Thoughts on democrats and republicans.

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
It is one thing to pay taxes for roads, schools, ect ect. However, why should I pay more taxes so others don't have to?
while some people may not pay taxes, that does not make it the case that you are paying more taxes "so they don't have to". you keep using very bad phrasing with all this, and sweeping generalizations.

again, let me ask...why do you have to pay taxes? did a king decree it to be so? was it a dictator? or did it come about through the process our founding fathers laid out for us, by ratifying an amendment to the constitution?

and what is the solution to them "taking your money unwillingly"? should they send everyone a form asking if they'd like to pay taxes or not? check yes or no?
 

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
Our founding fathers rebelled because of being over taxed by a central government. They set up the constitution the way they did so that it would be different after the rebellion. They knew one day that the government would overstep its bounds again.

Thomas Jefferson:

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.


Alexander Hamilton:

If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare… The powers of Congress would subvert the very foundation, the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America.


John Adams:

The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.


James Madison:

As a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights. Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions.

If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions.

It is sufficiently obvious, that persons and property are the two great subjects on which Governments are to act; and that the rights of persons, and the rights of property, are the objects, for the protection of which Government was instituted. These rights cannot well be separated.

There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.


Benjamin Franklin:

I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.

No nation was ever ruined by trade, even seemingly the most disadvantageous.


“When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”
-Benjamin Franklin


“To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.”
-Thomas Jefferson,


“A wise and frugal government … shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.”
-Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1801


“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.”
-Thomas Jefferson


“When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.”
-Thomas Jefferson to Charles Hammond, 1821. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, (Memorial Edition) Lipscomb and Bergh, editors, ME 15:332


James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, elaborated upon this limitation in a letter to James Robertson:
“With respect to the two words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”


In 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees who fled from insurrection in San Domingo to Baltimore and Philadelphia, James Madison stood on the floor of the House to object saying, “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”
-James Madison, 4 Annals of congress 179 (1794)


“…[T]he government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.”
-James Madison


Unfortunately most of the constitution was pretty much ignored during and after the civil war by the north, and they took away many of the checks and balances, as well as implementing income tax.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Our founding fathers ....
cool quotes, bro. you never answered me...

again, let me ask...why do you have to pay taxes? did a king decree it to be so? was it a dictator? or did it come about through the process our founding fathers laid out for us, by ratifying an amendment to the constitution?

and what is the solution to them "taking your money unwillingly"? should they send everyone a form asking if they'd like to pay taxes or not? check yes or no?
 

medicineman

New Member
Let us be clear about what is rich: Is 50K a year rich? I say no. Is 100K a year rich, I say no, but clearly above the mean. Is 100K-500K a year rich, well maybe not, but clearly well on the way. Is a thousand K+ a year rich, I say yes.
So, what say you righties? Do you all make that 1,000K+, or are you all in the underclass.
I say that the tax rate on the 1,000K+ a year should be 70% on the + side, on the 500K-1000K 50%.
What say you rich righties?
 

redivider

Well-Known Member
Our founding fathers rebelled because of being over taxed by a central government. They set up the constitution the way they did so that it would be different after the rebellion. They knew one day that the government would overstep its bounds again.

Thomas Jefferson:

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.


Alexander Hamilton:

If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare… The powers of Congress would subvert the very foundation, the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America.


John Adams:

The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.


James Madison:

As a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights. Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions.

If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions.

It is sufficiently obvious, that persons and property are the two great subjects on which Governments are to act; and that the rights of persons, and the rights of property, are the objects, for the protection of which Government was instituted. These rights cannot well be separated.

There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.


Benjamin Franklin:

I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.

No nation was ever ruined by trade, even seemingly the most disadvantageous.


“When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”
-Benjamin Franklin


“To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.”
-Thomas Jefferson,


“A wise and frugal government … shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.”
-Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1801


“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.”
-Thomas Jefferson


“When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.”
-Thomas Jefferson to Charles Hammond, 1821. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, (Memorial Edition) Lipscomb and Bergh, editors, ME 15:332


James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, elaborated upon this limitation in a letter to James Robertson:
“With respect to the two words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”


In 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees who fled from insurrection in San Domingo to Baltimore and Philadelphia, James Madison stood on the floor of the House to object saying, “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”
-James Madison, 4 Annals of congress 179 (1794)


“…[T]he government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.”
-James Madison


Unfortunately most of the constitution was pretty much ignored during and after the civil war by the north, and they took away many of the checks and balances, as well as implementing income tax.
i wouldn't quote the founding fathers, they were a bunch of rich guys who were full of shit.

they said that all men are created equal. women and blacks are shiiite... that's just one example..

they did NOT rebel because they were over taxed.

they rebeleld because they wanted MORE MONEY AND POWER, BECAUSE THEY WERE RICH AND GREEDY, and the powers in britain were saying NO.

