Republicans only care for children in the womb

Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Flat taxes are regressive. As far back as the Roman Empire, it was widely accepted that the wealthy pay more because they benefit more by the common security.

Progressive taxes are a big part of what made America the greatest country in history in the 1950s and 1960s- though even then it was far from perfect.
Click to expand...
So if taking the entire fruit of a persons labor without their consent is slavery. (If it isn't, please offer a rebuttal why it isn't so)


Do you feel that taking a smaller percentage makes a person not a slave? Would you say a person who has 75% of the money taken as a tax is 75% enslaved or not enslaved at all ?

Also your last paragraph is in error, but we can get to that after you answer my questions above.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Thundercat said:
I never said anyone else gave your consent. I said you gave your consent by choosing to live in this country or any place that has taxes :).

People that want to be part of a civilized society gladly pay taxes to keep that society running. The only people that fight paying taxes are the wealthy and bull headed that think society would some how magically exist without people paying for it.

I personally don't think there should be an income tax, and a property tax, and a school tax and sales tax. I would much rather see a flat 25% sales tax on EVERYTHING. This would help stop some of the loopholes, and hold EVERYONE living in this country accountable for paying their share to keep society progressing forward.
Click to expand...
Your first paragraph is nonsensical and contradictory. If you can't give another persons consent for them, (you can't) how could you possibly delegate something, the right to tax them, which you don't possess?

Also people don't chose where they are born do they? To say being in a place is equal to consenting to the actions of what happens there is to use a private property argument to attempt to buttress a socialist confiscatory policy taxation. (Read it again, you might get it)

You've equated society with confiscatory taxation. Gee, what a surprise. Societies and taxation are not synonymous, please don't say they are without defining each of them. Oh, that reminds me....you still haven't defined theft ? Can you?

I personally don't think actions which would be theft if you or I did them can be become "not theft" if other people with claimed magical powers do the exact same thing. How is it that my taking your things against your will is theft, but if you get a gang of people to do the exact same thing it isn't theft?
 
danjac82

danjac82

Well-Known Member
Moses Mobetta said:
The best argument against republicans is themselves and their own arguments / policies, of course a person has to be smart enough to see through their bullshit, the rest just get caught up in it and consumed by it. The economy is a magical beast that rears its head uncontrollably, rich people create jobs, the more money rich people have the better off we are. How come the 100 poorest counties in the US are straight red? How come the areas of the US where education is the worst are republican? How come over the course of my entire life when republicans get in control the economy is suddenly in a recession? Fuck republicans and their fuck the working class Americans agenda
Click to expand...
Lol. California is proof of left wing failure. Inner cities are mostly democrat even in the red states. Inner cities are failing everywhere. Your handout policies aren’t working
 
danjac82

danjac82

Well-Known Member
Herb & Suds said:
Please explain why blue states have to carry the red states financially?
I'll wait
Click to expand...
I’m still waiting on our discussion about racism. You threw out the accusation. You don’t get to make accusations without explaining yourself and then demand answers from me about a comment I made regarding a separate issue to someone else
 
Herb & Suds

Herb & Suds

Well-Known Member
danjac82 said:
I’m still waiting on our discussion about racism. You threw out the accusation. You don’t get to make accusations without explaining yourself and then demand answers from me about a comment I made regarding a separate issue to someone else
Click to expand...
You make up conditions then demand responses to nonsensical positions LOL
Speaking of nonresponse
You left a couple questions unanswered
Herb & Suds said:
Let me educate you
If your son is born feeling something about him makes him identify as a female
and he has to wait till he is 21 because his dad is an asshole
he doesn't suddenly "up and decide" to become a woman
It was the way he was born
Now the real question ...Do you stop loving him?
Click to expand...
 
Moses Mobetta

Moses Mobetta

Well-Known Member
danjac82 said:
Lol. California is proof of left wing failure. Inner cities are mostly democrat even in the red states. Inner cities are failing everywhere. Your handout policies aren’t working
Click to expand...
Your just another one living on fantasy island. Say hello to Tattoo while I enjoy having you on ignore. By the way if you have some extra cash why don't you send it off to a starving billionaire
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Thundercat said:
I get what you are saying, that's why I suggested a flat sales tax, not a flat income tax. Rich people buy more, so in turn, they will pay more in tax. They also make larger purchases which even though it is still, we will say 25%, its a huge input into the tax account.

A flat tax also makes sure EVERYONE pays. You can't work under the table or try to avoid paying.
Click to expand...
I see what you're trying to do but the math fails. Flat sales taxes are still regressive because those who aren't rich pay a much higher percentage of their overall income in products and services.

Poor guy buys a tank of gas to get around. Rich guy buys a tank to do the same. Both pay the same but who just paid a larger share of their income?
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
I think this is the part where I begin to address your questions, while you ignore mine.

Although some of your assertions are childlike emotional bleatings and lack any link to any consistent philosophy in your rationale.` Consider the following two paragraphs...

So you're saying that a person who uses roads should pay the owner of the road to use it? I agree. Is the only way to pay the owner of the road thru confiscatory taxation which places an automatic lien on your house ? Who owns roads ?

You correctly imply that using a road creates an obligation to pay an owner(s) , that makes sense. Then you abandon the mutual exchange aspect and bluster / cite "education" as being a valid obligation without the mutual aspect. You then neglect to discuss the confiscatory nature of government schools where people are forced to pay for them whether they use them or not. Why?
Should I go on?


Also, citing "oooh but you benefit from taxation" isn't an argument. People benefit from being able to run their own lives and make choices about how they spend their time and money. If I paint your house absent your consent and then bill you a figure we never agreed to, I could claim you benefitted from the freshly painted house...but how does my claim create an obligation on you ? It doesn't.

My argument assumes that taxation is theft, because if you or I did the exact same actions as "taxation", it would be theft. Are you man enough to admit that point?

Do similar actions by separate people cause the meaning of the action to change enough it requires a separate word to be used? No, it doesn't. If it were called theft though, rather than "taxation" , it would be harder to dupe people.

Could you define theft ? (I bet you don't)
Click to expand...
Roads are a public good, paid for by taxation.

Your analogy breaks down upon even the most cursory examination, while you've totally failed to justify why you shouldn't be paying for public goods you clearly benefit from.

Kansas tried it your way a few years ago; it was a total failure.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
danjac82 said:
Lol. California is proof of left wing failure. Inner cities are mostly democrat even in the red states. Inner cities are failing everywhere. Your handout policies aren’t working
Click to expand...
What handouts? Republicans have spent the last 40 years shredding the social safety net. How has that worked out for the other 90%?
 
Obepawn

Obepawn

Well-Known Member
danjac82 said:
Lol. California is proof of left wing failure. Inner cities are mostly democrat even in the red states. Inner cities are failing everywhere. Your handout policies aren’t working
Click to expand...
Some of the poorest counties in a America are in white, Ruby Red county and states...Kentucky, Alabama, Mississippi. They keep voting Republican and nothing ever changes for them. Explain that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top