Thank you for being civil and not calling me a Marxist who hates America. That is about the best that I can hope for from conservatives around here. Having said that, I will add that you seem to have a strange understanding of Democrats. I’m not sure what posts you’re referring to,, but don’t recall anyone saying “I want to pay higher taxes and I don’t care what it’s used for” That is certainly not what I am saying. The basic message from Democrats and Progressives is and always has been that every one should pay their fair share and that revenue should be used in a way that maximizes the greater good. Ofcourse, we may not always agree on what exactly that means, but if we could pur aside the ideology and focus on rational problem solving we most likely can find some common ground
Of course, like all "progressives," you use those vagaries to ultimately argue that gubmint is the great mommy and daddy of us all, and that no "greater good" is ever beyond your avaricious reach.
You say that you don’t want to talk about other countries but by doing so we might learn something about smarter and more effective government
How Scandinavian Countries Pay for Their Government Spending (taxfoundation.org)
"The grass is greener" isn't an argument, nor is bandwagon fallacy.
You can deride that as the “Nanny State” that goes against the grain of small government ideology. I call government for the people. Government that recognizes that personal responsibility and individuality goes only so far in a cruel and unpredictable capitalist economy.
We get it, you're a career victim.
If you support a free market economy, then you must also support social safety nets there are there for people when needed. The unbridled capitalism that you champion gives freedom to the capitalists.
No, I must not support that at all....Speak for yourself.
We will not thrive as a nation where peoples basic life necessities are not met, where a major illness, or just going to college can bring financial ruin upon a person . There is far to much emphasis placed on what things cost and far to little on the benefits, and worse, the cost of doing nothing because it will come back to bite you.
If the benefits outweighed the costs, you wouldn't need to use coercion to accomplish what you want.....What you want are "benefits" that go to a few, at the expense of everyone..."X benefits everyone" is yet another stale bromide that isn't an argument.
Moving on, you seem to be saying that roads and bridges are not a valid topic in relation to the issue of federal income tax. I beg to differ.
Was only a matter of time before we got to
MUH ROOOOADS!...Roads and other such infrastructure are paid for via fuel taxes and vehicle fees, not the income tax....Beside that, Murica had scads of roads and bridges before any income tax.
State rely heavily on federal grants to maintain infrastructure. You might recall the recent infrastructure bill signed by Biden. Most major roads and rail lines are critical to interstate commerce and therefore a federal –state responsibility.
Where do you think the feds got the funds to begin with?...Lucky the leprechaun and his pot of gold at the end of the rainbow?
Here in New Jersey, we have a major catastrophe waiting to happen because of Republican stupidity and twisted priorities. The two rail tunnels that connect NJ to Manhattan are well over 100 years old and are likely to fail soon, disrupting if not destroying the entire regional economy. The states simply cannot go it alone on this. Trump had put the project on the back burner, and the former Republican governor actually cancelled it once. This while giving tax breaks to the wealthy . Not smart government Now it is on track but we are racing.
Just couldn't let the conversation go by without shitlib sniveling about "tax cuts for the wealthy", could ya?
Your entire argument is no argument at all.
Dismissed.