Thread: What tax rate IS Fair? Is there REALLY a fair flat tax rate anymore?

Originally Posted by C-B-M

Again, that's not true for a few reasons. First of all, if people love, love, loves them their big government, why don't liberals just run on it? That is, liberals may go to small campaign stops here and there with union constituents and talk about "we'll get what is rightfully ours!!!" but they don't go to the general public with the message of liberalism. Clinton "triangulated" and Obama uses a conservative message to mask his true intentions (e.g., "we can't continue to spend irresponsibly"). The last time you had a person come out and be honestly liberal was Walter Mondale and he was so totally destroyed by Ronald Reagan that no liberal since has ever had the ball sack to do the same.

Second of all, as I said, you have only proven that people will take free money. And I'm not going to argue with that. You haven't, however, demonstrated at all that people like big government. In fact, people hate big government. Any time someone has to interact with the government, they hate it. You know that, I'm sure.

Lastly, the other thing you and other liberals use as a point of argument is that people will vote for you. Or they'll support taxes on the rich. But that is accomplished by, as I have said, merely pitting the majority against the minority and promising that the minority will do the work. In other words, you tell "the people" that "I'm going to spend money ...now you get to decide who I take it from, you? Or them?" And then when the people vote for "them," you're like "ah, see how this proved something?" No, not really. "Yes, it did. It proved that people like big government." It did? OK.

Republican or Democrat, every president has expanded government for 40+ years.

But people "hate" big government.

Okey-dokey, Smokey.

Originally Posted by zip98053

Fair is obviously subjective

No, actually, it's not. That's the problem right there.

Originally Posted by AdamKadmon

Republican or Democrat, every president has expanded government for 40+ years.

But people "hate" big government.

Okey-dokey, Smokey.

Way to avoid all of the points I made, champ. You're a winner.

Originally Posted by C-B-M

No, actually, it's not. That's the problem right there.

Great point.

There's really not a dime's worth of difference between what the Dems and Reps have been doing with the government

Tax and spend or borrow and spend. The common point is spend.

Its sad when one has to conclude that the most conservative POTUS we've had in the last 20 years was Bill Clinton,

You concluded that? That gives a lot of insight as to your qualifications.

Originally Posted by C-B-M

No, actually, it's not. That's the problem right there.

Yes it is.

I love this kind of "debate." You don't put any thought into your response, so I get to do the same.

But seriously, I think that the fact that people have taken completely opposite positions on an issue and each claims that their position is "fair" is pretty conclusive proof that "fair" is subjective -- using any recognized definition of "subjective."

Originally Posted by C-B-M

It's not even that. I mean, why is he even talking about saving money for his kids' college when he won't even have a place to live? Is that not totally messed up thinking, no offense? It's like if I said I had no food but I'm trying to save for my wedding. Wouldn't you be like "uh ...OK"? People engage in such weird thinking any more and most of it is because liberalism is like "you have the right to have blah blah blah."

Yeah. I noticed that bit of logical failure too. Personally, once my kids got out of high school and were 18, they could either pay rent like adults and still live under the same roof or they could find their own places to live. In either case, the burden of college is on them and them alone, not me. Now, with paying rent, my kids could then be afforded all the privileges and responsibilities associated with that rent. They could come and go as they please so long as they don't break any laws and so long as they are working and paying rent on time. It's not unreasonable for me, as a parent, to expect my kids to be accountable for their actions and to expect they pay their own way through life.

Originally Posted by RRAHH

Yeah. I noticed that bit of logical failure too. Personally, once my kids got out of high school and were 18, they could either pay rent like adults and still live under the same roof or they could find their own places to live. In either case, the burden of college is on them and them alone, not me. Now, with paying rent, my kids could then be afforded all the privileges and responsibilities associated with that rent. They could come and go as they please so long as they don't break any laws and so long as they are working and paying rent on time. It's not unreasonable for me, as a parent, to expect my kids to be accountable for their actions and to expect they pay their own way through life.

Some people think that making sure that their kids are properly prepared for life is their (the parent's) responsibility. We have created a society where a high school education isn't adequate. Wanting to see that your kids get a college education without having a humongous student load debt is not unreasonable, even for someone who is having a hard time making ends meet. There really is a difference between wanting to have money for your kid’s education and wanting money for a wedding. The kids can get married by a JoP, they can’t get a substitute for a college degree in the same way.

Originally Posted by AdamKadmon

This is what I've argued for a long time: That people say they're for small government, but when push comes to shove, most of them love, love, love big government.

ahoy AdamKadmon,

ayup, absolutely matey. the swabbies, whether they be on the left or right, love thar big government.

'cept only one 'o them parties be honest 'bout it.

*nod nod*

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by C-B-M

Actually, what this thread amply demonstrates is that conservatives want fair taxes and liberals don't care what "fair" is, so long as they can get other peoples' money and spend it. It is notable that to a liberal, the taxes you are levied are entirely dependent on how much money you have -- that is indisputable. And that is considered "fair." If you make more money as a result of your own work, you "owe" the state more because it's not fair that you have more than someone else. And if you are opposed to the wealth redistribution, why, you want the poor to die. That's an infantile argument, but the left loves it. You always want someone to die if you don't agree with them. It's like they got stuck in the third grade or something.

That's right, just keep repeating your basic "taxes are theft" argument, don't answer or even address my points and then reduce it all to name calling. Thanks so much for proving my point.

Originally Posted by John Drake

That's right, just keep repeating your basic "taxes are theft" argument, don't answer or even address my points and then reduce it all to name calling. Thanks so much for proving my point.

ahoy John Drake,

the interestin' thing 'bout the "taxes are theft" arguement be this; if one were to concede the point, the debate never reaches its natural conclusion; the o'erwhelmin' bulk 'o taxes that the government collects be deployed to A) provide a robust safety net fer senior citizens and B) support our gargantuan military.

if one were to really lay into the recipients 'o this largesse, they'd have to go after old people and the military - and 'tis curious and kinda funny (fer this debate hath gone on fer quite a while on USPO) how conservatives loathe to sail in these waters.

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

ahoy John Drake,

the interestin' thing 'bout the "taxes are theft" arguement be this; if one were to concede the point, the debate never reaches its natural conclusion; the o'erwhelmin' bulk 'o taxes that the government collects be deployed to A) provide a robust safety net fer senior citizens and B) support our gargantuan military.

if one were to really lay into the recipients 'o this largesse, they'd have to go after old people and the military - and 'tis curious and kinda funny (fer this debate hath gone on fer quite a while on USPO) how conservatives loathe to sail in these waters.

- MeadHallPirate

They don't seem at all "loathe" to screw old people...look at the guy in this thread who started out by saying he was a. old and b. sick...He's supposed to either somehow start his own business (while sick and without capital or credit) or rent out rooms (when it seems a good sized hotel wouldn't really help, given the situation he describes)

OTOH you ARE right in that they're really against ANY cuts to the military....Does the word "war profiteers" come to mind?

Originally Posted by John Drake

They don't seem at all "loathe" to screw old people...look at the guy in this thread who started out by saying he was a. old and b. sick...He's supposed to either somehow start his own business (while sick and without capital or credit) or rent out rooms (when it seems a good sized hotel wouldn't really help, given the situation he describes)

OTOH you ARE right in that they're really against ANY cuts to the military....Does the word "war profiteers" come to mind?

ahoy John Drake,

actually, by in large, them folk also kinda avoid talkin' 'bout old folks too (with rare exceptions). they'll talk instead 'bout independence and freedom, whilst ignorin' the fact that no one on USPO seems okies dokies with thar own social security/medicare benefits bein' cut.

the entire debate on the topic always steers clear 'o this reality.

- MeadHallPirate