Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MisterDeadeye" data-source="post: 7925157" data-attributes="member: 611015">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.</blockquote>

Verification

Top

What's new

Forum list