View Poll Results: Is it unreasonable to pay a little more?

Voters
97. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. I'm a greedy bastard!! I need MORE!!!

    28 28.87%
  • No. There's comes a point in wealthiness where it just doesn't even matter anymore.

    61 62.89%
  • I'm not sure.

    8 8.25%
Page 64 of 81 FirstFirst ... 1454626364656674 ... LastLast
Results 631 to 640 of 809

Thread: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

  1. #631
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post

    why do so many people make excuses for their own failures?
    Because it's much easier than doing the hard work needed to not be a failure... unfortunate for them and the whole country.
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  2. #632
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    First you pretend you never heard of FICA taxes, an now you pretend not to know that SS receipts go into the General Fund? Tell you what, bring it up for the people to vote on again in 2014!
    Man, you simply can not stick to a single point without some seriously off the wall dodges and twists. You have yet again, by yet another person, been called out, and have NOTHING. It's clear as day.

    The bottom 20% is more than the top 20% because there are more poor people. Simply astounding logic in that misfiring brain dude..... and it just keeps coming.
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  3. #633
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by EarlzP View Post
    This is the internet it takes no intellect
    You've proven that all too well.

  4. #634
    Professor

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    04-26-13 @ 03:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,404
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    You've proven that all too well.
    Alright ala- f'n- bama what is it that you and your libertarian and conservatives buddies want to do with the masses of people that your policies will put on the street. Are you going to give them tents to raise their children in or let me guess you don't care what happens to them. Their children should have been able to pick better parents to be born to.

  5. #635
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-15-17 @ 05:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    424

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Ooooh oooh! Me, me, Mr. Carta!

    Human rights, labor rights, environmental rights and a free and fair market. You know, the stuff that separates them from anarchists.
    Human rights and labour rights are two things that can be handled fairly, or, in most cases, become an orgy of granting special privilege to some groups at the expense of others. In other words, pretty much social Darwinism expressed through the institutions of power. For example: when I hear the term "labour rights" that usually means special privilege for organized labour at the expense of the personal freedoms of non-union workers.

    "free and fair market" - now you are right in my bailiwick. To begin with, there are no "free" markets. ALL markets exist under some kind of rules and enforcement, whether by the participants, outside forces or government. The closest I have ever encountered to a truly free marketplace was Russia shortly after the USSR fell apart. In that free market, the rulemakers very quickly became the criminals who had access to communications, command and control strategies (and weapons), and as soon as someone gets the power to make and enforce the rules, human nature dictates that they immediately begin to dispense the privilege to KEEP themselves in that position. Today we know them as the Oligarchs and government.

    So, tell me: how do Libertarians expect to produce these "free and fair" markets anyhow???
    Last edited by cannuck; 01-08-13 at 12:05 PM.

  6. #636
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by EarlzP View Post
    Alright ala- f'n- bama what is it that you and your libertarian and conservatives buddies want to do with the masses of people that your policies will put on the street. Are you going to give them tents to raise their children in or let me guess you don't care what happens to them. Their children should have been able to pick better parents to be born to.
    It happens around the world. Why should America be any different? If I thought the vast majority of people were good, hard-working people willing to save but just caught some bad luck, I'd be empathetic. However, the rampant stupidity that infests the poverty crowd makes me less inclined to do anything.

    My policies would put the poor who truly wanted to work and give back off the street. However, those seeking a free ride would get shoved into the gutter to hopefully die quietly and without a scene. Welfare reform needs an overhaul like nothing else. You receive money, you also work somehow - either on your own, or some form of community service. Random, mandatory drug tests. Either birth control is required, or an understanding is put in place that if you get pregnant, your assistance is immediately and irrevocably terminated.

    I would help people who help themselves. Anyone looking to skate on another's work...they can be shot in the street, for all I care. They're a burden to real humans, and I consider them subhuman crap.

  7. #637
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:03 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,373

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by cannuck View Post
    Human rights and labour rights are two things that can be handled fairly, or, in most cases, become an orgy of granting special privilege to some groups at the expense of others. In other words, pretty much social Darwinism expressed through the institutions of power. For example: when I hear the term "labour rights" that usually means special privilege for organized labour at the expense of the personal freedoms of non-union workers.
    I don't really care about your opinion of "labor rights". Fact is, they are necessary to some extent and all intellectually mature 'libertarians' accept this facet. Libertarians are not anarchists.

