Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 02-06-2015, 04:25 PM
 
1,442 posts, read 1,341,721 times
Reputation: 1597

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
Ah Petch, its a pathetic argument. Apparently you want others to pay your share. Im not surprised.
Deflection much? No, she doesn't want others to pay her share at all. She just wants to pay her fair share and others pay their fair share. She, nor I, feel that we should have to pay more than our fair share when millions pay little or nothing at all. Same can be said for the ACA crap. Our premiums and deductibles would be astronomical, not because we are in poor health but because our bank accounts are healthy. They want us to pay more in order to offset those who pay in little or nothing for the SAME service. How is that even remotely considered "fair". You have previously said you didn't mind paying more so when did you send that check for more in?

And if Obama has his way, the same would hold true for our kids college educations. We have the means and where with all to save for our kids college through our college fund investments. He wants to offer FREE college to folks and guess how that will be paid for? You got it, he wants to TAX our investments for our kids in order to fund his so called free college for others. Somebody, PLEASE tell me how that is ok?

Last edited by CLR210; 02-06-2015 at 04:36 PM..

 
Old 02-06-2015, 04:33 PM
 
3,792 posts, read 2,386,010 times
Reputation: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by CRenaud View Post
Deflection much? No, she doesn't want others to pay her share at all. She just wants to pay her fair share and others pay their fair share. She, nor I, feel that we should have to pay more than our fair share when millions pay little or nothing at all. Same can be said for the ACA crap. Our deductibles would be astronomical, not because we are in poor health but because our bank accounts are healthy. They want us to pay more in order to offset those who pay in little or nothing for the SAME service. How is that even remotely considered "fair". You have previously said you didn't mind paying more so when did you send that check for more in?
And I just want the top to pay the inflation tax. Not the bottom.
 
Old 02-06-2015, 04:42 PM
 
1,442 posts, read 1,341,721 times
Reputation: 1597
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianEcon View Post
And I just want the top to pay the inflation tax. Not the bottom.
Why should only the top pay the inflation tax? Did the top cause the inflation all by themselves?
 
Old 02-06-2015, 04:47 PM
 
1,442 posts, read 1,341,721 times
Reputation: 1597
Folks need to wake up. Those who have worked hard and made a good living for themselves are getting pretty tired of getting the short end of the stick and being almost criminalized because it. Not saying others don't work hard but they aren't catching near the crap as those who have done above average for themselves. I'm personally looking for ways to take myself "off the grid" and taking all of my HARD EARNED assets with me before I lose it because our government wants to rob Peter to pay Paul.
 
Old 02-06-2015, 04:55 PM
 
3,792 posts, read 2,386,010 times
Reputation: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by CRenaud View Post
Why should only the top pay the inflation tax?
'cause the top is strong. tax the strong don't tax the weak.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CRenaud View Post
Did the top cause the inflation all by themselves?
No but from about 1970 on they have benefited the most from it. And the bottom has gotten hurt by it.

Why should we give the top a free ride? Give the bottom a free ride with inflation and if you want off of the bottom then you have to work for it.
 
Old 02-06-2015, 05:24 PM
 
1,442 posts, read 1,341,721 times
Reputation: 1597
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianEcon View Post
'cause the top is strong. tax the strong don't tax the weak.No but from about 1970 on they have benefited the most from it. And the bottom has gotten hurt by it.

Why should we give the top a free ride? Give the bottom a free ride with inflation and if you want off of the bottom then you have to work for it.
The top has had a "free" ride, really??? And why would the bottom WANT to work themselves out of a free ride?
 
Old 02-06-2015, 05:27 PM
 
3,792 posts, read 2,386,010 times
Reputation: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by CRenaud View Post
The top has had a "free" ride, really??? And why would the bottom WANT to work themselves out of a free ride?
To get a girlfriend? More money is better.
 
Old 02-06-2015, 05:39 PM
 
34,279 posts, read 19,375,883 times
Reputation: 17261
Quote:
Originally Posted by CRenaud View Post
The top has had a "free" ride, really??? And why would the bottom WANT to work themselves out of a free ride?
Feel free to experience that free ride. Its just sOOO AWESOME.

I remember the days...of not having enough to eat always, worrying about rent, having to put down a pet rather then take it to a vet. Living with dental work because no one wants to work on your teeth for what the poor people can get for insurance.
 
Old 02-06-2015, 06:46 PM
 
1,442 posts, read 1,341,721 times
Reputation: 1597
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
Feel free to experience that free ride. Its just sOOO AWESOME.

I remember the days...of not having enough to eat always, worrying about rent, having to put down a pet rather then take it to a vet. Living with dental work because no one wants to work on your teeth for what the poor people can get for insurance.
Yup, I remember those days very well, your point?
 
Old 02-07-2015, 12:45 AM
 
Location: Midwest City, Oklahoma
14,848 posts, read 8,210,859 times
Reputation: 4590
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
That's work. He had to research the auctions, go to them, bid successfully against others, etc. There's also paperwork that needs to be completed and filed after such auctions. That's all work. It's not effortless.

You are missing my point. I'm not overly concerned about work, especially if the work is artificial. I'm focused on real wealth and its creation.


What I define as wealth, are those activities which create something of "real value".


Imagine it like this. Lets pretend there were undeveloped islands. How would someone go about "building wealth" on these islands? As a general rule, it would be about the "improvement of land" and the "creation of resources".


For instance, building a house, or clearing rocks to plant fields of crops, building storehouses to hold food, making fishing poles, or making a boat, or a dock, or even the creation of art. To me, wealth is about the creation of things of "real value". Things which improve the human condition.


Someone who buys a house at auction for $40,000, doesn't improve it, then sells it for $60,000. Is he creating wealth? What value is he actually creating? What benefit is there to society as a result of him being able to rip someone else off for an extra $20k?


As I said, I played a video game where people would buy items cheap and mark them up. Basically, there might be an item that normally sells for 500 gold, and someone who maybe was a new player or was otherwise unfamiliar with auction house prices, lists the item for a mere 100 gold.

Someone buys that item almost instantly and then immediately re-lists it for 500 gold, turning a 400 gold profit.


In your version of the world, this kind of activity is perfectly acceptable. You almost seem to think this kind of behavior is even a social good, something to be praised. You seem to be saying that the man who was able to buy the item for such a low price is "smart", that he earned the extra 400 gold with his intelligence and ingenuity. While the guy who sold the item for only 100 gold must be an idiot, and basically deserves nothing.


This is fundamentally how most of our economy works. The vast majority of the money created in our society, is derived from "speculation". Which is merely the purchasing of something for less than what its worth, and then selling it for a profit. Even worse, much of the money used to finance this speculation, comes from "loans from money created out of thin-air by the Federal Reserve".


The question becomes, is the making of money through this kind of speculation a good thing or a bad thing? This is where ethics comes into play.


So lets go back to my examples really quickly. Lets pretend that you played the video game with your brother, and he found the item that was worth 500 gold, and you knew it was worth 500 gold. But then you offered him 100 gold for the item without informing him the item was worth more. He accepts the 100 gold, and then you turn around and sell the item for 500 gold.

Lets pretend that he then learns that you sold the item for 500 gold. Would he be upset about it? Would it be "morally right" for you to buy something from your brother at such a low price for your own profit?


For that matter, would you buy a house for $40,000, and then turn around and sell it to your brother for $60,000 without improving it in any way? Basically, is it morally right to exploit your own brother for your own gain?

Why might it be morally wrong to exploit your brother, but not morally wrong to exploit a stranger? Isn't it true that the only reason people are able to speculate and exploit within our system, is because our system is so impersonal? That we live in a system of strangers, all of them whose primary goal is merely to take whatever they can get, regardless of who pays, or who suffers.


Just because what we have is what we have, doesn't mean it is either natural or good. Just because something is legally sanctioned, doesn't make it right.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyzi9GNZFMU
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.


Closed Thread


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 > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:03 PM.

© 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