Why does the middle class pay the most crippling amount of income tax?

Jerry said:

The Left has a long, very well documented history of racism, even before they stood with fire-hose in hand to oppose the enforcement of Board v Brown; KKK ties are hard to get rid of. Modern Liberal policies destroy the family, especially the Black family. Even Planned Parenthood, the priests who maintain the sacred alter of abortion all Liberals mush pay homage to, was founded for the expressed purpose of using eugenics to harm Blacks.

The only way to embrace Liberalism and deny racism is to admit ignorance, learn, then denounce Liberalism or embrace the truth of it's racist nature.

Click to expand...

Wait!? What? Say what?
Are you talking about how democrats in the south were the once being oppressive?

TheDemSocialist said:

Wait!? What? Say what?
Are you talking about how democrats in the south were the once being oppressive?

Click to expand...

...and how they, Democrats, who composed the major majority of southern politicians at the time, actively worked against everything Dr. King fought for.

I find it truly ironic that Blacks flock to the Democrat party today...a sort of cultural Stockholm Syndrome, where the liberal left have perfected a sophisticated form of slavery. The Left has simply traded the whip for the entitlement, and in so doing retain more control over Blacks and destroy more Black families then ever before.

TurtleDude said:

wrong, the fact that you pay state taxes IN NO WAY relieves you of your duties to pay federal taxes. You seem to forget that citizenship comes with duties and paying for that citizenship is one of them. Your claims about my position are completely dishonest

Click to expand...

And just who is claiming that state taxes relieve you of any duty you may have to pay any other taxes that are due? That is a strawman that has no basis in fact.

What claims about your position are dishonest? Lay it out for us Turtle. I suspect you throw that out as some sort of attempt to save face after many posts in the last week have exposed your position on taxes to be nothing more than a desire for you to get a tax cut. People are taking notice

from lpast

Hay if you read turtledudes posts consistently he is all over the place...one day hes for this one days hes for that....the only thing he is for is that he should pay less taxs than anyone else...umm just because he is him....FAIL...and thank the good lord the middleclass and poor outvote the handful of rich that have it all.

Click to expand...

and so this is your reply.

I laid it out quite clearly in a series of long posts in which I used YOUR OWN WORDS to indict you. YOUR OWN WORDS.

Again, first you took the position that taxation must be based on the amount of government services one used. We even had an entire thread for that purpose. Of course, that plan would have given you a tax cut.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/104349-taxation-retail-shopping-model.html

Turtle makes it very clear what his ultimate idea of a system of taxation would be:

ECONOMICS
Does Anyone Actually Think........ Deficit/Debt
18 #175 6/9/11

My definitions of fair-which reject the From each according to their ability

THE FAIREST

You pay for what you use

just like every other area of human interaction

Click to expand...

That is clear and straight forward and unambiguous. The FAIREST tax system he advocates is one in which "you pay for what you use".

He makes this clear again in this post using much the same words:



ECONOMICS
The Truth About Who Can Afford To Pay More Taxes
p. 18 #172 1/21/11

I want people to pay for what they use so when they demand more it costs them more

Click to expand...

=================================

Again, his idea of taxation if for people to "pay for what they use".

Yet again, in another discussion of taxation he expresses the same idea

ECONOMICS
Constant References to Billionaires
23 #228 6/23/11

fair would be everyone paying the same tax rate or people paying for what they use

Click to expand...

===================================

Here he looks back fondly on the ideal he believes once existed in which people paid for what they used in government services

ECONOMICS
Brief History of the Bush tax Cuts
25 #243 6/2/11

your obsession is that you like the current system and think that it cannot be changed.

and it once was different. people once paid for what they used

Click to expand...

=====================================

And once more into the breach

ECONOMICS
Tax Increase On the Table
4 #37 4/14/11

I know how the tax system works and why its ruining this country.

and yes, people should pay for what they use rather than voting themselves the wealth of others

Click to expand...

============================================

Here he says that the "standard" used in taxation should be the "value recieved" which is another way of saying what government services you consume

GENERAL POLITICAL DISCUSSION
Flat Tax
7 #66 7/4/11

Given I reject the From each according to their ability argument and note that value received should be the standard, and a flat tax prevents the many from jacking my taxes up what other argument do you have other than you want to keep more of your next dollar than I get to keep

Click to expand...

