• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republicans mount shock comeback, erase Democrats’ edge in eyes of Americans

I know what you think as well, the claim you made in post #530 is BS.

So good it's worth repeating.

Yup. GWB's "tax cuts for the rich" that Dems dishonestly demagogued in fact made our tax system more progressive.:peace
 
So good it's worth repeating.

Yup. GWB's "tax cuts for the rich" that Dems dishonestly demagogued in fact made our tax system more progressive.:peace
What was dishonest?
 
What was dishonest?

I think the whole "tax cuts for the rich" meme was dishonest. As I have already posted, there was significant tax relief at the bottom. Dollar amounts were greater at the top because that's where the money is, and so little was being paid further down the scale.:peace
 
I think the whole "tax cuts for the rich" meme was dishonest. As I have already posted, there was significant tax relief at the bottom. Dollar amounts were greater at the top because that's where the money is, and so little was being paid further down the scale.:peace

think = opinion
 
Yet, as in understand it, one of the key aspects of living in the US is that you can take steps to change a law you dislike. Granted doing so is a very long process and may fail.

Still, it is not a given that someone accepts current law, despite voluntarily living in the US. That they should obey the law, yes. That they agree with it, no.

Nobody is disputing that.
 
In what you just said:



Are you claiming that a person is free not to participate if he chooses?

You can leave at any time and end your sentence here.
 
You can leave at any time and end your sentence here.

Leave? What are you talking about? I'm not talking about going anywhere. I'm talking about a person not participating in this thing you keep insisting is voluntary.
 
Last edited:
Leave? What are you talking about? I'm not talking about going anywhere. I'm talking about a person not participating in this thing you keep insisting is voluntary.

When one enters a voluntary association like living in a nation of their choice, they accept all the benefits and all the responsibilities and duties that the nation offers and demands. If you do not like that, you are free to go elsewhere.

What part of that has not been explained to you over and over and over and over and over again and again and again and again for the last dozen or so pages?
 
When one enters a voluntary association like living in a nation of their choice, they accept all the benefits and all the responsibilities and duties that the nation offers and demands. If you do not like that, you are free to go elsewhere.

What part of that has not been explained to you over and over and over and over and over again and again and again and again for the last dozen or so pages?

But if it is a voluntary association, why can't one just leave the association and all its benefits but remain where he lives?
 
If that's your defense then I'll put this one in the "win" column.:peace
You would do that no matter what I said. I just realized you shot yourself in the foot, you said: "Dollar amounts were greater at the top because that's where the money is, and so little was being paid further down the scale." Tax cuts for the rich. :peace:
 
So. It looks like thus far the effects of the shut-down have equaled out the effects of the Obamacare debacle. Going forward, mind you, the only thing driving the numbers will be the continued Obamacare debacle....

..... until we find a way to do something else stupid.

Worth noting, however, is that the poll is of registered rather than likely voters, which will lean slightly D, and that "hoping the opposition really screws up" is not a terribly good strategy. :) Gonna be funny to watch Democrats begin to swing against ole O-Care.

[/FONT][/COLOR]

The last time I heard that, y'all were telling us how the polls indicated Romney was going to be the next president.

:lamo
 
You would do that no matter what I said. I just realized you shot yourself in the foot, you said: "Dollar amounts were greater at the top because that's where the money is, and so little was being paid further down the scale." Tax cuts for the rich. :peace:
Funny...

I read it as "everyone got a tax cut, but the amount reduced from what the richer persons paid was higher because they were paying so much to begin with.

Or, IOW, 1% of $25,000 is $250, but 1% of $25,000,000 is $250,000.

(disclaimer: I have no idea what the actual rate cuts were, or whatever).
 
But if it is a voluntary association, why can't one just leave the association and all its benefits but remain where he lives?
Because the association controls a physical area in which they apply their rules.
 
You would do that no matter what I said. I just realized you shot yourself in the foot, you said: "Dollar amounts were greater at the top because that's where the money is, and so little was being paid further down the scale." Tax cuts for the rich. :peace:

No one ever disputed that dollar amounts were more at the top; it's the top, after all. That situation was created, ironically, by the firmly progressive tax code. There was more room for cuts at the top; the bottom was already paying very little. After the cuts they paid nothing.:peace
 
But if it is a voluntary association, why can't one just leave the association and all its benefits but remain where he lives?

Explain how one lives in the USA and does not enjoy even a single benefit of that residence.

This goes much much deeper than any mere control of rules.

But tell us how you would still reside in the USA and not enjoy one benefit of doing so. This should be interesting.
 
No one ever disputed that dollar amounts were more at the top; it's the top, after all. That situation was created, ironically, by the firmly progressive tax code. There was more room for cuts at the top; the bottom was already paying very little. After the cuts they paid nothing.:peace

Bull.
 
Back
Top Bottom