• 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 The Rich Pay Too Much Federal Income Taxes

Do The Rich Pay Too Much Income Taxes


  • Total voters
    90
If that's true, then I applaud you.



"Ultimate racist hunter"? Where did I say that? Is it really so inconceivable to you that it's easy for a person with many years' experience in a particular way of life to recognize others who have lived that same way of life? Is that really so hard for you to understand?



You really should stop ASSUMING, O5 - I've said many, many times that I do NOT think that most conservatives are racist...but that they DO tend to be more likely to tolerate racists.

Please stop assuming - it doesn't help.

You can't possibly know what people are thinking, not matter what qualifier you think your possess.

What you are actually describing yourself to be is nothing but a bigot. And I don't think you want people to view you as a bigot, and a racist.

So, to borrow your line, please stop assuming, it doesn't help.
 
You can't possibly know what people are thinking, not matter what qualifier you think your possess.

How many children have you raised? Assuming you have, when you were raising them, did you know what their motivations were, and why they thought as they did?

What you are actually describing yourself to be is nothing but a bigot. And I don't think you want people to view you as a bigot, and a racist. So, to borrow your line, please stop assuming, it doesn't help.

OH! Ah...ya...GOT me...pardnuh....

*sigh*
 
How many children have you raised? Assuming you have, when you were raising them, did you know what their motivations were, and why they thought as they did?



OH! Ah...ya...GOT me...pardnuh....

*sigh*

Have I raised children? I am a Grand Father. You are way out of your league here GC.

I think this qualification you use to judge others is a joke. It is what it is.
 
Have I raised children? I am a Grand Father. You are way out of your league here GC.

I think this qualification you use to judge others is a joke. It is what it is.

I'm happy for you...but you didn't answer my question. When you were raising your kids, did you know what was motivating them, why they thought the way they did?
 
I'm happy for you...but you didn't answer my question. When you were raising your kids, did you know what was motivating them, why they thought the way they did?

No. I certainly thought I did. But as they grew up, moved out, went to college, graduated, and pursued their lives, I knew I didn't.

It is for this reason and a mountain of other experiences that forms the basis of my observations regarding your stereotypes and opinions.

What's amazing is this stereotyping is the basis of racism and prejudice, which you claim to have "overcome". It seems clear you haven't.

So be it.
 
No. I certainly thought I did. But as they grew up, moved out, went to college, graduated, and pursued their lives, I knew I didn't.

It is for this reason and a mountain of other experiences that forms the basis of my observations regarding your stereotypes and opinions.

What's amazing is this stereotyping is the basis of racism and prejudice, which you claim to have "overcome". It seems clear you haven't.

So be it.

That's strange...because my son is amazed to this day that I know what he's thinking, or at least why he's thinking that way. And if you were to spend some time among senior military, they'll tell you in no uncertain terms that they have a very good idea what goes through the minds of the junior personnel - they HAVE to in order to know how to lead them effectively. Once you really get into leadership positions, most of your job is knowing your people, knowing what's going through their minds...

...which is why retired military are sought after for teaching positions in the civilian world. Google "Troops to teachers" sometime.

No, guy, it's not me who's stereotyping here. I'm speaking from experience, from having walked a mile in the other person's moccasins. You haven't.
 
That's strange...because my son is amazed to this day that I know what he's thinking, or at least why he's thinking that way. And if you were to spend some time among senior military, they'll tell you in no uncertain terms that they have a very good idea what goes through the minds of the junior personnel - they HAVE to in order to know how to lead them effectively. Once you really get into leadership positions, most of your job is knowing your people, knowing what's going through their minds...

...which is why retired military are sought after for teaching positions in the civilian world. Google "Troops to teachers" sometime.

No, guy, it's not me who's stereotyping here. I'm speaking from experience, from having walked a mile in the other person's moccasins. You haven't.

My, my, you are special aren't you?

:roll:
 
Neither did Martin Luther, though the influence and effect his rabid anti-semitism had on majority-Lutheran Germany in the 1930's would be hard to overstate.

What MLK was getting at is that legally allowing people to discriminate - in the eyes of racists - gives legitimacy to their actions, just as the words of Nietzsche and Martin Luther gave legitimacy to the anti-semites of 1930's Germany.

You have to ask yourself which is more important - to protect someone's "right" to discriminate against others, or to protect someone's freedom from discrimination. You can't have both. You can either protect someone's "right" to discriminate, or you can protect someone's freedom from discrimination.

I'd really like to hear your thoughts on that. And as soon as I figure out how to make a poll, I'm going to put that choice there.

Discrimination is the essence of law. We discriminate all the time: between expensive and cheap, between good and bad, between fast and slow, etc.
 
Discrimination is the essence of law. We discriminate all the time: between expensive and cheap, between good and bad, between fast and slow, etc.

But that does not render legitimacy to discrimination against people for what they were when they were born, does it? And I think you're using the particular definition of 'discrimination' as it refers to 'choice', whereas I'm using the particular definition as refers to 'prejudice'.
 
One major reform we could make in the area of taxes is to get rid of the special inheritance or what some on the right like to call "death taxes". Abolish that distinction and get rid of the laws on it. Simply consider all new money going into a persons pocket according to the same tax schedule regardless of its source.

Do that and suddenly you achieve a bit more economic fairness.

I agree that we should end the capital gains distinction.
 
