You'd be surprised at how liberal a lot of people in Montana are. Their governor is one of the more liberal, and level minded in the country.


There are a lot of fucking wackos from there too though.

Well I'd certainly hope that Libertarians are liberal.

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

quote:

Originally posted by lenazi I am willing to bet that i pay a lot more taxes then you 17

proportionally, yes... I guarantee you pay a higher percentage in taxes than me. But net tax dollars per year? highly doubtful.

LET THE BATTLE OF THE ALPHA-EARNERS BEGIN!

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

so if you have so much then, what is the problem with having a little less to better your country with?

don't bother answering, i was just putting it out there as i already know the answer.

___________________
Le Freak Divas Dives And Dementia. [hausentech] *nouveau*
http://soundcloud.com/le-freak

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On No, but I also don't drink out of a fucking sippy-cup you goddamned Appalachian.

In The17sss' defence, our country would simply mis-use his money. You can't really argue with that.

But enough of that, greed is great.

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

those democrats and their damn war in eyerak took away ma monies.

___________________
Le Freak Divas Dives And Dementia. [hausentech] *nouveau*
http://soundcloud.com/le-freak

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On No, but I also don't drink out of a fucking sippy-cup you goddamned Appalachian.

quote:

Originally posted by lenazi so if you have so much then, what is the problem with having a little less to better your country with? don't bother answering, i was just putting it out there as i already know the answer.

I'll answer anyway- it's the principle of the matter for me. It's always "well just pay a little more... just pay a little bit more, what's the big deal?" And the people who usually say that are the ones who don't get routinely soaked with ever increasing rates and therefore have no problem with the concept. Take Joss' statement from the 1st page of this thread for example- he said he'd gladly give away 75% of his paycheck if it would do positive things for his community. Haha really? We're expected to believe that if he was making $100,000 per year, he'd gladly live off of $25,000 and give $75K away?

Now in the U.S. you basically have 44% of the population NOT paying taxes, and the top 1% of earners' tax revenue has matched the bottom 95%. When people with money get taxed excessively, at least in this country, once that 50% threashold hits them, the wealthy stop investing and taking risks with their money which spur economic growth.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss ...ever increasing rates...

LOL.

http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles LOL. http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss

Your line was "ever increasing," which is demonstrably false. Your chart says nothing about what top earners have paid over longer time periods.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss I'll answer anyway- it's the principle of the matter for me. It's always "well just pay a little more... just pay a little bit more, what's the big deal?" And the people who usually say that are the ones who don't get routinely soaked with ever increasing rates and therefore have no problem with the concept. Take Joss' statement from the 1st page of this thread for example- he said he'd gladly give away 75% of his paycheck if it would do positive things for his community. Haha really? We're expected to believe that if he was making $100,000 per year, he'd gladly live off of $25,000 and give $75K away? Now in the U.S. you basically have 44% of the population NOT paying taxes, and the top 1% of earners' tax revenue has matched the bottom 95%. When people with money get taxed excessively, at least in this country, once that 50% threashold hits them, the wealthy stop investing and taking risks with their money which spur economic growth.

If things like health care and any other exorbitant expenses are covered. Things like readily available public transit that doesn't suck would mean I wouldn't have to own a car.

Of course I think it should be on a sliding scale. Maybe 100k not 75%, maybe closer to 50%, and it would need to be dependent on the number of dependents (up to a certain point, we need to penalize people that have a lot of kids in this country).

That is if I knew it would be spent wisely and for the better of the community. As it stands now thats not ever going to be the case. Which is why I argue for succession of the PNW. We can do it better than you guys.