No Representation Without Taxation!

[The Rabbi]

It's very difficult to believe that in today's world, especially in today's America, anyone would equate fair, equal, and just representation with taxation, or the percentage of taxes one pays. Believe it or not, in the United States, there are millions of tax paying citizens without fair, equal, and just representation. Paying a fair share of taxes doesn't buy anyone equal representation in government. Wealth, power, and influence buys legislation and policy. Our government serves the wealthy, the powerful, and the influential, and not John Q. Public. If that were not true, we wouldn't be in the sad shameful state that we're presently in. Another fair question on the subject: Are all taxpayers represented in government?

No, idiot. As usual you miss the point.
Why should people who pay NOTHING but get benefits be allowed a voice in government? They will simply vote themselves more and more benefits because they arent paying the bills.

First, personal attacks are not only childish on these forums, but uncalled for and does nothing to enhance the conversation. Now, I'll answer your question. Not everyone is able or can pay into the system. We have disabled citizens, the elderly, children, mentally challenged, handicapped, disabled vets, the homeless, the poor and less fortunate, and those that can't find employment. There are a variety of reason why everyone can't pay into the system. We are a humane and civil people, therefore we don't just allow people to die on the streets due to starvation or lack of medical attention. We don't intentionally make children live on the streets and eat out of trash cans. We don't forget the elderly just because they're old and can't care for themselves. We don't forget the vets that have served this country. We don't ignore the mentally challenged, or the severely handicapped. We are a humane and civil people. Our government is not in place for the sole benefit of those that can support it, buy into it, or finance it. Our government is in place to equally, fairly, and justly represent "ALL" citizens, every single one of them. Our Constitution does not limit representation to only those that are bless with the means to pay into the system, and support it financially. Do we allow all of those in our prisons to starve to death and do without representation, simply because they can't pay into the system? Should we withhold representation from citizens until they become financially able to pay into the system? So, according to your logic, the elderly, the children, the disabled vets, the mentally challenged, and the poor and homeless deserve absolutely no representation in government. Am I correct? If not, please correct me. Again, calling me an idiot does nothing the enhance or further your points on this subject. Please be adult and civil in these conversations. Thanks.

There is always a reason why someone can't do something. Ask any malingerer and you'll get a litany of crap as to why they can't do something. It's bullshit.
But even so. Let's say some people really can't work at all. Fine. But why should they be able to vote, where they can support politicians who pander to their desires for more?

 

[Sonny Clark]

[

Indeed why should disabled veterans who will cost the country billions of dollars for decades to come be allowed a voice in government. Can you think of one reason?

No, I can't. Can you?
What about all the loafers, layabouts, goldbrickers, fakers, and outright shitheads who contribuite nothing but unwanted children?[/QUOTE]

So your credo is Baiser Nos Troupes. While you're laying about in your hammock of abysmal smugness, you expect America's bravest and most dedicated to
protect your tuckus?[/QUOTE]
FYI - The United States military, both our men and women that serve in the armed forces, protect and serve this nation and her citizens. They are not in place to merely serve those that are able financially to pay into the system and support it with tax dollars. They take an oath to serve and to protect every single American citizen and our allies. How many of our allies pay into the system and support our government financially? We not only protect many of our allies ( and their citizens ), but we protect them in addition to sending them untold $Billions in foreign aid. Yet, every single one of them are either directly, or indirectly represented by our government. From your comments, I gather that you're talking about a small percentage of citizens. Who do we send out to evaluate and to judge each individual receiving some form of government assistance or benefitting from government representation, to see if they indeed merit representation in government? Who do we appoint judge, jury, and to make final determination? Our military represents every single American citizen as they should, no exceptions. Would you like to be the judge, jury, and final say?

 

[LoneLaugher]

It's very difficult to believe that in today's world, especially in today's America, anyone would equate fair, equal, and just representation with taxation, or the percentage of taxes one pays. Believe it or not, in the United States, there are millions of tax paying citizens without fair, equal, and just representation. Paying a fair share of taxes doesn't buy anyone equal representation in government. Wealth, power, and influence buys legislation and policy. Our government serves the wealthy, the powerful, and the influential, and not John Q. Public. If that were not true, we wouldn't be in the sad shameful state that we're presently in. Another fair question on the subject: Are all taxpayers represented in government?

No, idiot. As usual you miss the point.
Why should people who pay NOTHING but get benefits be allowed a voice in government? They will simply vote themselves more and more benefits because they arent paying the bills.

First, personal attacks are not only childish on these forums, but uncalled for and does nothing to enhance the conversation. Now, I'll answer your question. Not everyone is able or can pay into the system. We have disabled citizens, the elderly, children, mentally challenged, handicapped, disabled vets, the homeless, the poor and less fortunate, and those that can't find employment. There are a variety of reason why everyone can't pay into the system. We are a humane and civil people, therefore we don't just allow people to die on the streets due to starvation or lack of medical attention. We don't intentionally make children live on the streets and eat out of trash cans. We don't forget the elderly just because they're old and can't care for themselves. We don't forget the vets that have served this country. We don't ignore the mentally challenged, or the severely handicapped. We are a humane and civil people. Our government is not in place for the sole benefit of those that can support it, buy into it, or finance it. Our government is in place to equally, fairly, and justly represent "ALL" citizens, every single one of them. Our Constitution does not limit representation to only those that are bless with the means to pay into the system, and support it financially. Do we allow all of those in our prisons to starve to death and do without representation, simply because they can't pay into the system? Should we withhold representation from citizens until they become financially able to pay into the system? So, according to your logic, the elderly, the children, the disabled vets, the mentally challenged, and the poor and homeless deserve absolutely no representation in government. Am I correct? If not, please correct me. Again, calling me an idiot does nothing the enhance or further your points on this subject. Please be adult and civil in these conversations. Thanks.

There is always a reason why someone can't do something. Ask any malingerer and you'll get a litany of crap as to why they can't do something. It's bullshit.
But even so. Let's say some people really can't work at all. Fine. But why should they be able to vote, where they can support politicians who pander to their desires for more?

Weeeeeeeeeee! For the millionth time, we hear the primary nutter motivation.

 

[hazlnut]

The CBO reported that the top 40% of income earners paid over 100% of federal taxes last year. The bottom 40% had a negative tax rate--they got back more than they paid in.
What possible rationale can there be for allowing people a voice in government when they pay nothing into it, in fact get stuff from it? Liberals looking for "fairness" can ponder why people getting money from the government are entitled to vote to increase that take at the expense of more productive people.
CBO Top 40 Paid 106.2 of Income Taxes Bottom 40 Paid -9.1 Got Average of 18 950 in Transfers CNS News

Dipshit.

Everyone pays taxes.

Every time you shop, buy gas, eat out, stay at a hotel. You PAID A TAX.

Just because you overpay on your paycheck and then get a FED refund at the end of the year -- YOU STILL PAID TAXES.

You paid into Medicare and Unemployment withholding.

You paid property tax if you own property and all but a few states have state income tax.

EVERYONE pays taxes. Even illegal immigrants.

You want to talk about "GETTING MONEY FROM THE GOVERNMENT" you daft retard, who do you think gets the most money???

Military Spending is the ultimate in Keynesian economics, fucktard.

 

[Sonny Clark]

It's very difficult to believe that in today's world, especially in today's America, anyone would equate fair, equal, and just representation with taxation, or the percentage of taxes one pays. Believe it or not, in the United States, there are millions of tax paying citizens without fair, equal, and just representation. Paying a fair share of taxes doesn't buy anyone equal representation in government. Wealth, power, and influence buys legislation and policy. Our government serves the wealthy, the powerful, and the influential, and not John Q. Public. If that were not true, we wouldn't be in the sad shameful state that we're presently in. Another fair question on the subject: Are all taxpayers represented in government?

No, idiot. As usual you miss the point.
Why should people who pay NOTHING but get benefits be allowed a voice in government? They will simply vote themselves more and more benefits because they arent paying the bills.

