No one really wants to pay higher taxes

[garbage can]

See the first graph of post #17. And, it's not my infinite wisdom; anyone who has taken the time to understand the problem can explain it to you. You just have to want to understand it for yourself.

In brief, the issue is to spend rationally instead of irrationally, the latter being what we have now. If you decide that an "allowance" system is what's required, then you're essentially writing off property and people that haven't been budgeted for in said "allowance". A rational plan would be to have an allowance AND the ability to cover unexpected spending, say like the kind necessary to rebuild parts of Arkansas after the tornadoes there recently. A rational plan would also ensure that any new spend would have to be offset by a reduction in spending elsewhere. A rational plan would do away with the almost $4B/year subsidy the sugar industry gets from the government. But tell that to Congress, who has kept what was supposed to be a temporary measure put in place during the Great Depression and is still sucking at the government's teet today.

You sound like a Republican.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Someone beat you to that punchline, bub.

But you, you I hope never change. There's too much comedy in what you post.

[garbage can]

Please, in your infiniter wisdom, do explain the "punchline"

While you're at it, please explain the essence of "bub."

[/garbage can]

 

[garbage can]

[garbage can]

Please, in your infiniter wisdom, do explain the "punchline"

While you're at it, please explain the essence of "bub."

[/garbage can]

You quoted Islandman, please direct your questions to him.

 

[RobDownSouth]

You quoted Islandman, please direct your questions to him.

Same old Garby.
Really good at asking questions of others.
Not so good at answering questions asked by others.

 

[islandman]

You sound like a Republican.

Were that the only measure of a Republican, then I would be one.

But I have no interest in a government so small as to fit into my bedroom or a woman's vagina. I also think that government should stand for those unable to stand on their own instead of thinking them less than simply because of their lot in life. I also don't think that money should buy access or votes. Finally, I despise those who love America, but hate Americans.

I am an independent and proud of it.

 

[Sean Renaud]

It is an absolute truth that no one wants to pay higher taxes..............there are more than a few that do want everyone else to pay higher taxes. It is that very fact that enables the democrat party.

Ishmael

There are plenty of people who accept that higher taxes may be necessary to running the country. I mean sure it's an absolute truth that no one wants to pay higher anything. The rent being too damn high doesn't lead to masses of people living in tents however or giving up their cable.

America has a price and it's one we're often unhappy to pay not all of us are like that.

Correct. He pays a lower tax rate because that's the way the tax laws are written.

Then change the fucking laws. Someone wrote them, many people today look at the fact that Buffet pays lower taxes than his secretary as bullshit. So don't tell us about how it's written, defend why it functions that way or help us change it to a system that more of us think is ideal.

I suspect that like most Republicans you think the way it's currently written is ideal and perfect and anything potentially wrong with it stems from taxes being too high across the board but I'll try not to put words in your mouth since magically your the one Republican who thinks we should raise taxes.

 

[Amberchgo]

Then change the fucking laws. .

That's the job of congress dear. I live in Chicago. All we have are Dems. Dems in the city. Dems in the County. Dems in the state.

I'm thinking all my so-called representatives have been trying to increase the taxes. Heck, in Illinois they were successful at increasing income taxes by 67%.


Oh .. and always using the word "fuck" or "fucking" in your posts doesn't do much to impress people.

 

[Que]

There are plenty of people who accept that <other people paying> higher taxes may be necessary to running the country. I mean sure it's an absolute truth that no one wants to pay higher anything. The rent being too damn high doesn't lead to masses of people living in tents however or giving up their cable.

America has a price and it's one we're often unhappy to pay not all of us are like that.



Then change the fucking laws. Someone wrote them, many people today look at the fact that Buffet pays lower taxes than his secretary as bullshit. So don't tell us about how it's written, defend why it functions that way or help us change it to a system that more of us think is ideal.

I suspect that like most Republicans you think the way it's currently written is ideal and perfect and anything potentially wrong with it stems from taxes being too high across the board but I'll try not to put words in your mouth since magically your the one Republican who thinks we should raise taxes.

There fixed it. That's the whole point of the thread...no there aren't people that vote to tax themselves. Ever.

That's the whole reason those of you that think government fixes anything it touches want the National government to do the spending. It is able to deficit spend where your locality can not.

If there was a grain of truth in what you said, everyone would be insisting on local control and taxation so they could levy each other for the services they feel the government should provide. A lot easier to push through a school over-ride (but what about the children!) then it is to beg the money from the feds.

There aren't plenty of people asking for their bracket to be increased. There IS a place on your tax forms to make a voluntary contribution. Use it

 

[unregistered]

 

[islandman]

Leave it to Islandman to come unwound over a savings of 0.1% of the federal budget.

1) Way to miss the broader point. Even garbage_can got it, hence why he thought I sounded like a Republican; guess you won't unless it's spoonfed to you by breibart;

2) Given that neither I nor garbage_can were discussing figures, I'm going to assume you pulled that percentage out of wherever it is you store your shit for later distribution.

 

[Sean Renaud]

There fixed it. That's the whole point of the thread...no there aren't people that vote to tax themselves. Ever.

That's the whole reason those of you that think government fixes anything it touches want the National government to do the spending. It is able to deficit spend where your locality can not.

If there was a grain of truth in what you said, everyone would be insisting on local control and taxation so they could levy each other for the services they feel the government should provide. A lot easier to push through a school over-ride (but what about the children!) then it is to beg the money from the feds.

There aren't plenty of people asking for their bracket to be increased. There IS a place on your tax forms to make a voluntary contribution. Use it

I've voted to tax myself. There are plenty of people who vote to tax themselves. Come to California someday.

Your second paragraph doesn't make sense.

