|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Oct 30, 2010 8:27:46 GMT -8
While I don't mind some level of progressive tax rates, I think it is a disservice that some pay nothing for income taxes (and even gets a earned income tax credit payout). While we are typically only talking a few hundred dollars, if everyone doesn't feel some pain with taxation, that sets up the "us" versus "them" scenario where one group will always want more for nothing. Also, the group who pays nothing has no incentive to stop Governmental waste, fraud and abuse.
The previous comments on the cash economy and its inherent avoidance of taxation are also an issue. I know it smacks of 666 and/or Big Brother, but the solution is biometrically confirmed electronic money transfers only - it could stop the avoidance of taxation, make many forms of crime harder to execute and easier to detect/stop/prosecute and illegal immigration would evaporate.
|
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 31, 2010 6:00:58 GMT -8
While I don't mind some level of progressive tax rates, I think it is a disservice that some pay nothing for income taxes (and even gets a earned income tax credit payout). While we are typically only talking a few hundred dollars, if everyone doesn't feel some pain with taxation, that sets up the "us" versus "them" scenario where one group will always want more for nothing. Also, the group who pays nothing has no incentive to stop Governmental waste, fraud and abuse. The previous comments on the cash economy and its inherent avoidance of taxation are also an issue. I know it smacks of 666 and/or Big Brother, but the solution is biometrically confirmed electronic money transfers only - it could stop the avoidance of taxation, make many forms of crime harder to execute and easier to detect/stop/prosecute and illegal immigration would evaporate. And I would say that those making so little as to not pay taxes, would gladly change places with those who carry that burden. Just think what the reaction would be if those who had to pay taxes suddenly made too little to have to pay them. Pardon me, we are already seeing the reaction, with 9.6% unemployment. Ask any Democrat. Us versus them? Us is already winning big time, in case you didn't notice. Saying that those who pay nothing are not interested in seeing the system work fairly is the same as saying that they are basically dishonest. If you feel that way about your fellow citizens, I am sorry. I know that those who do not pay and receive credits care as much that the system is fair as you and I do. |
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Oct 31, 2010 6:49:43 GMT -8
While I don't mind some level of progressive tax rates, I think it is a disservice that some pay nothing for income taxes (and even gets a earned income tax credit payout). While we are typically only talking a few hundred dollars, if everyone doesn't feel some pain with taxation, that sets up the "us" versus "them" scenario where one group will always want more for nothing. Also, the group who pays nothing has no incentive to stop Governmental waste, fraud and abuse. The previous comments on the cash economy and its inherent avoidance of taxation are also an issue. I know it smacks of 666 and/or Big Brother, but the solution is biometrically confirmed electronic money transfers only - it could stop the avoidance of taxation, make many forms of crime harder to execute and easier to detect/stop/prosecute and illegal immigration would evaporate. And I would say that those making so little as to not pay taxes, would gladly change places with those who carry that burden. Just think what the reaction would be if those who had to pay taxes suddenly made too little to have to pay them. Pardon me, we are already seeing the reaction, with 9.6% unemployment. Ask any Democrat. Us versus them? Us is already winning big time, in case you didn't notice. Saying that those who pay nothing are not interested in seeing the system work fairly is the same as saying that they are basically dishonest. If you feel that way about your fellow citizens, I am sorry. I know that those who do not pay and receive credits care as much that the system is fair as you and I do. Be sorry all you want but it is a universal constant that people like things for free and and it is also a universal constant that people who get something for nothing will want it to remain that way regardless of changing circumstances. It has nothing to do with honesty but human nature. Yes, it has been the "us" that pay the burden of the taxes but Obama is trying to make those that want more from the government the national bankrupting majority (the new "us") as opposed to making them a manageable minority. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Oct 31, 2010 7:34:22 GMT -8
While I don't mind some level of progressive tax rates, I think it is a disservice that some pay nothing for income taxes (and even gets a earned income tax credit payout). While we are typically only talking a few hundred dollars, if everyone doesn't feel some pain with taxation, that sets up the "us" versus "them" scenario where one group will always want more for nothing. Also, the group who pays nothing has no incentive to stop Governmental waste, fraud and abuse. The previous comments on the cash economy and its inherent avoidance of taxation are also an issue. I know it smacks of 666 and/or Big Brother, but the solution is biometrically confirmed electronic money transfers only - it could stop the avoidance of taxation, make many forms of crime harder to execute and easier to detect/stop/prosecute and illegal immigration would evaporate. And I would say that those making so little as to not pay taxes, would gladly change places with those who carry that burden. Just think what the reaction would be if those who had to pay taxes suddenly made too little to have to pay them. Pardon me, we are already seeing the reaction, with 9.6% unemployment. Ask any Democrat. Us versus them? Us is already winning big time, in case you didn't notice. Saying that those who pay nothing are not interested in seeing the system work fairly is the same as saying that they are basically dishonest. If you feel that way about your fellow citizens, I am sorry. I know that those who do not pay and receive credits care as much that the system is fair as you and I do. True for some people, but there are many more who do not have a value system that is in balance. When all you have to do to get a meal is walk to a soup kitchen, do you value that meal as much as the person who works to pay for his own meal as well as pay the tax or make the donation for the other people to eat? When you get something for nothing, do you value it as highly as a person who must work for everything they get? |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 31, 2010 8:13:38 GMT -8
"While we are typically only talking a few hundred dollars, if everyone doesn't feel some pain with taxation, that sets up the "us" versus "them" scenario where one group will always want more for nothing. Also, the group who pays nothing has no incentive to stop Governmental waste, fraud and abuse. "And I would say that those making so little as to not pay taxes, would gladly change places with those who carry that burden. Just think what the reaction would be if those who had to pay taxes suddenly made too little to have to pay them. Pardon me, we are already seeing the reaction, with 9.6% unemployment. Ask any Democrat. Us versus them? Us is already winning big time, in case you didn't notice. Saying that those who pay nothing are not interested in seeing the system work fairly is the same as saying that they are basically dishonest. If you feel that way about your fellow citizens, I am sorry. I know that those who do not pay and receive credits care as much that the system is fair as you and I do. Be sorry all you want but it is a universal constant that people like things for free and and it is also a universal constant that people who get something for nothing will want it to remain that way regardless of changing circumstances. It has nothing to do with honesty but human nature. Yes, it has been the "us" that pay the burden of the taxes but Obama is trying to make those that want more from the government the national bankrupting majority (the new "us") as opposed to making them a manageable minority. And there you have it. We have differing opinions of human nature. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Oct 31, 2010 12:01:01 GMT -8
"While we are typically only talking a few hundred dollars, if everyone doesn't feel some pain with taxation, that sets up the "us" versus "them" scenario where one group will always want more for nothing. Also, the group who pays nothing has no incentive to stop Governmental waste, fraud and abuse. "And I would say that those making so little as to not pay taxes, would gladly change places with those who carry that burden. Just think what the reaction would be if those who had to pay taxes suddenly made too little to have to pay them. Pardon me, we are already seeing the reaction, with 9.6% unemployment. Ask any Democrat. Us versus them? Us is already winning big time, in case you didn't notice. Saying that those who pay nothing are not interested in seeing the system work fairly is the same as saying that they are basically dishonest. If you feel that way about your fellow citizens, I am sorry. I know that those who do not pay and receive credits care as much that the system is fair as you and I do. True for some people, but there are many more who do not have a value system that is in balance. When all you have to do to get a meal is walk to a soup kitchen, do you value that meal as much as the person who works to pay for his own meal as well as pay the tax or make the donation for the other people to eat? When you get something for nothing, do you value it as highly as a person who must work for everything they get? You are making the assumption he is not grateful at all for the meal. If that is the only meal will get today, I suspect you are very grateful. In the same vein, you must think the guy in Rancho Sante Fe eating kobi steak is so much more grateful for that meal than the guy in East San Diego eating beans and rice. The rich guy paid a lot more for the meal. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Oct 31, 2010 16:15:30 GMT -8
True for some people, but there are many more who do not have a value system that is in balance. When all you have to do to get a meal is walk to a soup kitchen, do you value that meal as much as the person who works to pay for his own meal as well as pay the tax or make the donation for the other people to eat? When you get something for nothing, do you value it as highly as a person who must work for everything they get? You are making the assumption he is not grateful at all for the meal. If that is the only meal will get today, I suspect you are very grateful. In the same vein, you must think the guy in Rancho Sante Fe eating kobi steak is so much more grateful for that meal than the guy in East San Diego eating beans and rice. The rich guy paid a lot more for the meal. I did not say he is not grateful, just that he places less value upon that meal than did the person who paid for both their meals. When you pay nothing for something, that is how some people value it. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Oct 31, 2010 17:52:51 GMT -8
You are making the assumption he is not grateful at all for the meal. If that is the only meal will get today, I suspect you are very grateful. In the same vein, you must think the guy in Rancho Sante Fe eating kobi steak is so much more grateful for that meal than the guy in East San Diego eating beans and rice. The rich guy paid a lot more for the meal. I did not say he is not grateful, just that he places less value upon that meal than did the person who paid for both their meals. When you pay nothing for something, that is how some people value it. I disagree. I say when you have nothing you are grateful when you get something. |
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Oct 31, 2010 20:33:54 GMT -8
Be sorry all you want but it is a universal constant that people like things for free and and it is also a universal constant that people who get something for nothing will want it to remain that way regardless of changing circumstances. It has nothing to do with honesty but human nature. Yes, it has been the "us" that pay the burden of the taxes but Obama is trying to make those that want more from the government the national bankrupting majority (the new "us") as opposed to making them a manageable minority. And there you have it. We have differing opinions of human nature. I guess those riots in Greece and France tell us just how concerned the Paul's are about what the Peter's pay and "seeing the system work fairly". |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Nov 1, 2010 11:27:10 GMT -8
I did not say he is not grateful, just that he places less value upon that meal than did the person who paid for both their meals. When you pay nothing for something, that is how some people value it. I disagree. I say when you have nothing you are grateful when you get something. That is not a disagreement, just that the person who has to work to pay for both puts a higher value on the meal. |
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Nov 10, 2010 9:29:44 GMT -8
Be sorry all you want but it is a universal constant that people like things for free and and it is also a universal constant that people who get something for nothing will want it to remain that way regardless of changing circumstances. It has nothing to do with honesty but human nature. Yes, it has been the "us" that pay the burden of the taxes but Obama is trying to make those that want more from the government the national bankrupting majority (the new "us") as opposed to making them a manageable minority. And there you have it. We have differing opinions of human nature. See the riots in the UK today. I rest my case... "it is a universal constant that people like things for free and and it is also a universal constant that people who get something for nothing (or significantly subsidized) will want it to remain that way regardless of changing circumstances." |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Nov 11, 2010 10:42:15 GMT -8
And there you have it. We have differing opinions of human nature. See the riots in the UK today. I rest my case... "it is a universal constant that people like things for free and and it is also a universal constant that people who get something for nothing (or significantly subsidized) will want it to remain that way regardless of changing circumstances."And yet for all the violence in the UK, France and elsewhere, we continue to be one of the most violent civilized societies on earth. We riot and kill more than anyone in Europe. And we are supposedly the most free? We have the second amendment, though, and conservatives to tell us which human beings are useful and who we should discard like trash. Only they can make this determination, because liberal is a dirty word according to their marketing effort. Those Europeans will pay taxes to help their fellow citizens. How stupid is that? |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Nov 11, 2010 10:48:07 GMT -8
"While we are typically only talking a few hundred dollars, if everyone doesn't feel some pain with taxation, that sets up the "us" versus "them" scenario where one group will always want more for nothing. Also, the group who pays nothing has no incentive to stop Governmental waste, fraud and abuse. "And I would say that those making so little as to not pay taxes, would gladly change places with those who carry that burden. Just think what the reaction would be if those who had to pay taxes suddenly made too little to have to pay them. Pardon me, we are already seeing the reaction, with 9.6% unemployment. Ask any Democrat. Us versus them? Us is already winning big time, in case you didn't notice. Saying that those who pay nothing are not interested in seeing the system work fairly is the same as saying that they are basically dishonest. If you feel that way about your fellow citizens, I am sorry. I know that those who do not pay and receive credits care as much that the system is fair as you and I do. Be sorry all you want but it is a universal constant that people like things for free and and it is also a universal constant that people who get something for nothing will want it to remain that way regardless of changing circumstances. It has nothing to do with honesty but human nature. Yes, it has been the "us" that pay the burden of the taxes but Obama is trying to make those that want more from the government the national bankrupting majority (the new "us") as opposed to making them a manageable minority. And yet those lazy freeloaders pay. Yesiree they pay. They pay so that you don't have to pay tax. How do they pay, you ask? They get sicker and die sooner, which seems at odds with your contention that they like freeloading. There is no escape from personal responsibility. That the comeuppance is barbaric is of no concern to conservatives. www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/10/job.loss.toll/index.html?iref=allsearch |
