwise you end up with a power vacuum in which only those with resources can abuse all the others.

You are also falsely assuming that humans will always do the right thing if left to their own devices. Without taxes we would have no police or firemen. Without taxes we would not be able to pay lawmakers who have made seatbelt laws and speed limit laws.

I don't think you really want to live in a lawless society.

If you ever need a cop for anything, remember what you tried to argue here. Don't call 911 for yourself or anyone if you or your loved ones or even a stranger has a medical emergency.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: Tell

Beyond Saving wrote:

 Tell me about it. I just paid the balance I owe for my 2010 taxes, and I am sure I am picking up the tab for many right here on this site. So for those of you who say "The rich need to pay their 'fair share'" 

So? If you are in a high tax bracket you are STILL paying a lower rate than those below you.

So your attitude is "Let them eat cake"

Why is it Warren Buffet, whom should be your hero, who IS  a billionaire said that he finds it sad that his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does?

I don't want to hear you complain when GE and Bank of America didn't pay squat.

SERIOUSLY, if you are going to be this serious about money, then the next time you see a rust bucket in a car accident with poor people injured, don't call 911, they deserve to die because they don't have money like you.

I don't know what you make, but I damn sure wouldn't bitch because I am sure you make way more than me. What the hell does that say about your morals when I am less offended at my pay scale about being taxed at all, than you.

Beyond, I don't get you at all, everything is black and white to you on issues of economics. No one wants you to be poor. No one wants to tax you to the poor house. But I seriously hope you don't get too old before you realize that although money is important and less taxes is a nice idea on paper, you are NOT the only class in this country and you are not the only person in this country.

YOU WOULD get taxed less if corporate America were doing for workers what workers are turning to government for. But since you buy into this utopia solution "no taxes", and less pay, when people don't have what they need, they turn to the only place they can because the private sector isn't giving it to them.

ADRESS THE PAY GAP, put more into the worker and you WILL get government off your back. There is a difference between cant, and don't want to. You simply don't want to. Cry me a river.

Your attitude in what you think works as a tactic is my issue, not the fact that you want more money than others may feel they need. I don't care if you like money, but you damned sure are not the only person in this country and not everyone wants or needs what you think you need.

All I am seeing from the right wing is robbing from the other two classes via tax cuts that will ADD to our deficite and then on top of that fire people to pay for those tax cuts.

I don't have health care. BUT THE SAME goes for my middle class co-worker's husbands who OWN their own businesses as well. So even people who OWN THEIR OWN BUSINESSES, can agree with me.

JOHN STEWART AND STEPHEN COBERT ARE MILLIONAIRS, and I like them. So you are out of your mind if you want to make this about hating wealth or hating the free market.

STOP MAKING THIS ABOUT CLASS WARFARE OR YOUR ABILITY TO MAKE MONEY, this is a free market and you have every right to make money!

This is about your lack of introspection, NOT YOUR PERSONAL RIGHTS!

I am sick of you thinking you are going to end up in the poor house, if you are not in the poor house then you are not in the poor house, so get over it!

There are people far worse off in life than you. Until you realize that, you'll keep whining like you are now.

I would love to have LESS taxes, anyone would. But how we are going about it, hasn't worked and WILL NOT WORK.

 

 


 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: Tell

Beyond Saving wrote:

 Tell me about it. I just paid the balance I owe for my 2010 taxes, and I am sure I am picking up the tab for many right here on this site. So for those of you who say "The rich need to pay their 'fair share'" 

You in that corporate top 1%? Yes I think a flat rate would be fair compared to our current bullshit special interest program where the richest make the rules and congress votes it's self a raise.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
robj101 wrote:Beyond Saving

robj101 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

 Tell me about it. I just paid the balance I owe for my 2010 taxes, and I am sure I am picking up the tab for many right here on this site. So for those of you who say "The rich need to pay their 'fair share'" 

You in that corporate top 1%? Yes I think a flat rate would be fair compared to our current bullshit special interest program where the richest make the rules and congress votes it's self a raise.

BINGO, the issue is not wealth or personal rights. It is the MONOPOLY and abuse because only a few are running the government by paying off the government.

EVEN TRUMP says that we are getting ripped off by big oil. Because they lobby for their self interest so they can hold us hostage to their rigged prices. If you broke up their monopoly the prices would go down. THEN it would be a fair market end closer to a better free market.

If the top two percent don't start caring about the rest of society it will lead to the revolt they say they don't want. I don't want that either, but it wouldn't surprise me if we ended up going down that road. You cant simply price people out of existing.

EDIT, except for the flat rate thing, BULL, If I were a billionaire and they took half I would still be rich. The more you make the more you should pay.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
Taxes are neither good nor

Taxes are neither good nor bad, it depends how they are collected and spent. Two examples:

 In my country the political system is designed to be a golden trough for political pigs, quarreling over it. In total, 70% of people's income becomes tax, through various repeated VAT, consumer tax, electricity, water, equal limited income tax (good for business but not for people) and so on.
At least 20% of state budget gets stolen every year. The republic is getting more and more in debt, thanks to extraordinary incompetence of the politicians. The government is unstable, it falls apart about every 1,5 year, because the other parties want to get to the through as well. As a result, nothing ever gets done, and if yes, it's done idiotically with a massive theft of funds. I'm not making this up, not complaining for no reason, just remember, Czech government was brought down during its half year EU presidency period, which is another international faux pas. 

The point is, that local people pay taxes to thieves. They work and pay like crazy, because they must. And their money get misused or stolen, because the politicians for 20 years did not care to implement laws for making transparent, corruption-proof government projects and orders. There is no reason why they couldn't, except their own greed.
This is something I envy Slovaks, they are not cowards and do not tolerate so much corruption. The language may be similar, but Slovaks are not such pussies like Czechs. 

On the other hand, people in Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway, etc, they have very transparent system of taxes, no top limits on them, and they can directly see where the money are used in their community. Their education is the best, their life standard is high, and so on. Rich people pay more, because obviously, for a rich man 10 bucks has much lesser value than for a poor man. Equal tax is in fact inequal. 
So in these northern states, even if you pay a greasy fine for speeding, you get a warm and fuzzy feeling in your heart that you just helped your community.

One joke to describe the situation:

A Czech traffic minister visited a German traffic minister. The German minister showed him his nice house and car. 
"How did you get all this?" the Czech minister asked.
"See that highway over there?" German minister replied. "The project said, 20 meters breadth, I changed it to 19 meters and bought a villa and a car."
Later the Czech minister invited his German fellow to his house. Not a house, but a small chateau, with limousine, park and helicopter.
"How did you get all this stuff?" the German minister asked.
"See that highway over there?" 
"I don't." the German minister said.
"See?"
 