THE FOUNDING FATHERS HAD A NEGATIVE VIEW OF THE GOVERNMENT BEING INVOLVED IN CHARITY BECAUSE THEY WERE THE GOVERNMENT, AND THOSE GREEDY FUCKS WOULDN'T GIVE SHIT TO CHARITY.... THEY WERE WEALTHY LANDOWNERS, THE REST OF THE PPL IN NEED OF CHARITY WERE TRASH.....

don't try and think that the founding fathers didn't want any charity because its bad for the people in general... they didn't want government sponsored welfare because BY KEEPING THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE IN EXTREME POVERTY, A FEW WEALTHY MEN COULD HAVE MORE.

nice little history lesson for ya....
 

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
i wouldn't quote the founding fathers, they were a bunch of rich guys who were full of shit.

they said that all men are created equal. women and blacks are shiiite... that's just one example..

they did NOT rebel because they were over taxed.

they rebeleld because they wanted MORE MONEY AND POWER, BECAUSE THEY WERE RICH AND GREEDY, and the powers in britain were saying NO.

THE FOUNDING FATHERS HAD A NEGATIVE VIEW OF THE GOVERNMENT BEING INVOLVED IN CHARITY BECAUSE THEY WERE THE GOVERNMENT, AND THOSE GREEDY FUCKS WOULDN'T GIVE SHIT TO CHARITY.... THEY WERE WEALTHY LANDOWNERS, THE REST OF THE PPL IN NEED OF CHARITY WERE TRASH.....

don't try and think that the founding fathers didn't want any charity because its bad for the people in general... they didn't want government sponsored welfare because BY KEEPING THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE IN EXTREME POVERTY, A FEW WEALTHY MEN COULD HAVE MORE.

nice little history lesson for ya....

History lesson or mommy issues, I'm sure its one or the other.
 

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
Let us be clear about what is rich: Is 50K a year rich? I say no. Is 100K a year rich, I say no, but clearly above the mean. Is 100K-500K a year rich, well maybe not, but clearly well on the way. Is a thousand K+ a year rich, I say yes.
So, what say you righties? Do you all make that 1,000K+, or are you all in the underclass.
I say that the tax rate on the 1,000K+ a year should be 70% on the + side, on the 500K-1000K 50%.
What say you rich righties?
I mentioned that in my opening post. A lot of people know its wrong - whether it costs us financially or not. The same reason I don't take one of my guns and go to the nearest bank. It isn't the right thing to do. The people who make 50k a year vote republican. They know they could possibly get tax breaks from the democrats. Why don't they vote democrat? Either they don't agree with gay/abortion/ect or they don't agree with the road the democrats are leading the country down. Everything isn't about money, sometimes it is about what is right and wrong.
 

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
cool quotes, bro. you never answered me...

"again, let me ask...why do you have to pay taxes? did a king decree it to be so? was it a dictator? or did it come about through the process our founding fathers laid out for us, by ratifying an amendment to the constitution?

and what is the solution to them "taking your money unwillingly"? should they send everyone a form asking if they'd like to pay taxes or not? check yes or no?
"
I am not complaining about paying all taxes. My issue is that the taxes are being wasted. They are using what myself, and others who actually pay taxes to cushion other people who have preferred status. They have kids, they have sucky jobs, ect. Roughly 50 percent of the country isnt paying taxes AT ALL. 28 million people are eligible for Earned Income Credit. Maybe this is a usage of the word earned that I was not previous aware of. A fair way to do it would to be to raise tariffs on imports or increase sales tax. If everyone payed their own share of the taxes and the government wasn't collecting taxes to send checks to people who didn't earn it, how much lower would everyones tax burden be? The entire tax system isn't even 100 years old and it is obvious that it is broken. Then to add injury to insult, the Federal Government through the Federal Reserve is basically inflating our money. They are monetizing the debt. For every trillion they make up they are taking a trillion from what all of our money collectively is worth. Then the Fed is buying federal bonds with made up money and charging interest. So not only are they gouging the citizens with sales tax, income tax, and fees - they are also making your money worth half as much. All in the name of giving it to people who are poor. They are purposely destroying the country. I guess when hyper inflation hits, we can print our way out of debt and then re-stabilize. If that 20 trillion we will owe is only worth a loaf of bread, it will be easy to pay. The country is reacting to the recession like someone who loses their job and uses credit cards to pay everything until they hit rock bottom. How can you begin to justify not making everyone pay taxes, then the people who pay all the taxes get nothing in return. The people who pay nothing get everything, and then the government essentially takes another half of everything to give them even more. The Government is taxing us something akin to 80-90 percent when you count monetizing the debt. What a big pile of shit this is.

