Why are taxes such an issue?

[brentkhack]

If the excuse is dont have an opportunity, they are just making excuses. There are those who do not look like me have more opportunities than I do. But I choose for that to not to keep me down. You make the assumption that all corporate executive are crooks, cant lump them all together, right. Who cares if there are welfare laws to help those, IF they choose not to take advantage of it. There are many who make more doing nothing than if they worked. Remember when I pointed that out to you?

 

[MysticMiner]

No, I would not make the assumption that they all are. But I think the portion that is has vastly more wealth than the entirety of the people you have condemned with a blanket judgment. Let's take the top 1%. They control somewhere from 30-40% of the total wealth. That means if just 10% of them are crooks, then they have more wealth than 100% of the 47% who you complain pay no income taxes. (And has been noted, that 47% does pay other taxes.). So even if I accepted your contention about that mass of people, which I don't, then it's still worse if 10% of the top 1% are. If that bottom percent isn't 100% the lazy sofa sitters you claim they are, it gets even worse.

And I do care that there are corporate welfare laws. They are far more money than the individual welfare laws you condemn.

 

[brentkhack]

You say 10% are crooks, what about if I think that only .0000001% are crooks. The deal is we dont know. So we can both throw out numbers to make our side the logical one, but it doesnt matter. Only with true numbers will it. Did I say I like corporate welfare? Nope, never did. Welfare is welfare. Let me ask u this, do you want to pay higher taxes?

 

[MysticMiner]

I did not say that. I said IF 10% were crooks, then it would be as much wealth as if 100% of the group you complained about. Please try to read more carefully what I said so you can understand the point I'm making.

And I don't mind inherently object to paying taxes, so no, I would not automatically reject the idea, if you had a good plan for it. Raising taxes on the bottom 47% in inequitable fashion to what is done for say the top 1%, that I would object to. And increasing it the same percentage on both groups would be inequitable, so don't even suggest that.

 

[brentkhack]

What I said we dont know the true numbers, so the argument doeant hold water for either of us. So what if I said you have to pay me leta say $300 a month what would you tell me? I hope to F off. But if daddy government says the same thing you are fine with that. Thats weird. Have you paid more in taxes than required, ever? You have the opportunity everyday since that is your logic. But me, I like to keep the politics out of it. I put my money where I see fit, not what the government sees fit for their buddies. I think I can spend my money better than them, but u dont.

 

[MysticMiner]

But we do know the true numbers, more or less for the wealth, so my point stands. Even if I accepted that 100% of that 47% you complain about was lazy, it would still be LESS than 10% of the top 1%.

As for your other point, I do believe I would reject it because you and I have no relationship whatsoever, and you haven't even offered a reason why you wanted the money. You taking that money would just be a random demand of no merit to me. I receive absolutely nothing from you. OTOH, I do have a relationship with the government, they do things for me, and I respect that it costs money to do that, since the people doing it need money to live. You may not appreciate the benefits you get from the government, but I enjoy the roads, I enjoy the police protection, I enjoy the environmental projection. I enjoy lots of things, even if I may not perceive it directly.

Why are you letting your government rule over you if it's not doing anything comparable for you? Or do you just refuse to admit those benefits you do get?

And no, I don't feel my money can be spent better providing my own roads, that would be cost-prohibitive.

 

[jitpublisher]

Wow, lot of opinions here since I last browsed this thread. Well you all, I was out building my new i7 2600K, ASUS P8P67, 8GB Corsair Vengenace DDR3, 60 GB SSD, 1TB WD Black, EVGA 560ti, Cooler Master HAF922, Corsair Gold Professional Series 750 Watt PSU machine I had been mulling over for a few months.....and guess what, I wnet down to Frys in Wilsonville Oregon to buy every single piece of it where THEY HAVE NO FRIGGING SALES TAX WHAT SO EVER. Wahooooo!

 

[dogman_1234]

^ How much?

 

[dogman_1234]

Wow, lot of opinions here since I last browsed this thread. Well you all, I was out building my new i7 2600K, ASUS P8P67, 8GB Corsair Vengenace DDR3, 60 GB SSD, 1TB WD Black, EVGA 560ti, Cooler Master HAF922, Corsair Gold Professional Series 750 Watt PSU machine I had been mulling over for a few months.....and guess what, I wnet down to Frys in Wilsonville Oregon to buy every single piece of it where THEY HAVE NO FRIGGING SALES TAX WHAT SO EVER. Wahooooo!

Yeah, but you guys have an income tax...

 

[MysticMiner]

Sales Tax holidays are happening in quite a few states.

 

[jitpublisher]

$1030, including Win 7 64 b bit OEM. (I already had the 560ti)
The SSD is a Corsair Force 3.

