• 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!

Which would you rather have?

Which would you rather have?


  • Total voters
    32
  • Poll closed .
the subtlety of a train wreck. Your stupid poll doesn't take into account one person is being screwed over

Yes it does. That is exactly the point of the thread. You are supposed to recognize the one who is being screwed over and then vote for the opposite one.

Can you tell which one is getting screwed over? If so, don't cry like a little baby. Simply vote for the opposite one. of have you already voted? I see 0 votes for Option A so far.
 
I would choose:

C) A $250,000 income with a 0.00 tax burden
 
Why would anyone seek to make that kind of income in the first place if they knew that they were simply going to be robbed of most of it?

That's the problem here.

Taxation of the type you are defending crushes the incentive to perform or achieve above one's peers. It encourages people to strive only for mediocrity, as striving to be exceptional is essentially pointless.

I didn't see your vote for Option A.
 
Yes it does. That is exactly the point of the thread. You are supposed to recognize the one who is being screwed over and then vote for the opposite one.

Can you tell which one is getting screwed over? If so, don't cry like a little baby. Simply vote for the opposite one. of have you already voted? I see 0 votes for Option A so far.


the one crying like a baby appears to be the one who is trying to excuse being a failure economically while trying to salve his butt hurt envy by trying to justify confiscatory taxes on people more prosperous and industrious than he is

how's that for a poll answer
 
another problem with this moronic poll is we don't know how hard either works. the guy getting sodomized by the IRS might well work 80 hours a week in an incredibly risky high stress job while the freeloader might make 30K a year modeling thongs
 
However, that's not "no taxes."

true, but some people are paying (and I use that term loosely) say taxes on smokes and drinks from money given to them by the government
 
I didn't see your vote for Option A.

If you're just going to dump me straight into the situation no questions asked, sure. I'd take Option B) every time.

However, if we're talking about a situation resulting from the culmination of decades of my own personal labor, I wouldn't bust my ass trying to make two hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year in the first place if I knew that I could simply stop at one hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year (or whichever income establishes the jumping off point for the 50% tax bracket in question) and still possess a take home income more or less comparable to what the larger salary would provide.

The effort simply wouldn't be worth the reward.
 
I didn't see your answer. Which one did you choose? Remember. There are no wrong answers. Only wrong questions.

I tend not to dignify moronic polls with an answer-

when I tried cases I'd answer like this

The party is without knowledge sufficient to address the factual assertions contained in Paragraph # 3 and therefore denies the same for want of knowledge
 
another problem with this moronic poll is we don't know how hard either works. the guy getting sodomized by the IRS might well work 80 hours a week in an incredibly risky high stress job while the freeloader might make 30K a year modeling thongs

You are free to take that into consideration as well. I would guess the guy making $30,000 has a much easier job than the guy making $250,000. Wouldn't you think so? People are still choosing option B. It kind of makes you wonder if money incentivizes people to work harder. If you use this poll as a guide, it seems that money does incentivize people to work harder.
 
You are free to take that into consideration as well. I would guess the guy making $30,000 has a much easier job than the guy making $250,000. Wouldn't you think so? People are still choosing option B. It kind of makes you wonder if money incentivizes people to work harder. If you use this poll as a guide, it seems that money does incentivize people to work harder.


your feeble attempts to justify people who work harder than you paying more taxes fails on me
 
your feeble attempts to justify people who work harder than you paying more taxes fails on me

Are you going to vote in this poll or just continue to make excuses for why your not voting in this poll?

I already know which answer you would choose but I was hoping that you would surprise me.
 
A) A $30,000 income with a $0.00 tax burden?

or

B) A $250,000 income with a $125,000 tax burden?

Why do you think your answer is the most advantageous for you?

The answer is neither.
I would not be happy living on 30,000 a year so I would be out busting my ass like I have most of my life creating more wealth. After busting my ass for the money I would not be happy with being forced to pay half of my earnings in taxes. Got it?
 
The answer is neither.
I would not be happy living on 30,000 a year so I would be out busting my ass like I have most of my life creating more wealth. After busting my ass for the money I would not be happy with being forced to pay half of my earnings in taxes. Got it?

This is a public poll. I will be able to see your vote later. I already know which one that you prefer but I'll still keep checking to see which way you vote in this poll.
 
Are you going to vote in this poll or just continue to make excuses for why your not voting in this poll?

I already know which answer you would choose but I was hoping that you would surprise me.

I don't know. I might take the first one if he is sitting around all day while the other guy is say doing mercenary work behind north Korean lines
 
A) A $30,000 income with a $0.00 tax burden?

or

B) A $250,000 income with a $125,000 tax burden?

Why do you think your answer is the most advantageous for you?
Duh, I misplaced my calculator.
 
I don't know. I might take the first one if he is sitting around all day while the other guy is say doing mercenary work behind north Korean lines

Statisticallly speaking the first guy is making about $10 an hour and working about 51.8 hours per week. The second guy is probably a doctor, business executive, a farmer, a bureacrat, a successful lawyer or something like that. He's probably working around 80-100 hours per week. Come on. You have a brain. You have enough information to make an educated guess. You are a smart guy. I think you will make a good decision.
 
I would rather have the 250000 with 125000 burden bevause youre still making more than choice A. Well...it all really depends on what the taxes are being used for at that time. If theyre being used for something stupid, then id rather have the 30000 with no tax, because the tax collectors dont deserve the 125000 from my account to build something nobody wants or needs.
 
I would rather have the 250000 with 125000 burden bevause youre still making more than choice A. Well...it all really depends on what the taxes are being used for at that time. If theyre being used for something stupid, then id rather have the 30000 with no tax, because the tax collectors dont deserve the 125000 from my account to build something nobody wants or needs.

Finally! An opposing view with a valid justification for his position. Thanks Jackson1050.
 
A) $250,000 income with 0 compulsory tax burden, but instead a voluntary actions tax like the founders created.
B) $250,000 income with $125,000 government compulsory income tax burden.

this would have been the better poll question.

i vote A
 
Back
Top Bottom