Obama Care Could Be Deadly

[quote name='depascal22']I hate to go back to a couple pages ago but Knoell said something I want to respond to. You were complaining that New York was so stupid because they're cutting school budgets instead of entitlements.

My question is: Do you think that's a liberal state problem only or were you just being funny?

My point is that many conservatives laugh and point fingers at NY and CA while deriding them as liberal entitlement states. If you look, many states (of all persauasions) are cuttting left and right. Indiana is cutting school budgets while Illinois is cutting a third of it's state police. Can you tell which state is liberal or conservative by which cuts they make?[/QUOTE]

Yep, Georgia is cutting school budgets pretty dramatically as well, and has the past couple of years.

Its not just a liberal state problem. It's a problem most states are having as revenue is down due to unemployment (less income tax revenue), people losing homes and cars (less property tax revenue), and people cutting back on discretionary spending (less sales tax revenue).

Hell it may be worse in some conservative states since any type of tax increase is a non-starter, even increases in sin taxes on alcohol, tobacco etc.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If I'm reading that correctly, 20% of all defaulting mortgages (and up to 50% in some places) are owned by rent seekers. So we can effectively say that before we can even have the discussion of whether capital requirements or the poors getting loans they shouldn't or whatever are the issue, a full 1 out of 5 (at least) is due to market speculation on the part of the owner and issuing bank.

Am I misreading that?
 
[quote name='speedracer']If I'm reading that correctly, 20% of all defaulting mortgages (and up to 50% in some places) are owned by rent seekers. So we can effectively say that before we can even have the discussion of whether capital requirements or the poors getting loans they shouldn't or whatever are the issue, a full 1 out of 5 (at least) is due to market speculation on the part of the owner and issuing bank.

Am I misreading that?[/QUOTE]

That or the person with the mortgage is renting the home to himself or herself.

...

I know I'm not the voice of reason, but here's something related to the original topic.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...elieves-pills-cure-happiness-human-right.html

All that socialized medicine makes you a wuss.
 
[quote name='Kirin Lemon']It's really fun watching you guys interact with the new person who does a shitty job of defending himself. Entertaining as hell, keep up the good work.[/QUOTE]

It is like trying to deprogram a cult member.

Cons tend to live in their own little echo chamber.

---
FoC:

Nothing says manliness like fixing your ingrown toenail with a Swiss army knife.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Those first NHS patients had just come through the darkest time in British history, when we stood alone against Hitler’s tyranny. Yet what seems astonishing now is how few of them felt sorry for themselves.
Click to expand...
Now i don't know exactly what he means by that, but i'm getting that Britain beat the Nazis all by themselves. Judging by some of the other things said, this guy is either really naive or has a convenient memory of history.


​
 
[quote name='JolietJake']Now i don't know exactly what he means by that, but i'm getting that Britain beat the Nazis all by themselves. Judging by some of the other things said, this guy is either really naive or has a convenient memory of history.[/QUOTE]

America is still a colony of England.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']You can "tell" whether a state is liberal or conservative based on history and geography.

Northeast = Liberal
North (IL, WI, MN) = Liberal
South = Conservative
Midwest (The "Heartland") = Conservative

Just examples[/QUOTE]

So how do you explain that Illinois is liberal while Indiana is conservative? It's more than geography.

I'd argue that large population centers within states tend to be overwhelmingly liberal. Most of the state of Illinois trends conservative but gets drowned out by the the 8 million people in Chicagoland. Most of the state of New York can't wait to get rid of NYC because of the huge tax drain and the tendency to trend liberal.

What I'm getting at is that it's funny that in this day and age that people can still think that they can deduce a political affiliation or life view solely from the state they live in. Also, it's funny that people still think that liberal states are the only ones that are cutting school budgets (while keeping entitlements like Medicare). It's the kind of world view that's gotten us in this partisan mess in the first place.
 
Waterboarding? That is a pretty lame form of torture to be complaining about.
Click to expand...

Thanks for agreeing with us that it is indeed torture. We appreciate that. After denial comes acceptance ;)

Especially since we put our own soldiers through it in survival training, but we wouldn't want those poor poor terroists to get a boo boo would we? I can just imagine what our enemies would do to us for a bit of information.
Click to expand...

False equivalency since the soldiers know there is no possibility of death. And who cares what our enemies would do to us? We're better than them, we don't need to drop to their level. Ends don't justify the means. Something Cheney needs to realize.

Besides, whats to say torture was the only thing that prevented an attack on our homeland (note I'm excluding all the attacks on our bases in other countries)? Why do people think Obama not torturing people = inviting another attack? If that's the rationale, then Bush not torturing people = inviting another attack. After all he stopped it before Obama reiterated the stoppage.
 
