View Poll Results: Where do you land?

Voters
87. You may not vote on this poll
  • I am wealthy, and favor tax hikes for the wealthy

    9 10.34%
  • I am not wealthy, and favor tax hikes for the wealthy

    32 36.78%
  • I am wealthy, and against tax hikes for the wealthy

    0 0%
  • I am not wealthy, and against tax hikes for the wealthy

    34 39.08%
  • Other

    12 13.79%
  • Unsure

    0 0%
Page 14 of 18 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 178

Thread: Where do you land

  1. #131
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,693

    Re: Where do you land

    Quote Originally Posted by theplaydrive View Post
    Right, but racism is a word that describes a reality that has existed for centuries. CC claimed that thinking blacks were inferior to whites was not racism in 1776, but that's not true. Racism is by definition believing in the superiority of one or more races over others, so regardless of whether the word for that attitude existed in 1776 and regardless if thinking of one race as superior to others was normal, it was still racism. What other word describes "the belief that one race is superior to another"?

    A similar example would be if a capitalist society existed before the invention of the word "capitalism", it was still a capitalist society regardless if that word was used at the time. I'm arguing from the perspective that a word is a just a word and that the meaning is what has always existed. So while racism - the word - has not always existed. The meaning of the word - the reality that it describes - has always existed and it's the same in every time period, no matter how normal it was.
    Ockham is right. You cannot backdate the definition of a concept. In 1776, based on the beliefs of the time, the treatment of blacks was not racism. Based on what we know NOW, it was. And your analogy to capitalism doesn't work. Capitalism is a system, a series of actions. Racism is a belief, a perception. Very different things.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  2. #132
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,107

    Re: Where do you land

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    That's not how the average/effective tax rate is calculated. Add up all the various taxes you pay (e.g. payroll, sales, traditional income, capital gains income, excise, state/local taxes), then divide by the amount of money you made. Factoring all of those different taxes in, the wealthy do not pay a significantly higher tax burden than the middle class.
    ...
    http://www.ctj.org/pdf/taxday2011.pdf
    The actual numbers are from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.
    These people are including the employer contributions to the FICA tax on the employee side. In other words, they are doubling the effect of the (admittedly regressive) FICA tax on those making less than the cap, and subtracting that tax paid by the employer! Then they don't count taxes on corporate profits, but on net after tax.

    well yeah man, I mean, I could show you how the poor were actually taxed at 175% of their share of the national income if I were just allowed to count taxes paid by one group of people as paid by another; and apply Canadian tax-accounting methods to American Corporate Profits.


    anywho, as per OP, I think both of us would take revenue-neutral tax code simplification before we wanted our current system just with hiked nominal rates.


    It is an income tax (i.e. a tax levied on money you have made), but it is taxed at a lower rate than other forms of income.
    as well it should be. the money you are investing was already taxed when you earned it, and whatever productive use you put it to was already taxed when the business you invested in reported profits. If we could just get over ourselves enough to further lower or (preferably) eliminate this tax, we would become the worlds' investment/tax haven overnight.

  3. #133
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: Where do you land

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Ockham is right. You cannot backdate the definition of a concept. In 1776, based on the beliefs of the time, the treatment of blacks was not racism. Based on what we know NOW, it was. And your analogy to capitalism doesn't work. Capitalism is a system, a series of actions. Racism is a belief, a perception. Very different things.
    I'm not buying it, at all. Are you saying that no white person in 1776 thought white people were superior to black people?

  4. #134
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,677

    Re: Where do you land

    Quote Originally Posted by theplaydrive View Post
    I'm not buying it, at all. Are you saying that no white person in 1776 thought white people were superior to black people?
    Thats like saying yesterdays scientists were not scientists because their knowledge was primitive and has been shwon to be wrong. People from 200+ years ago lived their lives based on current events and their life experiences. We have the benefit of learning from that experience. I wouldnt at all be surprised if 200 years from now people will wonder what was wrong with this generation and time...especially considering the mess we are going to leave them stuck with.