But that does not render legitimacy to discrimination against people for what they were when they were born, does it? And I think you're using the particular definition of 'discrimination' as it refers to 'choice', whereas I'm using the particular definition as refers to 'prejudice'.

And so your complaint is not with people's choices but with what is in their hearts as they make those choices?:peace
 
It can't be stealing if the power to tax is delegated to our federal Congress.

i should not have to answer the simple basic principle which was laid down the Declaration of Independence. ....since YOU profess to know fundamental law.

our constitution of the founders follows the principles of the DOI.... life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.......happiness is listed in the constitution as [property].

founding principles are, government is created to protect all property, .....with MONEY of many other things being.......... property.

in our constitution of the founders article 1 section 8 which deals with the power to tax STATES, not direct individual citizens, taxes are apportioned by population of the states themselves.

states collect taxes on citizens, by voluntary action....thru TRADE, COMMERCE.

when a person earns money, it becomes his property, subject to the protection of government(s), to use FORCE on a person and take money from him unwillingly, Defies the founding principles of liberty, and the right of property.

as Madison states on the subject of Property 29 Mar. 1792

"In the former sense, a man's land, or merchandize, or money is called his property"......

"Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own"

the 16th amendment to our constitution Defies the founding principles laid out in the DOI, even though the DOI is fundamental law of the u.s....because it uses FORCE, to take from citizens that which........ is their property.
 
Last edited:
i should not have to answer the simple basic principle which was laid down the Declaration of Independence. ....since YOU profess to know fundamental law.

our constitution of the founders follows the principles of the DOI.... life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.......happiness is listed in the constitution as [property].

founding principles are, government is created to protect all property, .....with MONEY of many other things being.......... property.

in our constitution of the founders article 1 section 8 which deals with the power to tax STATES, not direct individual citizens, taxes are apportioned by population of the states themselves.

states collect taxes on citizens, by voluntary action....thru TRADE, COMMERCE.

when a person earns money, it becomes his property, subject to the protection of government(s), to use FORCE on a person and take money from him unwillingly, Defies the founding principles of liberty, and the right of property.

as Madison states on the subject of Property 29 Mar. 1792

"In the former sense, a man's land, or merchandize, or money is called his property"......

"Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own"

the 16th amendment to our constitution Defies the founding principles laid out in the DOI, even though the DOI is fundamental law of the u.s....because it uses FORCE, to take from citizens that which........ is their property.

Unfortunately for you, you are forgetting, Socialism 101.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises,

to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States;

but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
 
Unfortunately for you, you are forgetting, Socialism 101.

article 1 section 8...does not collect taxes directly on the people.........EVEN YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT!!!


........"the people are barred in their collective capacity in American government


federalist 63---The true distinction between these and the American governments, lies in the total exclusion of the people, in their collective capacity, from any share in the latter, and not in the total exclusion of the representatives of the people from the administration of the former.
 
In this area, I am for whatever tax policy Warren Buffet advocates. And.... he says the rich do not pay enough.

And no, Warren Buffet is not a socialist.
 
In this area, I am for whatever tax policy Warren Buffet advocates. And.... he says the rich do not pay enough.

And no, Warren Buffet is not a socialist.

no but he is a pimp and he is dishonest

he claims the tax system is unfair but he uses all his power to avoid paying taxes

he whines that the death tax should be higher yet he has set up his estate so the government gets NOTHING and he profits from the death tax because one of his main sources of income is selling life insurance policies.

so its funny watching a conservative support his class warfare advocacy which basically is against the moderately rich
 
article 1 section 8...does not collect taxes directly on the people.........EVEN YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT!!!


........"the people are barred in their collective capacity in American government


federalist 63---The true distinction between these and the American governments, lies in the total exclusion of the people, in their collective capacity, from any share in the latter, and not in the total exclusion of the representatives of the people from the administration of the former.

Where does it say, except for direct taxation?
 
Where does it say, except for direct taxation?

i believe it was you who claimed he knew law.

if the founders had given the government power to tax the people directly, ...we would not need the 16th amendment

No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.
Article I, Section 9, Clause 4

direct taxes on the people, was not constitutional from the USSC view late 1800's......so progressives pushed for a direct tax via the 16th.
 
i believe it was you who claimed he knew law.

if the founders had given the government power to tax the people directly, ...we would not need the 16th amendment

No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.
Article I, Section 9, Clause 4

direct taxes on the people, was not constitutional from the USSC view late 1800's......so progressives pushed for a direct tax via the 16th.

We didn't need the 16th Amendment, except for ignorance without even appealing to it.

No capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

The power to tax, directly, was available after the first census or enumeration.
 
We didn't need the 16th Amendment, except for ignorance without even appealing to it.



The power to tax, directly, was available after the first census or enumeration.

wrong......direct taxes were place on the people during the civil war. then removed, found to not be constitutional.

progressives push for direct taxes , and got the 16th amendment.

taxes of the founders , were collected from states not the people.

you fail at history and our Constitution..which states no direct tax........income tax is a direct tax.
 
wrong......direct taxes were place on the people during the civil war. then removed, found to not be constitutional.

progressives push for direct taxes , and got the 16th amendment.

taxes of the founders , were collected from states not the people.

you fail at history and our Constitution..which states no direct tax........income tax is a direct tax.

There is no appeal to ignorance.

No capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.
 
Back
Top Bottom