 

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4275
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is onlineOnline
Brian37 wrote:Beyond Saving

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

 Tell me about it. I just paid the balance I owe for my 2010 taxes, and I am sure I am picking up the tab for many right here on this site. So for those of you who say "The rich need to pay their 'fair share'" 

So? If you are in a high tax bracket you are STILL paying a lower rate than those below you.

So your attitude is "Let them eat cake"

Why is it Warren Buffet, whom should be your hero, who IS  a billionaire said that he finds it sad that his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does?

I don't want to hear you complain when GE and Bank of America didn't pay squat.

 

I guaran- damn- tee you I pay a hell of a lot higher percentage than you. I fit into that nice special tax bracket that pays more than everyone below and more than many above. As a matter of fact, I am probably in the exact same tax bracket as Buffets secretary (who is very highly paid by secretary standards). Why should Warren Buffet be my "hero"? He is an Obama cocksucker and I have little respect for him outside of his obvious business talents. 

 

You didn't hear me bitching about GE? I made a whole fucking thread about them not too long ago about how they pay virtually no taxes and it is because they blow the right people in washington. The FUCKING politicians are so damn corrupt. You bitch about the problem but suggest that we need to give the corrupt politicians MORE power and accuse anyone who suggests otherwise of desiring an impossible "utopia".

 

Brian37 wrote:

SERIOUSLY, if you are going to be this serious about money, then the next time you see a rust bucket in a car accident with poor people injured, don't call 911, they deserve to die because they don't have money like you.

Who said anything about letting poor people die? I am getting sick of you accusing me of wanting people dead simply because I disagree with you on what the size of our government should be and how our taxation system should be set up. Obviously, you must want people dead since you hold onto a larger percentage of your income than I do. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

I don't know what you make, but I damn sure wouldn't bitch because I am sure you make way more than me. What the hell does that say about your morals when I am less offended at my pay scale about being taxed at all, than you.

You mean my belief that everyone should pay for the government benefits the enjoy? What does it say about YOUR morals that it is ok to steal from someone else to fund government programs you think are a good idea? When I think something is a good idea, I put MY own money into it. I think your morality is fucked up if you think someone who steals from another is more moral than someone who uses their own personal resources. 

 

I bet you would bitch if you had to pay the same percentage of your income in taxes as I have to.

 

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond, I don't get you at all, everything is black and white to you on issues of economics. No one wants you to be poor. No one wants to tax you to the poor house.

Then why the hell are they doing it if they don't want to? Although, when I am highly taxed, it is not me who becomes poor. I draw the income I desire to live on regardless of the tax rate. What suffers is the amount I can reinvest. Yes, economics IS black and white. X goes in, Y comes out. Calculating the equation might get a little complicated. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

But I seriously hope you don't get too old before you realize that although money is important and less taxes is a nice idea on paper, you are NOT the only class in this country and you are not the only person in this country.

I'm not the only class. You're right. So why aren't you other fucking classes picking up part of the tab? Especially since YOU are the ones who want all the government programs?

 

Brian37 wrote:

Your attitude in what you think works as a tactic is my issue, not the fact that you want more money than others may feel they need. I don't care if you like money, but you damned sure are not the only person in this country and not everyone wants or needs what you think you need.

People can pursue whatever they think they want/need, I don't care. I only care when they come to steal from me to get what they want/need. Ask me for a donation and I am likely to give it to you if I think the cause is good. Come and DEMAND that I give you money and it pisses me off.

 

Brian37 wrote:

I don't have health care. BUT THE SAME goes for my middle class co-worker's husbands who OWN their own businesses as well. So even people who OWN THEIR OWN BUSINESSES, can agree with me.

I don't have health insurance either. So what? You make your calculated choice and live with the consequences. The difference between me and you is that if I get sick I will write the good doctor a check from my own bank account. If you get sick, you will send thugs to my door to steal money from me to pay for your doctor. And you have the audacity to question my morality?

 

Brian37 wrote:

STOP MAKING THIS ABOUT CLASS WARFARE OR YOUR ABILITY TO MAKE MONEY, this is a free market and you have every right to make money!

This is about your lack of introspection, NOT YOUR PERSONAL RIGHTS!

I have every right to make money, except for the money that goes directly to the government. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

I am sick of you thinking you are going to end up in the poor house, if you are not in the poor house then you are not in the poor house, so get over it!

There are people far worse off in life than you. Until you realize that, you'll keep whining like you are now.

I would love to have LESS taxes, anyone would. But how we are going about it, hasn't worked and WILL NOT WORK. 

 

I'm not worried about going to the poor house. I will take care of myself as I always have. Yes there are people far worse off than me, and I wish I could cut a five figure check to them rather than send it to uncle fucking sam who is going to hand it to those motherfuckers at GE, GM, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the rest of Obama's posse (or whichever posse is in control at the time). If you think most of your taxes goes to help those who are in need you are delusional. I won't go to the poor house, but every year the temptation to say fuck you all and liquidate everything I own and just quit working all together becomes very appealing.  

 

 

@ Rob, not the top 1% yet, but I'm comfortable and considered "rich" by Uncle Sam, even though I can't even dream of buying a Gulfstream yet.  

edit: Nor can I afford to buy a Senator or a President to lower my tax rate. 

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4275
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is onlineOnline
Brian37 wrote: The more you

Brian37 wrote:

 The more you make the more you should pay.

Why should the "rich" pay a higher percentage? Note that 15% of $1,000,000 is $150,000 which is a lot more than 15% of $30,000 which is $4500. So even at a flat rate the evil rich guy is paying a lot more money. Why should the poor be able to skate by without paying for any government services? After all, those services are so vital that the whole country would fall apart without that..... at least that is what MSNBC told me. 

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
And yet, if the millionaire

And yet, if the millionaire loses 150k in taxes he still has 850k left and really has no problems. $4500 from $30k might mean some bills don't get paid (probably not because the person making 30k is a lazy bastard either).

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Brian37

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

 The more you make the more you should pay.

Why should the "rich" pay a higher percentage? Note that 15% of $1,000,000 is $150,000 which is a lot more than 15% of $30,000 which is $4500. So even at a flat rate the evil rich guy is paying a lot more money. Why should the poor be able to skate by without paying for any government services? After all, those services are so vital that the whole country would fall apart without that..... at least that is what MSNBC told me. 

Because, by the time they get to that point, THEY ARE NOT doing the bulk of the labor, their workers are. Sitting at a desk and dreaming up ways to sell something or sell stock to others IS NOT work at the same scale as the people who actually do the work that the rich benifit from.

The "poor" your right wing buddies have falsely painted out to be deadbeats. I doubt, being poor myself, you could get anyone of my co-workers, or even my boss, to say I am a deadbeat. I outwork everyone there, including my owner. And all the people at my level work their asses off.

You have this stupid attitude that someone sold you that poverty is, or should be a crime.

You look at other countries where the pay gap isn't as wide as it is here, and THEY DONT have the same problems we do here. They have higher education rates, less crime. BECAUSE their top percent KNOW WHAT THEY HAVE AND GIVE BACK

It isn't a matter of "Why should I have to" YOU SHOULD WANT TO.

But instead you mistake "cant" with the reality of "don't want to".

Keep supporting your corporate buddies and maybe we too can have slave wages like India and China.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:I bet you would bitch

Quote:

I bet you would bitch if you had to pay the same percentage of your income in taxes as I have to.

Of course I would because I make less. But if I made what you made I WOULD NOT!

Again, boo hoo.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:I wish I could cut a

Quote:
I wish I could cut a five figure check to them rather than send it to uncle fucking sam

BINGO! Maybe if corporate America WOULD do more for their workers on their own, the other two classes would not be turning to the evil Uncle Sam. I'm not saying you personally could afford that to the same scale, but to the corporate  scale there certainly are tons of people sitting on money they could give directly to their workers, BUT DONT.

Who needs uncle sam anyway, they only provide us with a military. Cops and firemen, roads, food safety inspectors.. So your argument isn't "government bad" but, wasteful government bad. I say it is a waste to continue to fund tax cuts at the expense of the middle class and poor.

Unless you address the pay gap and cost of living and health care, YOU WILL NOT stop people from going to government for help. But either way no matter how much you say you hate taxes, you want cops and firemen. But you damned sure are not going to get away with saying "Only those who can afford them should have them".

It is nice to see you have a moment of sanity. I hope it sticks.

 


 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
I start a business,

I start a business, potentially bust my ass and work my way up to get taxed more? Worried about someone sitting behind a desk because they might have earned it? Seems like it would be easier to remain at a low bracket which would impede progress overall. You allow no one a chance to work at their potential even if they can earn it with this over taxing the rich idea.

Flat rate is fair and balanced. You don't penalize people for doing well.

"Hey Bobby, you did great in that game so you only get half your pudding for supper."

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:And yet, if

jcgadfly wrote:

And yet, if the millionaire loses 150k in taxes he still has 850k left and really has no problems. $4500 from $30k might mean some bills don't get paid (probably not because the person making 30k is a lazy bastard either).

No no no no, we are lazy. Our only goal should be to work for 30 cents an hour 24 hours a day so Exxon can sell conflated oil stock prices and so the banks can continue to bet both for and against their own loans.

If you set up any speed limits or cops on the highway  to insure traffic control, you get accused of being anti-car.

Now just accept your slave status from your corporate over loards and "maybe" they will throw us a crumb or two.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
If nothing else the rich are

If nothing else the rich are taxed "less" than the middle class right now, once again you overshoot and get all wacky, can't we work on evening it out before we speak of overtaxing them?

Does that make sense?

Baby steps.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
robj101 wrote:I start a

robj101 wrote:

I start a business, potentially bust my ass and work my way up to get taxed more? Worried about someone sitting behind a desk because they might have earned it? Seems like it would be easier to remain at a low bracket which would impede progress overall. You allow no one a chance to work at their potential even if they can earn it with this over taxing the rich idea.

Flat rate is fair and balanced. You don't penalize people for doing well.

"Hey Bobby, you did great in that game so you only get half your pudding for supper."

I bust my ass too, you . The real physical productivity is in the worker. You don't have a product without the worker. There are more workers than dreamers and pencil pushers.

No it is more like "I Bobby did a  great job, and since you helped me get here, I'll help you out too".

GOD DAMN IT

"you don't penalize people for doing well"

DUH AND THANKS FOR THE UPDATE

You also don't allow Monpolies where those who do well simply stack the rules in their favor by bribing lawmakers. That merely becomes money equals power and might makes right.


 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:robj101

Brian37 wrote:

robj101 wrote:

I start a business, potentially bust my ass and work my way up to get taxed more? Worried about someone sitting behind a desk because they might have earned it? Seems like it would be easier to remain at a low bracket which would impede progress overall. You allow no one a chance to work at their potential even if they can earn it with this over taxing the rich idea.

Flat rate is fair and balanced. You don't penalize people for doing well.

"Hey Bobby, you did great in that game so you only get half your pudding for supper."

I bust my ass too, you . The real physical productivity is in the worker. You don't have a product without the worker. There are more workers than dreamers and pencil pushers.

No it is more like "I Bobby did a  great job, and since you helped me get here, I'll help you out too".

GOD DAMN IT

"you don't penalize people for doing well"

DUH AND THANKS FOR THE UPDATE

You also don't allow Monpolies where those who do well simply stack the rules in their favor by bribing lawmakers. That merely becomes money equals power and might makes right.


 

 

So you are finally leading up to the real problem and what this discussion could lead too. Our system is fine but we the people have allowed it to become corrupt with "special interests" I just love that term.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
I'm afraid it would take an

I'm afraid it would take an actual revolution to fix the problem now and as bad as that sounds what's worse is how people's brains are too sogged down with entertainment and media bullshit to care. When I was young I thought the hillbillies would come down from the mountains and fix this shit.. but the hillbillie are all dead or they have to watch opra tomorrow.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4275
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is onlineOnline
Brian37 wrote:Because, by

Brian37 wrote:

Because, by the time they get to that point, THEY ARE NOT doing the bulk of the labor, their workers are. Sitting at a desk and dreaming up ways to sell something or sell stock to others IS NOT work at the same scale as the people who actually do the work that the rich benifit from.

No, it is work on a much larger scale. The person who dreams up potential uses of material and ways to make it more efficiently (with less labor or less materials) causes far more production in society than someone who simply makes what they can with their hands. This is especially true in a technology age where machines can replace much of manual labor. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

The "poor" your right wing buddies have falsely painted out to be deadbeats. I doubt, being poor myself, you could get anyone of my co-workers, or even my boss, to say I am a deadbeat. I outwork everyone there, including my owner. And all the people at my level work their asses off.

I am not questioning your work ethic. Personally, I have a terrible work ethic. But your "work" is rather limited in what it produces for society. Your output is limited by what you can cook in a specific time period. No matter how hard you work doing the actual physical labor, you will never be able to feed more than X number of people. Now if you came up with a way to feed 10,000 people in a day, your idea would be worth substantially more than your physical labor (which I assume feeds nowhere near 10,000 people in a day). So while the person who comes up with that idea might work less physically, they provide far more for society. 

You put physical labor up on a pedestal like it is somehow a greater more "pure" form of labor. Using your logic, we should still be an agrarian society where almost everyone grows their own food. Developing more efficient technologies and ideas that reduce the amount of physical labor is the best way to increase the wealth of society. Physical labor is something that we should be finding ways to reduce. I have spent a good portion of my life finding ways not to do physical labor and it has worked well for me and has caused far more people to get the things they want than I ever could have done with my two hands.

Now don't flip out on your "life isn't a script" speech. I don't care if you choose to do physical labor for the rest of your life. But I think you need to get some perspective on exactly how much you produce for society compared to the amount a good CEO produces. And again, I don't care how much you choose to produce. You can produce as much or as little as you desire, but recognize that as long as our system is capitalist, the amount of production you personally produce or CAUSE to be produced is directly related to your income.   

 

Brian37 wrote:

You have this stupid attitude that someone sold you that poverty is, or should be a crime.

When have I ever expressed that attitude? I don't care if you are  poor and I don't care if you do anything to change that situation. Your financial situation has absolutely no effect on me. I am  solely concerned about mine. Show me one instance in all the threads I have ever posted on where I suggested poverty should be a crime. Otherwise, please stop throwing out that ridiculous accusation. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

It isn't a matter of "Why should I have to" YOU SHOULD WANT TO.

If you asked nicely I might want to. You are not asking nicely, you are demanding and using the physical force of the US government to back it up. To that I will object to my last breath. 

 

 

jcgadfly wrote:

And yet, if the millionaire loses 150k in taxes he still has 850k left and really has no problems. $4500 from $30k might mean some bills don't get paid (probably not because the person making 30k is a lazy bastard either).

A common mistake people make in finances is thinking "If I had x number of dollars I would be able to pay all my bills." In realty, expenses tend to match your income. Someone who spends 105% of their money when they make 30k is likely to spend 105% when they make a million. No matter how much or how little money you make it is possible to live within your budget. I don't see why it is my concern whether or not you choose to live within your budget. And I certainly don't see why I should be penalized in the form of paying higher taxes because you think 15% is too burdensome on you. When I made $30,000/year I lived on $10,000. I'm not special. If I could do it, you can too. 

 

There are people who make hundreds of thousands a year but have no cash and run paycheck to paycheck. Whether you make million or $10,000 it is your responsibility to live within your budget. If you don't think you are making enough money, go make more.  

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


RatDog
atheistSilver Member
Posts: 562
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline

Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
robj101 wrote:I'm afraid it

robj101 wrote:

I'm afraid it would take an actual revolution to fix the problem now and as bad as that sounds what's worse is how people's brains are too sogged down with entertainment and media bullshit to care. When I was young I thought the hillbillies would come down from the mountains and fix this shit.. but the hillbillie are all dead or they have to watch opra tomorrow.

Sometimes you surprise me. We are conditioned to buy into 15 second sound bites. If people knew that advertising was nothing but emotional appeal and didn't buy crap just because it was being sold, the buying public would be able to have more power of the market.

Here is the thing. I don't want to scrap our open market for something like China or North Korea. But all I am saying is if the squeeze keeps being put on the middle class and poor, the same old pendulum swing that causes all revolutions will happen again. I don't want us to go in the opposite direction, but human nature is that when a majority gets fucked over they turn on the system that is bilking them.

The only thing that will prevent a worker revolt is INTROSPECTION and mutual cooperation. Otherwise people will do what they have to do to survive.

If a worker revolt happens, I wouldn't scrap our current system, I would simply make stronger the enforcement of anti-trust laws and oversight and transparency.

There is way too much BIG MONEY taking away the voices of the other two classes.  So we will end up having something like what happened in Egypt unless those at the top stop rigging the market and our politics.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:robj101

Brian37 wrote:

robj101 wrote:

I'm afraid it would take an actual revolution to fix the problem now and as bad as that sounds what's worse is how people's brains are too sogged down with entertainment and media bullshit to care. When I was young I thought the hillbillies would come down from the mountains and fix this shit.. but the hillbillie are all dead or they have to watch opra tomorrow.

Sometimes you surprise me. We are conditioned to buy into 15 second sound bites. If people knew that advertising was nothing but emotional appeal and didn't buy crap just because it was being sold, the buying public would be able to have more power of the market.

Here is the thing. I don't want to scrap our open market for something like China or North Korea. But all I am saying is if the squeeze keeps being put on the middle class and poor, the same old pendulum swing that causes all revolutions will happen again. I don't want us to go in the opposite direction, but human nature is that when a majority gets fucked over they turn on the system that is bilking them.

The only thing that will prevent a worker revolt is INTROSPECTION and mutual cooperation. Otherwise people will do what they have to do to survive.

If a worker revolt happens, I wouldn't scrap our current system, I would simply make stronger the enforcement of anti-trust laws and oversight and transparency.

There is way too much BIG MONEY taking away the voices of the other two classes.  So we will end up having something like what happened in Egypt unless those at the top stop rigging the market and our politics.

 

 

I never said scrap our current system, just need to scrap the current lifetime special interest politicians in it. When this country started politicians worked for peanuts and there were no "lifetime" politicians. Amazingly people way back seemed to do it because they wanted to be a a part of the american political system and work "for the people".

It has progressed to what we have now, which is directly related to the whole tax thing. Untill we remove the leeches from government who cater and pander to big corporation OVER the people this problem will only worsen. A bill passed a few years ago allowing big business to sponsor candidates for office, I thought this was a slap in the face to americans but few seemed to notice. It's not just america anymore it is now "corporate america". Well thanks to awesome decison making china also owns a chunk of us.

What will make the one's at the top stop rigging the game besides an egypt like happening?

The people are at fault, you and I and everyone else for letting these idiots swindle us and we continue to let them do so. Each election is just picking the flavor of our fuck you cone.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4275
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is onlineOnline
RatDog, stop using things

RatDog, stop using things like facts and numbers. Everyone knows that the "rich" don't pay taxes, Bama said so and you don't question the Messiah. 

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
The prescience of the

The prescience of the Congressional Budget Office is astounding. They already know what Oct 1st, 2011-2021 is gonna look like!

 

Amazing...

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3132
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:This is utopia

Brian37 wrote:

This is utopia absurdity.

You can argue better for waisted taxes, or less taxes. But there would be no government to protect your rights if the money wasn't raised somehow to keep the peace.

Any social structure is going to require some sort of order to maintain civility. Taxes are the way we pay to insure our civility. Otherwise you end up with a power vacuum in which only those with resources can abuse all the others.

You are also falsely assuming that humans will always do the right thing if left to their own devices. Without taxes we would have no police or firemen. Without taxes we would not be able to pay lawmakers who have made seatbelt laws and speed limit laws.

I don't think you really want to live in a lawless society.

If you ever need a cop for anything, remember what you tried to argue here. Don't call 911 for yourself or anyone if you or your loved ones or even a stranger has a medical emergency.

You completely misunderstand what I'm saying. I'm not against user fees to pay for police, fire, etc..., that is how all money should be raised. The current system is broken because we dont' do this enough. When you decide to fly on an airplane, there is obviously a security service that must somehow be paid. So the people that fly should pay this, not the people that don't. Just extend this principle to all activities government does.

Because this is not done, over time there is more people wanting a benefit they don't pay for and few people willing to pay it. That is the source of the current crisis. Taxation where there is no corresponing benefit is unsustainable. So I think you are the one creating an anarchy.

I claim your values have been creating a situation where we won't have adequate police or fire protection. All we need do is look at how bankrupt the governments are not for proof.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:RatDog,

Beyond Saving wrote:

RatDog, stop using things like facts and numbers. Everyone knows that the "rich" don't pay taxes, Bama said so and you don't question the Messiah. 

I know that "rich people" named Co. and Inc. are getting tax refunds while making millions in profits. Are they not rich enough for you?

I also know that cutting spending and revenue simultaneously will not get us out of the hole we are in. That seems to be the current legislative idea though.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


RatDog
atheistSilver Member
Posts: 562
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline
 Everything on the right

Kapkao wrote:

The prescience of the Congressional Budget Office is astounding. They already know what Oct 1st, 2011-2021 is gonna look like!

 

Amazing...

 Everything on the right side of the dotted line is a baseline projection.  Everything on the left is based what actually happened.  


RatDog
atheistSilver Member
Posts: 562
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Beyond Saving

jcgadfly wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

RatDog, stop using things like facts and numbers. Everyone knows that the "rich" don't pay taxes, Bama said so and you don't question the Messiah. 

I know that "rich people" named Co. and Inc. are getting tax refunds while making millions in profits. Are they not rich enough for you?

I also know that cutting spending and revenue simultaneously will not get us out of the hole we are in. That seems to be the current legislative idea though.

 

Corporations aren't people regardless of what any stupid Supreme Court decisions say.   Corporations are legal entities created by people for the enrichment of the people who created them.  The people who own the corporations expect to get money out of them which they pay taxes on, and the corporations also pay taxes on the money they make.  This creates a situation known as double taxation.  Think about it like this.  A guy goes and buys a store, and for whatever bizarre reasons decided to incorporate his business.  The business he created will have to pay taxes on any profits it makes, and the man will have to pay taxes on any money he receives from the business.  Let’s say that the man transfers all of the businesses profits to himself.  The business pays 20 percent of its income on taxes and the man also pays 20 percent of his income from the business on taxes.  The man’s effective tax rate becomes 36 percent.  Some people find this inequitable, and create laws to try to mitigate the effects of double taxations.  These laws are often poorly conceived and create unneeded complexity, or unintended results, but even when the laws are working as they are intended to work some people still find them unfair because they either don't know about double taxation or don't feel that it is unjust.

 

Another thing you’re not taking into account is NOL (net operating losses).    Let’s say a man buys a candy bar for $4 and sell it for $5.  Should the man have to pay taxes on the $5 dollars he received, or should he only have to pay taxes on the $1 net profit?  Most people would agree that he should only have to pay taxes on the net profit, because otherwise he is paying taxes on money that he doesn't actually get to keep.  Now let’s consider another situation.  The man buys a candy bar in one year but is unable to sell it.   That year he has a $4 net operating loss.  The next year he sells the candy bar or $5.  He deducted the cost of the candy bar last year so he can't deduct it again this year(note this example isn't quite right because the cost of the candy bar would be included in inventory instead of being deduced, but the example still shows the fundamental rational of NOLs).  Does that mean he should have to pay taxes on the whole $5?  It doesn’t really make any logical sense that the tax treatment of the candy bar should be different just because he was unable to sell it for a year.  This is why net operating losses are able to be deduced from two years before they occurred, and if there is any left over it can be deduced for 20 years after they occurred.  Often times this leads to situations were corporations are making a profit on their books, but not paying any taxes.  This makes many people mad, but still I don't think that NOL are unfair. 

 

 


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
RatDog.Wouldn't the main

RatDog.

Wouldn't the main reason that NOL aren't accounted for in income tax be that they're not income?

I'm sure that Mssrs. Co and Inc are well aware of them.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


RatDog
atheistSilver Member
Posts: 562
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly

jcgadfly wrote:

RatDog.

Wouldn't the main reason that NOL aren't accounted for in income tax be that they're not income?

I'm sure that Mssrs. Co and Inc are well aware of them.

NOLs are accounted for in income.   If a company looses money one year they gain a NOL.  If the company makes money the next year they can use any NOLs they have to reduce their taxable income for that year.  This means that a company might make money, but not need to pay taxes.  The justification for this is that a company shouldn't have to pay taxes on money they used to pay their expenses in previous year but were unable to deduct because they suffered a loss.  Often times people will see that a company didn't pay any taxes on a year they made a profit, and assume that it's because the company used some kind of unfair tax loop whole, but that isn't necessarily they case.  Companies are not always acting unethically.  If you villainize one group to much you start to loose track of the bigger picture.  Companies, governments, unions, and other groups and individuals of all kind can do things that are both good or bad for society.  Knowing which actions are ultimately beneficial to society, and which actions are ultimately harmful to society is not always strait forward.  That is why I think people should try and keep an open mind about these kinds of things, and be willing to try and consider them from different perspectives.    


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
RatDog wrote:jcgadfly

RatDog wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

RatDog.

Wouldn't the main reason that NOL aren't accounted for in income tax be that they're not income?

I'm sure that Mssrs. Co and Inc are well aware of them.