    "free and fair market" - now you are right in my bailiwick. To begin with, there are no "free" markets. ALL markets exist under some kind of rules and enforcement, whether by the participants, outside forces or government. The closest I have ever encountered to a truly free marketplace was Russia shortly after the USSR fell apart. In that free market, the rulemakers very quickly became the criminals who had access to communications, command and control strategies (and weapons), and as soon as someone gets the power to make and enforce the rules, human nature dictates that they immediately begin to dispense the privilege to KEEP themselves in that position. Today we know them as the Oligarchs and government.

    So, tell me: how do Libertarians expect to produce these "free and fair" markets anyhow???
    First, I'm not doing the absolute thing. We end up with no free market, no capitalism, no socialism, well, nothing. So, you can take that crap elsewhere.

    To create a free and fair market (terminology normal parlance, not sopohmoric babbling), one needs human, labor, and environmental rights in addition to standard stuff like 'no fraud', 'no coercion'... you know, basic regulations required for a market to be free and fair (and preferably without externalities).


    Of course, if the market is free and fair, and those rights exist, then a "superior group" cannot take advantage over "those unable to support themselves" (see: Social Darwinism).



    This is not rocket science. This is Politics 101. Or HS level.
    Last edited by ecofarm; 01-08-13 at 12:26 PM.

  8. #638
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-15-17 @ 05:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    424

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    I don't really care about your opinion of "labor rights". Fact is, they are necessary to some extent and all intellectually mature 'libertarians' accept this facet. Libertarians are not anarchists.



    First, I'm not doing the absolute thing. We end up with no free market, no capitalism, no socialism, well, nothing. So, you can take that crap elsewhere.

    To create a free and fair market (terminology normal parlance, not sopohmoric babbling), one needs human, labor, and environmental rights in addition to standard stuff like 'no fraud', 'no coercion'... you know, basic regulations required for a market to be free and fair (and preferably without externalities).


    Of course, if the market is free and fair, and those rights exist, then a "superior group" cannot take advantage over "those unable to support themselves" (see: Social Darwinism).



    This is not rocket science. This is Politics 101. Or HS level.
    I am just baffled by your defensiveness over what should be a very simple and civil discussion.

    What, then, do YOU take "labour rights" to mean - from a intellectually mature Libertarian frame of reference?

    I do not profess to understand US Libertarian philosophy, but I do understand human behaviour to some extent. How do you propose to see these "free and fair" rules written, and by whom?

  9. #639
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:03 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,373

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by cannuck View Post
    I am just baffled by your defensiveness over what should be a very simple and civil discussion.
    I am baffled by the lack of debate.

    I do not profess to understand US Libertarian philosophy, but I do understand human behaviour to some extent.
    Well, then I guess we have a basis for discussion! hah

    You might want to note, however, that there is no "US Libertarian" and "Other Libertarian". That whole "libertarian left" thing is nonsense created by Chomsky via Che-tshirts and Castro worship. It's a farce.

    How do you propose to see these "free and fair" rules written, and by whom?
    You want me to explain modern society and then how I think things could be done better?

  10. #640
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,680

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by EarlzP View Post
    Alright ala- f'n- bama what is it that you and your libertarian and conservatives buddies want to do with the masses of people that your policies will put on the street. Are you going to give them tents to raise their children in or let me guess you don't care what happens to them. Their children should have been able to pick better parents to be born to.
    Why...nothing at all. We are going to let all the very caring and concerned and committed liberals that really really really really really really really 'care' about them offer of their own free will their wealth and largess to pay for them. We are going to let socialism and the 'caring' people step up and do it without the the government forcing them. It shouldnt be a problem. After all...there are a whole lot of rich democrat politicians, actors, musicians, even some businessmen that talk about how much they care, so we are going to let them fore-go their multimillion dollar parties and yachts and awards shows, and put their money where their mouth is. Because...you know...they really really really really really really really really REALLY really really do 'care'.

Page 64 of 81 FirstFirst ... 1454626364656674 ... 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
  •