oops...

[cynic]

oops....

 

[Clutch]

F-off, covetous commie

 

[gator_hater]

That not so self made man has paid infinitely more than his " fair share" in taxes. Why should he pay 50% in total taxes and his employees pay closer to 10%?

 

[AirCobra]

This is just more of that Compound Empowerment stuff that is making the rounds on place like Alternet and the Huffington Post. A person in another thread tried to pass it off as a model for the progressive tax system.

Problem is, and something Cynic has yet to explain, is why it doesn't work both ways. If it did a person on Food Stamps for example, should pay higher taxes because they benefit more from the government infrastucture that is in place to distribute food stamps. The rich and middle class pay all the taxes right now to support food stamp programs, yet receive no benefit. Isn't it time fthe ood stamp recipients pay their fair share?

Like most things on Alternet its just more Progressive idiocy that hasn't really been thought through. The progressive tax system as proposed by people like Adam Smith works with simple algebra y=mx+b. This way no one could make a case for food stamp recipients paying their "fair share", or trying to quantify what "fair share" means.

 

[ackattacker]

No tax system is fair to everyone, but that's irrelevant anyway.

Taxes need only be economically and socially practical.

 

[IBNAV8R]

Trouble is that now, nearly half of all U.S. citizens pay no taxes and thus have no vested interest in how money is being spent. It's not THEIR money.

As Margaret Thatcher said, "The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money to spend".

 

[cynic]

sorry guys... I did not mean to leave the link. posting in the regionals was an accident.

 

[Raoul Duke]

The comment above is so true - there are so many people paying $0 that it is a joke to say that the rest of us owe them something. You cant get back on your feet until you get off your a$$

 

[rtmcfi]

Some of you don't know where you fall in terms of socio-economic status....

 

[Nevets]

www.FairTax.com

 

[glasspilot]

Fair tax? Really? To make a fair tax bring in the same amount then you'd have to tax EVERYONE 39%. So, a family of 4 living on $22,000 has to pay 39% leaving them $13,420. Does that seem about right? Or maybe we could just have a progressive tax like we always have and tax the rich a tad more to offset the poor. It's "fair" as the rich got rich BECAUSE of our system of government. Try getting rich in a theocracy.

 

[gator_hater]

Some of you don't know where you fall in terms of socio-economic status....

That's the problem. I know full well where I sit on the ladder. There is a difference in what is best for me and what is best for the country/economy as a whole.

Generally going with the economy will turn out best for everyone in the end. What is best forme now doesn't have a history of working so well.

 

[Nevets]

Fair tax? Really? To make a fair tax bring in the same amount then you'd have to tax EVERYONE 39%. So, a family of 4 living on $22,000 has to pay 39% leaving them $13,420. Does that seem about right? Or maybe we could just have a progressive tax like we always have and tax the rich a tad more to offset the poor. It's "fair" as the rich got rich BECAUSE of our system of government. Try getting rich in a theocracy.

It's actually 23% inclusive/30% exclusive, give or take 1%. In your example, the family would have a negative effective tax rate. The FairTax does tax the rich more.

 

[Clutch]

sorry guys... I did not mean to leave the link. posting in the regionals was an accident.

Your a liberal doosh

 

[Salukipilot4590]

Strong haterade in here

 

[Flyprdu]

Your a liberal doosh

This quote sums up the Tea Party perfectly.

Keep it up, idiot.

 

[j3tdr1v3r]

It's "fair" as the rich got rich BECAUSE of our system of government. Try getting rich in a theocracy.

Where the left loons lose this argument is this:

#1. Could the rich have gotten rich without your precious government?

The answer is YES... The drive for success is within the individual, not the collective. If Steve Jobs (R.I.P.) did not have the oligarcian government control you so desperately want to make relevant, could he still have become educated? Could he still have purchased the goods to make his first computer? Could he still have delivered his goods on the roads the left claims could not exist without the ever omnipotent government? (ever hear of privately owned toll roads?) Would he have succeeded?

You say "try getting rich in a theocracy", I say, you should try capitalism (psst... What we have now is NOT capitalism).

#2. The left's entire argument is that the rich do not "pay a fair percentage" and that they should because the rich "benefited the most from government". I beg to differ... If it's percentages you love, then what percentage of a wealthy persons success was because of the government? Now... What percentage of a welfare queens success in life is dependent on the government? If it's percentages you love so much, it looks to me like we should tax the welfare recipient at a higher rate, since they are gaining the most "life value" from the idiots in Washington.

 

[cynic]

Where the left loons lose this argument is this:

#1. Could the rich have gotten rich without your precious government?

The answer is YES...

That's just not true. In some cases the answer is yes and in other cases the answer is no. Businesses often leverage government to protect their own interests. I'm sure you can plug in lots of examples where big business did quite well thanks to government protections, requirement and BAILOUTS.

 

[j3tdr1v3r]

That's just not true. In some cases the answer is yes and in other cases the answer is no. Businesses often leverage government to protect their own interests. I'm sure you can plug in lots of examples where big business did quite well thanks to government protections, requirement and BAILOUTS.

Exactly the reason I said we do not currently see capitalism. We have cronyism. It's not the same.

I did not agree with bailouts, and understand that businesses currently use the system to their advantage, and who can blame them. If we're gonna use this BS system where you are punished for your success, then why not look for every advantage you can find.

My point was, the left claims that it would be impossible to achieve success without the government, and THAT is not true.

My question was more theoretical, to undermine the short-sighted and illogical thought of the liberal ideology.

Could a person become wealthy without the government? Yes
Could a person on welfare survive if they would put forth the effort to join a capitalist society? Yes
Could a person on welfare survive without effort without punishing those who succeed in capitalism? No, THAT requires the government.

So... Which is REQUIRED for survival? Government, or capitalism?

 

[Flyprdu]

Could a person become wealthy without the government? Yes
Could a person on welfare survive if they would put forth the effort to join a capitalist society? Yes
Could a person on welfare survive without effort without punishing those who succeed in capitalism? No, THAT requires the government.

So... Which is REQUIRED for survival? Government, or capitalism?

Oh look! It's another freshly indoctrinated conservative genius!

I am amazed how the 30 year propaganda campaign against government has been so effective in wiping the minds of most about the value of good government. Can a company prosper without government? No. Every billionaire you see in the United States got help. Every single one. They got help in the fact that they didn't have to pay bribes for security, to open their doors, or to expand. They got help that in that they had a highly developed infrastructure to produce and bring their products to market. Any tech company got help in the way their consumers were educated enough to use their products, and employees smart enough to design them.

I'm sick of low intelligent, moronic, and simply tired arguments against government and the poor. They're not original. You probably haven't had an original thought in your entire life. Regardless, this sort of sh*t doesnt even belong in a Regional thread...

... and any idiot defending billionaires in the regional forum ought to have his head examined.