Community

General discussion

Locked

I Hate Democrats

By maxwell edison ·
.
Okay, I got your attention.

And to all Democrats:

Get out of my life.

Stop trying to take my personal property.

Stop trying to infringe on my RIGHT to take personal responsibility.

Stop presuming that you know what's better for me than me.

Stop telling me how to live.

Stop telling me how to define my moral values.

Stop telling me how to plan for my own future.

Stop telling me how to raise my kids.

Stop telling me how to educate my kids.

Stop taking my hard-earned income.

Stop trying to take care of my own health.

Stop telling me how to run my own business.

Stop telling me how to live.

Just GO AWAY!

I'll make a deal with you. You leave me the **** alone, and I'll leave you the **** alone.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Who is really "in denial"?

by maxwell edison In reply to Chas, my reply

.
That was obvious sarcasm intended to make a point. And you suggest I'm in denial? This is getting too weird.

And I absolutely LOVE the fact that our exchanges" have contributed to your "revelation" into becoming an admitted liberal. I've been goading you for so long, and you finally broke. But can you spell "deep end"?

But I will suggest one thing that did surprise me. Your arrogant, pompous and smug judgmental attitude is absolutely sickening.

Have a nice life, Chas. But wait, your "nice life" is denying others their "nice life" of choice. How sad. And you call yourself a Christain. Excuse me while I throw-up.

Collapse -

No Sarcasm

by TheChas In reply to Chas, my reply

Max,

Are you so cynical that you cannot tell when someone is speaking from their very heart and soul.

I know that your hope was to guide me down the dark path of conservatism.

You have both my condolences, and my unending gratitude for being the instrument of my enlightenment.

Just as I know I am now following my proper life path, I know that I am not destined to be the one to guide you to the path of enlightenment.

Perhaps someday in the future you too will be guided down the path of true enlightenment.

Just to clarify, no joke, no sarcasm, no mind altering substances, no deep end or mental breakdown, just the inner calm of true enlightenment.

Chas

Collapse -

Oh, damn, I agree with TheChas!

by Absolutely In reply to Chas, my reply

But not on any important premise, just one fact, which we interpret differently: "one cannot be a true Christian and practice US style conservatism."

More importantly, one cannot be a true Christian and practice US style personal liberty. According to Christ, we must forgive every injustice 490 times, notwithstanding speculation that the mathematically defined quantity 70x7 was a misinterpretation of Jesus' attempt at hyperbole, meaning that he actually espoused infinite forgiveness, which in practice means treating every action of every other person as amoral, thus offering ourselves up willingly as sacrificial victims to the immoral. Christianity is indeed rationally incompatible with human rights. How sad that you chose a mystical belief over the rational philosophy though, TheChas!

Collapse -

so your only problem with it is

by jdclyde In reply to Fair Tax Recession

how it is shifted over?

Collapse -

The UN-fair tax

by TheChas In reply to so your only problem with ...

The chaos that would ensue with a direct shift from an income to a sales tax is not the only problem I have with the so called "fair-tax", just my worst fear.

I actually toned down what I believe will happen significantly.
A 5 year or longer recession bordering on a full scale depression is more likely.

On some levels, I should like the "unfair tax".
I agree that it is counterproductive to tax business income.
I am at a point in life where my spending on material goods should be dropping. So, I should come out ahead.
With a significant increase in the cost of new homes, urban sprawl should slow significantly under the unfair tax plan.

In no particular order, my issues with the unfair tax include:

The cost of living for everyone who earns less than $100,000 rises significantly.

The unfair tax, much like a flat income tax does not take into account ability to pay. You get taxed on your needs and your desires.
Exempt groceries, utilities and health care from the unfair tax, and it starts to become palatable.

I see no "just" reason to give the richest people in this country a major tax cut and shift the tax burden to the working class and young families.

The unfair tax WILL increase the economic divide between the rich and the rest of us!

The people who will take the biggest hit under the unfair tax are those starting out in life. Especially those starting families.

In fact, those for Zero Population Growth should love the unfair tax, as it will tax large families right out of existence.

Contributions to charitable organizations will drop significantly.
Businesses and the rich will reduce contributions because there will be no benefit.
The general population will have less money available to give to the causes they support.

If you think you can control your spending enough to reduce your tax burden under the unfair tax, you are kidding yourself.

Back when we were able to deduct sales tax from the Federal Income Tax, my wife and I worked VERY hard to control our expenditures so that one year we would come out ahead by totaling our actual sales tax paid, and the next, spend very little and take the standard deduction.
Guess what, unless you have a LOT of extra money to buy your day to day taxable items in advance, you end up spending very near the standard deduction every year.

Mark my words, the unfair tax will be both a financial and social failure if enacted.
Within 10 years, it will have to be replaced by either a new income tax, or some other progressive tax.

Chas

Collapse -

You're kidding, right?

by puppybreath In reply to The UN-fair tax

You failed to mention a few things in your gloom and doom predictions:

A flat tax closes the loopholes that many rich people use to pay no tax at all, so if you factor that in, the middle class tax burden will not go up nearly as much as you claim.

Since the bottom 50% of wage earners only account for 3.46% of tax revenues, shouldn't something be done to give the upper 50% a little tax relief? Which begs the question, 'How do you give a tax cut to someone who doesn't pay any taxes in the first place?'

Your assumption regarding charitable contributions is faulty also. Many corporations donate to their pet causes because that's what they believe in, not because of a tax break. I don't think you give people enough credit for their good deeds.

And how about some responsibility from those people starting out? Why are they starting families if they can't afford it? Look at the current welfare system. You have people on food stamps, WIC checks, and government checks having additional kids just so they get more freebies from the Government. People with no visible means of support should not be having 6 or 7 kids but our current system rewards them for it.

Your talk of gloom and doom with nothing to back up your ideas would be laughable if it wasn't so sad.

Collapse -

Out of all the people who post messages. . . .

by maxwell edison In reply to You're kidding, right?

.
....in these threads, ones from Chas, more than anyone else, cause me to just shake my head in total disbelief. Without the benefit of personal interaction, I can't put my finger on the best way to describe my impression, but something is just weird about his messages, especially over the past year or so.

I've had some great conversations with Chas over the years, and at one point I would have said that we had a pretty good understanding of each other, although we disagreed on some key issues. But then his outlook seemed to change to almost an apocalyptic degree. He told me once that he doesn't trust his fellow man -- doesn't trust his fellow man to "do the right thing", I suppose. So he comes across with this smugness to suggest to others what should be the "right thing" for them. Whatever the opposite of live and let live is, that describes how I've come to see Chas.

He calls it a revelation. But I call it having snapped.

If everyone in the USA thought like him, the USA would surrender to the terrorists; we'd confiscate everyone's income for the "greater good"; the business would come to a screeching halt to "save the environment"; the auto industry would be replaced with a bicycle industry -- a "hand-made" bicycle industry, I suppose, since manufacturing would cease to exist; a nation-wide moratorium on building would be implemented to halt, what he would describe as, urban sprawl; he would create MORE government hand-out programs, justified by his desire to have fewer government hand-out programs (I know, it doesn't make sense); all radio stations would be permanently preset to receive only NPR, so that all the things we consider include only the ones we should consider; the United States would pledge an allegiance to the United Nations, thereby capitulating to the desires and whims of that world body, so that their interests are placed before the USA's interests; and I would volunteer to be the recipient of a one-way ticket to Mars.

Of course, I'm being absurd (but not too far off-base), but only to point out the absurd that I've seen in his messages.

Maybe the day will come when I'll get this email or a message from Chas laughing his *** off at me for being fooled. Yea, that's it. He's really pulling my leg. Okay, I fell for it. This is an April fools joke for the ages, right? One that keep going and going and going, fooling year-long? This as all a big "gotcha", right?

Collapse -

Not an all or nothing proposition

by JamesRL In reply to You're kidding, right?

I would support a simpler tax system. While I think a flat tax as the only tax would not be "fair", we could have a flat income tax at a lower scale, and a consumptive tax, like the fair tax.

In Canada, there was great wailing and nashing of teeth about the GST(Goods and Services Tax) because it was on top of provincial sales taxes, and because it applied to services for the first time. As someone selling computer hardware at the time of introduction, I watched the prices fall, because the GST replaced a manufacturers tax - which applied to manufacturers and wholesalers of durable goods.

I do agree that loopholes should be closed - some of those tax loopholes mean people invest in stupid things to get tax breaks.

One of the silliest taxes we have are property taxes. In Toronto, many people have made huge gains in the equity in their house because their neghbourhoods have become hot and the value of their house has skyrocketed. But this is a paper gain - if they went to buy another house in Toronto, they would have to pay the same amount, so there is no real gain, unless they become renters or move to the country. Yet we tax them on it regardless. To me municipal taxes should be flatter - they pay for infratrsucture and everyone uses infrastructure.

James

Collapse -

The reasons I've seen

by TonytheTiger In reply to You're kidding, right?

for not supporting fairtax fall under one of these categories:

1. They're getting an unfair advantage under the current system, and are afraid of losing it.

2. They're worried that someone else will benefit more than they will.

3. They're in their comfort zone, and just don't want to rock the boat (this includes those who think their livlihood depends on the rules or complexity of the current tax code).


The way I look at it Accountants might have to shift around a little, but there will be plenty of work, probably more! Lobbyists... maybe become talk show hosts. Displaced lawyers, well, there's always fish-tank cleaning, and ex-IRS muscle could do something productive like collecting back child-support :)

Collapse -

Any tax on income is wrong (RE:James)

by TonytheTiger In reply to You're kidding, right?

Income taxes punish achievement! They stifle innovation!

Why should I have to pay extra because I'm willing to get my sorry *** out of bed in the morning and go to work doing something legal? Yet someone who has money given to them (either by the government or a rich relative); or a prostitute or drug dealer not have to pay it?

Related Discussions

Related Forums