Dante Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 Sounds nice, but doesnt work. Just like I said last week, it's a plan that is highly regressive and is not revenue neutral. One thing it is is fair. Everyone pays the same rate. Rich pay more money because 9% of 500,000 is more than 9% of 25,000. Rich buy more quantity and bigger ticket stuff so they pay more in sales tax. I've always believed that progressive tax is outright theft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 I fail to see how having a plan that's NOT revenue neutral is a bad thing. Austerity now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 I fail to see how having a plan that's NOT revenue neutral is a bad thing. Austerity now. Of course you don't One thing it is is fair. I would try to explain, but there is no point in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 Of course you don't I would try to explain, but there is no point in it. Thanks for sparing me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 (edited) First of all, the notion that there are grown ups in this country who pay 0 Federal tax is absolutely ridiculous. The fact that at least 40% of our population doesn't is a legitimate, historical pretext for war. Thankfully we invented alternatives. If this was 200 years ago, IRS agents would be tarred and feathered for carrying out this policy. Liberals love to talk about business owners living off of infrastructure they taxed us to put in place. This is another of their "one-size-fits-all" ridiculous assertions. But let's assume liberals weren't full of schit and that "everybody" does in fact gain significant utility from government infrastructure/spending equally. If that is so, then "everybody" should have to pay for it. Here's why: it is ruinous to create a entire class of people for whom every facet of their existence is "less than" others. How the F are people who pay nothing supposed to call themselves "citizens"? How the f am I supposed to recognize their claim to that title, if they are able-bodied and of sound mind, yet pay 0 of the cost of maintaining that citizenship? How are we supposed to be a nation, united, where everybody can take pride in providing some, however small, of the $ that paid for that new highway/aircraft carrier/cop, when 40% of us didn't pay a thing? Don't misunderstand: I am willing to pay more than my share, and I understand why it's necessary. But I KNOW that making someone a literal "second class citizen" is a recipe for disaster. These are people, not farm animals, and as such have a need to feel useful, and take pride in their contribution to society. How are they ever supposed to feel that way, if they know it's a lie? How are they supposed to take themselves seriously, if nobody who pays taxes does? We need the Fair Tax, or something similar that ensures that everybody pays at least something. The country will eventually tear itself apart otherwise. Edited October 11, 2011 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 First of all, the notion that there are grown ups in this country who pay 0 Federal tax is absolutely ridiculous. The fact that at least 40% of our population doesn't is a legitimate, historical pretext for war. Thankfully we invented alternatives. If this was 200 years ago, IRS agents would be tarred and feathered for carrying out this policy. Liberals love to talk about business owners living off of infrastructure they taxed us to put in place. This is another of their "one-size-fits-all" ridiculous assertions. But let's assume liberals weren't full of schit and that "everybody" does in fact gain significant utility from government infrastructure/spending equally. If that is so, then "everybody" should have to pay for it. Here's why: it is ruinous to create a entire class of people for whom every facet of their existence is "less than" others. How the F are people who pay nothing supposed to call themselves "citizens"? How the f am I supposed to recognize their claim to that title, if they are able-bodied and of sound mind, yet pay 0 of the cost of maintaining that citizenship? How are we supposed to be a nation, united, where everybody can take pride in providing some, however small, of the $ that paid for that new highway/aircraft carrier/cop, when 40% of us didn't pay a thing? Don't misunderstand: I am willing to pay more than my share, and I understand why it's necessary. But I KNOW that making someone a literal "second class citizen" is a recipe for disaster. These are people, not farm animals, and as such have a need to feel useful, and take pride in their contribution to society. How are they ever supposed to feel that way, if they know it's a lie? How are they supposed to take themselves seriously, if nobody who pays taxes does? We need the Fair Tax, or something similar that ensures that everybody pays at least something. The country will eventually tear itself apart otherwise. Great post. It politically more valuable to divide than to unite. This is what they are up to. Only in a perverted, brainwashed world is a progressive tax interpreted as fair. It's ludicrous and criminal. That's why IRS collectors would be friggen dumped in the swamp for pulling this crap. Only question I have is why would you agree to pay more than your fair share? If I feel philanthropic, I'm giving money to a charity of my choice. Certainly not to any government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 (edited) First of all, the notion that there are grown ups in this country who pay 0 Federal tax is absolutely ridiculous. The fact that at least 40% of our population doesn't is a legitimate, historical pretext for war. Thankfully we invented alternatives. If this was 200 years ago, IRS agents would be tarred and feathered for carrying out this policy. Liberals love to talk about business owners living off of infrastructure they taxed us to put in place. This is another of their "one-size-fits-all" ridiculous assertions. But let's assume liberals weren't full of schit and that "everybody" does in fact gain significant utility from government infrastructure/spending equally. If that is so, then "everybody" should have to pay for it. Here's why: it is ruinous to create a entire class of people for whom every facet of their existence is "less than" others. How the F are people who pay nothing supposed to call themselves "citizens"? How the f am I supposed to recognize their claim to that title, if they are able-bodied and of sound mind, yet pay 0 of the cost of maintaining that citizenship? How are we supposed to be a nation, united, where everybody can take pride in providing some, however small, of the $ that paid for that new highway/aircraft carrier/cop, when 40% of us didn't pay a thing? Don't misunderstand: I am willing to pay more than my share, and I understand why it's necessary. But I KNOW that making someone a literal "second class citizen" is a recipe for disaster. These are people, not farm animals, and as such have a need to feel useful, and take pride in their contribution to society. How are they ever supposed to feel that way, if they know it's a lie? How are they supposed to take themselves seriously, if nobody who pays taxes does? We need the Fair Tax, or something similar that ensures that everybody pays at least something. The country will eventually tear itself apart otherwise. Why are you bringing up this false argument again? That is 0% Federal income tax. Plenty of taxes are paid by the bottom 50% that are either Federal, State, County/Parrish/whatever, City, and/or non-existent dogcatcher tax. Okay i made the last one up, maybe... Fed mixes up their taxes by redistributing it to the states. States mix up their taxes by redistributing it to the County/Parrish/whatever, City, and/or non-existent dogcatcher tax. Point me to a chart with total taxation by income level. It is not going to look anything like your picture. Edited October 11, 2011 by Booster4324 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 Why are you bringing up this false argument again? That is 0% Federal income tax. Plenty of taxes are paid by the bottom 50% that are either Federal, State, County/Parrish/whatever, City, and/or non-existent dogcatcher tax. Okay i made the last one up, maybe... Fed mixes up their taxes by redistributing it to the states. States mix up their taxes by redistributing it to the County/Parrish/whatever, City, and/or non-existent dogcatcher tax. Point me to a chart with total taxation by income level. It is not going to look anything like your picture. I wanted to rebut your post here but then again I have no !@#$ing idea what you're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 First of all, the notion that there are grown ups in this country who pay 0 Federal tax is absolutely ridiculous. The fact that at least 40% of our population doesn't is a legitimate, historical pretext for war. Thankfully we invented alternatives. If this was 200 years ago, IRS agents would be tarred and feathered for carrying out this policy. Liberals love to talk about business owners living off of infrastructure they taxed us to put in place. This is another of their "one-size-fits-all" ridiculous assertions. But let's assume liberals weren't full of schit and that "everybody" does in fact gain significant utility from government infrastructure/spending equally. If that is so, then "everybody" should have to pay for it. Here's why: it is ruinous to create a entire class of people for whom every facet of their existence is "less than" others. How the F are people who pay nothing supposed to call themselves "citizens"? How the f am I supposed to recognize their claim to that title, if they are able-bodied and of sound mind, yet pay 0 of the cost of maintaining that citizenship? How are we supposed to be a nation, united, where everybody can take pride in providing some, however small, of the $ that paid for that new highway/aircraft carrier/cop, when 40% of us didn't pay a thing? Don't misunderstand: I am willing to pay more than my share, and I understand why it's necessary. But I KNOW that making someone a literal "second class citizen" is a recipe for disaster. These are people, not farm animals, and as such have a need to feel useful, and take pride in their contribution to society. How are they ever supposed to feel that way, if they know it's a lie? How are they supposed to take themselves seriously, if nobody who pays taxes does? We need the Fair Tax, or something similar that ensures that everybody pays at least something. The country will eventually tear itself apart otherwise. Right on....Keep fighting the good fight the message has to get out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 I wanted to rebut your post here but then again I have no !