Spend More, Tax the Rich Americans Say

[DiamondDave]

Socialist Dave opposes giving "We the People" the right to decide.

If we can vote on whether gays can marry we should be able to vote on whether rich people should pay more in taxes.

We shouldn't be able to vote for either, but I have no doubt in my mind that the righties don't see it that way. They are all okay with voting on gay marriage.

You seem to get it..

The right wing wants to be able to vote in each state whether gays should marry...majority rules

However, if you were to vote on whether the rich should have to pay additional taxes...they wrap themselves in the Constitution

Evidently you did not choose to see that 'the right' does not inherently think this. But nice try

 

[Polk]

For those wanting to crow about state and local taxes, most of that revenue comes from sales taxes, which represent a much higher proportion of the income of the poor than of the wealthy.

And that is an issue on individual spending. There is nothing that dictates that the spending of the 'rich' has to be less of a proportion, if those 'rich' persons do in fact spend the same or more of the monies they earn.

You act like it's a choice. People don't have an option if they want to buy clothes and furniture or if they want to eat.

 

[DiamondDave]

For those wanting to crow about state and local taxes, most of that revenue comes from sales taxes, which represent a much higher proportion of the income of the poor than of the wealthy.

And that is an issue on individual spending. There is nothing that dictates that the spending of the 'rich' has to be less of a proportion, if those 'rich' persons do in fact spend the same or more of the monies they earn.

You act like it's a choice. People don't have an option if they want to buy clothes and furniture or if they want to eat.

And you act as if the rich can't do the same thing...

I have been at the poverty line and still not spent everything... not buying new things, buying on mega sales and outlets.. and there have been times now that I make a good wage that I have spent more of my salary in ways that involve sales tax....

What you spend is a choice.. how much you spend is a choice.. what you spend it on is a choice

 

[Ravi]

We shouldn't be able to vote for either, but I have no doubt in my mind that the righties don't see it that way. They are all okay with voting on gay marriage.

You seem to get it..

The right wing wants to be able to vote in each state whether gays should marry...majority rules

However, if you were to vote on whether the rich should have to pay additional taxes...they wrap themselves in the Constitution

Are you so partisan that you truly can not see the difference?

One is a vote on whether or not someone is allowed to do something.

The other is a vote on whether the government is allowed to do something to OTHER people.

Actually, they are both about voting to let the government DO SOMETHING to other people. Disallowing something is DOING something.

 

[Polk]

And that is an issue on individual spending. There is nothing that dictates that the spending of the 'rich' has to be less of a proportion, if those 'rich' persons do in fact spend the same or more of the monies they earn.

You act like it's a choice. People don't have an option if they want to buy clothes and furniture or if they want to eat.

And you act as if the rich can't do the same thing...

I have been at the poverty line and still not spent everything... not buying new things, buying on mega sales and outlets.. and there have been times now that I make a good wage that I have spent more of my salary in ways that involve sales tax....

What you spend is a choice.. how much you spend is a choice.. what you spend it on is a choice

The entire point is, the more income you have, the less of it you spend on necessities and the more you invest. That, by definition, results in lower taxation than those are spending a higher proportion of their income on the basics of life.

 

[DiamondDave]

You act like it's a choice. People don't have an option if they want to buy clothes and furniture or if they want to eat.

And you act as if the rich can't do the same thing...

I have been at the poverty line and still not spent everything... not buying new things, buying on mega sales and outlets.. and there have been times now that I make a good wage that I have spent more of my salary in ways that involve sales tax....

What you spend is a choice.. how much you spend is a choice.. what you spend it on is a choice

The entire point is, the more income you have, the less of it you spend on necessities and the more you invest. That, by definition, results in lower taxation than those are spending a higher proportion of their income on the basics of life.

No

Because what people CONSIDER their own personal necessities is subjective.. as seen by the way some people think health insurance is a necessity or a car or a phone being a necessity, etc....

Your definition is entirely based on the subjectivity, the behavior, and choices of the spender... hell, growing up poor we canned vegetables to not have to spend a dime on them the rest of the year after harvest... we did not spend on a car and walked everywhere or got rides from neighbors and friends... we received hand-me-downs from friends and neighbors on clothes.. and while my grandmother and I did not earn shit, we did not spend shit either.... and I know of friends who earn 100K and spend every dime and more and claim it all to be necessary.. spending on the most expensive foods, specialty items, expensive housing, expensive transportation, etc

 

[Polk]

In large portions of the country, a car is a necessity. Even lived in a rural area? You can't realistically think people can walk ten miles to get the store and then be able to walk up with groceries to feed their family.