Then, you abandoned not only the plan itself, but you abandoned the principle behind it. Your completely trashed and flushed the idea of connecting taxation to how much consumes in government services in favor of a per capita levy on all persons based on government spending. Your impassioned plea to connect taxation to how much one consumes in government services was trashed and flushed and as gone with the wind. You did a 180 and completely embraced a principle that was opposite of your first. Of course, this new scheme also gave you a personal tax cut.

Then you trashed and flushed the per capita idea in favor of a consumption tax in which the entire idea of how much one consumed or even a per capita levy on it was trashed and flushed altogether in favor of a tax based on consumption.

I have always said a consumption tax is the most desirable practical tax.

Click to expand...

I guess , to you, the meaning of the word ALWAYS is interchangeable with "of the moment and what I now have retreated to"?

Of course, you would get a tax cut in that scheme also.

Three different ideas, all very different, some 180 degrees opposite the other, all based on very very different principles.

Or are they?

The one "principle" (if one can call selfishness a principle) in all three is that you get a tax cut.

Now that is the most honest presentation of your taxation positions there is and are completely supported by your own words. If you have a problem with that, state it clearly and I will speak to it.

TurtleDude said:

your silly efforts to attack me because I am an attorney with idiotic and unsupported claims about all attorneys is really amusing. I have always said there are too many attorneys-especially those who support more government and more income redistribution. ie the ones that make up the core of your party. NOT MINE. Three of Our last Four candidates for President were NOT Lawyers. Every candidate you have had since Carter was other than law school flunk out Al Gore. Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton, Kerry and Obama-all attorneys.

Click to expand...

No one is attacking you personally...lawyers in general are bottomfeeding bloodsuckers and every poll ever conducted on it the majority agrees...its not the attorneys that support more govt...its the blood suckers, the class action suit for anything including if your icecream melted lawyers...that bleed business and individuals for personal gain...come to florida spend one week watching the never ending ads trying to suck people into suing companies for every drug ever made, you still have them milking the mesothelioma ...so stop the whining about the legal profession, its sleezy period...CD is predicated on lies...its not a personal attack on YOU...everything isnt about YOU lol...its about lawyers sleezers in general...IMHO and im "ENTITLED" to my opinion lawyers are the main cause of the countries problems... so stop the victim thing please

Jerry said:

The Left has a long, very well documented history of racism, even before they stood with fire-hose in hand to oppose the enforcement of Board v Brown; KKK ties are hard to get rid of. Modern Liberal policies destroy the family, especially the Black family. Even Planned Parenthood, the priests who maintain the sacred alter of abortion all Liberals mush pay homage to, was founded for the expressed purpose of using eugenics to harm Blacks.

The only way to embrace Liberalism and deny racism is to admit ignorance, learn, then denounce Liberalism or embrace the truth of it's racist nature.

Click to expand...

I don't believe EVERY liberal (which encompasses a rather wide spectrum of beliefs-from gay rights activists, to pro choice advocates, to the typical reactionary statist parasites we see on this board, to utopian pillow headed idealists) supports racism and more than a few welfare-socialists I have met actually oppose affirmative action which is clearly institutionalized racism. But there is no doubt that many "liberal" programs are infected by the racism of low expectations etc.

haymarket said:

And just who is claiming that state taxes relieve you of any duty you may have to pay any other taxes that are due? That is a strawman that has no basis in fact.

What claims about your position are dishonest? Lay it out for us Turtle. I suspect you throw that out as some sort of attempt to save face after many posts in the last week have exposed your position on taxes to be nothing more than a desire for you to get a tax cut. People are taking notice

from lpast


and so this is your reply.

I laid it out quite clearly in a series of long posts in which I used YOUR OWN WORDS to indict you. YOUR OWN WORDS.

Again, first you took the position that taxation must be based on the amount of government services one used. We even had an entire thread for that purpose. Of course, that plan would have given you a tax cut.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/104349-taxation-retail-shopping-model.html

Turtle makes it very clear what his ultimate idea of a system of taxation would be:

ECONOMICS
Does Anyone Actually Think........ Deficit/Debt
18 #175 6/9/11



That is clear and straight forward and unambiguous. The FAIREST tax system he advocates is one in which "you pay for what you use".

He makes this clear again in this post using much the same words:



ECONOMICS
The Truth About Who Can Afford To Pay More Taxes
p. 18 #172 1/21/11


=================================

Again, his idea of taxation if for people to "pay for what they use".

Yet again, in another discussion of taxation he expresses the same idea

ECONOMICS
Constant References to Billionaires
23 #228 6/23/11


===================================

Here he looks back fondly on the ideal he believes once existed in which people paid for what they used in government services

ECONOMICS
Brief History of the Bush tax Cuts
25 #243 6/2/11


=====================================

And once more into the breach

ECONOMICS
Tax Increase On the Table
4 #37 4/14/11


============================================

Here he says that the "standard" used in taxation should be the "value recieved" which is another way of saying what government services you consume

GENERAL POLITICAL DISCUSSION
Flat Tax
7 #66 7/4/11




Then, you abandoned not only the plan itself, but you abandoned the principle behind it. Your completely trashed and flushed the idea of connecting taxation to how much consumes in government services in favor of a per capita levy on all persons based on government spending. Your impassioned plea to connect taxation to how much one consumes in government services was trashed and flushed and as gone with the wind. You did a 180 and completely embraced a principle that was opposite of your first. Of course, this new scheme also gave you a personal tax cut.

Then you trashed and flushed the per capita idea in favor of a consumption tax in which the entire idea of how much one consumed or even a per capita levy on it was trashed and flushed altogether in favor of a tax based on consumption.



I guess , to you, the meaning of the word ALWAYS is interchangeable with "of the moment and what I now have retreated to"?

Of course, you would get a tax cut in that scheme also.

Three different ideas, all very different, some 180 degrees opposite the other, all based on very very different principles.

Or are they?

The one "principle" (if one can call selfishness a principle) in all three is that you get a tax cut.

Now that is the most honest presentation of your taxation positions there is and are completely supported by your own words. If you have a problem with that, state it clearly and I will speak to it.

Click to expand...

why filibuster this thread with such long winded distortions. You constantly have whined that those who pay NO FEDERAL income tax pay state taxes and that somehow cuts against the argument that those who vote to raise income taxes on others don't pay that tax

lpast said:

No one is attacking you personally...lawyers in general are bottomfeeding bloodsuckers and every poll ever conducted on it the majority agrees...its not the attorneys that support more govt...its the blood suckers, the class action suit for anything including if your icecream melted lawyers...that bleed business and individuals for personal gain...come to florida spend one week watching the never ending ads trying to suck people into suing companies for every drug ever made, you still have them milking the mesothelioma ...so stop the whining about the legal profession, its sleezy period...CD is predicated on lies...its not a personal attack on YOU...everything isnt about YOU lol...its about lawyers sleezers in general...IMHO and im "ENTITLED" to my opinion lawyers are the main cause of the countries problems... so stop the victim thing please

Click to expand...

your idiotic stereotypes are just that and yes, you started your infantile jihad against attorneys as a pathetic attempt to attack me personally.

TurtleDude said:

your idiotic stereotypes are just that and yes, you started your infantile jihad against attorneys as a pathetic attempt to attack me personally.

Click to expand...

No your attacking me PERSONALY LOL....I dont take offense everytime someone posts a HATE COPS thread...so stop being infantile and self centered and please dont use this as an opportunity to tell everyone all about yourself...we know turtle..we know we know lol

TurtleDude said:

Oh that is up there but its no worse than those who claim the rich stole wealth from others or anyone who opposes affirmative action is racist. all are equally silly

Click to expand...

The difference is, those class warfare knobs post that every day for months... ignorance on a repetitive scale gets people numb to it's stupidity until it's expected stupidity.

lpast said:

No your attacking me PERSONALY LOL....I dont take offense everytime someone posts a HATE COPS thread...so stop being infantile and self centered and please dont use this as an opportunity to tell everyone all about yourself...we know turtle..we know we know lol

Click to expand...

so tell us Ipast-why did you start your juvenile attack on attorneys as a RESPONSE to my posts?

TurtleDude said:

so tell us Ipast-why did you start your juvenile attack on attorneys as a RESPONSE to my posts?

Click to expand...

Maybe the purpose was this?

TurtleDude said:

why filibuster this thread with such long winded distortions. You constantly have whined that those who pay NO FEDERAL income tax pay state taxes and that somehow cuts against the argument that those who vote to raise income taxes on others don't pay that tax

Click to expand...

Your own words are "long winded distortions"?

Your own views given back to you on a silver platter are "long winded distortions"?

Your own positions on tax issues are "long winded distortions"?

Your own statements of your own principles on taxation are "long winded distortions"?

Your own abandonment and reversals of those principles on taxation are "long winded distortions"?

That is an amazing charge Turtle. I realize you eschew evidence and loathe its uses preferring instead pontifications and belief system statements. But when you accuse me of distorting your positions on taxation it is right and proper to present that position in your own words. I realize you may take offense at anyone employing such an underhanded tactics actually reproducing your own words and yoru owns positions but that is right and proper in debate.

dp - sorry

lpast said:

Exactly I have no problem whatsoever with him wanting a tax cut or feeling he pays to much taxs...Im sick of hearing how many millions he pays and that everyone that has to take anything from the govt is a lazy slouch parasite stealing from him...hes obviously hasnt seen the real world out there other than his neighborhood and his office. You dont get real life experience sitting in a lecture hall learning how to overbill.

Click to expand...

"The rich are always going to say that, you know, just give us more money and we'll go out and spend more and then it will all trickle down to the rest of you," Warren Buffett, the world's third wealthiest person, recently told ABC News' Christiane Amanpour"

"Republicans would rather not have a debate about whether CEOs of bailed out financial firms, hedge fund managers, or energy company executives can afford paying taxes at the top tax brackets during the Clinton years. So they focus their sound bites on the revered, but mostly misunderstood, small business sector."

"According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, extension of high income tax cuts would do little to help the overwhelming majority of small businesses. Businessweek reported that the Congressional Research Service analysis found that "Small businesses with actual workers would pay only about 12 percent of the higher taxes." Furthermore, small business employment rose by an annual average of 2.3 percent -- or 756,000 jobs -- during the 1990's when top tax rates were at the levels they'll return to if the cuts expire. By contrast, between 2001 and 2006 -- after the Bush cuts took effect -- small business employment rose at only 1 percent annually -- or 367,000 jobs."

"But they are simply recycling the same "cry wolf" claims they've used whenever anyone proposes to raise taxes. They did it in 1982 when Ronald Reagan decided to address the swelling deficit, and again in the 1993 battle over Clinton's budget. Their dire warnings weren't true then and they aren't true now."

Will Higher Taxes on the Rich Kill Jobs? | Cry Wolf Project

"The rich are always going to say that, you know, just give us more money and we'll go out and spend more and then it will all trickle down to the rest of you," Warren Buffett, the world's third wealthiest person, recently told ABC News' Christiane Amanpour"

Click to expand...

Not taxing someone is giving them money? Or did the 'cry wolf project' cheat with context.

TurtleDude said:

I don't believe EVERY liberal (which encompasses a rather wide spectrum of beliefs-from gay rights activists, to pro choice advocates, to the typical reactionary statist parasites we see on this board, to utopian pillow headed idealists) supports racism and more than a few welfare-socialists I have met actually oppose affirmative action which is clearly institutionalized racism. But there is no doubt that many "liberal" programs are infected by the racism of low expectations etc.

Click to expand...

I'm sure there's a few KKK members who don't hate other races, either.

But how you feel doesn't define you.

Your actions define you.

Liberal left policies are based on race and harm based on race: that's racism.

One doesn't have to foam at the mouth and burn crosses to be a racist. A shaved head and red suspenders are not required. One only needs to support policies which undermine a race. A racist could be an otherwise perfectly calm, civil and polite individual.

Still a racist non-the less.

Jerry said:

I'm sure there's a few KKK members who don't hate other races, either.

But how you feel doesn't define you.

Your actions define you.

Liberal left policies are based on race and harm based on race: that's racism.

One doesn't have to foam at the mouth and burn crosses to be a racist. A shaved head and red suspenders are not required. One only needs to support policies which undermine a race. A racist could be an otherwise perfectly calm, civil and polite individual.

