• 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 Say They’re Open to ‘Revenue Raisers’

Gargantuan said:
Yes he has paid more tax dollars than I have. Dollars is not the issue here. The issue is a fair burden. I have said this before in many other threads. A family is in the 15% bracket and earns 30k a year jointly. They pay what? 4 grand about? That is fair. Someone who earns 275 million a year pays 15% of their salary and pays like 40 mil in taxes. That is a tiny little piece of that income compared with taking 4 grand from a family earnign 30k a year.
Click to expand...


fair burden-what nonsense. He pays far more than he uses. He makes that money because he provides tons of value to others. You are engaging in the FROM EACH ACCORDING TO THEIR ABILITY bull poop

fair value is far more relevant. He doesn't get a million times or 100K times more value from government services than you do. In fact since you are paid by tax dollars you get far more value from government services than he does
 
Hatuey said:
Thunder: You're not helping. The argument for a leftist system of taxation is not that the richest people owe something to society...
Click to expand...

if the law says you owe taxes, then you owe taxes.

this guy is arguing that if someone does not pay his taxes, that have been approved by our govt., and the IRS siezes some of his money to pay his debts, this is theft.
 
Hatuey said:
Thunder: You're not helping. The argument for a leftist system of taxation is not that the richest people owe something to society, it's that it's beneficial for there to be a strong safety next. I'm considered to be a Liberal who is "well off". I don't own anything to society. If anything, every single dollar I've ever made came from my own ambition. Society didn't give me my artistic talents or paid my bills. I do. I am more than willing to give part of my salary to those who need it more than me, however, I don't "owe" anything to them or society. If anything, it's the other way around.
Click to expand...

Damn Hatuey, that is one of the smartest posts I have ever seen on this board. Its brilliant.

that's a good one to sign off on

Bravo
 
Hatuey said:
Thunder: You're not helping. The argument for a leftist system of taxation is not that the richest people owe something to society, it's that it's beneficial for there to be a strong safety next. I'm considered to be a Liberal who is "well off". I don't owe anything to society. If anything, every single dollar I've ever made came from my own ambition. Society didn't give me my artistic talents or paid my bills. I do. I am more than willing to give part of my salary to those who need it more than me, however, I don't "owe" anything to them or society. If anything, it's the other way around.
Click to expand...

Well said!!!
 
ptif219 said:
Legal theft is not against the law that is why it is legal
Click to expand...

again, internet debate forum members don't get to decide what constitutes "theft".

society does. and through our representatives, NO state in the Union has branded the IRS garnishing wages or seizing assets to make up for unpaid taxes, as "theft".

sorry. case closed.
 
Thunder said:
it is a needed "program". or does 35 million Americans without health-insurance not concern you?

oh, right. I guess not.
Click to expand...


It is not needed, it is a scam and will cost much more than it will benefit anyone. People need to set priorities. If they do not have insurance it is not a priority. I buy mine I do not get insurance from my employer.
 
Hatuey said:
Thunder:

You're not helping. The argument for a leftist system of taxation is not that the richest people owe something to society, it's that it's beneficial for there to be a strong safety next. I'm considered to be a Liberal who is "well off". I don't owe anything to society. If anything, every single dollar I've ever made came from my own ambition. Society didn't give me my artistic talents or paid my bills. I did. I am more than willing to give part of my salary to those who need it more than me, however, I don't "owe" anything to them or society. If anything, it's the other way around.

Conservatives who don't agree with taxation in its present form call it "theft" because it is to an extent. It's not theft for the government to take money in order to fund street construction, infrastructure, certain safety programs. It's ridiculous for the government to tax millions in order to fund "free condom" drives. Theft is in the eye of the beholder. Some things which we are taxed for are theft, others, just common sense.
Click to expand...

Solid. You actually made another logical connection for my mental puzzle.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Well said!!!
Click to expand...

society has decided that we owe the govt. income tax. its not due to who we are, where we are, what we do.

its based on how much we earn, and the concept that since we all benefit from a well-functioning govt., we should all help fund it.
 
Thunder said:
if the law says you owe taxes, then you owe taxes.
Click to expand...

Yes and in a discussion where the political understanding is not above the 12th grade, then this would be over. However it's not. You said that people owe something to society. That's not true at all. I owe for what I use and nothing else. If I am using a road, I should be taxed for its maintanence. If I use water, then I should be taxed for its use. Everything else I am taxed for is out of my own adherence to whatever social contract I have drawn for myself. In some places of the US there is a stronger belief that there is a social contract that all must blindly obey. In others, people question it. To simply say that everybody actually "owes" anything to a social contract that only exists in your mind is ridiculous. Even the most ardent liberals wouldn't agree with you that they "owe" anything to society.
 
Hatuey said:
Yes and in a discussion where the political understanding is not above the 12th grade, then this would be over. However it's not. You said that people owe something to society. That's not true at all. I owe for what I use and nothing else. If I am using a road, I should be taxed for its maintanence. If I use water, then I should be taxed for its use. Everything else I am taxed for is out of my own adherence to whatever social contract I have drawn for myself. In some places of the US there is a stronger belief that there is a social contract that all must blindly obey. In others, people question it. To simply say that everybody actually "owes" anything to a social contract that only exists in your mind is ridiculous. Even the most ardent liberals wouldn't agree with you that they "owe" anything to society.
Click to expand...

So if you haven't ever used a federal interstate in Florida you don't owe any taxes for that, but you owe it for the part of it in NY? I don't follow.
 
Hatuey said:
I owe for what I use and nothing else.
Click to expand...

I have never been on welfare or Medicaid, nor do I ever plan on it.

when do I get back my share of taxes that helped pay for these programs?

I have never had a fire. When do I get back my city taxes that went to the FDNY?
 
TurtleDude said:
does someone else want to explain this idiotic math error

if you pay a 36% tax rate and that rate is increased to 39.6% that is about a 10% increase in the amount of money taken from your next dollar. NOT A 3% increase. figure it out and understand why you just made a rather gaping error
Click to expand...

Actually I think that you may be debating the marginal versus the effective tax rate impact. While top rate change is a larger increase on your next dollar it does not impact any tax that you owe in the lower brackets. So the impact on your effective tax rate is dependent on how many of those next dollars you actually make.

Based on the 2011 tax tables the top rate of 35% starts at 379,150. Without taking anything else into account (deductions, exemptions, credits, etc...) if you made 500,000 in salary you would owe 152,314 at the 35% rate. If the top rate was raised to 38% you would end up owing 155,939.50. For an increase of 3,625.50. This is a .7 percentage point increase in your effective tax rate, from 30.5% to 31.2%.

Of course as you make more money the impact is greater because more of your money is taxed at the higher rate. So if you made a million dollars your taxes would be 18,625.50 higher at the higher rate. In this case your effective rate goes up 1.9 percentage points, from 32.7% to 34.6%.
 
Thunder said:
if the law says you owe taxes, then you owe taxes.

this guy is arguing that if someone does not pay his taxes, that have been approved by our govt., and the IRS siezes some of his money to pay his debts, this is theft.
Click to expand...

No I am arguing that when they raise taxes and do not cut spending or balance the budget it is wealth redistribution and legal theft
 
Thunder said:
again, internet debate forum members don't get to decide what constitutes "theft".

society does. and through our representatives, NO state in the Union has branded the IRS garnishing wages or seizing assets to make up for unpaid taxes, as "theft".

sorry. case closed.
Click to expand...

Wrong theft does not have to be illegal.
 
Thunder said:
society has decided that we owe the govt. income tax. its not due to who we are, where we are, what we do.

its based on how much we earn, and the concept that since we all benefit from a well-functioning govt., we should all help fund it.
Click to expand...

Society my ass. It is politicians
 
Do you people still not get it?

They're going to stall until August by any means necessary. They never cared about "revenue raisers" in the first place.
 
Thunder said:
We The People elect representatives, to represent our interests in government. This is what the Constitution calls for.
Click to expand...

That does not mean they do what they said they would, which means they are not representing our interest
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom