Unconstitutional

[VWBobby 10+ year member]

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/popcorn.gif.32dd9e22fd77e77bc3c907062768fcd2.gif Couldn't agree with you more Audiolife.

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/popcorn.gif.32dd9e22fd77e77bc3c907062768fcd2.gif Couldn't agree with you more Audiolife.

He is beyond and idiot all he is doing is showing the crap that lines up that means NOTHING to his argument and then tries to pretend with no direct implementation of any of his "facts" into our modern economic situation and some how thinks through the magic of the liberal unicorn everything will work. Higher tax rates will mean better economy with NOTHING in between. You might get a "government does it better" reply but anyone with a basic economics class knows that it is all Marxist propaganda drawn up by hacks who couldn't make it in the real world without being the immoral unethical hacks that they ***** about.- What is worse yet they do so to force a permanent class structure. More poor fewer rich but the rich will always be the same.

 

[hoxie08 5,000+ posts]

Retroaudioinc is a scammer do not do business with him

 

[VWBobby 10+ year member]

Exactly. If you follow the scheme of things, the only thing the new tax structure would do is make it harder for small businesses to survive. When small business dies, millions of jobs are lost. It drives the poor further into a corner and elevates the rich even higher. The people in the middle have 2 choices, join everyone at the bottom or somehow try to rise above everyone else....? How's that "trickle down economics" working for them? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/mad.gif.c18f003ab0ef8a0d9c27ca78d77a6392.gif

 

[hoxie08 5,000+ posts]

retroaudioinc is a scammer do not do business with him

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Your point is obvious. What should be even more obvious is how ridiculous comparing SLAVERY to higher taxes on the rich is. Not that it doesn't paint an accurate picture of your viewpoint in general. My point is that it's black and white that Slavery is a horrible evil, while taxing the rich more than the average person to combat homelessness or to help the average person live a little more comfortably isn't so bad.
Again, it just comes down to whether or not you have the compassion to care about others who are less fortunate than you. You'll of course call me an extremist to say that conservatives don't care about people, but that really is the only way to characterize it. How does saying that maintaining a rich person's ability to buy Ferraris or go yatching in their third or fourth houses in Florida more important than making sure everyone in this country has a roof over their head and food to eat translate into caring? Seriously, tell me, I want to know.

Its funny how you say my point is obvious, and then continue on your tangent that shows you either cant follow my point, or refuse to do so. The only comparison I made between slavery and your 90% tax idea, was to conclude both have been advocated by our govt in the past. The fact that you mention, that slavery is so obviously unfair, is the exact reaction my comparison was suppose to reveal. I say 90% tax rates are unfair, you say our govt has done it in the past. I say our govt has advocated slavery in the past, and you say '90% taxes and slavery arent the same thing'. No shit, sherlock. Get a clue, I get tired of waiting for your brain to play catch-up in these discussions.

Again, it just comes down to whether or not you have the compassion to care about others who are less fortunate than you.

Take that 'Democrats just care about less fortunate people' bullshit somewhere that people might be stupid enough to believe it, not here. First off, YOU would stand to benefit from your 90% tax structure. So when YOU advocate that tax structure, YOU are the people you refer to as 'less fortunate'. Secondly, Democrats like to pretend this is all about fairness, that poor poor average citizen who is 'less fortunate' than the elite richest 1%. Those same Democrats, people like you, fail to remember you are TAKING money from people who EARNED IT to play your little 'lets be fair and share' game. We've been through this before, frankly Im surprised you still think that failed line of reasoning will work on me. Im sure it helps you keep a sense of personal fairness as you are demanding benefits from someone elses money, but your little ego saving excuse does not work on me.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Yeah, we're all going to take someone seriously who uses terms like "super, super rich". Do you even understand how this country is run? Like I said 1000 times, G20 summit. We are part of a super power that is the top 20 countries in the world that get together to have a little pissing match (meeting) about how each country is going to run. Ever wonder why every few 100's or 1000's of years each dynasty takes a dump and another one rises like clockwork? Wake up sheep.

Its funny you mention the G20 summit. Its at the last G20 summit that China beat on us, the United States, for basically reneging on our debts to them by printing more money, devaluing the dollar, and devaluing the debt we owe to them. Our country is in a major fiscal crisis, and our politicians are simply printing more money to help the short-term and saying screw the long term effects. At what point do we need to stop thinking short term and start thinking long term?

 

[galacticmonkey 5,000+ posts]

I think every politician, elected official, and anybody else who has any say so in the federal, state, or local government, should be required to pass a basic college level economics course and be able to tell you what the Constitution says, by amendment. Without this they should not be able to take any office, or maintain any office. Sounds reasonable to me.

"Dear Mr/Mrs (anybody high up in any Presidential administration), what does the 9th Amendment say?"

"Uh.... Freedom of speech?

"No. GTFO my government."

 

[Proximity 10+ year member]

Since government is public sector and the economy is private sector the more money left in the private sector means there is more money to be earned and not handed out by government. You can not ignore what is happening in an economy and look at tax rates and say "see higher tax rates means better economy" for the very reasons I have stated. You can keep up with you ignorant rant all you want but there is no direct correlation due to "higher tax rate means better economy" your argument means about the same as "pollution makes humans live longer".

Yet you seem to be drawing a correlation between lower taxes = higher government revenue and more economic growth, and there is none.

 

[Proximity 10+ year member]

Its funny how you say my point is obvious, and then continue on your tangent that shows you either cant follow my point, or refuse to do so. The only comparison I made between slavery and your 90% tax idea, was to conclude both have been advocated by our govt in the past. The fact that you mention, that slavery is so obviously unfair, is the exact reaction my comparison was suppose to reveal. I say 90% tax rates are unfair, you say our govt has done it in the past. I say our govt has advocated slavery in the past, and you say '90% taxes and slavery arent the same thing'. No shit, sherlock. Get a clue, I get tired of waiting for your brain to play catch-up in these discussions.

Believe it or not, a point can be understood though not agreed with. I understand the point you're making, but it's bullshit. Even though our government allowed it, Slavery was an obviously horrible practice. Taxing the rich is nowhere near as horrible as slavery (and I'm obviously arguing that it isn't bad at all). Thus, your comparison is invalid. I know what you're trying to say, but slavery and taxing the rich are nowhere near comparable. Sorry.

Take that 'Democrats just care about less fortunate people' bullshit somewhere that people might be stupid enough to believe it, not here.

Why, because you have no counter to it? Like I said (you know, the part that you conveniently left out of your quote. I wonder why), it's impossible to characterize it any other way.

First off, YOU would stand to benefit from your 90% tax structure. So when YOU advocate that tax structure, YOU are the people you refer to as 'less fortunate'.

Yeah, me and the other 294 million people in this country who would stand to benefit from it. But you're most worried about the 3 million who making millions of dollars a year instead of the 100 million who barely have enough money to pay their bills. It's like asking someone if they would punch 1 person in the arm to save the lives of 30 people and saying that it's unfair because that 1 person doesn't deserve to be punched in the arm.

Secondly, Democrats like to pretend this is all about fairness, that poor poor average citizen who is 'less fortunate' than the elite richest 1%.

Wait, the poorest people in the country aren't really less fortunate than the richest 1%?

Those same Democrats, people like you, fail to remember you are TAKING money from people who EARNED IT to play your little 'lets be fair and share' game.

Yeah, they earned it by working so hard, pleading with god to be born into a rich family. You really think that anything but a small minority of the richest people in this country weren't born into wealth? You're really that naive? I'm not saying they simply inherited all of their money or something, but the education they received and connections they were able to make (no what, but who you know) would have never happened if they didn't come from an affluent family.

Regardless, you really think the CEO of goldman sachs works so hard he has actually deserves to make over 20 million dollars a year? It's not like you have small business owners making $500k a year. He's doing good if he's generating that much in revenue.

You think George W Bush would have ever became president if he wasn't born into wealth?

 

[Proximity 10+ year member]

Traitor...should be shot. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/boink.gif.91933e72f927f2cefc79aff02573090c.gif

So you can hate your government and align yourself with those who think it should be small and only cover the basic needs and that government is distrustful blah blah blah, but when someone actually comes out and talks about the lies of government and what not, they're a traitor who you want to shoot? Double standard anyone? Do you realize how stupid you are.

