• 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!

Do You Want Higher Taxes?

TurtleDude said:
Its funny how envy works-it causes people to say really stupid things.
Click to expand...

You can take one thing to the bank...I dont envy anyone, especially you :)
 
TurtleDude said:
..If you have a problem then your quarrel is with other governments and who are you to tell other nations how they should run their labor system?..
Click to expand...

I am a human being....who believes that all men & women are deserving of certain human rights, political rights, and respect.

do you feel differently?
 
TurtleDude said:
I support market reality. who are you to say what poor working conditions or wages are. Wages are proper if it obtains the suitable quantity and quality of labor needed by the employer
Click to expand...

I am guessing that you would think that if three people were living in a field with a limited amount of food in it and one person gathered up all the food, ate what he/she wanted and then defecated on the rest ... to those who have to decide whether or not to eat the spoiled meat, my guess is that you would say "I support market reality, that selfish person got there first, so just shut up and deal with it" ... lol! Perhaps this is not what you would think; however, it is analogous to what you are saying regarding market realities. Oh .. do you support monopolies?
 
TurtleDude said:
I see lots of people posting stuff that clearly is the product of ignorance.
Click to expand...

Having worked as an assistance to greedy and corrupt businessmen and simply observing the reality that is all around us ... I think I am qualified to make that statement ... should I question what you do for a living? Besides, just because someone does not work in a particular field, does not mean they aren't educated or self-educated ... the internet has really evened the playing field :)
 
lpast said:
You can take one thing to the bank...I dont envy anyone, especially you :)
Click to expand...

NO you are just upset that some people are rich and you think that is a problem
 
MusicAdventurer said:
Having worked as an assistance to greedy and corrupt businessmen and simply observing the reality that is all around us ... I think I am qualified to make that statement ... should I question what you do for a living? Besides, just because someone does not work in a particular field, does not mean they aren't educated or self-educated ... the internet has really evened the playing field :)
Click to expand...

I am a civil trial attorney, among other things.

assistance? secretary? assistant? Huh?
 
TurtleDude said:
NO you are just upset that some people are rich and you think that is a problem
Click to expand...

I can only speak for myself, but I fully support Capitalism, and the ability of wealthy people to invest their money to get richer.

however, folks who earn vast sums of wealth, can afford to pay a higher percentage in taxes. and they do.

as they should.
 
Thunder said:
I can only speak for myself, but I fully support Capitalism, and the ability of wealthy people to invest their money to get richer.

however, folks who earn vast sums of wealth, can afford to pay a higher percentage in taxes. and they do.

as they should.
Click to expand...

so you support the concept of from each according to their ability?

why should the rich pay a higher rate? what is the moral argument for it
 
TurtleDude said:
I am a civil trial attorney, among other things.

assistance? secretary? assistant? Huh?
Click to expand...

Lol, no wonder why you like to personalize things instead of sticking to the subject at hand ... actually I was an assistant to the CFO and CEO of a company (sorry for the misspell :) ). Again this is irrelevant (see earlier post).
 
MusicAdventurer said:
Lol, no wonder why you like to personalize things instead of sticking to the subject at hand ... actually I was an assistant to the CFO and CEO of a company (sorry for the misspell :) ). Again this is irrelevant (see earlier post).
Click to expand...

and based on your subordinate status to a couple of executives you have determined that most or many business leaders are corrupt greedy and need to have the government take more and more of their wealth to punish them for their alleged misdeeds?
 
TurtleDude said:
why should the rich pay a higher rate? what is the moral argument for it
Click to expand...

Because while jealousy is a terrible thing a bit of compassion isn't a bad thing. I have no problem with giving someone struggling an assist. I've been there.

So while I believe everyone should be paying something to be invested into the system, I have no problem paying more than the person making less. It's just a matter of where that line is drawn.
 
TurtleDude said:
so you support the concept of from each according to their ability?

why should the rich pay a higher rate? what is the moral argument for it
Click to expand...

if that's what you want to call it, I agree with Thunder's statement ... and ... how is there not a moral argument for it?
 
TurtleDude said:
so you support the concept of from each according to their ability?

why should the rich pay a higher rate? what is the moral argument for it
Click to expand...

is that what you call the graduated income tax?

all Presidents for the last 40 years have supported it. you calling Reagan and Bush Sr., Commies?
 
1Perry said:
Because while jealousy is a terrible thing a bit of compassion isn't a bad thing. I have no problem with giving someone struggling an assist. I've been there.

