Why don't you want to tax the rich?

[Frankenstein]

The classification of public services like schools, roads, police, and fire departments is a subject of ongoing debate, but many political and economic theorists agree that they are not inherently
socialist. Instead, they are typically considered public goods or essential government services within a mixed economy.

 

[Company 13]

Yeah. Freedom sucks.

No one should be a libertarian without reading an article about why it won't work.
Notice that there are no libertarian societies. There's a reason for that.

 

[Frankenstein]

All of us benefit. For example, highways, schools, etc.

read 1061, I knew where you were going. By the way even with those, government gets kickbacks from projects

 

[Frankenstein]

If there's a welfare topic on the forum, you should avail yourself of it. This is not about welfare. Someone wanted to learn about regressive taxes, and I went to a lot of work to help him, and you are trying to derail the topic.

It still boils down to you coveting what someone else makes, my guess is you, like most progressive liberals don't pay more than you are asked to in taxes, start. According to stats you are less charitable than conservatives also

 

[Company 13]

read 1061, I knew where you were going. By the way even with those, government gets kickbacks from projects

Do you mean 1061 of the tax code?
As for the kickbacks, I don't like it, but we can't stop government services because people get kickbacks. They also get bribes. Homan.

 

[Frankenstein]

Do you mean 1061 of the tax code?
As for the kickbacks, I don't like it, but we can't stop government services because people get kickbacks. They also get bribes. Homan.

Post #1061

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Why do you oppose aggressive taxation of people making more than $250,000+ a year or $400,000+ a year annually?

History is littered with the answer(s)...look up "former communist states" or see "CUBA" The island paradise reduced to a patch of dirt.

 

[Company 13]

It still boils down to you coveting what someone else makes, my guess is you, like most progressive liberals don't pay more than you are asked to in taxes, start. According to stats you are less charitable than conservatives also

I don't covet anything. Well, I have paid more than I had to be only because it was easier to pay than to figure out how to fill out the forms to pay less. Now I have an accountant and get bigger refunds and now realize the amount I thought wasn't worth doing the work for was quite a bit.
Me? Less charitable. Not a chance. And I don't do the kind of charity you can count as a tax deduction. I am out in the trenches spending my own money to help those in need.
If "you" meant liberals in general, I doubt that's true. By the way, people can count money they give to their church as a charitable deduction. Then their kid gets to go to church summer camp and sometimes schools for free.

 

[Company 13]

Post #1061

I did see it and reacted to it. Thanks.

 

[dblack]

No one should be a libertarian without reading an article about why it won't work.

LOL - I've read lots of articles on why it won't work. All pushed by statists who want to government to control every-*******-thing. No thanks.

You might want Trump running every aspect of your life. I don't.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The classification of public services like schools, roads, police, and fire departments is a subject of ongoing debate, but many political and economic theorists agree that they are not inherently socialist.

Well duh.
-They are not means of producing wealth
-They are not means of distributing wealth.
Thus, they are not inherently socialist.

They do socialize the cost of fire protection., law enforcement, and education, but that just means, like car and house and health insurance, the cost is spread across the population, rather rather forcing each person to pay their costs themselves. That's - not- socialism.

Its funny how little socialists understand about socialism.

 

[dblack]

Its funny how little socialists understand about socialism.

Maybe they should read an article on it before commenting.

 

[Company 13]

LOL - I've read lots of articles on why it won't work. All pushed by statists who want to government to control every-*******-thing. No thanks.

You might want Trump running every aspect of your life. I don't.

The articles aren't written by statists who want government to control everything.
The articles explain it in a very logical way.

 

[Company 13]

Well duh.
-They are not means of producing wealth
-They are not means of distributing wealth.
Thus, they are not inherently socialist.

They do socialize the cost of fire protection., law enforcement, and education, but that just means, like car and house and health insurance, the cost is spread across the population, rather rather forcing each person to pay their costs themselves. That's - not- socialism.

Its funny how little socialists understand about socialism.

I think it's possible that you label too many people as socialists who are not.

Healthcare could be spread out across the population so that we are not forced to pay the costs ourselves.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The left worked on bipartisan legislation with Bush
Once Obama was elected, Republicans refused to work on any issue no matter how insignificant.

You reap what you sow

Elections have consequences.

 

[Company 13]

History is littered with the answer(s)...look up "former communist states" or see "CUBA" The island paradise reduced to a patch of dirt.

All because of a brutal far right wing evil dictator who was overthrown.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Elections have consequences.

Democrats can ride along, but they have to sit in the back of the bus.

 

[dblack]

The articles aren't written by statists who want government to control everything.
The articles explain it in a very logical way.

Of course.

 

[Robert W]

You miss the point. Oh, well, not everyone is good at math.

If your goal is to collect sufficient funds to pay for Government, the best way of all is to have the Feds levy sales taxes.

 

[Company 13]

If your goal is to collect sufficient funds to pay for Government, the best way of all is to have the Feds levy sales taxes.

Nope. That's a regressive tax. Horrible and unfair.
Anyway, Trump has already done that. That's what tariffs amount to. You do know that consumers in the US pay Trump's tariffs, right?