Hilariously enough, I'm sure this is happening everywhere on the right, while it's those on the left who mostly commend Assange for what he is doing. Classic.

 

[AlterEgo99 5,000+ posts]

Merry Christmas Prox! //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/boink.gif.91933e72f927f2cefc79aff02573090c.gif//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wave.gif.002382ce7d7c19757ab945cc69819de1.gif

Oh, and to audioholic and audiolife, Merry Christmas as well my fine Internez friends. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/celebrate.gif.82eef51c49c9919296cb60fd0d148863.gif//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wave.gif.002382ce7d7c19757ab945cc69819de1.gif

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

Yet you seem to be drawing a correlation between lower taxes = higher government revenue and more economic growth, and there is none.

Really? So the economy really shrunk under Reagan vs Carter and Carter was just so good he got smashed by Reagan and Reagan ****** so bad he blew away Micheal Dukakis? Sweet , that goes along the lines of Obama's incoherent rant about being a really good 1 term president...which means he does not care about what the people want but only his ideology which in turn means he is tyrannical which totally ignores the "for the people by the people" saying in our government's founding. Jolly good for you to point that out Proxy, I am impressed.

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

So you can hate your government and align yourself with those who think it should be small and only cover the basic needs and that government is distrustful blah blah blah, but when someone actually comes out and talks about the lies of government and what not, they're a traitor who you want to shoot? Double standard anyone? Do you realize how stupid you are.
Hilariously enough, I'm sure this is happening everywhere on the right, while it's those on the left who mostly commend Assange for what he is doing. Classic.

Lets see so you admit government lies but you pick and choose the lies to advance the causes to your liking. Thanks for pointing that out as well. Bigger government that lies must just lie better then.

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

Believe it or not, a point can be understood though not agreed with. I understand the point you're making, but it's bullshit. Even though our government allowed it, Slavery was an obviously horrible practice. Taxing the rich is nowhere near as horrible as slavery (and I'm obviously arguing that it isn't bad at all). Thus, your comparison is invalid. I know what you're trying to say, but slavery and taxing the rich are nowhere near comparable. Sorry.Wow a leftist trying to take the moral high ground against the left. Like minded people were the cause of slavery and segregation in this country. They were also pro big government and more pro socialist. Even the man in your picture expanded on Woodrow Wilson's vision which expanded the need for the Civil Rights Act.

Why, because you have no counter to it? Like I said (you know, the part that you conveniently left out of your quote. I wonder why), it's impossible to characterize it any other way.

Democrats are never responsible for any bad then huh? That is a historic blunder on your part.

Yeah, me and the other 294 million people in this country who would stand to benefit from it. But you're most worried about the 3 million who making millions of dollars a year instead of the 100 million who barely have enough money to pay their bills. It's like asking someone if they would punch 1 person in the arm to save the lives of 30 people and saying that it's unfair because that 1 person doesn't deserve to be punched in the arm.

Please tell us all the great benefits we would all gain. Do all those people on welfare barely get by? Are those people you want to keep on welfare figured into your statistics?

Wait, the poorest people in the country aren't really less fortunate than the richest 1%?

Created equal is a rights issue not a "we all get the samethings no matter what we do with our lives issue".

Yeah, they earned it by working so hard, pleading with god to be born into a rich family. You really think that anything but a small minority of the richest people in this country weren't born into wealth? You're really that naive? I'm not saying they simply inherited all of their money or something, but the education they received and connections they were able to make (no what, but who you know) would have never happened if they didn't come from an affluent family.

Regardless, you really think the CEO of goldman sachs works so hard he has actually deserves to make over 20 million dollars a year? It's not like you have small business owners making $500k a year. He's doing good if he's generating that much in revenue.

You think George W Bush would have ever became president if he wasn't born into wealth?

You are a Marxist class warfare type aren't you? It's not OK for Goldman Sachs but it is OK for Franklin Raines of Fannie Mae?

Could the same thing be said about Jimmy Carter as Bush? Funny part is Carter won a Nobel for getting NOTHING done (so did terrorist leader Yasir Arafat) Bush did more in good Africa than both Carter and Arafat.