I have to pay taxes because the government will attack me if I do not. It is as simple as that. Kind of like the troll under the bridge.
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
Taxes: why not abolish income taxes and use a national sales tax?
because if you did that you would only be able to tax consumption. The Gov't needs to be able to tax savings and capital gains also,so they use inflation and dollar devaluation to screw those damned money hoarders.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
If ... the government wasn't collecting taxes to send checks to people who didn't earn it, how much lower would everyones tax burden be?
that would barely make a dent. in fact, that could exacerbate the issue

So not only are they gouging the citizens with sales tax, income tax, and fees - they are also making your money worth half as much.
at a current rate of 1.5% or so, it will take a LONG time for inflation to cut my money's worth in half. get a grip.

All in the name of giving it to people who are poor. They are purposely destroying the country.
ALL? all that taxes do is support the poor? wow, so simple, so naive.

i guess you've never heard of this thing we spend about half the taxes on...what is it called?

oh yeah...the fucking military.

i suppose the military often recruits the poor, so your argument may work in a roundabout way. kind of like making a junk shot while playing pool.

destroying the country. again dude, get a fucking grip.

what would destroy the country is letting old people eat cat food and die from lack of medical attention. and you can't call that 'giving it to the poor' because they paid in their whole lives and it is capped at $106,000.

military, social security, and medicare/medicaid. those are the big 3 as far as what your taxes pay for. you can't honestly say that any of these are as simple as 'giving to the poor' or 'destroying the country'. if you do, you are deluded.

I have to pay taxes because the government will attack me if I do not. It is as simple as that. Kind of like the troll under the bridge.
oh, it must be so tough to be you, all persecuted and shit. boo fucking hoo.

you know, you don't have to pay taxes. you are choosing to pay them because you don't want to forgo the benefits of living in a society. if you didn't want to pay taxes, you could simply abscond to the wilderness and keep every penny of your labor.

and you never answered me about how taxes came about. was it done by a king, a dictator, or within the confines of the us constitution? FUCKING ANSWER THE QUESTION.
 

MrDank007

Well-Known Member
Knee jerk reactions and impractical solutions don't amount to much, but you forgot one of the largest expenses is interest on our national debt.
 

Mr.GreenJeans

Well-Known Member
and you never answered me about how taxes came about. was it done by a king, a dictator, or within the confines of the us constitution? FUCKING ANSWER THE QUESTION.
Aside from acting like an immature myrmidon, you are massively oversimplifying your supposed point. Your "constitutuional" argument applies to only one type of tax -- Federal Income taxes (which btw, the original FEDERAL income tax in America was NOT passed by constitutional amendment. It was forced through by FDR and Congress as a temporary 1% tax on all income -- no punitive tax scales, everyone paid the same rate -- to finance our participation in WWII [and it was supposed to cease immediately when the war was won]. But, as history has repeatedly proven, once any government gets hold of a cash source it will never give it up and will only ask for more, but I digress). But on an overall scale, yes you are correct where income taxes are concerned.
HOWEVER, Your premise is flawed in that private income taxes are but one of the multitude of ways that the government plays their little income redistribution game. And the VAST majority of taxes in this country were NOT passed by any Constitutional amendment. Nor were the subsequent graduated increases that inevitably followed. Ok, the sheeple voted for a, oh say 5% tax. Sounds reasonable enough, right? But then something happens. The sheeple are all distracted worrying about American Idol, so the gov't (be it Fed, State, or local) votes to add another 1%. Then a few years later it's another 1%. Then another. And another. It's like the proverbial death of a thousand cuts! And you have multiple entities/agencies all doing it simultaneously!! To state that we have our current tax structure because the people voted for it is incredibly simplistic and insulting to the intelligence of anyone with more than 2 still-functional brain cells. The people opened pandoras box by ever allowing ANY form of income tax. But they did NOT vote for the bloated, punitive monstrosity that we are currently saddled with.
 