Still a racist non-the less.

Click to expand...

I know several gays who only support the dems because of gay marriage. true, by voting for dems they support the racist policies you have detailed. But I have a hard time calling them racists when they also oppose affirmative action, welfare handouts and other racist policies even though being single issue voters they often end up voting for supporters of racist policies

Jerry said:

I'm sure there's a few KKK members who don't hate other races, either.

But how you feel doesn't define you.

Your actions define you.

Liberal left policies are based on race and harm based on race: that's racism.

One doesn't have to foam at the mouth and burn crosses to be a racist. A shaved head and red suspenders are not required. One only needs to support policies which undermine a race. A racist could be an otherwise perfectly calm, civil and polite individual.

Still a racist non-the less.

Click to expand...

I strongly suspect from your posts that you would not know actual racism if it bit you in the posterior and then gave you a photo of it.

haymarket said:

I strongly suspect from your posts that you would not know actual racism if it bit you in the posterior and then gave you a photo of it.

Click to expand...

actually those who work the most for racist institutions are often the most vehement in denouncing racism and labeling their opponents "racists"

TurtleDude said:

so tell us Ipast-why did you start your juvenile attack on attorneys as a RESPONSE to my posts?

Click to expand...

Nooooo originally it was because you of course as you always do were tooting your horn about being an ivy league lawyer and in the same post doing your usual juvenile whining about the peasants robbing you...and in other posts your usual juvenile whining that anyone on any kind of entitlement social security medicare, medicaid etc shouldnt be allowed to vote because it was a conflict of interest...I merely pointed out to you that the since most politicians are lawyers that it was a conflict of interest for lawyers to be voting ...I hope that explains it and I hope its sufficient because thats all your getting...lol
Feel like youve won something ? grin

Ockham said:

The difference is, those class warfare knobs post that every day for months... ignorance on a repetitive scale gets people numb to it's stupidity until it's expected stupidity.

Click to expand...

Turtle needs you Ockham help him...hes not getting his desired result...maybe the two of you putting both your heads together will make one and you guys will be more successful...lol...so far no cigars

Oh and when your going to write a post on stupidity could you please structure it so it could be understood...thanks

lpast said:

Nooooo originally it was because you of course as you always do were tooting your horn about being an ivy league lawyer and in the same post doing your usual juvenile whining about the peasants robbing you...and in other posts your usual juvenile whining that anyone on any kind of entitlement social security medicare, medicaid etc shouldnt be allowed to vote because it was a conflict of interest...I merely pointed out to you that the since most politicians are lawyers that it was a conflict of interest for lawyers to be voting ...I hope that explains it and I hope its sufficient because thats all your getting...lol
Feel like youve won something ? grin

Click to expand...

so your rants about attorneys was a personal attack. thanks for conceding what we already knew yet you denied that a while back.

lpast said:

Turtle needs you Ockham help him...hes not getting his desired result...maybe the two of you putting both your heads together will make one and you guys will be more successful...lol...so far no cigars

Click to expand...

why are you cluttering up this thread with silliness? we get the fact that you feel that those who are tired of being taxed too much are a threat to your lifestyle.

TurtleDude said:

so your rants about attorneys was a personal attack. thanks for conceding what we already knew yet you denied that a while back.

Click to expand...

Absolutely not...you were attacking me or rather trying to lol...you can only attack someone who CARES..grin..

TurtleDude said:

why are you cluttering up this thread with silliness? we get the fact that you feel that those who are tired of being taxed too much are a threat to your lifestyle.

Click to expand...

The last several posts if I may be so bold to inform you have been your silliness cluttering up the thread LOL but you incapable of realizing that or admitting it...actually your incessant juvenile whining about paying too much taxs isnt because you want everyone to believe you pay to much in taxs...its because you want everyone to know your a rich ivy league lawyer...well you should be proud you pay that much in taxs it gives you the opportunity to boast in most everyone of your threads about how much you have...be happy turtle..lol...Im sure that everyone who reads your posts indicating who and what you are and how much you have...go away admiring you immensely.....damn you sure have impressed me a few hundred times in the 5 months ive been here...you even have an aspiring groupie in the thread...grin