 

[DiamondDave]

In large portions of the country, a car is a necessity. Even lived in a rural area? You can't realistically think people can walk ten miles to get the store and then be able to walk up with groceries to feed their family.

And I would bike 5 miles to get things... without a car...

What some consider 'necessity' others do not.. and in fact spending is subjective and as stated, depends on choices, behavior, situation, etc

 

[Polk]

So your claim is going to be that eating is optional? That's rich.

 

[DiamondDave]

So your claim is going to be that eating is optional? That's rich.

No... but where some people think it is a necessity to buy food.. others garden.. other raise chickens (as we did) for eggs and meat.. some trade services to get product in return from friends and neighbors... some make do with homemade or hand-me-down clothes...

But nice attempt at trying to change what I said

 

[The Rabbi]

For those wanting to crow about state and local taxes, most of that revenue comes from sales taxes, which represent a much higher proportion of the income of the poor than of the wealthy.

And that is an issue on individual spending. There is nothing that dictates that the spending of the 'rich' has to be less of a proportion, if those 'rich' persons do in fact spend the same or more of the monies they earn.

You act like it's a choice. People don't have an option if they want to buy clothes and furniture or if they want to eat.

Well actually they do. People have wide discretion in how they spend money on those items.

 

[Polk]

So your claim is going to be that eating is optional? That's rich.

No... but where some people think it is a necessity to buy food.. others garden.. other raise chickens (as we did) for eggs and meat.. some trade services to get product in return from friends and neighbors... some make do with homemade or hand-me-down clothes...

But nice attempt at trying to change what I said

All of which are more expensive than buying food.

 

[Polk]

And that is an issue on individual spending. There is nothing that dictates that the spending of the 'rich' has to be less of a proportion, if those 'rich' persons do in fact spend the same or more of the monies they earn.

You act like it's a choice. People don't have an option if they want to buy clothes and furniture or if they want to eat.

Well actually they do. People have wide discretion in how they spend money on those items.

There hasn't been a discussion of how much people spend on those items. Only that those items are vital.

 

[The Rabbi]

You act like it's a choice. People don't have an option if they want to buy clothes and furniture or if they want to eat.

Well actually they do. People have wide discretion in how they spend money on those items.

There hasn't been a discussion of how much people spend on those items. Only that those items are vital.

Lots of things are vital. So what? So what if poor people end up spending slightly more because of taxes. It will serve to discourage people from being poor, which is a good thing and certainly preferable to the present system that discourages people from moving up.

 

[DiamondDave]

So your claim is going to be that eating is optional? That's rich.

No... but where some people think it is a necessity to buy food.. others garden.. other raise chickens (as we did) for eggs and meat.. some trade services to get product in return from friends and neighbors... some make do with homemade or hand-me-down clothes...

But nice attempt at trying to change what I said

All of which are more expensive than buying food.

HORSE SHIT... absolute, pure utter horse shit

Do not fabricate to attempt to make it fit your argument...

We canned vegetables (and I still do even though I make a great wage) at a fraction of the cost... using the corn and other things to feed the chickens where we got eggs and meat... patched old hand-me-down clothes and got material to make clothing as well... traded lawn mowing from the time I was 9 to gain things in return like rides, favors, house repairs, etc...

Mankind was very self sufficient for along time and even citizens within our country did much to provide for themselves when money was scarce or they lived in isolation... just because many have fallen into the entitlement mantra trap of thinking they must buy things and have them given to them by others, does not mean that they cannot do things to provide for themselves at minimal expense

 

[Vast LWC]

SO mortgage backed securities are fake assets?
So much for your credibility, Goober.

When they're priced at 6,000% of their worth? Yes.
Oh, ok, they're 98% fake, and 2% real, how's that?

Oh wow, I got a detail wrong. Just roll me in doo-doo and call me stinky. It's the end of the world.
You on the other hand can post errant nonsense all day long and feel no shame whatsoever.

A detail? That was the basis of your argument in that post.
Errant nonsense? I'll happily concede if you show me where I've posted false data.

 

[Vast LWC]

It's pegged to inflation.

Ahh, that would explain it, thanks for the info.