First, personal attacks are not only childish on these forums, but uncalled for and does nothing to enhance the conversation. Now, I'll answer your question. Not everyone is able or can pay into the system. We have disabled citizens, the elderly, children, mentally challenged, handicapped, disabled vets, the homeless, the poor and less fortunate, and those that can't find employment. There are a variety of reason why everyone can't pay into the system. We are a humane and civil people, therefore we don't just allow people to die on the streets due to starvation or lack of medical attention. We don't intentionally make children live on the streets and eat out of trash cans. We don't forget the elderly just because they're old and can't care for themselves. We don't forget the vets that have served this country. We don't ignore the mentally challenged, or the severely handicapped. We are a humane and civil people. Our government is not in place for the sole benefit of those that can support it, buy into it, or finance it. Our government is in place to equally, fairly, and justly represent "ALL" citizens, every single one of them. Our Constitution does not limit representation to only those that are bless with the means to pay into the system, and support it financially. Do we allow all of those in our prisons to starve to death and do without representation, simply because they can't pay into the system? Should we withhold representation from citizens until they become financially able to pay into the system? So, according to your logic, the elderly, the children, the disabled vets, the mentally challenged, and the poor and homeless deserve absolutely no representation in government. Am I correct? If not, please correct me. Again, calling me an idiot does nothing the enhance or further your points on this subject. Please be adult and civil in these conversations. Thanks.

There is always a reason why someone can't do something. Ask any malingerer and you'll get a litany of crap as to why they can't do something. It's bullshit.
But even so. Let's say some people really can't work at all. Fine. But why should they be able to vote, where they can support politicians who pander to their desires for more?

OK. Now I see where you're coming from. Before I comment on your reply, let me say that we have many voters that have absolutely no knowledge of politics, politicians, their stand on issues, their background, nor whether they actually qualify to be a competent representative of the people. We have voters that never question anything, they just go to the polls and vote straight party lines, as their parents did, and their parents before them did. Also, there's absolutely no guarantee that any politician will cater to a particular group or sect. Just ask all of the people of color that voted for Mr. Obama. Now, everyone votes for the ones that they believe will do them the most good, everyone. No one is going to vote for someone that they believe will do them harm, or take something away from them. That holds true for Wall Street, big oil, farmers, financial institutions, and government contractors. Everyone wants something in return, everyone. It's unfair to single out those that can't financially support crooked politicians. By the same token, is it fair that we allow the wealthy, the powerful, and the influential to place the names on the ballots, knowing that politicians will pander to their wishes, desires, and needs? Do you see the big picture here?

 

[Lilah]

[

Indeed why should disabled veterans who will cost the country billions of dollars for decades to come be allowed a voice in government. Can you think of one reason?

No, I can't. Can you?
What about all the loafers, layabouts, goldbrickers, fakers, and outright shitheads who contribuite nothing but unwanted children?

So your credo is Baiser Nos Troupes. While you're laying about in your hammock of abysmal smugness, you expect America's bravest and most dedicated to
protect your tuckus?[/QUOTE]
Your powers of argument are, um, lacking, to put it charitably.
Let's start with: Since the end of the draft we have an all volunteer force. People sign up for military service knowing the risk. And they're OK with it.
Do you know any other profession where getting hurt on the job entitles you to lifetime free care and benefits? Just name a couple, OK?
In any case, it is a red herring as the number of wounded veteran unable to work becaues of their injuries is pretty small.[/QUOTE]

You must really be low on the ladder's rung to speak so callously and cowardly about our brave men and women in uniform. Some give their lives for the freedoms we all know and share in this country, and you are so self-satisfied and complacent that you can't even muster up a thank you for keeping me and my family safe while we hide under the covers.
You really should pull your pants up and stop showing us your backside with the yellow streak running down it. Police officers and members of Congress are entitled to lifetime free care and benefits, just to name a couple.

 

[bendog]

Doesn't this study show the top 1% take 70% of total income?

 

[Dekster]

The top 40% know they won''t be able to beat off a starving bottom 40% with their three woods and still hit the ball straight from the fairway onto the green on those pesky par 5's would be my guess.

The top 40% can pay for security guards armed with AR-14s.

However, it was nice of you to admit that the the entire tax system is nothing more than ransom money paid to extortionists.

That's the way to take the moral high ground!

It is a lot less awkward to pay them off than give your bottom 40% guard with a gun your "World's Best Grandpa" coffee cup on Boxing Day.

There is no moral high ground. The tax system and social programs are the results of incremental steps taken since the late 19th century to curb the -ism tendencies of the masses when life starts to become economically too uncomfortable for too many (Marxism, Communism, Democratic Socialism, Obamaism, insert an ism here).

 

[g5000]

What possible rationale can there be for allowing people a voice in government when they pay nothing into it, in fact get stuff from it?

Thomas Jefferson has the answer to that question.

 

[g5000]

What about all the loafers, layabouts, goldbrickers, fakers, and outright shitheads who contribuite nothing but unwanted children?

So you support eliminating the child tax credit?

 

[g5000]

There was a time when very, very, very few Americans paid a federal income tax. A much smaller percentage than today. Only the wealthy paid federal income taxes back then.

It was not until WWII that the federal income tax base was radically expanded, and that was because our debt-to-GDP ratio hit the highest it has ever been.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The CBO reported that the top 40% of income earners paid over 100% of federal taxes last year. The bottom 40% had a negative tax rate--they got back more than they paid in.
What possible rationale can there be for allowing people a voice in government when they pay nothing into it, in fact get stuff from it? Liberals looking for "fairness" can ponder why people getting money from the government are entitled to vote to increase that take at the expense of more productive people.
CBO Top 40 Paid 106.2 of Income Taxes Bottom 40 Paid -9.1 Got Average of 18 950 in Transfers CNS News

You prove my point. Conservatives want to widen the gap between rich and poor.

 

[g5000]

Whenever I hear someone whine about people who don't pay federal income taxes, it cracks me up.

The biggest reason some people end up paying no federal income tax is because after they take all the exemptions, deductions, and credits the government gives them, they drop out of the "owe" column.

What is so hilarious about that is these are the exact same exemptions, deductions, and credits the whiners take advantage of, and that means if they want those who aren't paying taxes to start paying taxes, we have to eliminate the exemptions, deductions, and credits the whiners love so so much.

 

[g5000]

It's almost like the whiners can almost see the light, but some weird filter prevents them.

 

[TooTall]

There was a time when very, very, very few Americans paid a federal income tax. A much smaller percentage than today. Only the wealthy paid federal income taxes back then.

It was not until WWII that the federal income tax base was radically expanded, and that was because our debt-to-GDP ratio hit the highest it has ever been.

Good point. The highest debt-to-GDP ratio was when it peaked at 121.7% in 1947 and is 101.53% today and climbing.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Whenever I hear someone whine about people who don't pay federal income taxes, it cracks me up.

lol, what you hear from the RWnuts is that everyone should pay some tax, that whole 'skin in the game' thing.

So, presumably, after the Nuts took the vote away from all the non taxpayers, they would pass laws that would tax all of those people,

but then they'd have to give them the vote back.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

THE RABBI SAID:

“There is always a reason why someone can't do something. Ask any malingerer and you'll get a litany of crap as to why they can't do something. It's bullshit.
But even so. Let's say some people really can't work at all. Fine. But why should they be able to vote, where they can support politicians who pander to their desires for more?”

In addition to being ignorant, hateful, and reprehensible, this is also un-Constitutional, a violation of both the 14th Amendment's Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses, where you seek to single out and disadvantage a particular class of persons by denying them the fundamental right to vote absent a rational basis or legitimate legislative end, motivated solely by your unwarranted animus toward those disabled and unable to work through no fault of their own.

Your contempt for the Constitution, its case law, and the civil liberties of your fellow citizens is exceeded only by your disdain for basic human dignity.

You represent everything sick and foul and diseased about conservatism, where you and most others on the right indeed deserve the contempt of the American people you've so clearly earned.

 

[JFK_USA]

So they still paid something right? As you said, they got more than what they PAID into. Which means they PAID taxes. Meaning since they pay taxes, they get represented as well.