NOLs are accounted for in income.   If a company looses money one year they gain a NOL.  If the company makes money the next year they can use any NOLs they have to reduce their taxable income for that year.  This means that a company might make money, but not need to pay taxes.  The justification for this is that a company shouldn't have to pay taxes on money they used to pay their expenses in previous year but were unable to deduct because they suffered a loss.  Often times people will see that a company didn't pay any taxes on a year they made a profit, and assume that it's because the company used some kind of unfair tax loop whole, but that isn't necessarily they case.  Companies are not always acting unethically.  If you villainize one group to much you start to loose track of the bigger picture.  Companies, governments, unions, and other groups and individuals of all kind can do things that are both good or bad for society.  Knowing which actions are ultimately beneficial to society, and which actions are ultimately harmful to society is not always strait forward.  That is why I think people should try and keep an open mind about these kinds of things, and be willing to try and consider them from different perspectives.    

That's why I'm here

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
RatDog

Nice cherry picking.

Why not look up the tax rate for the past 60 years and you will see that it is the LOWEST ever. AGAIN, BOO HOO. And if history is any indication taxes were CUT right before the great depression.

And as far as your stupid accusation of "force".

For someone who supposedly understands evolution, then you should know that government WILL end up happening ins some form(I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT TYPE OF GOVERNMENT, just that it is unavoidable from an evolutionary standpoint, BECAUSE we are social animals.

You look at a group of monkeys they WILL establish roles in that community. Humans are no different and SOME SORT of government , GOOD OR BAD, will arise as a result of competition for power.

Now, you are living in a utopia to think that everything is better in the private sector. NO the private sector can be just as abusive as the government.

ANYTHING left without a check on it, ANYTHING left to it's own devices, PRIVATE OR GOVERNMENT, can be abusive. Merely owning a business does not make one abusive. Merely being a government employee or government entity does not make one abusive.

What the right is proposing WILL affect my own mother. SHE spent 30 years teaching and they basically want to "FORCE" her to buy private insurance which she already has, but want her to use a "voucher" which is basically using her as a middle man to pad the profit margins of insurance companies, instead of her using medicare to pay for the things the insurance companies wont pay for. What will end up happining is that AT HER AGE she will end up paying more out of her pocket and depend more on some asshole in a cubical, instead of her doctor, what treatment she should get.

DON'T TALK TO ME ABOUT "FORCE". The rich are going to FORCE my mother to pad their profit margins.

This is no different than the coal mining scams run in West Virginia where they paid the miners in company "vouchers" and at the same time owned the houses they rented in and stores they shopped at.

WE are headed for big business turning us into indentured slavery.

But do not sit there and bitch about government when you damned well know you are willing to pay police, firemen and military. BOTH YOU AND I ARE FORCED TO PAY FOR THOSE THINGS. It would be impossible to have a civil society without them.

I don't know what you make. But I am sure it is way more than I do. If you think my mother is not worth paying for, then I don't know what to say. Tell her to her face that she needs to give her money "by force" to a private company or PAY MORE out of her own pocket. Taking care of teachers we shouldn't do? Military and private contractors ok, who cares right? All she did was EDUCATE PEOPLE.

Your real issue isn't that you are not willing to pay taxes. You are lying because you know damned well you are glad we have a military and police and fireman and roads. How do you suggest we pay for those things if not through taxes? Only people with money who can afford them?

If you really think taxes are bad THEN DON'T USE PUBLIC ROADS! I dare you.

Your real issue is what you think we should spend our taxes on.  The right wing is giving away money to big corporations and fucking over the middle class and poor. PERIOD!

We will end up looking like India and China's labor force. THAT is not my idea of competition.

Don't talk to me about "force" this is merely bullies shaking down the middle class and poor because they have the money to pay off our congress.

I am tired of your "poor me" crap. I doubt seriously you have any clue how good you have it.

 

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:A bill passed a few

Quote:
A bill passed a few years ago allowing big business to sponsor candidates for office, I thought this was a slap in the face to americans but few seemed to notice. It's not just america anymore it is now "corporate america". Well thanks to awesome decison making china also owns a chunk of us.

Totally agree. This has merely allowed "might makes right" to take over.

The middle class and poor increasingly have no voice in government and BOTH parties are scamming us. It sickens me to think that an entire company can be treated like an individual. It basically takes away the voice of the clerk who works for them.

What fucking pisses me off is this stupid false equation that when you point out the importance of anti-monopoly and abuse of power, somehow you are against private business. I AM SO SICK OF THAT FUCKING STUPID ANALOGY! ABUSE OF POWER, not personal desires, is my issue.

The right wing are experts in getting people to vote against their own self interest. The left are a bunch of fucking wimps because they also don't want to lose their campaign funds, so they let the right lead them by the nose.

The corporate class wont be happy until we work for 30 cents an hour 16 hours a day 6 days a week like China.

And to Beyond,

When I talk about worker revolt, you failed to notice that I said "I hope it doesn't get to that point", but like any other species in evolution, when you don't have resources, you seek them out. It is an evolutionary product that that will happen. It is unavoidable.

If you don't want that to happen, working on the CONDITIONS and environment help.

ALL revolutions, be it the American or Russian revolution, are a result of ABUSE OF POWER, you end up with a wrecked economy and the people will turn on you. That is evolutionary and life IS about resources and why people turn on their governments. This has always happened in human history.

It is not a matter of wanting it to happen. It WILL happen because of evolution in that every species seeks out resources. And I also said that if it were to happen I WOULD NOT want to replace our current Constitution. I would simply hope that the workers standing up to bullies would merely go back to the anti-trust laws that have served us well up until 30 years ago when they started getting stripped.

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
 You can show me a graph

 You can show me a graph that says the top 2% are paying a higher percentage of income tax but that doesn't mean the middle class are not paying in more overall. The top 2% that own half the money in this country are not paying in half of the income tax by any means.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sknt-UBRhxo

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:RatDog,

Beyond Saving wrote:

RatDog, stop using things like facts and numbers. Everyone knows that the "rich" don't pay taxes, Bama said so and you don't question the Messiah. 

Yea, we all know he is really the anti-Christ for merely pointing out inequity. Money equals power and only those with money should have any say. GOT IT.

 

Keep caring about yourself, that's what you are best at right?

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
http://www.usatoday.com/money

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/2010-05-10-taxes_N.htm

Who needs facts.

Oh and notice the person in the comment section bitching about how bad Canada is. If I didn't hate cold weather I'd move there.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


lalib
atheist
lalib's picture
Posts: 134
Joined: 2010-12-31
User is offlineOffline
robj101 wrote:  You can

robj101 wrote:

 You can show me a graph that says the top 2% are paying a higher percentage of income tax but that doesn't mean the middle class are not paying in more overall. The top 2% that own half the money in this country are not paying in half of the income tax by any means.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sknt-UBRhxo

 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Brian37 wrote:This

EXC wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

This is utopia absurdity.

You can argue better for waisted taxes, or less taxes. But there would be no government to protect your rights if the money wasn't raised somehow to keep the peace.

Any social structure is going to require some sort of order to maintain civility. Taxes are the way we pay to insure our civility. Otherwise you end up with a power vacuum in which only those with resources can abuse all the others.

You are also falsely assuming that humans will always do the right thing if left to their own devices. Without taxes we would have no police or firemen. Without taxes we would not be able to pay lawmakers who have made seatbelt laws and speed limit laws.

I don't think you really want to live in a lawless society.

If you ever need a cop for anything, remember what you tried to argue here. Don't call 911 for yourself or anyone if you or your loved ones or even a stranger has a medical emergency.

You completely misunderstand what I'm saying. I'm not against user fees to pay for police, fire, etc..., that is how all money should be raised. The current system is broken because we dont' do this enough. When you decide to fly on an airplane, there is obviously a security service that must somehow be paid. So the people that fly should pay this, not the people that don't. Just extend this principle to all activities government does.

Because this is not done, over time there is more people wanting a benefit they don't pay for and few people willing to pay it. That is the source of the current crisis. Taxation where there is no corresponing benefit is unsustainable. So I think you are the one creating an anarchy.

I claim your values have been creating a situation where we won't have adequate police or fire protection. All we need do is look at how bankrupt the governments are not for proof.

My "values"? What's that? That people who have less should be treated like criminals? That wages should remain stagnant or drop while corporate profits explode?

That's rich, GE pays no taxes and you want to accuse me of anarchy? Their class is the one writing the laws, not me. I would have left the regulations in so they HAD to pay taxes.

FINE, DONT use anything public since you think only those who can afford to pay should have it. Don't pay your taxes. Who needs a military? You obvioulsy make enough by yourself to protect yourself.

After all "TAXES ARE THEFT"

If the middle class and poor voted in their self interest and didn't get distracted by the bullshit that allowed GE to pay off congress and the banks to pay off congress, you are right, we wouldn't be in this mess. So in a way, you are right, we are to blame because we are fucking stupid to realize we are getting screwed.

I was hoping that the democrats would grow some balls, but no, money is the only thing that congress listens to.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Wouldn't "user fees simply

Wouldn't "user fees simply be taxes paid to private companies for services that everyone needs? How is that less theft-like?

Or do you want to have "ghettos" that don't get services because they can't/won't pay user fees?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Yea, we all

Brian37 wrote:
Yea, we all know he is really the anti-Christ for merely pointing out inequity.

Where has he pointed out inequality?

Ah, whatever... I don't know about antichrist, but I do find it disturbing how many people here are willing to give him a pass on highly dishonest behavior simply because he (initially) championed a few of their pet causes. (Societal pluralism -which you so frequently obsess over- comes to mind)

Quote:
(something about packing bags and moving to Canada)

If it meant no more thread-jacking because of your incessant desire to preach to us about "pluralism", "monopolies of power", "top 2%" and whatever else fool's crusade strikes you at the moment, I welcome it!

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3132
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:My "values"?

Brian37 wrote:

My "values"? What's that?

To me it seem your values are 'If someone can't pay for the services they need, others should be force to pay for there share". The values of the nanny state while never addressing the causes of this situation. Well the nanny is bankrupt so it really doesn't matter what you think it fair, balance will be restored.

 

Brian37 wrote:

That wages should remain stagnant or drop while corporate profits explode?

This is what you get with the welfare state. The money spent on medicare and food stamps ends up in pockets of the corporations. Doesn't solve any problem.

Brian37 wrote:

That's rich, GE pays no taxes and you want to accuse me of anarchy?

They are the welfare queens on the other end of the spectrum. You accused me of wanting anarchy, remember.

 

Brian37 wrote:

 

FINE, DONT use anything public since you think only those who can afford to pay should have it. Don't pay your taxes. Who needs a military? You obvioulsy make enough by yourself to protect yourself.

Obviously if someone owns a lot, you have a lot more to protect and defend. So if went with a philosophy of pay for the security services you need and use, the military and police wouldn't be bankrupting us. But instead we penalize hard work and innovation with income tax. Workers pay to defend the privileges of the rich.

Brian37 wrote:

I was hoping that the democrats would grow some balls, but no, money is the only thing that congress listens to.

I think the public is going to have to grow some first.

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


RatDog
atheistSilver Member
Posts: 562
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline
Kapkao wrote:Brian37

Kapkao wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
Yea, we all know he is really the anti-Christ for merely pointing out inequity.

Where has he pointed out inequality?

Ah, whatever... I don't know about antichrist, but I do find it disturbing how many people here are willing to give him a pass on highly dishonest behavior simply because he (initially) championed a few of their pet causes. (Societal pluralism -which you so frequently obsess over- comes to mind)

What dishonest behavior?  If you have some kind of specific problem with something I've done then tell me.  


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
lalib wrote:robj101 wrote:

lalib wrote:

robj101 wrote:

 You can show me a graph that says the top 2% are paying a higher percentage of income tax but that doesn't mean the middle class are not paying in more overall. The top 2% that own half the money in this country are not paying in half of the income tax by any means.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sknt-UBRhxo

 

Huh, so were wrong and everythings fine. Why isn't this graph on fox news nightly.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


RatDog
atheistSilver Member
Posts: 562
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline
robj101 wrote:lalib

robj101 wrote:

lalib wrote:

robj101 wrote:

 You can show me a graph that says the top 2% are paying a higher percentage of income tax but that doesn't mean the middle class are not paying in more overall. The top 2% that own half the money in this country are not paying in half of the income tax by any means.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sknt-UBRhxo

 

Huh, so were wrong and everything fine. Why isn't this graph on fox news nightly.

The video you linked talked about corporate income taxes, while the graph talks about individual  income taxes.  These are totally different things.   Corporations only take on a small amount of the tax burden, while individual income taxes account for a large part of the tax burden.  You can see that on this graph.  

The dotted line near the bottom of the graph is corporate income taxes, and the much higher line is individual income taxes.  

There are two totally different discussions here.

One discussion is should wealthy people be paying more in income taxes.

The other discussion is should Corporations be paying more in income taxes.   


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
RatDog

 

Please note- graphs 2 and 3 are tax rates.  What are the actual tax revenues by income quintile?  Also, where is the data showing the total rate when including capital gains?  Remember the drastic cut in capital gains taxes?  That would not show up on these graphs, I believe.

Remember, it doesn't matter what the tax rate for income is if you pay some few thousands to an accountant so you pay $0 in taxes. 

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


RatDog
atheistSilver Member
Posts: 562
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline
cj wrote:Also, where is the

cj wrote:

Also, where is the data showing the total rate when including capital gains?  Remember the drastic cut in capital gains taxes?  That would not show up on these graphs, I believe.

Remember, it doesn't matter what the tax rate for income is if you pay some few thousands to an accountant so you pay $0 in taxes. 

Actually it does include capital gain.  

I found this in the notes and definitions part of the paper. 


RatDog
atheistSilver Member
Posts: 562
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: Nice cherry

Brian37 wrote:

Nice cherry picking.

Why not look up the tax rate for the past 60 years and you will see that it is the LOWEST ever. AGAIN, BOO HOO. And if history is any indication taxes were CUT right before the great depression.

I've been researching things related to the national dept lately.   While I was doing that I came across the graphs I posted.  They seemed related to this topic so I posted them.  I'm sorry if they aren't complete enough.  

Brian37 wrote:

And as far as your stupid accusation of "force".

I've made not accusation of force. 

Brian37 wrote:

For someone who supposedly understands evolution, then you should know that government WILL end up happening in some form (I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT TYPE OF GOVERNMENT, just that it is unavoidable from an evolutionary standpoint, BECAUSE we are social animals.

You look at a group of monkeys they WILL establish roles in that community. Humans are no different and SOME SORT of government, GOOD OR BAD, will arise as a result of competition for power.

I don't hate government.  Businesses and government can do both bad and good things.  

Brian37 wrote:

Now, you are living in a utopia to think that everything is better in the private sector. NO the private sector can be just as abusive as the government.

I don't think that the private sector is perfect.  There is no such thing as a perfect organization.  

Brian37 wrote:

ANYTHING left without a check on it, ANYTHING left to its own devices, PRIVATE OR GOVERNMENT, can be abusive. Merely owning a business does not make one abusive. Merely being a government employee or government entity does not make one abusive.

I agree, what's your point?  Actually I would go even farther and say that even thing things which do have checks on them can still become abusive.  

Brian37 wrote:

DON'T TALK TO ME ABOUT "FORCE". The rich are going to FORCE my mother to pad their profit margins.

I didn't talk to you about force.  I don't think I have ever talked to you about force.  Outside of discussion about force, I kind of think you villianizing rich people too much.  I don't personally know any rich people, but I find it kind of hard to believe that they are responsible for everything that is wrong with America.  

Brian37 wrote:

This is no different than the coal mining scams run in West Virginia where they paid the miners in company "vouchers" and at the same time owned the houses they rented in and stores they shopped at.

WE are headed for big business turning us into indentured slavery.

I'm not sure I believe that.  

Brian37 wrote:

But do not sit there and bitch about government when you damned well know you are willing to pay police, firemen and military. BOTH YOU AND I ARE FORCED TO PAY FOR THOSE THINGS. It would be impossible to have a civil society without them.

I don't recall bitching about government on this web site.  I do complain about government sometimes.  I think that politicians focus too much on getting reelected, and not enough on doing what is in people best interest.  

Brian37 wrote:

I don't know what you make. But I am sure it is way more than I do. If you think my mother is not worth paying for, then I don't know what to say. Tell her to her face that she needs to give her money "by force" to a private company or PAY MORE out of her own pocket. Taking care of teachers we shouldn't do? Military and private contractors ok, who cares right? All she did was EDUCATE PEOPLE.

Your real issue isn't that you are not willing to pay taxes. You are lying because you know damned well you are glad we have a military and police and fireman and roads. How do you suggest we pay for those things if not through taxes? Only people with money who can afford them?

If you really think taxes are bad THEN DON'T USE PUBLIC ROADS! I dare you.

Did I ever say taxes were bad?  I think that taxes can be good or bad depending on their nature.   If the total cost to society of extracting the tax is less than the total benefit to society from using the tax then the tax is good.   In other words if a tax creates value then the tax is good.  This is kind of a useless definition in a practical sense because there is really no way to measure the ability of a tax to create value.  So I'm not really sure how to tell if a tax is good or not.  My opinion about such things tends to vary with my moods.  

Brian37 wrote:

Your real issue is what you think we should spend our taxes on.  The right wing is giving away money to big corporations and fucking over the middle class and poor. PERIOD!

I don't know about that.  I don't really know that much about what the Republican Party is doing.   If I gain more information in the future I will probably form an opinion on the matter.   

By the way I don't affiliate myself with republican, democrats, libertarians, capitalists, socialists, or any other political groups or ideologies.  

Brian37 wrote:

We will end up looking like India and China's labor force. THAT is not my idea of competition.

The global economy affects everyone.  Labor conditions in India and China affect labor conditions here at home because businesses can outsources labor to other countries.   If you want to improve labor conditions in the United States you will have to address the realities of a global economy.  I'm not really sure if or how that could be done.   Most people I've talked to think education is the key, and that we need to focus on skilled labor.  

Brian37 wrote:

Don't talk to me about "force" this is merely bullies shaking down the middle class and poor because they have the money to pay off our congress.

I didn't talk to you about force.  

Brian37 wrote:

I am tired of your "poor me" crap. I doubt seriously you have any clue how good you have it.

Ok, fair enough.  

 


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
RatDog wrote:robj101

RatDog wrote:

robj101 wrote:

lalib wrote:

robj101 wrote:

 You can show me a graph that says the top 2% are paying a higher percentage of income tax but that doesn't mean the middle class are not paying in more overall. The top 2% that own half the money in this country are not paying in half of the income tax by any means.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sknt-UBRhxo

 

Huh, so were wrong and everything fine. Why isn't this graph on fox news nightly.

The video you linked talked about corporate income taxes, while the graph talks about individual  income taxes.  These are totally different things.   Corporations only take on a small amount of the tax burden, while individual income taxes account for a large part of the tax burden.  You can see that on this graph.  

The dotted line near the bottom of the graph is corporate income taxes, and the much higher line is individual income taxes.  

There are two totally different discussions here.

One discussion is should wealthy people be paying more in income taxes.

The other discussion is should Corporations be paying more in income taxes.   

I don't see a whole lot of difference considering the richest folks are ceo's of said corporations lol.

Why does everyone think if you have 40 million you are taxed less? That much cashola could sit in a bank and draw more than enough interest to pay for it's self from what I understand.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin