Wisconsin Revolt

Who do you support in the Wisconsin Revolt?


  • Total voters
    118

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Wow keep on keeping arguing lol:peace: but the poll now is what it is.
and it reflects what the people of wisconsin, as well as americans in general, also believe.

the right picked the wrong hill climb.

and they should have warned the dumb as shit governor of that state not to fall for any prank calls.

they really should have warned him not to make it public that he is bought and paid for by two spoiled little trust fund babies who were handed their daddy's business.
 

Ernst

Well-Known Member
Uncle Buck and all There is a bill going through Congress the defines Rape as good rape or bad rape.
If that bill passes then a Woman or man will have to prove it was forced rape. This is aimed at the Tax code of all things.
You see they are controlling a tax deduction for your health insurance if a raped woman has an abortion so to get that tax deduction she has to prove it was bad rape or they forfeit that tax deduction for their health insurance even if they paid cash for the abortion.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Got your internet muscles flexed eh?

Rape is never the fault of the victim. Okay. We seem to agree there. Why? Is it because on some level you acknowledge that the initiation of force against a person that isn't consenting is wrong? Now take that concept and broaden it just a bit to include other forms of force applied to unconsenting persons....Feel that tingle? It's your cognitive dissonance alarm going off.
'we the people' consented.

passed an amendment to the constitution and everything.

did it just as the founding fathers laid it out for us.

we could repeal it at any time, or pass another amendment.

for some reason, we don't.

do you not understand that you are part of 'we the people'?

are you really hoping that one day, the government will single you out and start sending you that form that politely asks if you agree to pay taxes?

go shit in one hand, and wish into the other.

see which fills up first.

you are the height of naivete.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Uncle Buck and all There is a bill going through Congress the defines Rape as good rape or bad rape.
If that bill passes then a Woman or man will have to prove it was forced rape. This is aimed at the Tax code of all things.
You see they are controlling a tax deduction for your health insurance if a raped woman has an abortion so to get that tax deduction she has to prove it was bad rape or they forfeit that tax deduction for their health insurance even if they paid cash for the abortion.
i made a thread about this, actually.

https://www.rollitup.org/politics/405451-take-rape-victims.html

of course, the same guy who was the first to jump on this thread screaming and hollering about those evil unions was the first one to take a stab at defending that piece of shit bill.

i do not think empathy is a strong point of those on the right, in general.
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
'we the people' consented.

passed an amendment to the constitution and everything.

did it just as the founding fathers laid it out for us.

we could repeal it at any time, or pass another amendment.

for some reason, we don't.

do you not understand that you are part of 'we the people'?

are you really hoping that one day, the government will single you out and start sending you that form that politely asks if you agree to pay taxes?

go shit in one hand, and wish into the other.

see which fills up first.

you are the height of naivete.
Actually a small number of rich white guys formed a government a long time ago. It wasn't "we the people", that formed that government or consented, although it's a nice story. Even if it had been, they're all long dead now aren't they? No need to give me history lessons either, I've read most of it, spare yourself.

Still doing anything you can to steer the conversation away from the simple fact that your desired system has as it's foundation forced funding rather than consensual transactions ? THAT is my point, not the sidelines you keep casting to avoid the gun in the room.
 

secretweapon

Active Member
http://theuptake.org/2011/03/05/michael-moore-the-big-lie-wisconsin-is-broke/

The government and the corporations are lying, republicans are just a puppet for the top 1%, they do also have there hand in unfortunately our media. they just passed a bill to cut public funding to public newscasting stations in 2013, Really i think, just as many others that Fox news along with cnn, and now msnbc are all controlled somehow by the elite rich so its hard for me to find a factual news outlet where i can get actual non biased news. :clap:

*repost from the democracynow.org thread, thank you Ernst!
 

MrDank007

Well-Known Member
say it again! say it again!

i think we may have found out new buzzword for 2011!

c'mon, righties, make it happen!

actually, my reaction is something a little more like this:

[video=youtube;G2y8Sx4B2Sk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk[/video]

i can tell you exactly how to make it sustainable: don't give away the hundreds of millions of dollars worth of tax breaks t corporations who don't need it, and you won't have to take it from the backs of teachers and nurses.

which, by the way, they have already agreed to.

so clearly, the money is not the issue: they have already conceded that.

what are you so afraid of, that they will bargain themselves a pay cut once again?

boo fucking hoo.

honor their contracts.
You clearly can not perform simple math or see a negative trend, so I'm done with the loopholes/taxbreaks BS. You keep saying is it not the teachers fault that there was a recession? Is it John and Jane Doe's fault down the street who make $46k in the private sector? They should have to pay a select group's pension gap in your opinion. There's no common sense to that, even within your own ideology. I get what your saying...you pay for a public service...when you pay people to retire and lose money in the market...you aren't really getting a service that you are paying for are you? Unsustainable! Contracts! I think we have found nicknames for each other.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Still doing anything you can to steer the conversation away from the simple fact that your desired system has as it's foundation forced funding rather than consensual transactions ? THAT is my point, not the sidelines you keep casting to avoid the gun in the room.
there is no gun in this room.