  5. #135
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,775

    Re: Where do you land

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    I'm not saying it's not understandable. I'm saying it's still racism. Call it what it is. Standards for what truly qualifies as racism or racist don't change over time. Racism has a very specific definition. Just like one thing isn't socialist one day, then not-socialist then next. Racism isn't time-relative; just because everyone else is racist in your society doesn't make you not a racist. Words have meaning.
    Sorry. definitions change all the time. If they didn't, they wouldn't have to keep updating the dictionary, they could just reprint the same one from 200 years ago. You're just wrong.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  6. #136
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: Where do you land

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Sorry. definitions change all the time. If they didn't, they wouldn't have to keep updating the dictionary, they could just reprint the same one from 200 years ago. You're just wrong.
    So what do you call a white man in 1776 who thought whites were superior to blacks?

  7. #137
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Where do you land

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Sorry. definitions change all the time. If they didn't, they wouldn't have to keep updating the dictionary, they could just reprint the same one from 200 years ago. You're just wrong.
    I wasn't talking about definitions in general. I was talking about racism in particular. Racism, while the word itself and how we think about racism today are fairly modern, doesn't take away from the fact that people 200 years held racist attitudes, and were therefore racists. Yes, the reality is that almost everyone back in the day held racist attitudes. It's also reality that just because they were in the majority doesn't make them not racists.
    Last edited by StillBallin75; 07-05-11 at 01:00 PM.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  8. #138
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Where do you land

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahGalt View Post
    What happens to the wealthy tax base when states implement a massive tax hike on the wealthy? It disappears. They move.
    You can always find more people who want to be rich. The rich aren't special because they're rich; they're just rich. The rules, however, are set up for a very small portion at the top of the income list to beneft the most by being able to define their income various ways to reduce their tax rate. We don't need to treat the rich like they're some form of royalty. If they don't want to do it and maintain their wealth, they ain't got to. We can replace them with someone who wants to be rich and will obey the rules.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  9. #139
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Where do you land

    Quote Originally Posted by theplaydrive View Post
    I noticed you didn't respond to my comment. That leads me to believe that you agree with me, but would rather be silent instead of acknowledging it.
    It was already answered - twice I believe.

    Quote Originally Posted by theplaydrive View Post
    The bold part is absolutely not true. Blacks were thought of as inferior to whites - as were Native Americans and Asians. So what do you call someone who thinks of one race as superior to others Ockham?
    Back then you'd call them have nots... they were considered inferior, so they were less than a have not. However, there was no such term as "racist". They were "stinking indians" or "yellow man" or "nigger" in the verbiage of the time. That was a widely held belief at the time and not just in the United States.

    Quote Originally Posted by theplaydrive View Post
    What word describes that reality which existed 300 years ago?
    I just provided this. There is no term of racist ... there was nothing at the time that could be called "racism" other than a modern concept of the term.

    Quote Originally Posted by theplaydrive View Post
    Like I said, if a capitalist society existed 300 years before the word "capitalism" was used, the society was still a capitalist society.
    If viewed from the present. If viewed from the past, it was not a capitalist society.
    Quote Originally Posted by theplaydrive View Post
    If a racist existed 300 years before the word was used, he's still a racist.
    Continuing to say the same thing over and over is not going to make it true. It's a matter of perspective. If viewing the past from the present you are correct, if viewing the past from the pasts perspective, you're wrong.
    I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on whats being proposed here, hed agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute. - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  10. #140
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Where do you land

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    Our CURRENT understanding of race and racism is what's modern. Racist attitudes certainly existed way back in the past. A racist is a racist is a racist is someone who believes one race to be superior to another. There's really no two ways about it. Racist beliefs/worldviews/attitudes existed, at LEAST as far back as the renaissance and enlightenment era, when European nations were coming into contact with people who were radically different from themselves.

    Racism is a word, with a concrete definition used to describe a concrete reality. Whether we are imposing modern views onto the past is irrelevant. Those people are still racists regardless of time period. That's basically my point.
    Sorry, we're just going to have to disagree on this one.
    I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on whats being proposed here, hed agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute. - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


Page 14 of 18 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •