Who should pay the most taxes?

I sincerely hope you are joking. Because this is one of the more unworkable suggestions for policy I've seen today.

It would be easier to just outlaw mink coats, Ferraris and lobsters. Problem solved until a different kind of sh*t hits the fan.
I'm glad he didn't think of truffles, he would have had an issue with those too.
 
The most stupid post of the day, thank you.

Just how much do you want to give the government, Karl Marx?
I would toil at a job 5 days a week just as I do now if my needs were satisfied, the needs of the weak or handicapped were met, and being "rich" didn't mean you needed lear jets, ownership of football teams, clothing brands that add hundreds of dollars to the cost of marginally better products. Too live in an equitable society I would devote all of my effort.
 

Who should pay the most taxes?​

Considering we all toil underneath the exact same incompetent bureaucracy, everyone who wants to have a say in how it’s run should should pay the exact same amount in order to vote. $50 a month sounds reasonable.
 
I would toil at a job 5 days a week just as I do now if my needs were satisfied, the needs of the weak or handicapped were met, and being "rich" didn't mean you needed lear jets, ownership of football teams, clothing brands that add hundreds of dollars to the cost of marginally better products. Too live in an equitable society I would devote all of my effort.
You would only live a life that your masters would allow you to live.
Don't be naïve
 
My point is that although a lot of people died sooner than they might have otherwise, their deaths spared millions more from suffering under pre-industrial conditions that would continue to exist if some radical changes that were indeed brutal were not made. So sure, the circumstances were bad. A little bit of logic proves the results would be worse otherwise.
Ah i see, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few? So if that is the case, why dont you off yourself so the many can live a little better.....
 
I would toil at a job 5 days a week just as I do now if my needs were satisfied, the needs of the weak or handicapped were met, and being "rich" didn't mean you needed lear jets, ownership of football teams, clothing brands that add hundreds of dollars to the cost of marginally better products. Too live in an equitable society I would devote all of my effort.
Too live in an equitable society
My ass, when i went overseas to Saudi Arabia to work on their F-15s, this big black union guy just sat on his ass all day doing nothing, so by the end of the day, he would say he needed overtime. In Socialism it is always the same, some people work hard, carrying the load that the freeloaders just sit and do nothing, but then cry foul if they dont get the same pay. This breeds resentment and soon everyone is not working, and at that point, the socialist society goes full bore Communism at the point of a gun.....There is no equity with humans, it just cant work, because everyone has different needs, and different goals. Go watch what Morgan Freeman said...I dare you.
 
Ah i see, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few? So if that is the case, why dont you off yourself so the many can live a little better.....
I'm not reducing the quality of life for anyone else.

I would agree that most of the people in the US who claim to be concerned with the needs of the many couldn't be less interested in reducing actual poverty. I'd even argue their efforts exacerbate the problem.
 
My ass, when i went overseas to Saudi Arabia to work on their F-15s, this big black union guy just sat on his ass all day doing nothing, so by the end of the day, he would say he needed overtime. In Socialism it is always the same, some people work hard, carrying the load that the freeloaders just sit and do nothing, but then cry foul if they dont get the same pay. This breeds resentment and soon everyone is not working, and at that point, the socialist society goes full bore Communism at the point of a gun.....There is no equity with humans, it just cant work, because everyone has different needs, and different goals. Go watch what Morgan Freeman said...I dare you.
My comments were limited to myself and what I am willing to do to achieve my goals.

I don't know why anything you said there diminishes anything I believe in.
 
Yes, very different.
Please explain how you live unrestricted and are currently waiting entry into the Stock Holder's Club so that you can double your net worth just before the congressman you own drafts legislation that will crush your competition (and do no one else any harm).

I didn't realize they let everyone in.
 
I'm not reducing the quality of life for anyone else.

I would agree that most of the people in the US who claim to be concerned with the needs of the many couldn't be less interested in reducing actual poverty. I'd even argue their efforts exacerbate the problem.
Did you watch the 2 minute and 33 second clip of Morgan Freeman, or are you too scared to see the truth?

The War on Poverty After 50 Years
In the 50 years since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs. Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all U.S. military wars since the American Revolution. Yet progress against poverty, as measured by the U.S. Census Bureau, has been minimal, and in terms of President Johnson’s main goal of reducing the “causes” rather than the mere “consequences” of poverty, the War on Poverty has failed completely.
Why is it that all that money has been wasted on the poor? Because the poor chooses to be poor, while voting for the very people who keep them poor.

 
My comments were limited to myself and what I am willing to do to achieve my goals.

I don't know why anything you said there diminishes anything I believe in.
Bidenet.png
 
LOL...

You think I'd be a Biden voter? I mean if he ACTUALLY REPRESENTED the cult of personality they sell people of a common working class guy trying to increase the standards of living for the working class and ensure the wealthy were held accountable to basic human dignity I'd be happy to pretend he's a functioning, honest leader but he looks more like a sadistic aristocrat from Belgium governing an African Colony.

I'm not a Trump fan either, he would be a carnival tilt-o whirl operator if he wasn't born wealthy, but at least he didn't go into the office to steal everything he has. He might actually be the only thing close to a decent human being in DC without actually being one. I think all American voters are morons. You fools believe any of these people want to do the right thing, or would even be allowed to by the banking elite if they did?
 
I don't agree. The Catholic Church says to donate what you can afford. Some families give only 2%, some give 10%

I myslef haven't donated in a long time.. partly bc I am not happy with things going on in the Church. I also don't like the way some of their charities help illegals but not Americans (or so it seems. I have not investigated this, but I've seen some things...)

Donations are voluntary, taxes aren't. Since we all have to pay federal taxes (at least if your last name isn't Biden), we should all be on the hook for the same proportion of our income. If I'm paying 20% (for example), everyone should pay 20%.
 
Did you watch the 2 minute and 33 second clip of Morgan Freeman, or are you too scared to see the truth?

The War on Poverty After 50 Years Why is it that all that money has been wasted on the poor? Because the poor chooses to be poor, while voting for the very people who keep them poor.

Why would a bureaucrat solve a problem like poverty? So that they can go find another government program to manage and eliminate that job as well?

Being a Marxist and a realist are not exclusive, although from the way I see most so called "progressives" in the US reality isn't attractive too them. The "War on Poverty" was a means to create dependence on handouts, rather than a productive working population. It's easier for rich governments to write checks than kick people's asses for being lazy.
 
Why would a bureaucrat solve a problem like poverty? So that they can go find another government program to manage and eliminate that job as well?

Being a Marxist and a realist are not exclusive, although from the way I see most so called "progressives" in the US reality isn't attractive too them. The "War on Poverty" was a means to create dependence on handouts, rather than a productive working population. It's easier for rich governments to write checks than kick people's asses for being lazy.
rather than a productive working population.

 

Forum List

Back
Top