 

[jitpublisher]

Yeah, but you guys have an income tax...

I live in Washington.

 

[dogman_1234]

^ And...you went to Oregon why?

 

[jitpublisher]

^ And...you went to Oregon why?

Oregon has no sales tax, period, on anything.

 

[dogman_1234]

I understand, but wasn't the gas more of a burden?

 

[Wisecracker]

In FY2000, Federal tax revenues were $2.03 trillion.
In FY2011, anticipated Federal tax revenues are $2.17 trillion.

GDP has increased 55% - tax receipts 6%

The Republicans have put politics above America, and refuse to cover their unpaid debts nor pay for their corporate welfare, tax cuts and war.

 

[jitpublisher]

I understand, but wasn't the gas more of a burden?

Cost about $20 in gas. My wife also bought a camera, $980. So between the 2 of us, talking about saving $150. I could have went online I suppose, but I hate waiting on it. When I buy it, I want to see it in my hand. It was kind of an impulse thing.

 

[blackhawk1928]

The Democrats have put stupidity above america, and refuse to aknowledge that it is they who have caused the majority of debt and it is they who are in three wars currently (Troops in Iraq, war in libya and afghanistan).

 

[MysticMiner]

Yeah, the Democrats are responsible for the Iraq and Afghanistan occupations.

Somehow I think if Obama had ordered a complete withdrawal, you'd be against that. And I know that plenty of Republicans were complaining about not doing anything about Libya before he finally did something.

 

[brentkhack]

In FY2000, Federal tax revenues were $2.03 trillion.
In FY2011, anticipated Federal tax revenues are $2.17 trillion.

GDP has increased 55% - tax receipts 6%

The Republicans have put politics above America, and refuse to cover their unpaid debts nor pay for their corporate welfare, tax cuts and war.

Good thing the Dems were in charge from 06 until now to really step on the gas on spending. Plus Obama loves to spend money, why will you not throw his name in the mix? Also good thing Obama has added to our war footprint, that wasnt Bush. Im not a Bush fan so dont go there. But he did ask to go into war unlike Obama.

 

[brentkhack]

But we do know the true numbers, more or less for the wealth, so my point stands. Even if I accepted that 100% of that 47% you complain about was lazy, it would still be LESS than 10% of the top 1%.

As for your other point, I do believe I would reject it because you and I have no relationship whatsoever, and you haven't even offered a reason why you wanted the money. You taking that money would just be a random demand of no merit to me. I receive absolutely nothing from you. OTOH, I do have a relationship with the government, they do things for me, and I respect that it costs money to do that, since the people doing it need money to live. You may not appreciate the benefits you get from the government, but I enjoy the roads, I enjoy the police protection, I enjoy the environmental projection. I enjoy lots of things, even if I may not perceive it directly.

Why are you letting your government rule over you if it's not doing anything comparable for you? Or do you just refuse to admit those benefits you do get?

And no, I don't feel my money can be spent better providing my own roads, that would be cost-prohibitive.

How can you come up with an answer without the all the true numbers. We do not know how many people scam the welfare system or refuse to work just like we do not know which fatcats are commiting corporate fraud. So when does the government do exactly what they say. So they would never say they will tax you for x and spend it on y, they woulnd would they? Did you the government does much more thn police or maintain roads. They also give mexican drug cartels gun so they can shot our own agents. Obamas stimulus package paid for that one. Also im proud our tax money lets us find out if the size of a gay mans penis effect them. What about a study of why pigs smell. Instead of that let there be roads, quality teachers, or police. Not that other crap. Do you spend your money on that? So yes the government has a basic set of rules they are always expanding. So yes I do thing I spend my money better, no politics involved.

 

[blackhawk1928]

Yeah, the Democrats are responsible for the Iraq and Afghanistan occupations.

Somehow I think if Obama had ordered a complete withdrawal, you'd be against that. And I know that plenty of Republicans were complaining about not doing anything about Libya before he finally did something.

No, the Republicans are, but the democrats didn't end them, despite having complete government control for 2 years, and majority government control for 5 years.

I am against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, they are useless wars with no purpose and are only costing the lives of soldiers. However, if the Democrats think so, why couldn't they end it? Infact Barack Obama lied on national television when he said he would end the War in Iraq 16months after becoming president, because he never did that.

You are defending a party and president that has proven to be harmful for the nation throughout history, both economically and politically. Why are you defending it?

 

[MysticMiner]

^^Because I don't need the actual numbers for the point I was making, which was that even taking that your completely unreasonable assumption that all of the 47% do nothing but sit on their couch, which is a preposterously negative condemnation of tens of millions of people, that if 10% of the top 1% are of the same negative quality, then you would have the same amount of wealth. If the number is less than 100%, then it's even less than 10% of the top 1%

If you want to get specific numbers, then you can actually look up the prosecutions done, and the reports on it, the problem is not ignored as you seem to think, but studied as part of the process of justice. But until you do so, simply going with your own assumptions, you have quite a hurdle to reach regarding the merits of your complains, because it's only 3% of the problem. At most.

And if you feel your government isn't doing what they say, you should petition for more transparency and accountability in government, that is within your rights. As for the Obama Administration, they didn't give the Mexican drug cartels guns to shoot anybody, they were trying to track the existing arms trade that has already lead to thousands of deaths. Why do you attribute such a malicious desire to their actions, and ignore the real and substantive concerns they were trying to address? I could understand being troubled over the effectiveness of their methods, but you don't even give thought to the actual reasons involved. Why is that? Do you not even realize how many thousands of guns are illegally sold across the border? Do you want to deal with the root of the problem, or do you want to just kick at the surface and pretend that makes things better? Criminal investigations can be like that, they let things go on until they have enough proof to solve the problem, not just put a band-aid on it.

Also, if you lived near a pig farm, you might want to know what causes that smell, and how to reduce it. Sometimes studies are important, but even then, how much do you think they are of the federal budget? For somebody so concerned about true numbers, you don't seem to want them, just random anecdotes you think prove your points. They don't really persuade me though.

^

I'm opposing what I feel is your disingenuous criticism of him. As I said, if he had ordered an immediate pullout, I feel you would be against that. Can you convince me otherwise?

Not with your blatant displays of partisanship.

 

[Mutt x]

My 15 y/o daughter thinks the federal government should be limited to providing defense, international relations and making sure that laws do not give unfair advantages to special interest groups. Equality in opportunity not equality in outcome. She's a smart cookie.

The primary tool of the government to control the citizens has become the tax code. Changes in the tax code are most often paybacks and punishments for political friends and enemies. That my friends is why there will never be a simple tax code. It would be like expecting the roosters and hens to vote on chicken for supper.

 

[brentkhack]

^^Because I don't need the actual numbers for the point I was making, which was that even taking that your completely unreasonable assumption that all of the 47% do nothing but sit on their couch, which is a preposterously negative condemnation of tens of millions of people, that if 10% of the top 1% are of the same negative quality, then you would have the same amount of wealth. If the number is less than 100%, then it's even less than 10% of the top 1%

If you want to get specific numbers, then you can actually look up the prosecutions done, and the reports on it, the problem is not ignored as you seem to think, but studied as part of the process of justice. But until you do so, simply going with your own assumptions, you have quite a hurdle to reach regarding the merits of your complains, because it's only 3% of the problem. At most.

And if you feel your government isn't doing what they say, you should petition for more transparency and accountability in government, that is within your rights. As for the Obama Administration, they didn't give the Mexican drug cartels guns to shoot anybody, they were trying to track the existing arms trade that has already lead to thousands of deaths. Why do you attribute such a malicious desire to their actions, and ignore the real and substantive concerns they were trying to address? I could understand being troubled over the effectiveness of their methods, but you don't even give thought to the actual reasons involved. Why is that? Do you not even realize how many thousands of guns are illegally sold across the border? Do you want to deal with the root of the problem, or do you want to just kick at the surface and pretend that makes things better? Criminal investigations can be like that, they let things go on until they have enough proof to solve the problem, not just put a band-aid on it.

Also, if you lived near a pig farm, you might want to know what causes that smell, and how to reduce it. Sometimes studies are important, but even then, how much do you think they are of the federal budget? For somebody so concerned about true numbers, you don't seem to want them, just random anecdotes you think prove your points. They don't really persuade me though.

^

I'm opposing what I feel is your disingenuous criticism of him. As I said, if he had ordered an immediate pullout, I feel you would be against that. Can you convince me otherwise?

Not with your blatant displays of partisanship.

I never said all 47% sit on the couch all day. I said they do not pay federal income taxes because of sitting on the couch or because they do not make enough. You love your made up numbers. Well IF .000000018 of the top .00000001% I like those numbers better. Hey this is kinda fun making up numbers.
Yea, this administration is waaaaaay awesome when it comes to transparency. The government already admitted that they knew they would not really be able to track the weapons, real smart. The root of the problem is the drug cartels in Mexico. Last I checked we can go there. Hell even our agents cannot carry their weapons. Mexico is too corrupt to be effective. The rule is by silver or lead.
I thought you wanted roads or police. Well stop the pig smell study and hire a cop. See all these pet projects do add up. I would love true number, but like you said "because I dont need actual numbers". Since we both do not agree with each other, only I am being partisan. Now tell me, how is that?