• 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!

Tentative agreement reached on tax cuts

TurtleDude said:
My concept of liberty and rights are consistent with this country's traditions

yours are not
a right is the ability to do something without being punished by the government. Same with liberty. Liberty is the ability to act without the government interfering.

your right to free speech does not require me to buy you a microphone. Your right to bear arms is not a just demand for a gunshop to give you a weapon. YOur ability to travel in this nation is not a claim on Ford to provide you a car or Delta to give you a free round trip airline ticket
Click to expand...
Appeal to tradition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

cool story bro
 
Redress said:
it involves each side actually giving something. This is the first time in 2 years I have seen republicans actually compromise.
Click to expand...

There was no compromise here. This was Obama handing the Republicans everything they asked for on a silver platter, while extracting a token, face-saving concession in the form of unemployment benefits so that he could trumpet it as a bipartisan compromise.
 
Patria Antiqua said:
The worker is oppressed in this society merely by being a worker. Unless you are born into a particular class, you are born into a state of forced subservience to those who control wealth. There's a word for this form of slavery, and it's "employment."
Click to expand...

It's called freedom to prosper if you have a good work ethic.
 
Barbbtx said:
The Republicans promised to keep taxes down for everyone, including small business owners and the uber rich job creaters. They did that.
They gave in to extending the unemployment for another 13 months! Which they will get grief over from some on the right.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I'm talking about. The Republicans gave Obama a 13-month unemployment extension. Obama gave the Republicans a 2-year extension of the Bush tax cut and a relatively low estate tax. That's hardly an equitable exchange; that's a token concession in exchange for capitulation. Everyone knows that the Republicans are NOT going to "get grief from some on the right" over this. There will be a few murmurs about unemployment benefits on the op-ed page of the Wall Street Journal for a few days, then everyone will forget about it. This is hardly the type of thing that are going to make conservatives become disillusioned with their congressional leadership.
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
There was no compromise here. This was Obama handing the Republicans everything they asked for on a silver platter, while extracting a token, face-saving concession in the form of unemployment benefits so that he could trumpet it as a bipartisan compromise.
Click to expand...

I'D AGREE with that

Elections have consequences
 
haymarket said:
Obama could have nailed the GOP into a corner ........ But he failed to pull the trigger .
Obama will continue to crash the ship upon the rocks.... Obama failed to do it .
Click to expand...


so you are saying that obama is nothing more than an inexperienced, arrogant empty suit that just blows alot of hot air......thats what iv been saying all along.....its glad to know more people are catching on
 
Kandahar said:
This is exactly what I'm talking about. The Republicans gave Obama a 13-month unemployment extension. Obama gave the Republicans a 2-year extension of the Bush tax cut and a relatively low estate tax. That's hardly an equitable exchange; that's a token concession in exchange for capitulation. Everyone knows that the Republicans are NOT going to "get grief from some on the right" over this. There will be a few murmurs about unemployment benefits on the op-ed page of the Wall Street Journal for a few days, then everyone will forget about it. This is hardly the type of thing that are going to make conservatives become disillusioned with their congressional leadership.
Click to expand...

I hope not, but I'm hearing it already from callers on talk radio. Some were even pissed that there was only a 2 yr extention. Personally I think the Republicans did a good job on this and I'm proud of them. Obama did the right thing too. It's a win win.
 
fishinRod said:
so you are saying that obama is nothing more than an inexperienced, arrogant empty suit that just blows alot of hot air......thats what iv been saying all along.....its glad to know more people are catching on
Click to expand...

Not quite. All he had to do was stand and fight and make his case before the people but like it was said by another poster, he punted on third down. It was simply terrible strategy and even worse execution.

I suspect some of this started with the hiring of Rahm Emanuel. The guy left after only a year plus on the job after doing heaven knows what while he was there. Rahm as this street rep as one bad mother who will kill you while looking into your eyes and then cut them out and send them to your mother. Must be all hype because in the White House spot he was a *****cat.
 
Barbbtx said:
So to you, fairness is taking from those who earned it and giving to those who didn't?

Justice is punishing those who succeed?

Not trying to be snarky. Just really curious as to what liberals consider fairness.
Click to expand...

how is paying a fair share punishing anyone?
 
liblady said:
how is paying a fair share punishing anyone?
Click to expand...

What do you consider a fair share? 50% 75% 85% ?
Should everyone pay their fair share or only those deemed to be wealthy?
 
Barbbtx said:
What do you consider a fair share? 50% 75% 85% ?
Should everyone pay their fair share or only those deemed to be wealthy?
Click to expand...

why not answer the question?
 
Patria Antiqua said:
It's a logical fallacy with or without a law degree.

Your traditions mean nothing.
Click to expand...

nor does your communist nonsense

but the pattern and practice of this nation favors my interpretation rather than yours
 
liblady said:
how is paying a fair share punishing anyone?
Click to expand...

a fair share means everyone pays for what they use

liberals have no objective basis for what they call "fair"
 
TurtleDude said:
a fair share means everyone pays for what they use

liberals have no objective basis for what they call "fair"
Click to expand...

Turtle... and yet again, for a time beyond reckoning or calculation, you labor under the self imposed delusion that taxation is akin to shopping at Costco, with you and others filling up your carts with only what you want to purchase and then paying at the check out.

You need to get hold a a basic high school government text and read about taxation.

Although I imagine if you repeat this 1,000 times in the next year you might win the Bart Simpson Blackboard Award for persistence.
 
TurtleDude said:
nor does your communist nonsense

but the pattern and practice of this nation favors my interpretation rather than yours
Click to expand...
Way to support a logical fallacy with the exact same logical fallacy.

Do you have any sort of argument to offer to what I've said? Or are you just going to repeat the fact that I'm young and socialist over and over, and then repeat some non sequiturs?
 
haymarket said:
Turtle... and yet again, for a time beyond reckoning or calculation, you labor under the self imposed delusion that taxation is akin to shopping at Costco, with you and others filling up your carts with only what you want to purchase and then paying at the check out.

You need to get hold a a basic high school government text and read about taxation.

Although I imagine if you repeat this 1,000 times in the next year you might win the Bart Simpson Blackboard Award for persistence.
Click to expand...

my definition is one of fair. It also is consistent with the founders' concept of taxes. The dems sort of pissed all over that concept in order to buy the votes of people who feel like you do

You seem to think that once a system is in place it is set in stone and the fact that it is currently being used means it is right as well as being fair

that is why you are so terrified of any system that prevents your masters buying the votes of your bots using the money of others
 
Patria Antiqua said:
Way to support a logical fallacy with the exact same logical fallacy.

Do you have any sort of argument to offer to what I've said? Or are you just going to repeat the fact that I'm young and socialist over and over, and then repeat some non sequiturs?
Click to expand...

this is coming from somebody who whines that peole are oppressed when they contract?
 
Patria Antiqua said:
It's a perfect reason, actually.
Click to expand...

Actually its not, because "fairness" is an intangiable abstraction that is identified differently based on the vantage point of an individual.

You see "fairness" in taking money from people you think don't deserve it and giving it to "less fortunate.". Where as others see taking money from people who have worked to earn said money and giving it to people who haven't worked to earn it as inherently "unfair". Your particular viewpoint of what is or isn't fair is, frankly, irrelevant and far from being some kind of universal guiding tool.

Fairness, like beauty and many other things, is in the eye of the beholder. The issue with trying to pass or push for any kind of government legislation based on "fairness" is the fact that its a meaningless word that could mean a dozen things to a dozen people.
 
TurtleDude said:
my definition is one of fair. It also is consistent with the founders' concept of taxes. The dems sort of pissed all over that concept in order to buy the votes of people who feel like you do

You seem to think that once a system is in place it is set in stone and the fact that it is currently being used means it is right as well as being fair

that is why you are so terrified of any system that prevents your masters buying the votes of your bots using the money of others
Click to expand...

Well you be sure to let me know when the late 18th century rolls around again so I can dust off those old calendars. Going back to the day of 13 states huddled along the eastern seaboard with 4 million farmers and small merchants in a nation pretty much isolated from the rest of the world operating under an agrarian economic system. Yeah partner, you let us all know when that comes around again and those old concepts you claim about taxes just may have some merit then.
 
haymarket said:
Well you be sure to let me know when the late 18th century rolls around again so I can dust off those old calendars. Going back to the day of 13 states huddled along the eastern seaboard with 4 million farmers and small merchants in a nation pretty much isolated from the rest of the world operating under an agrarian economic system. Yeah partner, you let us all know when that comes around again and those old concepts you claim about taxes just may have some merit then.
Click to expand...

yawn-that's a lame response.

the post above yours pretty much deals with the "fairness" nonsense
 
TurtleDude said:
yawn-that's a lame response.

the post above yours pretty much deals with the "fairness" nonsense
Click to expand...

Actually, every single word of it is true. If it is not, please tell me where it is inaccurate.

IF you are so able to do. Feel free to dust off some of those old Ivy League college tomes now being used to press old $10,000.00 bills for the needed information. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom