Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-07-2017, 10:34 AM
 
6,089 posts, read 4,965,333 times
Reputation: 5985

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post
Oh for heavens sake: when the right women runs for president she will have every opportunity to be elected and probably will be, but so far we haven't seen her. and it bothers me when I think someone would even consider voting for a person based on their gender, race, sexual orientation or religious beliefs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-07-2017, 10:38 AM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,125 posts, read 107,381,087 times
Reputation: 115942
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliRestoration View Post
If California votes were based on tax payers, the state would be red. In fact, almost the entire country except the Pacific Northwest and the New England area would be red.
Wait, what?
Everyone pays taxes. Ever heard of a little thing called sales tax?
If that somehow "doesn't count", let's see you and the rest of the state get by without it. Repeal the sales tax, so you can claim the poor don't pay taxes, and see what happens.


You know, now that I think about it, that sounds like a great idea. As long as we're giving away more and more tax breaks to the wealthy, let's be fair, and repeal the sales tax, which, as we all know, disproportionately affects the poor. Or let's exempt everyone from it, who receives food stamps and/or welfare, or SSI, so we can deprive them of the vote. When they go to the store, they can show a special ID that certifies them as being "on the dole" in some form, and therefore exempt from sales tax at the cashier stand. The only glitch in the plan, though, is--would they go for it? Would they agree to give up their right to vote in exchange for a tax break? And if giving up the vote is the price to pay for a tax break, why would the rich get to retain their right to vote? They're been benefiting from corporate welfare for ages, so why do they get to mooch AND vote at the same time?


Somebody hasn't thought through all the implications of this moochers-shouldn't-vote thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2017, 10:39 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
77,772 posts, read 104,433,328 times
Reputation: 49248
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliRestoration View Post
I think only tax payers should be allowed to vote on tax measures (bonds/increases/etc). Is that not fair? Why should someone who is a tax negative contributor have any say on what other's do with their money?

The simple fact is the poor and lazy will ALWAYS vote and identify with the political party that promises to redistribute someone else's stuff to themselves.

Although it's backfiring for the poor and lower middle class in California who vote overwhelmingly Democrat. The democrats have run out of money to give away to people hence the massive gas tax increase. I'm ok with the higher gas taxes because they'll hit illegals and welfare queens hardest. Then those perennial Democrat voters will see how their chosen side treats them. People in the upper middle class and higher will barely notice the increased fees.

I could pay 200% tax for gas and not feel a tingle, but your average low wage Democrat? They will be suffering, self induced suffering.
I understand what you are saying about only tax payers voting on tax issues, but I wonder if you have thought about it this way? All of us pay some taxes, sales tax, car tax, tax on our phones, In some states on food. Where would you draw the line?

I have take issue with the poor and lazy will always vote: those who vote, yes, usually vote left, but many of them never bother to vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2017, 10:44 AM
 
6,089 posts, read 4,965,333 times
Reputation: 5985
Quote:
Originally Posted by StanleysOwl View Post
And KazChasey overlooks that StanleysOwl just did "morally, spiritually, and logically counter the point CR made without looking like a Bolshevik". Bolshevik has zip to do with the logic just presented. The "taxpayers," being a minority, cannot account for / equal the productivity and consumption of the masses. Therefore the taxpayer class relies on the low-to-no-tax-payers for their well being. As such, cutting the majority of productive consumers out of the process is grossly inequitable and unwise ... completely from a capitalist position of growth consumerism.
Taxpayers are not a "minority", the IRS breakdown for 2016 is about 50/50 between positive tax contributors and non-contributors nationally. On the state level, California does have more takers than makers (100 makers for every 114 takers). That's still 47/53, so your claim that the taxpaying class is some small minority is false.

Taxpayers do rely on "some" volume of consumption from non-taxpayers but it's not as much as you think. The simple fact is if you took away all the redistributed wealth from the takers and gave it back to the middle or upper class, they would use that money to consume goods and services too. So your argument is pretty weak in that regard.

The truth is, redistributed wealth was meant to be used as a safety net, but the reality is tax takers are using it as a cushion in life. Just look at what happened to SNAP in the State of Georgia when they changed their requirements to include "employment". 80% of SNAP recipients dropped out of the program.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2017, 10:44 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
77,772 posts, read 104,433,328 times
Reputation: 49248
StanleyOwl; you talk about social equality: I hope you understand we are not all equal. and no we do not all have the right to be equal. We work for what we have, we strive to be the best we can, but there will always be those who have more than others, whether it is status, money, personal toys, better health care, more available cash to do what they want. We must accept that and not expect the government to make sure we have the same as everyone else. We live a capitalistic country, that is the way it works.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2017, 10:46 AM
 
911 posts, read 589,317 times
Reputation: 561
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportyandMisty View Post
Yet about half the adult population pays no federal income tax -- they're benefitting from society but they are not paying their share.
"Not paying their share?" First off, subdivide that 50%. Take out the retired, who have already contributed their labor and money to various taxes that support society. Take out the disabled who are not in a position to be equally supportive. Take out students who are adults working toward a productive, contributing future. Then let's look at what percentage is left and where they work at what labors. Those working adults who don't pay income tax include, by the way, a percentage of well-off individuals who can live off the fats of their net-worth, as well.

But, back to those who work and don't hit the income tax brackets. They pay plenty and receive less in return in most cases. They pay a variety of other-than-income taxes. Plus, and not least, poorly compensated labor supports all kinds of industry profitable for the taxpayer class and the nation as a whole.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2017, 10:52 AM
 
6,089 posts, read 4,965,333 times
Reputation: 5985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post

Somebody hasn't thought through all the implications of this moochers-shouldn't-vote thing.
Yes and that somebody is you. You clearly haven't thought it out because you think poor people paying sales tax comes close to what the state redistributes in wealth to fund welfare programs.

Sure they pay sales tax, but how much do they receive in benefits from redistributed wealth?

So the average sales tax is what... 8%?

The California budget for all welfare programs for FY2017 is $29,260,000,000 ($29.26 Billion).

What do tax takers pay out in sales tax? My guess is FAR lower than $29 billion dollars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2017, 10:53 AM
 
6,089 posts, read 4,965,333 times
Reputation: 5985
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post
I understand what you are saying about only tax payers voting on tax issues, but I wonder if you have thought about it this way? All of us pay some taxes, sales tax, car tax, tax on our phones, In some states on food. Where would you draw the line?

I have take issue with the poor and lazy will always vote: those who vote, yes, usually vote left, but many of them never bother to vote.
I draw the line here.

If you vote to redistribute wealth from another class of taxpayer into your own pocket, it's theft. Plain and simple. People are justified to goods and services they have EARNED. That is all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2017, 10:56 AM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,125 posts, read 107,381,087 times
Reputation: 115942
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliRestoration View Post
Yes and that somebody is you. You clearly haven't thought it out because you think poor people paying sales tax comes close to what the state redistributes in wealth to fund welfare programs.
Whoa, whoa! You don't know what I think; don't put words in my mouth. All I was doing is pointing out that your statement that the poor don't pay taxes was inaccurate. That's all. All you have to do is amend your statement for accuracy, and you're free to continue with your diatribe. Or "theory". Or proposal. Whatever you call it. Carry on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2017, 10:58 AM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,125 posts, read 107,381,087 times
Reputation: 115942
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post

I have take issue with the poor and lazy will always vote: those who vote, yes, usually vote left, but many of them never bother to vote.
If you take away the voting cards of the poor, you'll whip the electoral rug out from under Trump. He never would have won without the welfare queens and kings in Appalachia, burned-out Midwestern (former) factory towns, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:24 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top