@#$ing idea what you're talking about. You do not understand that he is saying federal tax and he really means federal income tax. Remind me not to invest with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 You do not understand that he is saying federal tax and he really means federal income tax. Remind me not to invest with you. If someone is talking about people paying zero in federal taxes it is implied they mean zero federal INCOME taxes. You're making a !@#$ing argument over that? You're probably the last person I'd want as a client anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 If someone is talking about people paying zero in federal taxes it is implied they mean zero federal INCOME taxes. You're making a !@#$ing argument over that? You're probably the last person I'd want as a client anyway. Please, that is a generic bs far right wing talking point. You are better than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 Please, that is a generic bs far right wing talking point. You are better than that. So now your arguing the zero federal INCOME tax point? And now I'm better than that? So you don't believe that there are people that pay zero in income taxes? Are you stoned, because you sure sound stoned. [/crayonz] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 So now your arguing the zero federal INCOME tax point? And now I'm better than that? So you don't believe that there are people that pay zero in income taxes? Are you stoned, because you sure sound stoned. [/crayonz] He said federal taxes. There is social security (now called an entitlement with a horrible ROI), gas, payroll taxes etc. Those are all federal taxes and there are more. He used to say, "Words mean something." What did his post imply? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 He said federal taxes. There is social security (now called an entitlement with a horrible ROI), gas, payroll taxes etc. Those are all federal taxes and there are more. He used to say, "Words mean something." What did his post imply? His post implied federal income taxes. We all know that's the argument that millions of people pay ZERO in federal income taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 His post implied federal income taxes. We all know that's the argument that millions of people pay ZERO in federal income taxes. So you really want to argue that total taxation is irrelevant, but a specific percentage of a specific type of taxation is relevant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 So you really want to argue that total taxation is irrelevant, but a specific percentage of a specific type of taxation is relevant? !@#$, I'll argue anything with you. It's a blast watch you flip out when you're off your meds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 (edited) !@#$, I'll argue anything with you. It's a blast watch you flip out when you're off your meds. And that is why I like arguing with you. You freely admit you are a troll and facts mean nothing to you. Edited October 12, 2011 by Booster4324 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 And that is why I like arguing with you. You freely admit you are a troll and facts mean nothing to you. Ok I'll argue facts with you. Sure it's false to say that someone in a low income bracket pays zero in federal taxes. I never said that. I said they pay zero in federal income taxes which is true in many cases. So are you saying that when you add in payroll taxes, and SS taxes they lower incomes pay a larger percentage? Or are you saying something else? Because it's difficult sometimes to really understand what the !@#$ you are saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 Ok I'll argue facts with you. Sure it's false to say that someone in a low income bracket pays zero in federal taxes. I never said that. I said they pay zero in federal income taxes which is true in many cases. So are you saying that when you add in payroll taxes, and SS taxes they lower incomes pay a larger percentage? Or are you saying something else? Because it's difficult sometimes to really understand what the !@#$ you are saying. After I said this to Ocin when he said zero federal taxes: I wanted to rebut your post here but then again I have no !@#$ing idea what you're talking about. I made it abundantly clear I was speaking of total federal taxes. So, since I know you are smarter than that, you are trolling. I am saying they pay something, which is not what Ocin claimed. Now are they paying enough? I do not know, but let me ask you this? If we slap on a 10% flat tax on people making under 25,000 what will be the ramifications and how much tax revenue will we raise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts