hey republicans

Now, obviously, I'm operating under a few key assumptions which are:

1) Those with wealth no longer hoard it out of greed

2) Those at or under the poverty line do their fair share of work to step up

3) Government works as one, not as two separate entities fighting over who has more power(seriously, you take pride in grid locking Obama so that nothing gets done based on your idea of liberty? It's called evolution -- it's time to evolve. There are other people who inhabit this country. We don't care about your games.)
I believe the tax code needs to be revised to somehow tie tax rates to profits and how well the workers of a company are payed. Many of these people get rich on the backs of the middle class.

The deficit is obviously an issue, a huge one, possibly ending with a catastrophic failure for the economy, and there may actually be no coming back. I blame Washington DC. I blame partisan bickering and power grabs that have gone on for the past several decades, and more importantly the past 15 years or so. I blame the media for blatantly polarizing the country nearly down the middle and creating this in the first place. However, I do not blame Bush. Or Clinton. Or Obama. They are not the problem.
Agreed, I think that every person who gets a paycheck, welfare or social security should have a certain percentage taken out every week. Flat amount no deduction, reductions loopholes, everyone pays, just to pay off the deficit. Figure out what if would take to get it payed off in a reasonable amount of time and get it payed off.

Honestly, I probably should have posted elsewhere. This was essentially a political trolling thread, so there might not have really been a use in trying to talk to the people posting.
This!

 
First, how is it an exaggeration to imply that one cannot be born poor and eventually own Coca-Cola? I was providing you with a fact that supports the fact that people in this country are not born with equal opportunity. There's no possible way to interject with the idea that I was exaggerating. It's an analogy based on facts.
I never said that families are dying all across America. I said there were some people with these problems. Those are the people who do not have the opportunity to better themselves. The people you're describing are lower middle class. I'm lower middle class. You're lower middle class. The fact is, even the lower middle class is towing poverty. I used to eat Ramen every day, or ground beef and rice. While we were poor, at least we were able to feed ourselves.

I had two part time jobs between the age of 16 and 18, and went to a university the fall after I graduated. I eventually dropped out(for personal reasons, nothing about the work being too hard or because of money), and now I love a much different lifestyle. I don't have much, but I am not angry or jealous of those wealthier than I am. I'm grateful to be where I am, to have the opportunities I have. Many kids I went to school with weren't able to get the education that I got(yes, even in the same school -- education depends on more than classes, while they do matter). Many of them did not graduate, and had to do different things. Some went to the labor workforce, some got pregnant and had to go on welfare, some had to start dealing drugs, and some tried to become famous rappers. None of the people I went to school with are the types of people I am talking about. They all have real opportunities based on where we are in the country.

Feel free to answer even one of my questions. I'd honestly like to know, if you want to have a real discussion. If you're just going to speak angrily about moochers, I'd really prefer for you to just let me know now before I continue trying to talk to you. If you're able to put aside those emotions, or at least understand that the problems you're describing can be fixed, then we can actually discuss the ideas I've presented.

Honestly, I probably should have posted elsewhere. This was essentially a political trolling thread, so there might not have really been a use in trying to talk to the people

I could have tried harder in Highschool and went to college i chose not to . But there is no reason someone can't make a decent living no matter how poor you grow up . That's all i was saying i agree not everyone can be rich but they can make a 100% improvement on their situation if they try.
 
David just give up......Looks like you have found yourself here!!!!


Brickwall.jpg
Why would you go out of your way to prove my point?

This process of:

1) Insult the other side

2) Egg on your side

3) Rinse/repeat

Is exactly why the country is in the position that it's in. Partisan "na na na na boo boo" is counterproductive. Prove me wrong. Show me how I'm wrong. I dare you to take the time to actually put thought into an argument beyond "You're stupid". I'll gladly respond in an adult manner, trying to get my point across. If you noticed, I've addressed every point that David(cool, now I can put a name to the username) has brought up.

Here, just answer this one question. If a bill was written up, and you were the deciding vote for it to become law, would you vote yes or no to sharing a small percentage(1% or so) of your taxable income to help out a family who would otherwise be incapable of going anywhere with their collective lives? Disregard the possibility of someone taking advantage of this system. In this bill, that has been addressed. Someone who cheats the system as a result of this bill will be imprisoned. Justice will be served.

Now multiply that single family by 1,000,000, all in the same position, and rethink your answer. If you had the chance to give up 1% of your income, so that those without opportunity would have it, would you say yes or no? Why or why not?

 
Why would you go out of your way to prove my point?
This process of:

1) Insult the other side

2) Egg on your side

3) Rinse/repeat

Is exactly why the country is in the position that it's in. Partisan "na na na na boo boo" is counterproductive. Prove me wrong. Show me how I'm wrong. I dare you to take the time to actually put thought into an argument beyond "You're stupid". I'll gladly respond in an adult manner, trying to get my point across. If you noticed, I've addressed every point that David(cool, now I can put a name to the username) has brought up.

Here, just answer this one question. If a bill was written up, and you were the deciding vote for it to become law, would you vote yes or no to sharing a small percentage(1% or so) of your taxable income to help out a family who would otherwise be incapable of going anywhere with their collective lives? Disregard the possibility of someone taking advantage of this system. In this bill, that has been addressed. Someone who cheats the system as a result of this bill will be imprisoned. Justice will be served.

Now multiply that single family by 1,000,000, all in the same position, and rethink your answer. If you had the chance to give up 1% of your income, so that those without opportunity would have it, would you say yes or no? Why or why not?





And you missed the ENTIRE point of my post........It is really pointless to argue politics because YOU are NEVER going to change his mind about his feelings as HE is NEVER going to change yours..........Just agree to disagree.......

And I don't really claim to any party......But Capitalism has brought MORE people up out of poverty than Socialism ever has.........No-one is saying that we shouldn't help the poor.....We as Americans have always done that on our own that's what made this country great........Talk to immigrants that have come here to escape countries like Cuba that have Socialism in full effect....I personally think that the government we have interferes in ALL our lives a little too much but that seems to be the way most of the electorate here wants it.....How much intervention should the government have in our lives?.......I love this country but I think it's headed in the wrong direction but I am just one man and that's my opinion......I want everyone of us to have the best opportunities available and prosper but those opportunities should be earned........

The problem with your big tax idea is you guys think that if taxes are raised on the wealthy that they are going to keep working just as hard and doing the same things that they were doing before and that is simply not true......What is the incentive for the wealthy to push forward with creating new jobs and growing their businesses and incomes if it is PUNISHED........Every time in the past that tax rates were lowered the revenue into the Federal gov went up and that's because when people get to KEEP more of what they earn they put more back into the system and therefore more revenue is created.........Even our current president admitted this on National TV right after his first election and he stated "It's about Fairness"....so even he knows that raising taxes on the rich will result in LESS revenue and not to mention JOB LOSSES.......

 
Why would you go out of your way to prove my point?
This process of:

1) Insult the other sidE

2) Egg on your side

3) Rinse/repeat

Is exactly why the country is in the position that it's in. Partisan "na na na na boo boo" is counterproductive. Prove me wrong. Show me how I'm wrong. I dare you to take the time to actually put thought into an argument beyond "You're stupid". I'll gladly respond in an adult manner, trying to get my point across. If you noticed, I've addressed every point that David(cool, now I can put a name to the username) has brought up.

Here, just answer this one question. If a bill was written up, and you were the deciding vote for it to become law, would you vote yes or no to sharing a small percentage(1% or so) of your taxable income to help out a family who would otherwise be incapable of going anywhere with their collective lives? Disregard the possibility of someone taking advantage of this system. In this bill, that has been addressed. Someone who cheats the system as a result of this bill will be imprisoned. Justice will be served.

Now multiply that single family by 1,000,000, all in the same position, and rethink your answer. If you had the chance to give up 1% of your income, so that those without opportunity would have it, would you say yes or no? Why or why not?
Your absence did not go unnoticed. Welcome back, sir.

 
And you missed the ENTIRE point of my post........It is really pointless to argue politics because YOU are NEVER going to change his mind about his feelings as HE is NEVER going to change yours..........Just agree to disagree.......

And I don't really claim to any party......But Capitalism has brought MORE people up out of poverty than Socialism ever has.........No-one is saying that we shouldn't help the poor.....We as Americans have always done that on our own that's what made this country great........Talk to immigrants that have come here to escape countries like Cuba that have Socialism in full effect....I personally think that the government we have interferes in ALL our lives a little too much but that seems to be the way most of the electorate here wants it.....How much intervention should the government have in our lives?.......I love this country but I think it's headed in the wrong direction but I am just one man and that's my opinion......I want everyone of us to have the best opportunities available and prosper but those opportunities should be earned........

The problem with your big tax idea is you guys think that if taxes are raised on the wealthy that they are going to keep working just as hard and doing the same things that they were doing before and that is simply not true......What is the incentive for the wealthy to push forward with creating new jobs and growing their businesses and incomes if it is PUNISHED........Every time in the past that tax rates were lowered the revenue into the Federal gov went up and that's because when people get to KEEP more of what they earn they put more back into the system and therefore more revenue is created.........Even our current president admitted this on National TV right after his first election and he stated "It's about Fairness"....so even he knows that raising taxes on the rich will result in LESS revenue and not to mention JOB LOSSES.......
Okay, firstly, I never said I promote socialism. I promote capitism, and agree that it's the only known way to keep an economy going. I literally said this in an earlier post. I suggest that you look up socialism so that you can understand it to see that nothing I have said this far has related to socialism in any way. I'm talking about liberal social policies. The only similarity is the word social. They're implement different.

And no, the idea that politics is a brick wall argument is fairly new. There were hundreds of years of debate and compromise, all the way up through early 20th century. There is no point in agreeing to disagree, at least on some issues. Agreeing to disagree turns into the feeling that those who disagree are ignorant or stupid. I want compromise, discussion, the finding of truth. I am not a brick wall, my opinions on politics have changed drastically over the past year, even! Just a year ago, on this very site, I was trying to argue in favor of socialism. As I began to truly understand what socialism is, I realized that I was not promoting socialism, but social liberalism.

Contrary to the picture I've seemingly painted in this topic, I do not want big government. I just believe that government can/should adopt new/different roles based on the social status of Americans today. I would not have voted for Obama if any other candidate held the same social views. At least Obama claims to care about people. Some of his policies reflect this. Some of his other policies, I feel, take away liberty from us in a very bad, unsettling way.

As for the tax idea, I've already talked about the incentive of paying an extra 1%. The incentive is that the large amount of people in poverty would potentially be a contributing part of society, and more importantly, the economy, giving everyone more money, the wealthy included! Once those who need the money no longer need it, the taxes are gone. It is not permanent.

And you're looking at it incorrectly. For the sake of this argument, understand that you used the wrong words. You are not punished for making money. You are obligated to share it. I know, it's a hard thing to grasp. If someone takes your money, you have a right to be angry, even if that someone is the government. What we need to do is realize that there are people in need. There really are. I'm not making it up, or trying to twist data to prove my point. There are people who will never have the opportunity to learn geometry or see a washing machine. They cannot do anything for themselves, literally. They are incapable.

What you need to do is acknowledge that and have compassion. If you care about them, you're more willing to share with them. Back to my cookie analogy, let's say you are with two other children. You have a full bag of candy. You worked for it, and it's yours. One of the others(kid 2) has half of a bag of candy, and the last(kid 3) has an empty bag. Now, assume that the other kids worked just as hard as you did, but kid 3 lives in a poor neighborhood where there are no people who give out candy. Kid 2 understands this, but you do not.

Kid 2 has an adult offer kid 3 ten percent of his earnings out of compassion. You are confused, and ask kid 2 why he did what he did. He answers, "Because kid 3 is poor and couldn't get his own candy. I had some extra so I gave him some of mine." You look down at your bag, and come to a realization. You have so much candy! So, you give the adult ten percent of your candy to kid 3 and feel good knowing that he will never forget what you did(let's assume that this was special candy or something...)

Now, let's redo the scenario, only before kid 2 lets you know that kid 3 is poor, an adult(who knows all of your candy amounts, and where you live) comes and takes ten percent of yours and kid 2's candy and gives it to kid 3. You're obviously confused and outraged. Kid 2, however, is unphased, and actually smiles at the adult as he is taking away his candy. The difference is that kid 2 understands what's going on, and you don't.

Think about that. Think about how it can relate to the nation and money. Now, it's much harder to convince an adult of a reality that they never knew existed(can't teach an old dog new tricks), hence the idea that political arguments are brick walls, but the thing is, with proper education and training, an old dog can start fetching in no time.

(Fetching = having compassion for those less fortunate than you)

I could come up with a better set of analogies, but I had to just go with something on the fly because my phone is almost dead. I know it's not perfect, but hopefully it gets my point across.

As long as there are angry, conservative media outlets, ignorance, and misunderstanding, there will be people who think that if they give up any of their money, it's going to potheads and *** crazed young girls.

tl;dr: It's all about perception. If you knew that the small percentage of your earnings went to someone who would potentially work for you, and come up with a new product for you to sell(or in your case, developed a new algorithm for making the best possible box for a given application), wouldn't you be willing to give it up? Wouldn't you do it without the government's help?

Would you notice an extra 1% tax on your earnings? How big of a difference would it make on your day-to-day life? Conversely, how much would that extra money help out the kind of person I'm talking about? Which difference is bigger? Do you think it would be worth it to give up the 1%? Just food for thought, I don't need an answer.

By the way, Obama recently spoke about vetoing any budget reform that does not tax the ultra-rich. Are you sure he does not think that taxing the rich is the right way to go? That's what the biggest issue was with the grid lock last term. And by the way, I'm not talking about taxing the rich to solve the deficit issue. I'm not saying that at all. I'm talking about proposing a new tax on everyone, ranging from 0-1%(0 being everyone at or under the poverty line, 1 being $1mil+ salary) to help get people out of poverty, along with helping the education system and living conditions of everyone in the country. Once those specific problems are solved, the tax is gone and the economy is booming.

 
Your absence did not go unnoticed. Welcome back, sir.
Thanks, man. My laptop somewhat recently broke, and I haven't cared enough to get a new one. I haven't done anything car audio related for months, but it feels good to be back and contribute again. It seems a few things have changed(your avatar included).

 
Thanks, man. My laptop somewhat recently broke, and I haven't cared enough to get a new one. I haven't done anything car audio related for months, but it feels good to be back and contribute again. It seems a few things have changed(your avatar included).
I think i'm going to put a big ol', red, Urkin Empire decal on my back windshield, too, lol. Invader Zim is awesome.

Also, I consider myself to be kid two in your scenario. The funny thing is, I make very little compared to many of the people on here(under 20,000 a year). However, I know that our country, and our people, need the help right now.

 
I think i'm going to put a big ol', red, Urkin Empire decal on my back windshield, too, lol. Invader Zim is awesome.
Also, I consider myself to be kid two in your scenario. The funny thing is, I make very little compared to many of the people on here(under 20,000 a year). However, I know that our country, and our people, need the help right now.
I'm kid two as well. I am far from wealthy, but I recognize the fact that I am far luckier many people in the country and that I should do my fair share to help people out. I would gladly welcome a 1% tax set aside for such things. I buy from local butchers and farmer's markets(in the summer), grow my own produce to can and preserve, get drinking water from a spring rather than using tap, and try to buy American made products when I can. I care about the economy, and our freedom, and the general welfare of my fellow people. I do not particularly care for China and Chinese products, mostly on the basis of how unhappy their people are.

I am trying to cut spending where I can, and spend the rest of my money correctly. Until I'm in the position to donate thousands to charities, I am doing what I can.

 
Here is the comment from the man whom is now president........Now my question to you is "Does the term FAIRNESS sound like Capitalism or Socialism?"...I don't care how much the Hedge fund managers make that is their business HELL they took all of the risk investing it and do you really think that wealthy people like them don't contribute to charities and our economy?....Wealthy people buy goods and services just like all of us do they are just buying BIGGER ticket items and not to mention a lot of the wealthy that are demonized pay our salaries......Those are the people we all work for...Have you ever had a poor person sign your payroll check?....This is what the man (Pres Obama) believes (socialism) and you can put your head in the sand and ignore it if you would like to.......I was mistaken about the TYPE of tax but the point is still the same he (Obama) doesn't care if the GOV gets less revenue as long as the ones at the TOP are punished for their success......I understand you wanting to give up a little more tax to help out the underprivileged that need it but this Gov is spending money our country doesn't have at such a high rate of speed it will NEVER get paid back no matter how much YOU and others give them in 1% increments.......If the Gov confiscated EVERY dollar earned above $250,000 it would run our Gov for 138 days!!!!!!!......And the FORTUNE 500 companies earn about 400 Billion a year in profits, if the Gov confiscated that too that it would run it for 40 more days.........I don't believe you guys will ever see the FOREST for the TREES...........BOTH PARTIES need to stop spending money like we have plenty of it........In 2012 we are borrowing 43 CENTS of EVERY dollar they spend that's 4 times the amount it was in 1980....I appreciate your passion for wanting to help your fellow man but do it VIA charities...You wouldn't give your money to a bank that was burning it in a burn barrel out back would ya?.....That's in essence what you're doing with it when you hand it over to our precious GOV.......So be my guest and give them every dollar you think you don't need above your bills and necessities I personally think THEY(Gov) have enough and are SERIOUSLY mismanaging what they are getting now!!!......I don't like contributing my money to PONZI schemes......When a CEO of a corporation mismanages money like this they get FIRED.......We need to replenish Washington with an ENTIRE new group of PEOPLE that love this country the way a lot of us do!!!!!!.........It's "WE THE PEOPLE"...........

Obama Raise Taxes, Capital Gains - For Purposes of Fairness 2008 - Video Dailymotion

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And I don't really claim to any party......But Capitalism has brought MORE people up out of poverty than Socialism ever has
You realize it's possible to have neither 100% capitalism nor 100% socialism, right? You realize that our economy is currently a mix between capitalism and socialism, right? This is why it's impossible to actually have a productive discussion with most conservatives, because instead of them living in the real world and basing their arguments off of it, they just fabricate a reality where every liberal just wants sure socialism and a complete destruction capitalism.

Yes, socialism is bad. Pure socialism. By that same token, so is capitalism. PURE capitalism. Can you understand the different between socialism, capitalism and a mixed economy?

What is the incentive for the wealthy to push forward with creating new jobs and growing their businesses and incomes if it is
Yes, because being taxed 50% of $1,000,000 is just so much worse than only being taxed 10% on $50,000 income. Rich people have it so hard.

Like MisterDeadeye said, you're basing your arguments on factless emotion. Argue with facts. Taxes on the rich are much less than when our economy was booming and the middle class was stronger.

 
If anything, the contraceptive thing enhances peoples freedom of religion. Why should sane people be punished for batshit religious people's batshit objection to contraceptives? If a woman wants contraception on her policy, she should be able to get it regardless of her employer.

Or how about your 2nd amendment rights?
Right not to be killed by guns > Right to own guns. If the people who wrote the bill of rights had to re-write it today, I guarantee that with the guns readily available now that weren't then, the second amendment would be WAY more specific or not exist at all.

 
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...

About this thread

THATpurpleKUSH

5,000+ posts
Fuckyou
Thread starter
THATpurpleKUSH
Joined
Location
Slums of the Shaolin
Start date
Participants
Who Replied
Replies
383
Views
7,323
Last reply date
Last reply from
quackhead
IMG_20260516_193114554_HDR.jpg

sherbanater

    May 16, 2026
  • 0
  • 0
IMG_20260516_192955471_HDR.jpg

sherbanater

    May 16, 2026
  • 0
  • 0

New threads

Top