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
that would barely make a dent. in fact, that could exacerbate the issue



at a current rate of 1.5% or so, it will take a LONG time for inflation to cut my money's worth in half. get a grip.
1.5 was the monthly rate for december. Maybe you didn't notice that whole 5-6% a month we had. Either way, the rate is artificial. Have you noticed the price of gold and other metals? A lot of people know hyper inflation is coming because every country that does what we are doing ends up with hyper inflation. While not directly tied to the price of gold any longer, Gold is still the indicator on whats going to happen with our money. I hope you don't have any retirement. If I have 10 trillion dollars, and I print another trillion. I now have 11 trillion dollars, but it isn't worth any more than it was. All I did was take value from every dollar and move it somewhere else. We are doing this hard core right now - when prices catch up, it is going to be really bad. Cause if you have 10 trillion, and print 10 trillion, then the money is worth half as much and the items will cost twice as much. [/quote]

ALL? all that taxes do is support the poor? wow, so simple, so naive.
[/quote] If the 'poor' poor payed their share of taxes, we wouldn't have a deficit or need to monetize the debt.
i guess you've never heard of this thing we spend about half the taxes on...what is it called?

oh yeah...the fucking military.

i suppose the military often recruits the poor, so your argument may work in a roundabout way. kind of like making a junk shot while playing pool.
The military operations in other countries should stop, that would cut a lot of it. Let other countries sort themselves out. We have bases all over the world.
destroying the country. again dude, get a fucking grip.

what would destroy the country is letting old people eat cat food and die from lack of medical attention. and you can't call that 'giving it to the poor' because they paid in their whole lives and it is capped at $106,000.
A few issues with that, Cat food costs more than human food, why would they eat that. Second, We weren't talking about the legitimate use of social security as was intended. The issue is that a lot of the funds in social security and medicare/medicaid are being used in a way that wasn't what was intended.
military, social security, and medicare/medicaid. those are the big 3 as far as what your taxes pay for. you can't honestly say that any of these are as simple as 'giving to the poor' or 'destroying the country'. if you do, you are deluded.
Those are the big 3, they could all be trimmed. What do you do at home when you don't have money to pay your bills? You spend less.


oh, it must be so tough to be you, all persecuted and shit. boo fucking hoo.

you know, you don't have to pay taxes. you are choosing to pay them because you don't want to forgo the benefits of living in a society. if you didn't want to pay taxes, you could simply abscond to the wilderness and keep every penny of your labor.

and you never answered me about how taxes came about. was it done by a king, a dictator, or within the confines of the us constitution? FUCKING ANSWER THE QUESTION.
The reason it is so hard to ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION that you phrased was it was done by none of the 3. The question is akin to asking "Are you still gay?"

The wilderness is owned by someone. It doesn't work that way. and you know it. Also, by your reasoning then all everyone who makes less than 50k a year are forgoing the right to live in society because they aren't paying taxes.

Well, have a good day, I have to go to work to pay my taxes.
 

MrDank007

Well-Known Member
citation? por favor
You can Google it and pull up any number of sources, but for 2010 it was around $414 Billion and is projected to become the largest expense in our budget over the next decade. I think it is currently 4th or 5th. It is very clear the tax side of the equation can never fix this, it's the spend side.
 

BFSKINNER

Member
You can Google it and pull up any number of sources, but for 2010 it was around $414 Billion and is projected to become the largest expense in our budget over the next decade. I think it is currently 4th or 5th. It is very clear the tax side of the equation can never fix this, it's the spend side.
That chart basically vindicates the "tax the rick and feed the poor" method of taxation. Did you notice the the national debt growth explodes immediately following Bush Jr's massive tax cut to the top tax bracket.

Unless nobody cares about debt/balancing the budget and just wants to do "whats right".

"Whats right" in this case meaning let the rich use the infrastructure to conduct their commerce (roads, ports, water, electricity, police, firefighters, the legal system, education) but not pay for it because they have more money so they have earned the right not to.

Does anybody really think that entitlement programs like welfare and medicaid are "bankrupting" the country or the rich?



p.s- Canada's top tax rate is around 40%, much much higher than in America. In addition, they have a 12-15% sales tax on every commercial purchase. Oh yeah, and a totally socialized medical system. AND a semi-socialized post-secondary education system.

So how come they didn't get hit by the recession? Conservative economics fails to explain this.
 
Top