• 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!

U.S. Debt is a Myth

Absentglare said:
Well you'd have to actually articulate your own, coherent position, and i guess you're right that you haven't really ever done that.
Click to expand...

And for about the one hundredth time, where did I ever say that I favor giving the rich tax cuts, other than reducing corporate tax rates? It seems we have finally reached the point where you finally have to admit that I never said that and that you just assumed it or made it up. I forgive you. It's common for the left to make assumptions that were just never present in the first place. It seems to be very common for the left to read things which aren't there. Just because I am "moderate right" you just accuse me of believing everything that the far right believes in and I do actually favor increasing the taxes on the rich. They should pay more but, again, everyone over the poverty level should pay something to contribute to the programs financed by federal income taxes.
 
Moderate Right said:
And for about the one hundredth time, where did I ever say that I favor giving the rich tax cuts, other than reducing corporate tax rates? It seems we have finally reached the point where you finally have to admit that I never said that and that you just assumed it or made it up. I forgive you. It's common for the left to make assumptions that were just never present in the first place. It seems to be very common for the left to read things which aren't there. Just because I am "moderate right" you just accuse me of believing everything that the far right believes in and I do actually favor increasing the taxes on the rich. They should pay more but, again, everyone over the poverty level should pay something to contribute to the programs financed by federal income taxes.
Click to expand...

Oh, right here, but of course you probably don't realize that "simplifying the tax code" is a rhetorical phrase meant to describe a tax cut and vaguely allude to the removal of some *generally unspecified* tax deductions :

Of course anyone can come up with tax plan, including a flat tax plan. I know of no one suggesting a flat tax that only wants to reduce taxes on the rich and stick it to everyone else. I'm for simplifying the tax code but I think more and more about having a minimum tax for certain income levels so that no matter how much crap you want to do on a tax form, you still have to pay the minimum tax for that income level. Anybody making more than the poverty level would have to pay at least the minimum tax for their income level.
Click to expand...

Here's you whining about how republicans don't want to raise taxes on the poor (because... get this, republican voters can't be that stupid !?! Lol!!) :

Still hogwash. You know, the Republicans have the same exact argument. Since you used a guy that isn't going to be president I will use Bernie Sanders as an example. There's no way we can do everything he wants to do without taxing everyone more. Even he admits everyone's taxes will go up under him. The Republicans are the ones who reduce everyone's tax rates. Now if you want to argue that that will benefit the rich more then I'll listen to you but if you are going to argue that they are going to give tax breaks to the rich while increasing taxes on the poor then I'm telling you again that that is hogwash. Many on the left are not able to comprehend that there are MANY Republican voters who are poor and middle class. Do you really believe that they are stupider than poor and middle class Democrats?
Click to expand...

And then here's you demanding that we raise taxes on the poor :

No. It is not a head tax. It would only be a tax on the return, not the number of heads in the return. People at or below the poverty levels would pay zero. Those just above poverty levels would pay small minimal amounts of like $100 or even less so that most everyone is paying their fair share. The more you earn the more the minimum tax goes up so that the rich would pay a large minimum tax and would not be able to do any creative accounting to pay zero. My plan would make the rich pay more than they pay now but everyone above the poverty levels would pay something. I think revenue neutral is a stupid idea when we go 500 billion in the hole every year. There's nothing wrong with collecting more tax revenue as long as it goes to the deficit and not more spending and the rich would pay the major part of this tax increase and the poorer would only pay a pittance, if not zero.
Click to expand...

But, you know, i don't even really care about you, personally. Tell me, do you favor Trump or Sanders, and who is more likely to cut taxes ?

Do you have any idea what FIT cuts do ?
 
Absentglare said:
A donation is different than a tax increase.

Tax increases are compulsory. I want the government to secure our shared prosperity through compulsory tax increases and correspondent social service expenditures for the poor, especially in regards to education.

We were never meant to have an oligarchy. What we were rebelling against was the consolidation of power in a monarchy. That's why we designed the government to balance itself.
Click to expand...

the point is ,you are free to give away as much of your money to government as you like ,without even having to have your taxes increased by law.

tax increases are not compulsory, direct taxes are compulsory, if you and others use the power of voting to increases because that is what you want, fine, but just remember others do not share your ideas.

the government is no longer balanced, because its not longer a mixed government, that ended with the 17th amendment, and moved america away from a republican form to a more democratic form, which is driven by faction/special interest in reality, and not the people.
 
Absentglare said:
Oh, right here, but of course you probably don't realize that "simplifying the tax code" is a rhetorical phrase meant to describe a tax cut and vaguely allude to the removal of some *generally unspecified* tax deductions :



Here's you whining about how republicans don't want to raise taxes on the poor (because... get this, republican voters can't be that stupid !?! Lol!!) :



And then here's you demanding that we raise taxes on the poor :



But, you know, i don't even really care about you, personally. Tell me, do you favor Trump or Sanders, and who is more likely to cut taxes ?

Do you have any idea what FIT cuts do ?
Click to expand...

When I say simplifying the tax code I mean not only making it simpler but raising overall tax revenues. Please don't give me an option between Trump and Sanders. Don't forget that suicide is also an option and I might have to consider that.
 
Moderate Right said:
When I say simplifying the tax code I mean not only making it simpler but raising overall tax revenues. Please don't give me an option between Trump and Sanders. Don't forget that suicide is also an option and I might have to consider that.
Click to expand...

Right which, if you claim it's revenue neutral, would involve cutting taxes on a ****load of high earners.
 
Absentglare said:
Right which, if you claim it's revenue neutral, would involve cutting taxes on a ****load of high earners.
Click to expand...

My gosh. You are so hard to believe. My own post you quoted stated "When I say simplifying the tax code I mean not only making it simpler but raising overall tax revenues", not revenue neutral. I am not for revenue neutral. We need to collect more taxes than we do now overall and we also need to cut expenses to eliminate the deficit. Did you forget that I am not an MMT'r? I believe in fiscal responsibility.
 
Absentglare said:
It is a pay raise from the government jaeger. That's what it is when the tax laws are changed to give someone more money. The government pushes itself toward deficit so that someone receives more money.
Click to expand...

Keeping my own money.. the money I earn with my own work is not "getting a pay raise" from the government.

A "pay raise" that "gives someone more money".. that does happen.. like someone getting an earned income credit that gives them more in money than they paid in taxes. Or a stimulus check, (which I did not get).. etc. Those can be considered a "pay raise",, because it takes money from ME and gives it to someone else.

But keeping my own money.. is not a pay raise. that's absurd.

The government pushes itself toward deficit because of its spending.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom