No Representation Without Taxation!

[The Rabbi]

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

 

[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 Rabbi]

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.

OK, thats one explanatin anyway.

 

[Sonny Clark]

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

In all fairness, the wealthy are the only ones represented in government. Thus the reason the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The government doesn't hesitate to bailout Wall Street and corporate America, but they have a habit of forgetting about John Q. Public. In America, we have taxation without fair, equal, and just representation. The U.S. Congress, and the oval office, only listen to the powerful, the wealthy, and the influential. We have a Lobbyists controlled U.S. Congress and an oval office bought and paid for. Once elected to office, professional politicians exert their will, and not the will of the people. In reality, "The Washington Brotherhood" acts as an entity unto itself, answerable to no one except itself. Politicians are bought and paid for. Politicians are all about egos, power, influence, greed, self-service, and climbing the political ladder at all cost. So, what makes anyone think or believe that paying a fair share of taxes would equate to fair, equal, and just representation? In addition, the tax laws and codes have enough loopholes that even the wealthy escape by putting money in offshore accounts, taking deductions not available to the average citizen, and hiding assets through investments and partnerships. How many corporations operating in America, dodge taxes by having operation headquarters overseas? An example is GE which pays no taxes. In summary, your voice is not determined by the amount of taxes you pay, rather it's determined by your power, wealth, or influence.

 

[Plasmaball]

hey its 2012

 

[The Rabbi]

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

In all fairness, the wealthy are the only ones represented in government. Thus the reason the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The government doesn't hesitate to bailout Wall Street and corporate America, but they have a habit of forgetting about John Q. Public. In America, we have taxation without fair, equal, and just representation. The U.S. Congress, and the oval office, only listen to the powerful, the wealthy, and the influential. We have a Lobbyists controlled U.S. Congress and an oval office bought and paid for. Once elected to office, professional politicians exert their will, and not the will of the people. In reality, "The Washington Brotherhood" acts as an entity unto itself, answerable to no one except itself. Politicians are bought and paid for. Politicians are all about egos, power, influence, greed, self-service, and climbing the political ladder at all cost. So, what makes anyone think or believe that paying a fair share of taxes would equate to fair, equal, and just representation? In addition, the tax laws and codes have enough loopholes that even the wealthy escape by putting money in offshore accounts, taking deductions not available to the average citizen, and hiding assets through investments and partnerships. How many corporations operating in America, dodge taxes by having operation headquarters overseas? An example is GE which pays no taxes. In summary, your voice is not determined by the amount of taxes you pay, rather it's determined by your power, wealth, or influence.

Thats not the most idiotic thing I've read here. BUt it might be the top 3.
Arent unions strongly represented? What about the sierra club? NRA? Arent those powerful lobbying organizations?
Who was Barney Frank bought and paid for? What about Ron Paul? Jeb Hensarling?
Your simplistic idiotic post is a disgrace.

 

[Lilah]

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

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?

 

[Sonny Clark]

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

In all fairness, the wealthy are the only ones represented in government. Thus the reason the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The government doesn't hesitate to bailout Wall Street and corporate America, but they have a habit of forgetting about John Q. Public. In America, we have taxation without fair, equal, and just representation. The U.S. Congress, and the oval office, only listen to the powerful, the wealthy, and the influential. We have a Lobbyists controlled U.S. Congress and an oval office bought and paid for. Once elected to office, professional politicians exert their will, and not the will of the people. In reality, "The Washington Brotherhood" acts as an entity unto itself, answerable to no one except itself. Politicians are bought and paid for. Politicians are all about egos, power, influence, greed, self-service, and climbing the political ladder at all cost. So, what makes anyone think or believe that paying a fair share of taxes would equate to fair, equal, and just representation? In addition, the tax laws and codes have enough loopholes that even the wealthy escape by putting money in offshore accounts, taking deductions not available to the average citizen, and hiding assets through investments and partnerships. How many corporations operating in America, dodge taxes by having operation headquarters overseas? An example is GE which pays no taxes. In summary, your voice is not determined by the amount of taxes you pay, rather it's determined by your power, wealth, or influence.

Thats not the most idiotic thing I've read here. BUt it might be the top 3.
Arent unions strongly represented? What about the sierra club? NRA? Arent those powerful lobbying organizations?
Who was Barney Frank bought and paid for? What about Ron Paul? Jeb Hensarling?
Your simplistic idiotic post is a disgrace.

It just may be idiotic to you, and no doubt it is. But, the truth of it can't be disputed. Sure, many organizations are represented by Lobbyists, and that's exactly my point. Money talks. How many of the bottom 70% can afford to pay Lobbyists to fight for them? I sure can't, and I'm a tax paying citizen. Your point becomes moot when you imply that only those that pay their fair share of taxes should be represented. I pay my fair share, and I'm certainly not represented. I can't afford a voice in government. I'm not a big corporation, a wealthy and powerful member of society. I'm not a Wall Street big wheel or head of a large financial institution. I'm John Q. Public, without a voice in government. Yet, I pay my taxes according to the tax laws and codes. Also, try to explain equal representation to those taxpayers that need infrastructure repairs and upgrades. What about explaining equal representation to those taxpayers that have no right to privacy, or that can't afford fair representation in our court system. Is the judicial system fair to all citizens? Is justice equal across the board, and given equally to every single American citizen? Is White Collar crime always punished? Is favoritism shown to the wealthy and powerful in our judicial system? Exactly how much equality does paying a fair share of taxes get you?

 

[BluesLegend]

Predictions: Liberals will continue to lie and foment class warfare by claiming the 'rich' don't pay their fair share and the poor who buy into that garbage will stay poor.

 

[Sonny Clark]

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

View attachment 34923

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?

Bravo. Very good response.

 

[bripat9643]

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!

 

[bripat9643]

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

In all fairness, the wealthy are the only ones represented in government. Thus the reason the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

Horseshit.

 

[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?

 

[The Rabbi]

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

View attachment 34923

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?

 

[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.

 

[Sonny Clark]

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

View attachment 34923

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?

I agree that we do have the lazy, the takers, and the undeserving living among us. But, they do not make up the majority, nor are they representative of the entire population. On the other hand, we have millions of hard working taxpaying citizens that are not represented in government. So, my point stands that paying taxes does not get you representation. Speaking of being unfair, what about the $Billions of tax dollars spent on the care and support of illegal immigrants? How much do they pay in taxes each year? How many anchor babies have taxpayers paid for? What about their education and welfare? If you want to talk about those that don't pay their fair share of taxes, not being entitled to representation, lets look around and see who benefits from our tax dollars. Do all of the citizens in foreign countries that directly benefit from the tax dollars we send overseas deserve representation in our government? They get consideration either directly or indirectly. Look at the big picture before passing judgment on a few less fortunate and the poor that are citizens. Are they not as deserving of representation as illegal immigrants or citizens in foreign countries? Should we reserve a voice in government for only those that can afford representation? Where would be a fair place to draw the line?

 

[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?[/QUOTE]
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?

 

[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.

 

[The Rabbi]

[

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]
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.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Hey! New blood! Welcome to the forum. I'm enjoying the back and forth.