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.
Why does putting a gun on my head to take my legally earned money to pay for your stuff become moral, just and fair?
So how do we provide services like water treatment, roads and bridges, schools and library,police and fire? If taxes are theft then you tell me how we maintain a modern society without them.
I'm not against it because I believe in a certain level of redistribution. Not totally communistic, but enough to at least get people educated and get them healthcare, which helps society as a whole.
We each have individual liberty. I should not obligated to do anything for "society" against my own free will.
This is a serious question. Considering conservatives are against minimum wage, against redistribution of wealth, against the commons (i.e. publicly funded things like police, schools, fire, etc), against unions, against healthcare.
Conservatives aren't against those things. Your premise is really way off base.
Conservatives strongly SUPPORT redistribution of wealth -- on a voluntary basis within the community, not by force and not from one community to another.
Conservatives strongly SUPPORT public goods. Your perspective on this is so off-the-wall that I can't even provide a further response.
Conservatives strongly SUPPORT healthcare, but forcing some people to pay for others is an entirely different matter. See above.
Conservatives aren't against those things. Your premise is really way off base.
Conservatives strongly SUPPORT redistribution of wealth -- on a voluntary basis within the community, not by force and not from one community to another.
Conservatives strongly SUPPORT public goods. Your perspective on this is so off-the-wall that I can't even provide a further response.
Conservatives strongly SUPPORT healthcare, but forcing some people to pay for others is an entirely different matter. See above.
Except the ideology doesn't work in real life. Sorry but reality > ideology.
So how do we provide services like water treatment, roads and bridges, schools and library,police and fire? If taxes are theft then you tell me how we maintain a modern society without them.
These people who whine about "free stuff" want free stuff for services they use themselves but dont want to pay taxes for it. Thats "theft".
Wrong, a flat tax is reverse Robin Hood. It cripples the working class, and the owner class doesn't then pay enough in for the government to run a balanced budget. But then, you probably knew that and am betting you are a libertarian/Anarcho capitalist
Wrong. European and Scandinavian countries have a flat (or even regressive) tax system. It generates more tax revenue, and they are therefore able to redistribute much more via social programs and services. All explained here:
We each have individual liberty. I should not obligated to do anything for "society" against my own free will.
Then you should move to the boondocks in a cabin without civilization. Voting for puppets of billionaires wont give you more freedom. Just more oligarchy.
So how do we provide services like water treatment, roads and bridges, schools and library,police and fire? If taxes are theft then you tell me how we maintain a modern society without them.
Such a question to some people is futile, they just don't get it...
Some people just don't grasp the respectful nature of what is civil society and the community of mankind. They only think of grasp, hoard, covet and fixate themselves upon self consumption. Something as simple and basic as Taxes, that help support the "common goods of things and services" of which helps society and the people within it; they just can't digest such levels of regard for humanity.
Exactly. They wont pay the same dollar amount so a flat tax is redistribution of wealth. Only privatized user fees on everything is not redistribution of wealth. If you are against redistribution of wealth you need to support no taxes to fund public services. None whatsoever. The poor disabled grandma will of course die, but that is the price to pay for "no redistribution of wealth".
People need to be responsible for their own predicament.
"Poor" grandma can move in with her family, ask for charity and/or use her savings (or did she live beyond her means for most of her life and now expects others to take care of her?).
But instead low income earners get so many handouts it's unbelievable.
The number 1 purchase with food stamps is SODA. FREAKING SODA.
If you can afford soda, you're not poor and you have ZERO reason to have your hand in my pocket.
The people who are the most against the redistribution of wealth are not wealthy, at all.
So you're saying because I'm not making millions I ought to be FOR taking other people's money so I can have some of theirs? To me, THAT is baffling. It's baffling how you think principles should be based on class.
It's all relative. I don't want my wealth or income taken away by the state and given to somebody else's family, just as I don't want someone else's wealth or income taken away by the state and given to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpier015
Even making a 150k a year does not make you wealthy. Heck in DC it barely makes you middle class.
Here in North Texas, in combination with having no kids no health issues and no debt, and being a saver, it means I don't feel the need nor want for any more, and it means I want to keep what I've earned and worked up to and sacrificed and delayed gratification for.
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.