i consent to taxes, or else i would not work.

plenty of ways to make tax free money, live off the grid, and not be involved in this society form which you derive benefit.

but you have to be willing to forgo the benefits if you want to forgo the costs.

again, this applies to EVERYTHING.

want to walk on two feet? sure...gotta give up those epic tree climbing skills.

want a thick coat of blubber to keep you warm in the winter? sure...gotta give up the ability to endure higher temperatures as easily.

want to avoid the costs of society? sure....gotta give up the benefits of society.

there are trade offs in everything. keep that in mind as you post away on your computer (thank public education and universities) and use the internet (made available by public infrastructure).

put your money where your mouth is, jagoff.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
You clearly can not perform simple math or see a negative trend, so I'm done with the loopholes/taxbreaks BS. You keep saying is it not the teachers fault that there was a recession? Is it John and Jane Doe's fault down the street who make $46k in the private sector? They should have to pay a select group's pension gap in your opinion. There's no common sense to that, even within your own ideology. I get what your saying...you pay for a public service...when you pay people to retire and lose money in the market...you aren't really getting a service that you are paying for are you? Unsustainable! Contracts! I think we have found nicknames for each other.
paying a teacher a fair wage and benefits is EASILY sustainable in any number of ways.

you couldn't think your way out of an open box.

keep yelling that it is unsustainable, maybe someone will believe you.

that someone will likely be named ernest, he will likely be from shitshatapoopton, nowheresville and will likely tell interesting stories about how they stuck lit firecrackers in the rectal orifices of small animals as a kid.

they will also likely be a fan of the tea party.

my apologies to anyone named ernest from shitshatapoopton who tortured animals as a kid and likes the tea party but realizes the value of paying teachers a fair wage.
 

MrDank007

Well-Known Member
Ugh...just remember the formula ballbusting - funny = mean. So I appreciate the effort in the last comment.

I for one, think they should kept the wage where it was, but done away with the guarantees on pension shortfalls. You tell me how to bridge that gap and get these govs out of the red and I will shut up. Do you have any idea how detrimental bond auction failures are to a local or national gov? It means game over and the jig is up. Is that what its gonna take?
 

secretweapon

Active Member
Rob Roy, I totally understand the point of view that democracy probably isn't the answer, and i might agree with that, but its what we have now, a democracy is supposed to work for the people, it can be debated that we willingly chose to be where we are, but i truly believe that isn't the case. the rich are staying filthy rich and the poor man working hard isn't getting any richer.

Now on a more broader point of view, yes i do understand that most people are living comfortably as they are but what about social security? im 21 and I definitely know im sure as shit not going to see any of that money that's been coming out of my paychecks since i've been working, 14years old. What about the benefits of all those people who are working FOR the people. they are going to lose their right to VOTE on their benefits.

Until someone comes up with a better idea on how the people can help people with or without government, i fear I'll never see the day when we change to a different way of life as a species.
really we all got robbed and we all don't know it (if you live in america)
 

Ernst

Well-Known Member
The social security problem can be solved by raising the Social Security taxable income up from $120,000 to $180,000 because the wealth has shifted radically to the top.

So there would be no need to make people work to 70 and 72 like I think they are planning for you. I have to wait to 68.
Again I stress a simple adjustment to the SS taxable income from 120k to 180k solve the problem.
That means income up to 180k is taxed for Social Security because of the shift in wealth from the bottom to the top. I don't think people understand what this shit of wealth really means for their children and grand children. That no one is willing to do a simple taxable income adjustment is very suspect.
 

secretweapon

Active Member
I would be absolutly fine paying more taxes if it further benifits other people, what i just realize it that there are many people who would like to have a million dollar and live the "dream" than help out the fellow man or woman, so i think were fuct
ed
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy, I totally understand the point of view that democracy probably isn't the answer, and i might agree with that, but its what we have now, a democracy is supposed to work for the people, it can be debated that we willingly chose to be where we are, but i truly believe that isn't the case. the rich are staying filthy rich and the poor man working hard isn't getting any richer.
it can be debated that we willingly chose to be where we are. in fact, i can even concede it for the sake of argument.

now, we face the choice of where we want to be. how we want to move forward.

that is what i have in mind when i call myself a progressive, although to be fair a sizable share of my views could be defined as such.

if people do not consent to be taxed, they have the right to 'petition the government for a redress of grievances' and change it.

but i bet if you asked enough people, you'd hear way more often than not that people do consent to being taxed by and large, but would just like to be taxed less.

they understand they are part of a greater whole.

