• 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!

Should we eliminate taxes that tax you for the right to own property?

Should we eliminate taxes that tax you for the right to own property?

  • Total voters
    31
iliveonramen said:
I can agree with that to a certain extent. Sure consistency is important. Why are they shutting down the rigs? It's not like oil isn't profitable.
Click to expand...
They want to know the results of the election, and are apprehensive about spending until they know the results, so they know what drilling programs they are going to use for the remaider of the year and next year.
 
Federalist said:
I'm sorry you are so ignorant regarding economics, but that is your problem not my problem.

Since your ignorance causes you to be uncomfortable with my use of the economic term "public good", I will revise my original statement and we can move on:

"I would definitely agree with changing things in my own state to reduce the cost of state government. Since schooling is non-rivalrous and non-excludable and hence is not subject to market failure, I would certainly get behind the idea of education being provided by the private sector, rather than through state socialism."
Click to expand...

Boy are you jumping to conclusions that have no basis in reality!!!!!

What I have told you is that your use of an economic definition is twisted as it presents a so called definition of public good that is radically different than the commonly used one.

And that is why you insist upon using it in the first place.
 
haymarket said:
Boy are you jumping to conclusions that have no basis in reality!!!!!

What I have told you is that your use of an economic definition is twisted as it presents a so called definition of public good that is radically different than the commonly used one.

And that is why you insist upon using it in the first place.
Click to expand...

As I mentioned in my last post, in order accommodate you, I am no longer using the term "public good". I rephrased my initial statement, eliminating the statement that education is a public good, and simply pointing out that education is non-rivalrous and non-excludable.

You're welcome.
 
Does it allow for a reticulation of the berivial cranistan given the Pochlar Inclination in even numbered years? ;)
 
I'm against all taxes, not merely this one. Though I'll concede that they're necessary in the states.
 
I don't know why it is not feasible to tax items bought and sold on a local, state and federal level to eliminate paying taxes on something you supposedly own. You figure a 20% tax on everything split up 3 ways according to what the governments would need for example. I mean really taxing us for the same items yearly is bull****.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom