billvon 2,476 #51 October 14, 2008 >And I have no problems paying my share to keep things running. But >when I'm EXPECTED to pay others shares too.... You always will be; it's the only way that works. The "fairest" tax of all would be to charge every US citizen about $60,000 a year, period. If you don't pay it you go to prison. Everyone gets access to the same benefits, everyone pays the same amount. That, of course, is unworkable. So instead we have a system where those who make more, pay more. The argument over how progressive that system should be becomes something of a detail then. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AWL71 0 #52 October 14, 2008 Quote Quote Quote We most certainly are not a society of EQUAL opportunity. Something I agree with you on. We are all born Unequal. Each with different Intellect, Intelligence, Drive, Motivation and Opportunity. The ones that take what they have and what is available to them and make the most of it are generally called Conservatives. Those that whine about how unfair that is are generally called Liberals. Then we agree; claiming that we are an equal opportunity society is incorrect. You are dead wrong. ANYONE that works hard can earn a decent living and contribute to society. Thats not to say that hard work guarantees great wealth but it does guarantee self sufficiency. People that sit on their ass all day desrve what they get-welfare.The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #53 October 14, 2008 QuoteYou are dead wrong. ANYONE that works hard can earn a decent living and contribute to society. Thats not to say that hard work guarantees great wealth but it does guarantee self sufficiency. People that sit on their ass all day desrve what they get-welfare. Bullshit... Anyone who sits on their ass and does not work does not deserve welfare... period. Paying women to have children is fucking stupid. EVERYONE can do something... with the exception of those severly disabled. Even many of those can and do remain productive members of society. BUT.. what do you do with those who are capable of working... but will not work???? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #54 October 14, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote We most certainly are not a society of EQUAL opportunity. Something I agree with you on. We are all born Unequal. Each with different Intellect, Intelligence, Drive, Motivation and Opportunity. The ones that take what they have and what is available to them and make the most of it are generally called Conservatives. Those that whine about how unfair that is are generally called Liberals. Then we agree; claiming that we are an equal opportunity society is incorrect. You are dead wrong. ANYONE that works hard can earn a decent living and contribute to society. Thats not to say that hard work guarantees great wealth but it does guarantee self sufficiency. People that sit on their ass all day desrve what they get-welfare. You seem to have a lot of difficulty comprehending the concept of "equal".... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thanatos340 1 #55 October 14, 2008 QuoteThen we agree; claiming that we are an equal opportunity society is incorrect. Absolutely. And no matter what happens we never will be. Each Individual (I know liberals hate that word) is unique. Each is born into this world with different attributes (Physical, Mental and Environmental), How that individual deals with those attributes will greatly determine what opportunities they have later in life. Some are more physically attractive than others. Some of us are downright ugly. Some are born with above average intellect. Others are downright Dumb. Some are born into families of wealth and affluence, Others are born into poverty. And in spite of all that, ANYONE can be successful if they can apply themselves to the opportunities available to them. And ANYONE can be a failure if they do not. The opportunities are there. They are not equal and they never will be as long as we are individuals. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #56 October 14, 2008 Quote>And I have no problems paying my share to keep things running. But >when I'm EXPECTED to pay others shares too.... You always will be; it's the only way that works. The "fairest" tax of all would be to charge every US citizen about $60,000 a year, period. If you don't pay it you go to prison. Everyone gets access to the same benefits, everyone pays the same amount. That, of course, is unworkable. So instead we have a system where those who make more, pay more. The argument over how progressive that system should be becomes something of a detail then. Why shouldn't we have a system where those who HAVE more pay more?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AWL71 0 #57 October 14, 2008 QuoteQuoteYou are dead wrong. ANYONE that works hard can earn a decent living and contribute to society. Thats not to say that hard work guarantees great wealth but it does guarantee self sufficiency. People that sit on their ass all day desrve what they get-welfare. Bullshit... Anyone who sits on their ass and does not work does not deserve welfare... period. Paying women to have children is fucking stupid. EVERYONE can do something... with the exception of those severly disabled. Even many of those can and do remain productive members of society. BUT.. what do you do with those who are capable of working... but will not work???? I don't think they deserve anything either. My verbage was lackluster there. I meant to say if you don't work all you will end up with is welfare even though they shouldn't.The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #58 October 14, 2008 I would also add that when someone reaches retirement age they DESERVE the ability to sit on their ass, and not have to worry about their health care or having a roof over their heads or food on their table. The thought that this administration and many of those who support them would allow the money that is paid into ones retirement fund for an entire life could be invested in bullshit financial instruments such as we have seen in the last few years and are now worthless SHOULD give pause to ever even SUGGESTING doing that again by ANY group. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AWL71 0 #59 October 14, 2008 QuoteQuote>And I have no problems paying my share to keep things running. But >when I'm EXPECTED to pay others shares too.... You always will be; it's the only way that works. The "fairest" tax of all would be to charge every US citizen about $60,000 a year, period. If you don't pay it you go to prison. Everyone gets access to the same benefits, everyone pays the same amount. That, of course, is unworkable. So instead we have a system where those who make more, pay more. The argument over how progressive that system should be becomes something of a detail then. Why shouldn't we have a system where those who HAVE more pay more? Why should those who have success be punished? Those who have more normally have more for a reason. Let them keep their money and invest it back in the economy.The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #60 October 14, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote>And I have no problems paying my share to keep things running. But >when I'm EXPECTED to pay others shares too.... You always will be; it's the only way that works. The "fairest" tax of all would be to charge every US citizen about $60,000 a year, period. If you don't pay it you go to prison. Everyone gets access to the same benefits, everyone pays the same amount. That, of course, is unworkable. So instead we have a system where those who make more, pay more. The argument over how progressive that system should be becomes something of a detail then. Why shouldn't we have a system where those who HAVE more pay more? Why should those who have success be punished? Those who have more normally have more for a reason. Let them keep their money and invest it back in the economy. Paying tax to run the country that enabled your success is PUNISHMENT? Is it a mark of "success" to inherit wealth like Paris Hilton?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AWL71 0 #61 October 14, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote>And I have no problems paying my share to keep things running. But >when I'm EXPECTED to pay others shares too.... You always will be; it's the only way that works. The "fairest" tax of all would be to charge every US citizen about $60,000 a year, period. If you don't pay it you go to prison. Everyone gets access to the same benefits, everyone pays the same amount. That, of course, is unworkable. So instead we have a system where those who make more, pay more. The argument over how progressive that system should be becomes something of a detail then. Why shouldn't we have a system where those who HAVE more pay more? Why should those who have success be punished? Those who have more normally have more for a reason. Let them keep their money and invest it back in the economy. Paying tax to run the country that enabled your success is PUNISHMENT? Is it a mark of "success" to inherit wealth like Paris Hilton? Less than 3% of the wealthy inheritied their money. Wealthy people should pay taxes but they should not pay more and be punished for their success. The wealthy people will put the money to better use than the government will.The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thanatos340 1 #62 October 14, 2008 Quote would also add that when someone reaches retirement age they DESERVE the ability to sit on their ass IF they actually saved something for retirement. Then yes, They should enjoy the fruits of THEIR labor. Otherwise they can get their social security checks and try to survive on that. QuoteThe thought that this administration and many of those who support them would allow the money that is paid into ones retirement fund for an entire life could be invested in bullshit financial instruments such as we have seen in the last few years and are now worthless SHOULD give pause to ever even SUGGESTING doing that again by ANY group. I personally don’t want any Government agency telling me how I can or can not invest my money. Like everyone else my 401K took about a 30% hit over the last month. Over the past couple days I have got about half that back. I expect it all will come back and grow a bit before I am retirement age. If it does not, then I can accept the fact that I made poor choices. Of course I could have CHOSEN different vehicles for my Retirement and not lost a dime during this mess. I did not do that. I still think I made right decision over the long haul in leaving the retirement accounts alone. I am glad I have the Opportunity to invest pretax money in a Retirement account that I have some choices as to where the money is invested. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #63 October 14, 2008 Quote This is NOT an equal opportunity society. Would you say it is better than most? And while there are for sure more difficulties in some areas, we also have much more opportunity than others here. Your man Obama is an example of that I would think."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #64 October 14, 2008 QuoteAnyone who sits on their ass and does not work does not deserve welfare... period. Paying women to have children is fucking stupid. EVERYONE can do something... with the exception of those severly disabled. Even many of those can and do remain productive members of society. You and I agree 100% on this. QuoteBUT.. what do you do with those who are capable of working... but will not work???? I say let them starve. If they turn to crime, throw them in jail. Your take?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #65 October 14, 2008 QuoteBUT.. what do you do with those who are capable of working... but will not work???? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I say let them starve. If they turn to crime, throw them in jail. Your take? We already have a prison population that we should be ashamed of as a modern western nation. I would bet that the removal of the welfare system as it currently is implemented would force a whole lot of people into the jobs that illegal aliens are currently getting. That is another loophole I would close in a heartbeat. If you are not an American you do not get a job in America. I would penalize business owners who hire people without the required documentation, and make the penalty for doing so REALLLLY hurt to ensure compliance. If the ilegals who come here for jobs could not get the jobs they would stay at home and be a burden on their own society. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #66 October 14, 2008 QuoteWe already have a prison population that we should be ashamed of as a modern western nation. Agreed. We need to stop the drug war."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #67 October 14, 2008 QuoteQuoteBUT.. what do you do with those who are capable of working... but will not work???? I say let them starve. If they turn to crime, throw them in jail. Your take? Give them cookies. Get them nice and plump. Then turn them into Soylent Green. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #68 October 14, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote Clicky Wealth redistribution is fucking bullshit. It's earned, not distributed. That fucking shit-head Marx would be so proud. [barf] Counterpoint. So. If you are a sleazy CEO who rips off your shareholders and pensioners while getting millions for doing it and it put you in the way upper tax bracket and you have all those loopholes to avoid paying taxes, should you have to kick some down or do you deserve Big Bubba? If you didn't break any laws, then neither. If the CEO violated some written corporate governance, then give it back to the company. Otherwise, a clerk in the mail room, doing his job isn't entitled to a dime of anyone else's compensation, regardless of how outrageous it is. True. If that company signed that contract and allowed that CEO that take home amount.... the company (including the share holders) can't complain about the deal. BUT... they also shouldn't be bailed out by the government because of that contract either. But... hey. Lets just take all from those who have it and give it to those that don't. Why this pisses me off so much: My sisters and I all have similiar intellect. All were given the same emphasis on education by my parents. My older sister chose to join the carnival after failing out of college (cuz she partied a bit). My younger sister has been hoping for some guy to come and sweep her off her feet and just take care of her. I chose to go to college on a scholarship, went into the military, then went back to medical school on my own finances and now.... I have been told by my sisters that the "deserve" to get a certain amount each month from me! Now... if I CHOSE to give .... that's one thing. But the EXPECTED contribution is intolerable. This "redistrubution" is disgusting. We can argue this hardline fair vs it's mine, give it back...WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA. But as a bit of relief from the constant rhetoric from both sides, if, uh, someone, YOU, needs a kidney/bone marrow/etc, family members make the best tissue match donors, guess who's piss out of luck? My sister is getting the family fortune, I'm the youngest and most healthy, I've already told them all they need to look elsewhere if that need arrises. Fuck em. Of course they could have their choice, left or right kidney for a mere 1 mill . Greed, on a family level or a national level is really filth and examples of that are all around us with the OJ and his wife mess and many other notable celebrities and way more everyday people. Laughable to watch people making 100's of thousands per year crying about paying 10% of it to taxes.....pathetic really. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #69 October 14, 2008 QuoteQuoteWe're a land of equal opportunity,. No, we are most certainly NOT. Thank you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #70 October 14, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteWe're a land of equal opportunity,. No, we are most certainly NOT. I disagree. -one of my friends is a 18year old mother of two African American that was orphaned at age 16. She is a sophmore in college. She is seizing the opportunity despite the challenges. A non-random sample size of 1 with vague details does not establish reliable data. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #71 October 14, 2008 QuoteTHAT will result in worse economic issues. I have a few friends with small businesses. They cannot afford to provide healthcare for employess now. Tax "incentives" don't interest them. It will NOT create "jobs" that do not currently exist. If they have 20 employess now and are required by the government to provide healthcare, they'll have 10 employees when they do provide this healthcare. NOW tell me how this is good for the economy again? You've just laid support for universal care / nationalized medicine and I couldn't agree more. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #72 October 14, 2008 QuoteQuote>And I have no problems paying my share to keep things running. But >when I'm EXPECTED to pay others shares too.... You always will be; it's the only way that works. The "fairest" tax of all would be to charge every US citizen about $60,000 a year, period. If you don't pay it you go to prison. Everyone gets access to the same benefits, everyone pays the same amount. That, of course, is unworkable. So instead we have a system where those who make more, pay more. The argument over how progressive that system should be becomes something of a detail then. Why shouldn't we have a system where those who HAVE more pay more? Right, taxes follow money, not people; don't want the burden, lose the money. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,476 #73 October 14, 2008 >Why should those who have success be punished? Why would the rich refuse to support the United States? Why not support the country that allowed them to make that money? >Let them keep their money and invest it back in the economy. Are you willing to cut all funding to our military? How about all highway funding? How about we shut down the border patrol? I thought not. So we agree that there have to be taxes. A progressive tax is the least burdensome way to get those taxes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #74 October 14, 2008 QuoteWhy shouldn't we have a system where those who HAVE more pay more? I'm good with that as a concept; but the whole thing get all twisted about by all the special considerations. In other words, keep it progressive, AND get rid of all the loopholes. Have a level below which there in no tax, then progressively higher tax rates for higher incomes (increases on the margin amount only - not the whole nut), and a cap at somewhere around 35%. Set the percentages at a level that can accomodate for the prevailing characteristics of people in that group; kind of like making up for the discarding of all the special exemptions. The problem with the exemptions is that they are like roots in a crack in the cement. The cracks never go away, and most likely they keep growing and growing because everybody thinks there particular cause or situation is so fucking special. So we keep piling on loopholes and exemptions and credits . What's the saying? "When everybody is somebody, nobody is anybody." A progressive tax, which recognizes ability to pay, without removing incentives to earn, and ignores all whining." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #75 October 14, 2008 QuoteI'm good with that as a concept; but the whole thing get all twisted about by all the special considerations. In other words, keep it progressive, AND get rid of all the loopholes. Uh, 'scuze me ... you think baseball is America's favorite pasttime? Guess again. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