Now on a more broader point of view, yes i do understand that most people are living comfortably as they are but what about social security? im 21 and I definitely know im sure as shit not going to see any of that money that's been coming out of my paychecks since i've been working, 14years old. What about the benefits of all those people who are working FOR the people. they are going to lose their right to VOTE on their benefits.
44 years from now will be 2055. social security will still be solvent by any projection at that point, and will pay you out 3/4 benefits or so (again by most projections).

one thing we could do is lift the cap above $106k (i also favor raising the retirement age, which would not be considered a 'progressive' view), either of which would mean you still get full benefits.

i also think that allowing people to draw into ss at an earlier age at a progressively reduced rate would help. that would provide people the incentive to save for their own retirement (which we all should be doing anyway).

Until someone comes up with a better idea on how the people can help people with or without government, i fear I'll never see the day when we change to a different way of life as a species.
really we all got robbed and we all don't know it (if you live in america)
you get robbed just about everywhere by the definitions of the rube cult leader with the persecution complex. the only question is how.

it's not that i am against the private sector so much, it is that i have not seen any examples of how the private sector alone, without any type of public sector (the government), can provide as much as or more than the private sector alone.

after all, the only end of any business is the bottom line. returns to shareholders. making money in any way they can get away with.

any reasonable person, no matter their disagreements on size and scope of government, can reasonably agree that some type of governance is needed, and needs to be paid for somehow.

if ruberoy wants to name me some examples of great, successful societies that prospered without some form of governance financed in some way through 'extortion' (ie, taxes), be my guest. put up or shut up.
 

Ernst

Well-Known Member
I believe in the goodness of the Average American.
I also believe that there are forces that will destroy that if it makes a buck.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
The social security problem can be solved by raising the Social Security taxable income up from $120,000 to $180,000 because the wealth has shifted radically to the top.

So there would be no need to make people work to 70 and 72 like I think they are planning for you. I have to wait to 68.
Again I stress a simple adjustment to the SS taxable income from 120k to 180k solve the problem.
That means income up to 180k is taxed for Social Security because of the shift in wealth from the bottom to the top. I don't think people understand what this shit of wealth really means for their children and grand children. That no one is willing to do a simple taxable income adjustment is very suspect.
how about instead of hitting up the 120-180 people, why not have a millionaire/billionaire tax? tax a certain percent (very small) of income above $1 million or $1 billion and close the gap.

now get ready for the righties to cal me a class warfare guy who is greedy for other people's money and wants to punish success. 3, 2, 1.....
 

Ernst

Well-Known Member
No Social Security is a well funded program except that no one anticipated the huge shift in wealth to the top.
So since the bottom has become lower the range of income to be taxed to fix the huge shift in wealth to the top needs to go from the current limit of the first $120k to $180k and the system is fixed.
The odd thing is no one is proposing this simple adjustment on Capital Hill.
Cutting Corporate taxes yes adjusting Social Security no.
 

NewGrowth

Well-Known Member
"Why do you have a right to YOUR money?"

[video=youtube;wD809fp6i_0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wD809fp6i_0[/video]

That sums it up nicely. :roll:
Did not watch the video but I create things of worth with my own labor. Well put welcome to the Chinese Republic of California :mrgreen:
 

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
yes, don't be mad because you aren't on top.

be mad because those on top have their boot firmly pressed on your neck, instead of a hand extended to help you up.

be mad because you play fair and work hard, while those on top rape the tax code and do whatever they can get away with to make another penny.
Rape the tax code? The bottom 50% of people in the country don't pay hardly any taxes. The top 1 percent pay about 40% of the taxes. Those horrible horrible people. How dare they? The lower 75% of the population pays about 15% of the taxes in the country. Exactly how much do you think the burden should be on the people in the top 25%? 85% of all isn't enough? Not to mention those same 25% at the top are the ones paying the business tax too because they own the businesses. That doesn't seem a tad bit excessive?

http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html
 

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
say it again! say it again!

i think we may have found out new buzzword for 2011!

c'mon, righties, make it happen!

actually, my reaction is something a little more like this:

[video=youtube;G2y8Sx4B2Sk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk[/video]

i can tell you exactly how to make it sustainable: don't give away the hundreds of millions of dollars worth of tax breaks t corporations who don't need it, and you won't have to take it from the backs of teachers and nurses.

which, by the way, they have already agreed to.

so clearly, the money is not the issue: they have already conceded that.

what are you so afraid of, that they will bargain themselves a pay cut once again?

boo fucking hoo.

honor their contracts.
If your neighbors dog keeps killing your chickens, even if your neighbor pays for the chickens after you argue with him for weeks, you either shoot his dog next time it tries or you build a fence to keep him out. You don't just accept it because the neighbor payed for the chickens - you protect your future.
 
Top