Local control doesn't work. We're a country, no a colection of independent city states. If we need to break into 50 countries because this shit isn't working anymore so be it but no, local control is insanity.

There are people who accept that taxes are too low period. A voluntary contribution is stupid. I don't even know why that's there.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

It is an absolute truth that no one wants to pay higher taxes..............there are more than a few that do want everyone else to pay higher taxes. It is that very fact that enables the democrat party.

Ishmael

I'd pay higher taxes. It would allow me to keep more of my paycheck.

 

[Bry1313]

I've voted for higher property taxes a number of times for our local school district.

 

[girlsmiley]

There are plenty of people who accept that higher taxes may be necessary to running the country. I mean sure it's an absolute truth that no one wants to pay higher anything.

Ha. My friends and I were discussing something similar the other day. More later. Time to go to work.

 

[Liar]

You sound like a Republican.

No. He sounds like a fiscal conservative.

 

[Bry1313]

No. He sounds like a fiscal conservative.

Given fiscal trends of the last three GOP presidencies, it's pretty clear that GOP does not equal fiscal conservative.

 

[Liar]

I'd pay higher taxes. It would allow me to keep more of my paycheck.

Let's see if anyone gets cross-eyed from reading that, or if they get it.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I've voted for higher property taxes a number of times for our local school district.

I've done that too.

Ha. My friends and I were discussing something similar the other day. More later. Time to go to work.

Well duh. I think in the history of the world the number of people who'd say they want to pay more for something can be counted on one hand. When you phrase it as do you want more money to be available for something and are you willing to pay for it you get a different answer. I can't tell you how many times in California I've voted to raise the sales tax, I think the las time was for that bullet train they refuse to build.

I'd pay higher taxes. It would allow me to keep more of my paycheck.

Let's see if anyone gets cross-eyed from reading that, or if they get it.

I'll admit my brain did not process that correctly. I went all crosseyed squinty then remembered I'm supposed to be workin on my porn stories and shrugged.

 

[garbage can]

Let's see if anyone gets cross-eyed from reading that, or if they get it.

I thought about it, but didn't get it.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

I thought about it, but didn't get it.

http://bite-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/iago-burn.gif

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

It's interesting to note that it's called "hypocrisy" when championing for the other team, yet it's "business as usual" when shilling for the Republican party.

He's a capitalist, a dyed in the wool member of the money party. He doesn't give a damn if his secretary pays more in taxes than he does. Anyone who thought otherwise ought to check back into the hospital and complete that lobotomy.

When do I shill for the Republican Party?

Are you a Democrat shill?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I've voted to tax myself. There are plenty of people who vote to tax themselves. Come to California someday.

Your second paragraph doesn't make sense.

Local control doesn't work. We're a country, no a colection of independent city states. If we need to break into 50 countries because this shit isn't working anymore so be it but no, local control is insanity.

There are people who accept that taxes are too low period. A voluntary contribution is stupid. I don't even know why that's there.

“Like most of her neighborhood, she was a fighting liberal, fighting to have her money taken from her. For all her exertions, it never was.”
John Updike

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

See the first graph of post #17. And, it's not my infinite wisdom; anyone who has taken the time to understand the problem can explain it to you. You just have to want to understand it for yourself.

In brief, the issue is to spend rationally instead of irrationally, the latter being what we have now. If you decide that an "allowance" system is what's required, then you're essentially writing off property and people that haven't been budgeted for in said "allowance". A rational plan would be to have an allowance AND the ability to cover unexpected spending, say like the kind necessary to rebuild parts of Arkansas after the tornadoes there recently. A rational plan would also ensure that any new spend would have to be offset by a reduction in spending elsewhere. A rational plan would do away with the almost $4B/year subsidy the sugar industry gets from the government. But tell that to Congress, who has kept what was supposed to be a temporary measure put in place during the Great Depression and is still sucking at the government's teet today.

The problem here is that rational is a subjective term and when we operate on preferential treatment, then sugar is going to win because you are now making a political calculation rather than an economic decision. Congress is never going to cede power and power is spelled taxes and the fact that you view everyone who disagrees with you even slightly as "a Republican shill" gives them exactly the tool they need to keep that power; divided, we are conquered.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Post #17

Is you daughter responsible for spending on emergencies, such as floods or tornatoes? What happens if a bridge is in urgent need of repair, but that wasn't factored into her allowance? Will you force her to drive over said bridge regardless of the risk until there's allowance set aside for that?

The analogy is comforting - right up there with the tried-and-true "If I have to balance my checkbook, then so should the government - but it isn't based in reality. The government isn't anyone's daughter because when push comes to shove, the government can't turn around and ask "daddy" for help. The problem isn't one of not holding steadfast to an allowance, but rather the daughter thinking that she's got an unlimited credit card.

See the first graph of post #17. And, it's not my infinite wisdom; anyone who has taken the time to understand the problem can explain it to you. You just have to want to understand it for yourself.

In brief, the issue is to spend rationally instead of irrationally, the latter being what we have now. If you decide that an "allowance" system is what's required, then you're essentially writing off property and people that haven't been budgeted for in said "allowance". A rational plan would be to have an allowance AND the ability to cover unexpected spending, say like the kind necessary to rebuild parts of Arkansas after the tornadoes there recently. A rational plan would also ensure that any new spend would have to be offset by a reduction in spending elsewhere. A rational plan would do away with the almost $4B/year subsidy the sugar industry gets from the government. But tell that to Congress, who has kept what was supposed to be a temporary measure put in place during the Great Depression and is still sucking at the government's teet today.

...

 

[Saint Peter]

When do I shill for the Republican Party?

When you computer is on and your lips are flapping.