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.
The question was to stimulate debate over a clear question of ownership. You can't debate a liberal over the "rate" of taxation, as they will never decide what is appropriate, only that no matter what it is, it should be higher.
This isn't a discussion of green eyeshade policy.
This is a discussion of the moral foundation of governance and when you violate morality in governance, tyranny and failure always result.
What? Because you think no "liberal" can decide what % higher taxes should go we should assume they want to take 100%. I'm not following your logic. Also, I don't understand what "eyeshade policy" means? Your last 2 lines don't make any sense either in regards to your question. I think you need to spend a little more time formulating your assumptions. Good luck.
What? Because you think no "liberal" can decide what % higher taxes should go we should assume they want to take 100%. I'm not following your logic. Also, I don't understand what "eyeshade policy" means? Your last 2 lines don't make any sense either in regards to your question. I think you need to spend a little more time formulating your assumptions. Good luck.
What? Because you think no "liberal" can decide what % higher taxes should go we should assume they want to take 100%. I'm not following your logic.
You aren't reading. Obviously.
I never said any such thing. I asked a question, not for the answer, but for the reasoning (the why part), which reveals how people think and their assumptions.
Quote:
Also, I don't understand what "eyeshade policy" means? Your last 2 lines don't make any sense either in regards to your question. I think you need to spend a little more time formulating your assumptions. Good luck.
Green eyeshades were once a common article worn by people who were accountants or actuaries or otherwise did mathematical analysis. They could be counted on to be deeply contentious over minute matters of no import, simply because they were very theoretical in their thinking.
What are you saying then? Spell it out. You clearly had a preconceived notion of what your "Liberals" were going to think. Then, you find that your preconceived notions are not true, you back track. Be direct and to the point. What do you want exactly? Cheers guy...
What are you saying then? Spell it out. You clearly had a preconceived notion of what your "Liberals" were going to think. Then, you find that your preconceived notions are not true, you back track. Be direct and to the point. What do you want exactly? Cheers guy...
Just respond to questions and say what YOU think, instead of attempting to tell me what I think.
What? Because you think no "liberal" can decide what % higher taxes should go we should assume they want to take 100%.
I have never said anything of the sort.
I'm just pointing out that when you ask a liberal what taxes SHOULD be, they will not say "18% of your income". They say "higher on the rich".
And when you ask them if we're taxed enough, the answer is "no".
And when you ask them what the idea percentage of the GDP should be our level of taxation, they have no answer. It's always "more" than what it is now.
I haven't seen a single liberal seriously put this forward. This is the internet, so I have seen some crazy ideas proposed, this included, but in the U.S. anyone who really believed this would be voted out of office faster than their opposition could even challenge them.
Personally, I would not support this because this is a ridiculous, impractical, and rather heartless idea that would solve nothing. Of course, I am sure you still believe the majority of liberals think like this, yet I haven't seen any Democrat propose more than a small tax hike on the wealthy.
Just respond to questions and say what YOU think, instead of attempting to tell me what I think.
OK. I think your question is stupid and I think you are an elementary grade student for asking such a question. You have no understanding of what you are asking. I've skimmed this discussion and poster after poster has told you that you are wrong. Yet, you don't get it. Honestly, I wonder if your parent knows you are still on the computer. Is that honest enough for you? I'm sure you will report me and cry. Go for it. I really do think you are a 12 year old boy that is f'ng around. That is my honest opinion. You asked. You got. Cheers....
I am afraid he is an adult with an intellectual capacity of a 7 years old...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oakformonday
OK. I think your question is stupid and I think you are an elementary grade student for asking such a question. You have no understanding of what you are asking. I've skimmed this discussion and poster after poster has told you that you are wrong. Yet, you don't get it. Honestly, I wonder if your parent knows you are still on the computer. Is that honest enough for you? I'm sure you will report me and cry. Go for it. I really do think you are a 12 year old boy that is f'ng around. That is my honest opinion. You asked. You got. Cheers....
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.
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.
