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 Yesterday, 04:52 PM
 
7,115 posts, read 1,531,920 times
Reputation: 17563

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rebeldor View Post
.

Most firefighters are volunteers.

.
Wow -- I honestly didn't know that, so thanks for educating me about that!

https://www.wired.com/2015/01/course...ers-tax-break/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 05:13 PM
 
5,147 posts, read 5,118,389 times
Reputation: 6375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grlzrl View Post
Wow, you are on scary dude.

Nevertheless, I will bite. 'Rightwingers' don't believe that poor people's money should 'flow to the top'. That isn't even possible. It sounds idiotic to even say it. The fact is, 45 percent of the people in this country pay zero in federal income taxes. I promise you, that's not people on the top.

Politicians tell you that you are being taken advantage of to buy your votes by promising
you free stuff.

Here's the perfect example:

In Illinois, the state employees get huge pensions. Illinois and Chicago are broke as a result of it. They already increased taxes on higher earners 100% and they are trying to get an amendment to the Constitution to raise them another 70% but only on the higher earners. They need the voters to pass the amendment. How are they doing it? By promising to cut the taxes on lower earners by a tiny amount. OR, if you don't vote for that, we will raise everyone's taxes. It's classic class warfare. The wealthy pay a fortune in Illinois already.

There is no way that people are taking from poor (who don't have it) and giving it to the rich. It's the other way around.
Human parasitic systems evolve, become more abstract and impersonal. But basics remain the same. The rich must find a way to parasitize on life and health of the poor without making sacrifices of their own. Money is an abstraction. Toiling poor sacrificing their time, life and health for money give the money its value. Universal wage slavery is still a must, except that surplus population is not locked in workhouses, but as technology develops the mind of a rightwinger sidekick for the rich is buzzing with new ideas for surplus extermination/utilization. Why do you object parasitism of public unions if they just emulate our rich overlords, tweaking the government system to redirect money flow is an ancient wealth building tool, it bothers you not, but as soon as it is being used to throw a few crumbles to the underlings you are bursting with anger.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:51 PM
 
67,002 posts, read 30,697,252 times
Reputation: 8763
Quote:
Originally Posted by katharsis View Post
But what if someone CAN'T pay any income taxes because they are unable to earn a paycheck? Are you saying they shouldn't be allowed to have police services, have their children educated, etc.?
Those are local services. They're not funded by the federal income tax.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 12:13 AM
 
Location: Las Vegas & San Diego
329 posts, read 55,204 times
Reputation: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
LOL!!!

We need a very big jail. The majority of Americans pay 0% federal income taxes.
Not the majority - it is only 48% that pay no federal tax - LOL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 12:56 AM
 
Location: Las Vegas & San Diego
329 posts, read 55,204 times
Reputation: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by somebodynew View Post
The truth is that the "more" that is being suggested is above some huge amount of yearly income. The further truth is these so-called free things are good for a lot of things, including the economy. Like it or not, we are in a global economy. If we want to compete in the global economy, we have to such a lot less than we do.
The truth is this would not be above some huge amount - Bernie's plan calls for 4 percent income-based premium paid by households. Point to ANY study or independent analysis that forgiving student loans would help us in the global economy. Quit trying to sell it by saying it is just taking someone rich's money - it helps you but not them.

Someone that is NOT YOU earned it - quit trying to spend it for them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 01:35 AM
 
Location: Las Vegas & San Diego
329 posts, read 55,204 times
Reputation: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by katharsis View Post
But, to ask my question again (albeit in a different way) -- what if people cannot afford to buy the things that they need and are now provided by taxes, and they are without relatives who are able to help them? Are you willing to have them literally die in the street, starving and homeless? To just name one example, have you heard of the Irish potato famine? There was almost no government or private aid, and approximately one million people died.

Yes, charities can help the poor a little, but I don't think they can take over what the federal government has provided for the last 75 or so years. (And, yes, there are many factors involved in the millions of subsidy-dependent people.)

Honestly, reading what some posters write, I am reminded of the following quote from A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens: "Those who are badly off must go there." "Many can't go there; and many would rather die." "If they would rather die," said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."
Are people "literally dying" on the streets because they have college debt or no free Obama phone. Give me a break.

"Need" is often misused in place of "want" - many of these things that taxes paid for are not needs. I have seen those on assistance buy stupid stuff with food stamps because it cost them nothing - it has no value because it did not have to be worked for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 01:42 AM
 
8,007 posts, read 3,529,254 times
Reputation: 11274
They make more thus they should pay more. Simple. Make it fair.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:10 AM
 
Location: *
8,171 posts, read 2,469,652 times
Reputation: 2257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tominftl View Post
They make more thus they should pay more. Simple. Make it fair.
You too are a fan of Adam Smith:

"The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities.

― Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 06:21 AM
 
7,115 posts, read 1,531,920 times
Reputation: 17563
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddeemo View Post
Are people "literally dying" on the streets because they have college debt or no free Obama phone. Give me a break.

"Need" is often misused in place of "want" - many of these things that taxes paid for are not needs. I have seen those on assistance buy stupid stuff with food stamps because it cost them nothing - it has no value because it did not have to be worked for.
Give ME a break. I didn't say that they were dying on the street -- I asked if that is something that people would like to see happen to the poor if given a choice between that or continuing to subsidize them with one's own money in the form of taxes. In short, if you are given a choice between forking over, say, an extra thousand a year in taxes vs. having someone go without food and starving to death (which, granted, is not very likely but it could happen, which is why I brought up the Irish Potato Famine), which would you choose?

And let me be clear. I completely agree with your second paragraph, and I am very much against giving adults who CAN work but refuse to do so any kind of freebies for longer than it would take for them to find a job if they actually tried to find one. I don't think that describes the majority of the poor, but I think that is true for some. I personally know two people now -- I have known more than that in the past -- who can work but would rather live off the taxpayers and/or steal or deal drugs to get by; and I confess that I honestly wouldn't care at all if I heard that they just dropped dead. However, if someone asked me to actually murder them, I couldn't go that far, unless it was a choice of either they die or one of my loved ones do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 06:23 AM
 
30,205 posts, read 16,653,460 times
Reputation: 14024
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tominftl View Post
They make more thus they should pay more. Simple. Make it fair.
If only robbery could be made fair or moral by doing it on a sliding scale.
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

Quick Reply
Message:


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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top