So while I believe everyone should be paying something to be invested into the system, I have no problem paying more than the person making less. It's just a matter of where that line is drawn.
Click to expand...

both flat taxes and consumption taxes would achieve that without creating a mechanism where votes can be bought by promising the many that all tax increases will be imposed on only those in the top brackets

what is wrong with saying that if the public wants more spending EVERYONE has to pay more? answer-because those who win elections by promising more spending don't want to alienate most of the voters by telling them that everyone of them will have higher taxes if spending goes up
 
Thunder said:
is that what you call the graduated income tax?

all Presidents for the last 40 years have supported it. you calling Reagan and Bush Sr., Commies?
Click to expand...

why do you ask such stupid questions: politicians want to win elections and telling the many that they should pay their fair share would lose elections
 
MusicAdventurer said:
if that's what you want to call it, I agree with Thunder's statement ... and ... how is there not a moral argument for it?
Click to expand...

how is there a moral argument for it? the rich don't get any additional government benefits for paying most of the income taxes. they don't get more value received then those who have full citizenship benefits without being taxed for them
 
TurtleDude said:
and based on your subordinate status to a couple of executives you have determined that most or many business leaders are corrupt greedy and need to have the government take more and more of their wealth to punish them for their alleged misdeeds?
Click to expand...

Why did you include the word "subordinate"? How is that relevant? Actually, that was an influence, however, I am also educated, I have studied ethics, politics, psychology and sociology (at undergraduate and graduate levels). Also, I don't live under a rock, lol! :) It seems you ignored my previous statement ... so I'll state it again ... the internet tends to even things out :)
 
TurtleDude said:
both flat taxes and consumption taxes would achieve that without creating a mechanism where votes can be bought by promising the many that all tax increases will be imposed on only those in the top brackets
Click to expand...

No doubt but I was just addressing your question.

what is wrong with saying that if the public wants more spending EVERYONE has to pay more? answer-because those who win elections by promising more spending don't want to alienate most of the voters by telling them that everyone of them will have higher taxes if spending goes up
Click to expand...

Everyone should pay something. There are some that can't pay more. This is a generalized statement and has nothing to do with our current situation.
 
TurtleDude said:
why do you ask such stupid questions: politicians want to win elections and telling the many that they should pay their fair share would lose elections
Click to expand...

why are you so insulting in your posts? e.g. using the word "stupid" ? Do you think that makes you look smarter or that you will make any compromises with anyone? Seriously, its this kind of behavior that slows progress!
 
TurtleDude said:
how is there a moral argument for it? the rich don't get any additional government benefits for paying most of the income taxes. they don't get more value received then those who have full citizenship benefits without being taxed for them
Click to expand...

Again, if the rich are still rich and the unlucky don't suffer as much .. who loses?
 
TurtleDude said:
how is there a moral argument for it? the rich don't get any additional government benefits for paying most of the income taxes. they don't get more value received then those who have full citizenship benefits without being taxed for them
Click to expand...

let me just state this Turtledude: if you someday lost all your money and became poor, and then needed an operation that cost the public $300,000, I would totally support your right to have that operation. I would not want you to die in the street, just because your income taxes may not match the cost of this tax-payer funded benefit.

that's what generosity, humanity, and love of your fellow-man is all about. we don't judge people by their wealth, and we don't provide for them what they need, based on the calculations of the IRS.
 
I don't think anyone ever wants higher taxes. I don't want to pay my bills, I don't want to have to use money to buy things, I wish I drove a Ferrari and flew a G6 to work. Simple fact is sometimes you have to do things that suck. Eventually all the Bush tax cuts will have to be phased out, the only way we couldn't do that is if somehow we dropped our budget down to 2 trillion a year (which I suggested in another thread how to do) and I think that is DOABLE but seriously all of our leaders have to make tough choices instead of sticking to some code they made up a few months prior that helped them abide to the flavor of the month.
 
Thunder said:
let me just state this Turtledude: if you someday lost all your money and became poor, and then needed an operation that cost the public $300,000, I would totally support your right to have that operation. I would not want you to die in the street, just because your income taxes may not match the cost of this tax-payer funded benefit.

that's what generosity, humanity, and love of your fellow-man is all about. we don't judge people by their wealth, and we don't provide for them what they need, based on the calculations of the IRS.
Click to expand...

Here is the thing about what you said, if we actually had better regulations an operation would never cost him $300k. One of the shining examples of capitalism in the world, Japan has such a system that makes sure that it would never cost him as such if he were rich or poor.

That is beside the point of the thread, but goes along with my point about bringing government spending down to 2 trillion...
 
Last edited:
JohnWOlin said:
Here is the thing about what you said, if we actually had better regulations an operation would never cost him $300k. One of the shining examples of capitalism in the world, Japan has such a system that makes sure that it would never cost him as such if he were rich or poor.

That is beside the point of the thread, but goes along with my point about bringing government spending down to 2 trillion...
Click to expand...

oh, I'm sure certain transplants costs 300k or more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom