TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- And another thing...
And another thing...
Yes, I support tax cuts, across the board. I do not support government dictated reallocation of wealth. Another good quote:
| quote: |
| YOUR TAX MONEY AT WORK You work your buns off for 40 hours or more every week. When you're not working you're sitting at the dining room table trying to figure out how you are going to get the bills paid and still have some money to put aside for your child's college education. You take a look at your paycheck and see that deduction for federal income tax. You also see the deduction for Medicare tax. That money would sure come in handy for your own personal needs, wouldn't it ... but you may need Medicare when you get older, so you just let that 2.25% slide. The next weekend a friend comes up with tickets for a local college football game. While you're sitting in the stands you notice a blimp flying overhead. On the side of the blimp you see the words "1-800-MEDICARE" You think that perhaps this is a bit odd. You wonder why they are advertising Medicare in the skies over a college football game. When you get home you decide to find out just who put that blimp up there. Just curious, I guess. You then find out that the federal government spent $600,000 on that blimp. It's part of a $30 million advertising campaign to make Medicare better known to seniors. A blimp! $600,000 for a blimp! $600,000 while you're struggling to make ends meet and trying to figure out a way to get your kid into college. Somewhere some bureaucrats and politicians decided that it was more important for the federal government to have that money to spend on a blimp than it was to allow the people who actually earned that money to keep it and use it to cover their own family expenses and needs. What is it going to take to send you to the battlefront in the fight to cut back on the size of government? What is it going to take to convince you that politicians are out of control with their spending? Is a blimp enough? |
Tax cuts are proportional. the 8-5 working class guy won't benefit at all... reallocation works... the rich just don't want us to think that...
VIVA SOCIALISMA! 
I'm a libertarian, so I'm all in favor of cutting as much government as possible (except in the case of education, which behind defense and the tenants of the constitution is the single most important implied power of the governmentn IMO). I am also in favor of a flat tax. I could never figure out this whole tax the rich more thing. I understand they have more money, but does that mean they owe a greater percentage of that money? To me it equates to "you've worked hard, and earn a lot of money...congrats, we're going to take an unproportionally fair amount away from you." It totally goes against the basis of capitalism.
It's already leading to shortages in key areas, such as doctors. You go through four years of expensive medical school, 3-7 years of residency where you make next to nothing while working 100 hours a week, and then you have to pay off debts from schooling for the rest of your life while again working hundred hour weeks. Who the hell wants to be a doctor? You have to reward those who work hard and provide a great service to the comminuty in key areas. In a perfect world the only reward a doctor would need is the joy of helping others, but let's get real. Taxing the hell out of people that work hard removes their incentive to achieve greater things.
We need to get back to basics; flat tax, small, small, small national government and the individuals right to spend and invest their money in the way they want.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by NeoPhono I'm a libertarian, so I'm all in favor of cutting as much government as possible (except in the case of education, which behind defense and the tenants of the constitution is the single most important implied power of the governmentn IMO). I am also in favor of a flat tax. I could never figure out this whole tax the rich more thing. I understand they have more money, but does that mean they owe a greater percentage of that money? To me it equates to "you've worked hard, and earn a lot of money...congrats, we're going to take an unproportionally fair amount away from you." It totally goes against the basis of capitalism. It's already leading to shortages in key areas, such as doctors. You go through four years of expensive medical school, 3-7 years of residency where you make next to nothing while working 100 hours a week, and then you have to pay off debts from schooling for the rest of your life while again working hundred hour weeks. Who the hell wants to be a doctor? You have to reward those who work hard and provide a great service to the comminuty in key areas. In a perfect world the only reward a doctor would need is the joy of helping others, but let's get real. Taxing the hell out of people that work hard removes their incentive to achieve greater things. We need to get back to basics; flat tax, small, small, small national government and the individuals right to spend and invest their money in the way they want. |
Your assertion about there being less doctors due to skyrocketing insurance premiums is also correct, though NeoPhono makes a perfectly valid point as well, IMO. I'm definitely for tort reform, which would hopefully help to ease the insurance costs that we've all been saddled with, and which only continue to go up as more multi-million dollar verdicts are handed out to people who were unfortunate enough to be in the right place at the wrong time.
Also, isn't taxation, and therefore the redistribution of wealth essentially a morality issue the way that you argue it? Fuck the rich, help the poor is an argument that tries to prey on people's emotions and feelings of morality, as if it's their civic duty to help those who have less than them. Just because someone has more money than you do, doesn't mean that you have a rightful claim to their wealth. So a guy wants to buy another yacht--are you telling me that simply because you can't also buy a yacht that you are entitled to his? That somehow he hasn't earned it since he paid for it, but that you somehow have a more rightful claim to it than he does? I just can't see it that way, it's illogical.
If I choose to share my wealth, it will be my choice to do so, not because someone else demanded it of me. My right to personal property, not your right to my property.
My main point is that the yacht isn't neccesary when there are people out there that are struggling mightily day to day. They have no access to health-care, medicine, decent education, housing. I have a REALLY big problem with the fact that many are struggling and a few are living it up. Its not that they didn't work hard, its that they don't need ALL of it, especially those making a significant amount of money. My town is very republican, the people complaining about taxes live in a big house with a BMW. I am sorry I don't really buy that argument. Go 20 min. from my house to Elizabeth, NJ or Newark and see what SOOOO many people have to struggle through. Thats why the wealth should be redistributed, IMO. Besides, don't those people making 7 dollars an hour or whatever often work just as hard as that guy makes 200,000 a year? How is that fair? This isn't a morality issue, its a welfare, Socio-Economic issue.
Its great that you share your wealth, most wouldn't. I believe govt. is neccesary to protect and help all citizens. Everyone deserves a decent standard of living and govt. is the structure humanity has created to help make that a reality. Its far from perfect, infact often quite the opposite. But its there for a reason.
Well, I can see how a yacht is a luxury, but who are you or I or anyone to tell someone else what they do and don't need or want? That's freedom, like it or not. Furthermore, it sounds more like jealousy--on the one hand you say that those people don't need the yacht, and on the other you say that everybody deserves a decadent lifestyle. So which is it? If everyone 'deserves' a yacht, why doesn't the guy who can actually afford one deserve it? I don't get it.
And I strongly disagree with your statement that everyone 'deserves' a decadent standard of living and that it's somehow the role of the government to ensure that it happens. How do you propose to accomplish that? Somebody has to pay for it if others want to sit back and have a free ride. The entitlement mentality is a major part of what's wrong with society.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Shakka ... Also, isn't taxation, and therefore the redistribution of wealth essentially a morality issue the way that you argue it? Fuck the rich, help the poor is an argument that tries to prey on people's emotions and feelings of morality, as if it's their civic duty to help those who have less than them. Just because someone has more money than you do, doesn't mean that you have a rightful claim to their wealth. So a guy wants to buy another yacht--are you telling me that simply because you can't also buy a yacht that you are entitled to his? That somehow he hasn't earned it since he paid for it, but that you somehow have a more rightful claim to it than he does? I just can't see it that way, it's illogical. ... |
I would have no problem with taxing the rich and giving to the poor, in such a Robin Hood-esque manner if it were not for one thing. There is absolutely no reason a person cannot move themself upwards when it comes to income through hard work.
Say what you might about this country, but the ability of hard work and determination to move you up in life is still a reality. I don't care where you come from in life, the possiblity to set yourself, or at least your progeny, up for success when it comes to economic gain is not a dream.
My great grandparents came from Italy with literally nothing but the shirts on their backs. My grandfather was able to go to college on a scholarship, and my father was later able to go to medical school. Now I myself am on the way to becoming a doctor. My family literally went from absolutely nothing to "well-off" in less than two generations.
Nothing is in the way of other people ability to do the same thing. As I said before, hard work and success should not be punished, because everyone has the opporotunity to work hard and have the same success.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Shakka Well, I can see how a yacht is a luxury, but who are you or I or anyone to tell someone else what they do and don't need or want? That's freedom, like it or not. Furthermore, it sounds more like jealousy--on the one hand you say that those people don't need the yacht, and on the other you say that everybody deserves a decadent lifestyle. So which is it? If everyone 'deserves' a yacht, why doesn't the guy who can actually afford one deserve it? I don't get it. And I strongly disagree with your statement that everyone 'deserves' a decadent standard of living and that it's somehow the role of the government to ensure that it happens. How do you propose to accomplish that? Somebody has to pay for it if others want to sit back and have a free ride. The entitlement mentality is a major part of what's wrong with society. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by NYGblue I said Decent not decadent, you misread. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Shakka Woops! My bad. However I still don't think the role of government is to make sure everyone is well off, has a job, earns a decent living, etc. Nobody owes anyone a living--it is the duty of the person to make their own decisions and to choose their own career path, etc. |
I think we're probably done debating here, but I'll add one more thought.
If you think the government's role is to provide you with a job, security, healthcare, etc., then go get a government job. You will have job security, a crappy HMO, and retirement benefits. You will NOT, however, in all liklihood, be as successful, wealthy, happy, or independent as the man/woman who makes his/her own decisions, chooses his/her own career path, and takes life by the reigns and decides their own destiny.
I, however, think that bigger government is bad for the whole.
Does anyone here actually know how the economy works? You all seem to have different theories about this issue, but it basically boils down to economics.
Tax Cuts = Expansionary Fiscal Policy.
In simple terms, this means that they want to increase total demand for goods and services in the economy.
This eventually leads to higher GDP in the economy
(although it also contributes to inflation)
GDP is a useful measure of the standard of living in society.
With higher GDP, everyone is better off.
So, basically, the effects of tax cuts are:
lower unemployment
more goods and services produced
but also higher prices
Sorry, i could go on for ages about economics stuff but i don't think you would understand lol
btw i see a lot of ppl talking about taxing the rich and giving to the poor. That's what progressive income tax does doesn't it?
I don't know about the tax system in USA, but in Australia, the more you earn, the higher the rate of income tax that you pay. These taxes go towards welfare payments such as unemployment benefits. It seems to me like your welfare system is pretty unfair in the US (from what i know)As far as i know, not everyone is covered for healthcare and unemployment benefits, so you get ppl who are extraordinarily rich but u also get many people living in poverty.
Maybe the government needs to get its priorities straight and stop spending just about as much as the rest of the world combined on the military every year.
Thanks, Captain Obvious. What was the point of that post?
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Vigilante Does anyone here actually know how the economy works? You all seem to have different theories about this issue, but it basically boils down to economics. Tax Cuts = Expansionary Fiscal Policy. In simple terms, this means that they want to increase total demand for goods and services in the economy. This eventually leads to higher GDP in the economy (although it also contributes to inflation) GDP is a useful measure of the standard of living in society. With higher GDP, everyone is better off. So, basically, the effects of tax cuts are: lower unemployment more goods and services produced but also higher prices Sorry, i could go on for ages about economics stuff but i don't think you would understand lol btw i see a lot of ppl talking about taxing the rich and giving to the poor. That's what progressive income tax does doesn't it? I don't know about the tax system in USA, but in Australia, the more you earn, the higher the rate of income tax that you pay. These taxes go towards welfare payments such as unemployment benefits. It seems to me like your welfare system is pretty unfair in the US (from what i know)As far as i know, not everyone is covered for healthcare and unemployment benefits, so you get ppl who are extraordinarily rich but u also get many people living in poverty. Maybe the government needs to get its priorities straight and stop spending just about as much as the rest of the world combined on the military every year. |
IMO, taxes are not on everyones favorite list, but we're going to have them, no matter what. Its what's done with the taxes that should be more of the argument, not the take from the rich and give to the poor aspect. Our government spending 600,000 for a BLIMP is the problem. If the taxes that were taken out of my two paychecks (yes, I have two jobs) were used towards the common good and benefit of the society/country, I would have no problem handing over that money. Of course, I would still complain, but probably not as much. 
The taking from the rich and giving to the poor concept that seems to have taken over this little debate... Everyone just wants to take from the rich out of pure jealousy, because they don't have what the more wealthy people have. IMO, there is no reason why someone cannot get a job and make their bills. There is no reason why someone has to be a bum. I know people with no completed high school education, who live in an acquaintance's house because they have yet to find somewhere to live, but found a job. They are working their way into a better life.
The problem is who society gives the bigger paycheck to, IMHO. Do we really need to pay Britney Spears millions of dollars for a half-assed voice and a skank dance? (Oh, I forgot that movie with no plot, no good acting, nothing of value- Crossroads) A lot of musicianists that I know simply want to be heard, to play for the pleasure and enjoyment of other people. Why are we giving so much money to these morons who cannot even speak? Of course I want to bring up the oh so tired reel of why aren't teachers getting more pay, because I honestly think its ridiculous how much they get paid. But enough about that, for that issue will never resolve, and can be argued for years and decades.
*sigh* I'm done ranting. 
The taxes issue will never die. As I said, we shouldn't focus so much on who gets taxed as what we are doing with the tax money.
Uhm, what's a musicianist?
Their are a few crucial things I think your all missing.
You say that being able to spend your money on whatever the hell you want is freedom? while were do you get that freedom, from living in a country. But unfortunatelly that freedom comes with a responcibility. If you don't like it then leave. And if you really feel that your constitutional rights are being violated then please don't pay your taxes and then when your taken to court argue as a defence it violated your rights.
Taxing the rich to SUPPORT the poor helps everyone in society, and not just the poor.
And to whomever said hard work can still make it in America, that is a pretty falsehood. Do you think all those people working 60 hours a week at minimum wage to support their families don't work hard? How about you go look and see how the wealth is being divided. I think you'll notice the rich class are getting smaller, and the poor larger. And its not because they don't work hard.
That reply made very little sense. However it is obvious that you are not a supporter of Darwinist theory. Not that I am either, just pointing out the obvious.
Furthermore, I see nothing "crucial" about anything you just pointed out. In fact, I think some of these arguments are starting to nitpick and are straying too far from the core issues that we have been discussing.
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.