Why should other taxpayers have to subsidize gay mating?

[kaz]

Who cares what you perceive.

Just butt out of their lives with your unjustified prudish meddling.

Yes, not getting tax breaks. They can do whatever they want, I just don't want to pay them for it. It's like living in Nazi Germany, isn't it? Hitler didn't give gays tax breaks for mating either. And he put Jews into pogroms. Makes you think, doesn't it? You liberals sure do deeply love other people's money

Is giving a ''tax break'' by lowering the tax rate on the wealthiest highest tax bracket, ''making us who did not get this tax break, pay for the wealthiest's tax break''? Or, as you all claimed, giving the wealthiest a tax break is just letting them keep more of their ''own money''?

Care......you're confused. If its gays, then any tax break is a subsidy. If its the rich, then any tax break is letting them keep more of their own money.

You lost your way when you didn't take the double standard into account. Consistency has nothing to with it. As Kaz demonstrates here:

So let's see, my standard is all should pay the same tax rate.

So you didn't say that comparing taking less of someone's money to giving someone money earned by someone else is preposterous?

Yes, it is preposterous. Taxes aren't just given to others, you're comparing firs and trees, firs are only one kind of tree

 

[orogenicman]

Who cares what you perceive.

Just butt out of their lives with your unjustified prudish meddling.

ROFLMNAO

The Homo-cult shoves their degeneracy in our face and demand we accept it or else.

In response, I offer a heartfelt... FUCKYOU. I'm in for the Or ELSE. Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman.

That's how it is and it's not changing. If you don't like it, that's just a bonus as far as I'm concerned.

Erm, we are all Homos, dude. or are you some other genera of which we are unaware?

Don't quit your day job, Richard Pryor

Homo sapiens = Human beings. Next. You ARE a human being, are you not?

Continuing with the eight year old games. You really want people to think that's what he meant by "homos?"

Homosexuals are still human beings. You can disagree with them and still show compassion and respect.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Who cares what you perceive.

Just butt out of their lives with your unjustified prudish meddling.

Yes, not getting tax breaks. They can do whatever they want, I just don't want to pay them for it. It's like living in Nazi Germany, isn't it? Hitler didn't give gays tax breaks for mating either. And he put Jews into pogroms. Makes you think, doesn't it? You liberals sure do deeply love other people's money

Is giving a ''tax break'' by lowering the tax rate on the wealthiest highest tax bracket, ''making us who did not get this tax break, pay for the wealthiest's tax break''? Or, as you all claimed, giving the wealthiest a tax break is just letting them keep more of their ''own money''?

Everyone should pay the same rate. And BTW, that is charging the wealthy more, the more you earn, the more you pay

What a shame for you that you live here, where we have progressive, meaning fair, the concept not the reality, taxation.

Yes, you only want people in this country who agree with you, you mentioned that already

I didn't mention it, and I don't care whether they agree or not, as long as they lose out on what actually matters. Thinking you are serving God by cleaning the church urinals doesn't matter so that you can keep that. When it comes to progressive taxation or the rights of others, you losing means the government is working.

 

[kaz]

ROFLMNAO

The Homo-cult shoves their degeneracy in our face and demand we accept it or else.

In response, I offer a heartfelt... FUCKYOU. I'm in for the Or ELSE. Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman.

That's how it is and it's not changing. If you don't like it, that's just a bonus as far as I'm concerned.

Erm, we are all Homos, dude. or are you some other genera of which we are unaware?

Don't quit your day job, Richard Pryor

Homo sapiens = Human beings. Next. You ARE a human being, are you not?

Continuing with the eight year old games. You really want people to think that's what he meant by "homos?"

Homosexuals are still human beings. You can disagree with them and still show compassion and respect.

you rule the eight year old argument category, well done

 

[kaz]

Yes, not getting tax breaks. They can do whatever they want, I just don't want to pay them for it. It's like living in Nazi Germany, isn't it? Hitler didn't give gays tax breaks for mating either. And he put Jews into pogroms. Makes you think, doesn't it? You liberals sure do deeply love other people's money

Is giving a ''tax break'' by lowering the tax rate on the wealthiest highest tax bracket, ''making us who did not get this tax break, pay for the wealthiest's tax break''? Or, as you all claimed, giving the wealthiest a tax break is just letting them keep more of their ''own money''?

Everyone should pay the same rate. And BTW, that is charging the wealthy more, the more you earn, the more you pay

What a shame for you that you live here, where we have progressive, meaning fair, the concept not the reality, taxation.

Yes, you only want people in this country who agree with you, you mentioned that already

I didn't mention it, and I don't care whether they agree or not, as long as they lose out on what actually matters. Thinking you are serving God by cleaning the church urinals doesn't matter so that you can keep that. When it comes to progressive taxation or the rights of others, you losing means the government is working.

The bourgeoisie is oppressing the proletariat, the rich, the corporations, blah blah, got it

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Is giving a ''tax break'' by lowering the tax rate on the wealthiest highest tax bracket, ''making us who did not get this tax break, pay for the wealthiest's tax break''? Or, as you all claimed, giving the wealthiest a tax break is just letting them keep more of their ''own money''?

Everyone should pay the same rate. And BTW, that is charging the wealthy more, the more you earn, the more you pay

What a shame for you that you live here, where we have progressive, meaning fair, the concept not the reality, taxation.

Yes, you only want people in this country who agree with you, you mentioned that already

I didn't mention it, and I don't care whether they agree or not, as long as they lose out on what actually matters. Thinking you are serving God by cleaning the church urinals doesn't matter so that you can keep that. When it comes to progressive taxation or the rights of others, you losing means the government is working.

The bourgeoisie is oppressing the proletariat, the rich, the corporations, blah blah, got it

Those who are being oppressed here is the same group as capitalism always oppresses.

 

[Skylar]

Yes, not getting tax breaks. They can do whatever they want, I just don't want to pay them for it. It's like living in Nazi Germany, isn't it? Hitler didn't give gays tax breaks for mating either. And he put Jews into pogroms. Makes you think, doesn't it? You liberals sure do deeply love other people's money

Is giving a ''tax break'' by lowering the tax rate on the wealthiest highest tax bracket, ''making us who did not get this tax break, pay for the wealthiest's tax break''? Or, as you all claimed, giving the wealthiest a tax break is just letting them keep more of their ''own money''?

Care......you're confused. If its gays, then any tax break is a subsidy. If its the rich, then any tax break is letting them keep more of their own money.

You lost your way when you didn't take the double standard into account. Consistency has nothing to with it. As Kaz demonstrates here:

So let's see, my standard is all should pay the same tax rate.

So you didn't say that comparing taking less of someone's money to giving someone money earned by someone else is preposterous?

Yes, it is preposterous. Taxes aren't just given to others, you're comparing firs and trees, firs are only one kind of tree

So then the entire premise of your thread is preposterous by your standards. As there is no subsidy according to your own logic.

 

[kaz]

Everyone should pay the same rate. And BTW, that is charging the wealthy more, the more you earn, the more you pay

What a shame for you that you live here, where we have progressive, meaning fair, the concept not the reality, taxation.

Yes, you only want people in this country who agree with you, you mentioned that already

I didn't mention it, and I don't care whether they agree or not, as long as they lose out on what actually matters. Thinking you are serving God by cleaning the church urinals doesn't matter so that you can keep that. When it comes to progressive taxation or the rights of others, you losing means the government is working.

The bourgeoisie is oppressing the proletariat, the rich, the corporations, blah blah, got it

Those who are being oppressed here is the same group as capitalism always oppresses.

And in this country, those being oppressed are the same as socialism always oppresses

 

[kaz]

Is giving a ''tax break'' by lowering the tax rate on the wealthiest highest tax bracket, ''making us who did not get this tax break, pay for the wealthiest's tax break''? Or, as you all claimed, giving the wealthiest a tax break is just letting them keep more of their ''own money''?

Care......you're confused. If its gays, then any tax break is a subsidy. If its the rich, then any tax break is letting them keep more of their own money.

You lost your way when you didn't take the double standard into account. Consistency has nothing to with it. As Kaz demonstrates here:

So let's see, my standard is all should pay the same tax rate.

So you didn't say that comparing taking less of someone's money to giving someone money earned by someone else is preposterous?

Yes, it is preposterous. Taxes aren't just given to others, you're comparing firs and trees, firs are only one kind of tree

So then the entire premise of your thread is preposterous by your standards. As there is no subsidy according to your own logic.

No, dumb ass, it doesn't say that. You are making the assumption that all taxes are taken from one person and given to another. Actually taxes also go for the military, courts and other expenses. We should all pay the same rate for that and redistribution of wealth should be eliminated, particularly at the Federal level. You are mixing fir trees (taxes to redistribute wealth) and trees (all taxes)

 

[PaintMyHouse]

What a shame for you that you live here, where we have progressive, meaning fair, the concept not the reality, taxation.

Yes, you only want people in this country who agree with you, you mentioned that already

I didn't mention it, and I don't care whether they agree or not, as long as they lose out on what actually matters. Thinking you are serving God by cleaning the church urinals doesn't matter so that you can keep that. When it comes to progressive taxation or the rights of others, you losing means the government is working.

The bourgeoisie is oppressing the proletariat, the rich, the corporations, blah blah, got it

Those who are being oppressed here is the same group as capitalism always oppresses.

And in this country, those being oppressed are the same as socialism always oppresses

Nope. They are getting away with murder, literally.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Kaz, what do you call this fantasy world you live in by chance?

 

[kaz]

Yes, you only want people in this country who agree with you, you mentioned that already

I didn't mention it, and I don't care whether they agree or not, as long as they lose out on what actually matters. Thinking you are serving God by cleaning the church urinals doesn't matter so that you can keep that. When it comes to progressive taxation or the rights of others, you losing means the government is working.

The bourgeoisie is oppressing the proletariat, the rich, the corporations, blah blah, got it

Those who are being oppressed here is the same group as capitalism always oppresses.

And in this country, those being oppressed are the same as socialism always oppresses

Nope. They are getting away with murder, literally.

What are you talking about now? Smoking the peace pipe again? Who is "literally" being murdered by us rich bastards?

 

[Skylar]

No, dumb ass, it doesn't say that. You are making the assumption that all taxes are taken from one person and given to another.

I'm applying your logic that a tax break isn't a subsidy. These are your standards applied to your argument.

Without a subsidy, your thread is meaningless.

 

[kaz]

No, dumb ass, it doesn't say that. You are making the assumption that all taxes are taken from one person and given to another.

I'm applying your logic that a tax break isn't a subsidy. These are your standards applied to your argument.

Without a subsidy, your thread is meaningless.

Winston Churchill: I can explain it to you, I cannot comprehend it for you

 

[Skylar]

No, dumb ass, it doesn't say that. You are making the assumption that all taxes are taken from one person and given to another.

I'm applying your logic that a tax break isn't a subsidy. These are your standards applied to your argument.

Without a subsidy, your thread is meaningless.

Winston Churchill: I can explain it to you, I cannot comprehend it for you

Your explanation runs smack into your own arguments: a tax break isn't a subsidy according to you.

And without a subsidy, the entire premise of your thread implodes.

 

[kaz]

No, dumb ass, it doesn't say that. You are making the assumption that all taxes are taken from one person and given to another.

I'm applying your logic that a tax break isn't a subsidy. These are your standards applied to your argument.

Without a subsidy, your thread is meaningless.

Winston Churchill: I can explain it to you, I cannot comprehend it for you

Your explanation runs smack into your own arguments: a tax break isn't a subsidy according to you.

And without a subsidy, the entire premise of your thread implodes.

The thread is applying liberal standards to liberals. I'm mocking you When Republicans wanted spending cuts and Obama shut down the government, then claimed he was so incompetent he actually spent more money not running it than running it, liberals turned around and then blasted Republicans for wasting money supporting something they believed in. Then when liberals want a tax cut to get gays out of the progressive taxes and death taxes you want, suddenly it's not an issue. Your ideology is endlessly hypocritical.

 

[Skylar]

No, dumb ass, it doesn't say that. You are making the assumption that all taxes are taken from one person and given to another.

I'm applying your logic that a tax break isn't a subsidy. These are your standards applied to your argument.

Without a subsidy, your thread is meaningless.

Winston Churchill: I can explain it to you, I cannot comprehend it for you

Your explanation runs smack into your own arguments: a tax break isn't a subsidy according to you.

And without a subsidy, the entire premise of your thread implodes.

The thread is applying liberal standards to liberals. I'm mocking you

Then by your own logic, the premise of the thread is invalid. As you reject as 'preposterous' the very logic you were applying.

Thank you.

 

[kaz]

No, dumb ass, it doesn't say that. You are making the assumption that all taxes are taken from one person and given to another.

I'm applying your logic that a tax break isn't a subsidy. These are your standards applied to your argument.

Without a subsidy, your thread is meaningless.

Winston Churchill: I can explain it to you, I cannot comprehend it for you

Your explanation runs smack into your own arguments: a tax break isn't a subsidy according to you.

And without a subsidy, the entire premise of your thread implodes.

The thread is applying liberal standards to liberals. I'm mocking you

Then by your own logic, the premise of the thread is invalid. As you reject as 'preposterous' the very logic you were applying.

Thank you.

This is why I hesitate to waste my time with you. First, you are so in love with your own voice it's hard to get you to think about anything else. Second ... no, wait, that was it ...

 

[danielpalos]

i think Kaz just needs a full body massage with happy ending; any local chics want to volunteer?

Can you imagine eating your mate after sex like some insects do? You go to all that work to find the right one, then eat them and have to start over? Seems like a lot of work to get some once

It depends; I am beginning to like to role-play with women. I don't mind if women claim to want to be my boss so they can hire me on a for-cause basis to ensure they can help with diversity, client relations, and stress management in a team oriented environment; and, that her assistants are ClitLicker Pro certified, by her.

 

[Seawytch]

I'm applying your logic that a tax break isn't a subsidy. These are your standards applied to your argument.

Without a subsidy, your thread is meaningless.

Winston Churchill: I can explain it to you, I cannot comprehend it for you

Your explanation runs smack into your own arguments: a tax break isn't a subsidy according to you.

And without a subsidy, the entire premise of your thread implodes.

The thread is applying liberal standards to liberals. I'm mocking you

Then by your own logic, the premise of the thread is invalid. As you reject as 'preposterous' the very logic you were applying.

Thank you.

This is why I hesitate to waste my time with you. First, you are so in love with your own voice it's hard to get you to think about anything else. Second ... no, wait, that was it ...

Says the guy who started a click bait thread. You knew a thread about just plain old married taxes wouldn't have gotten you the attention you crave.