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Nov 11, 2010 12:52:27 GMT -8
Be sorry all you want but it is a universal constant that people like things for free and and it is also a universal constant that people who get something for nothing will want it to remain that way regardless of changing circumstances. It has nothing to do with honesty but human nature. Yes, it has been the "us" that pay the burden of the taxes but Obama is trying to make those that want more from the government the national bankrupting majority (the new "us") as opposed to making them a manageable minority. And yet those lazy freeloaders pay. Yesiree they pay. They pay so that you don't have to pay tax. How do they pay, you ask? They get sicker and die sooner, which seems at odds with your contention that they like freeloading. There is no escape from personal responsibility. That the comeuppance is barbaric is of no concern to conservatives. www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/10/job.loss.toll/index.html?iref=allsearchSo we agree, if we take them off the dole it will help them in the long run. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Nov 11, 2010 12:58:24 GMT -8
What is wrong with the tax system?
1. Too complicated. Remove most all deductions. Everyone should be able to file a short form.
2. Over taxes exports. Countries that use a value added tax, don't tax exports and we don't tax imports. So we buy tax free goods from overseas. We tax our exports and they tax our imports, so we sell doubly taxed items overseas.
3. Marginal rates too high. After removing most deductions the marginal rates can be reduced. Low marginal rates encourages activity and reduces under the table dealings.
4. Corporate taxes are too high. We shouldn't be taxing our corporations way higher than the rest of the world. We want them here.
|
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Nov 11, 2010 13:24:06 GMT -8
What is wrong with the tax system? 1. Too complicated. Remove most all deductions. Everyone should be able to file a short form. 2. Over taxes exports. Countries that use a value added tax, don't tax exports and we don't tax imports. So we buy tax free goods from overseas. We tax our exports and they tax our imports, so we sell doubly taxed items overseas. 3. Marginal rates too high. After removing most deductions the marginal rates can be reduced. Low marginal rates encourages activity and reduces under the table dealings. 4. Corporate taxes are too high. We shouldn't be taxing our corporations way higher than the rest of the world. We want them here. My solution would be to tax only conservatives. It will "P" them off so bad that they will go into vapor lock. |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Nov 11, 2010 13:26:52 GMT -8
And yet those lazy freeloaders pay. Yesiree they pay. They pay so that you don't have to pay tax. How do they pay, you ask? They get sicker and die sooner, which seems at odds with your contention that they like freeloading. There is no escape from personal responsibility. That the comeuppance is barbaric is of no concern to conservatives. www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/10/job.loss.toll/index.html?iref=allsearchSo we agree, if we take them off the dole it will help them in the long run. The article says that the unemployed individual's health is affected for as long as 15 to 20 years after they find work again. You would say make them suffer forever for their sin, right? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Nov 11, 2010 14:04:25 GMT -8
I can see some humor in just about all these posts, but don't think I will join in. A voice of reason, even a Conservative voice of Reason would be drowned out.  Waztec, you are getting close to "losing it"! |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Nov 11, 2010 14:19:33 GMT -8
I can see some humor in just about all these posts, but don't think I will join in. A voice of reason, even a Conservative voice of Reason would be drowned out. Waztec, you are getting close to "losing it"! No. It is just that the article on CNN about people getting sick from unemployment bothered me. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Nov 11, 2010 14:41:41 GMT -8
I can see some humor in just about all these posts, but don't think I will join in. A voice of reason, even a Conservative voice of Reason would be drowned out. Waztec, you are getting close to "losing it"! No. It is just that the article on CNN about people getting sick from unemployment bothered me. The sooner we start following policies that put Americans back to work we will have people getting well from employment! Lack of any progress and unwillingness to go down that path is making me sick. |
|