Jimmy Fallon had a great joke on his show. Sarah Palin said the GOP isn't the party of NO, they're the party of HELL NO! Not to be outdone, Biden said the Democrats are the party of fuck YEAH!
 
[quote name='depascal22']So how do you explain that Illinois is liberal while Indiana is conservative? It's more than geography.

I'd argue that large population centers within states tend to be overwhelmingly liberal. Most of the state of Illinois trends conservative but gets drowned out by the the 8 million people in Chicagoland. Most of the state of New York can't wait to get rid of NYC because of the huge tax drain and the tendency to trend liberal.

What I'm getting at is that it's funny that in this day and age that people can still think that they can deduce a political affiliation or life view solely from the state they live in. Also, it's funny that people still think that liberal states are the only ones that are cutting school budgets (while keeping entitlements like Medicare). It's the kind of world view that's gotten us in this partisan mess in the first place.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for clearing a bit of that up for me. Large population centers do drown out the rest of the state, and yes we cannot wait to get rid of NYC, but it will never happen they depend on our tax money.

I would also like to correct the fact that I did NOT say no other states are making cuts, liberal or conservative. All I said was that New York, and California have gigantic social programs that they are not willing to sacrifice in the face of a gigantic budget deficit.

Are you people really going to deny this? Other states are having problems too. I am talking about the decisions these specific two states are making though. If you were a representative would you like to tell your constituents you are cutting programs? Nope, this is the problem, the system is too bloated and noone is budging.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']You can "tell" whether a state is liberal or conservative based on history and geography.

Northeast = Liberal
North (IL, WI, MN) = Liberal
South = Conservative
Midwest (The "Heartland") = Conservative

Just examples[/QUOTE]
I wouldve gone with population density first and foremost as the leading indicator for whether or not a place is liberal.

The second best indicator would be whether they get more federal tax money than they put in (conservative) or less than they put in (liberal).
 
[quote name='Knoell']Waterboarding? That is a pretty lame form of torture to be complaining about. Especially since we put our own soldiers through it in survival training, but we wouldn't want those poor poor terroists to get a boo boo would we? I can just imagine what our enemies would do to us for a bit of information.[/QUOTE]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUkj9pjx3H0

Who cares if they do it? They use suicide bombers and we don't. Should we do that too? They want to use WMD on civilians and we wouldn't think of it. Should we change that policy? The "but they torture our guys!" argument is laughable on its face.

Torture (1) is wrong; (2) causes us to lose the moral high ground, which is especially important in a confrontation with those who most people think behave immorally (attacking civilians, beheading, torture, etc); and (3) doesn't provide accurate information. In other words, torture is not only wrong, but counterproductive. And it's un-American.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUkj9pjx3H0

Who cares if they do it? They use suicide bombers and we don't. Should we do that too? They want to use WMD on civilians and we wouldn't think of it. Should we change that policy? The "but they torture our guys!" argument is laughable on its face.

Torture (1) is wrong; (2) causes us to lose the moral high ground, which is especially important in a confrontation with those who most people think behave immorally (attacking civilians, beheading, torture, etc); and (3) doesn't provide accurate information. In other words, torture is not only wrong, but counterproductive. And it's un-American.[/QUOTE]

You all sure are jumping all over the torture thing. Where again did I say I support it? All I was saying is that it isnt like we were doing anything especially terrible. Sure it is terrible and we shouldn't be up to those type things.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Yep, Georgia is cutting school budgets pretty dramatically as well, and has the past couple of years.

Its not just a liberal state problem. It's a problem most states are having as revenue is down due to unemployment (less income tax revenue), people losing homes and cars (less property tax revenue), and people cutting back on discretionary spending (less sales tax revenue).

Hell it may be worse in some conservative states since any type of tax increase is a non-starter, even increases in sin taxes on alcohol, tobacco etc.[/QUOTE]

And, what is the reasonable thing to do when one's revenue goes down?
A. Try to tax people more to increase revenue.
B. Cut spending.
C. Downsize staff and cut their benefits.

In California, the answer seems to be "A," while "B" and "C" are impossible. This is why we are on our way to become the next Greece!
 
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=134401

Smell that. It's fresh death panel news.

I have an open point to discuss. One of my wife's single friends is becoming both a nurse and a conservative. She likes to point out that the government won't pay for her 85 year old grandfather's colonoscopy anymore and he is retired from IRS. She really likes to stress the last point.

She likes to claim that the colonoscopy would assist him in reaching an age greater than 100. Of course, she doesn't know if colorectal cancer runs in her family or if he is on any medication that could complicate a colonscopy. Any thoughts?
 
[quote name='Knoell']All I was saying is that it isnt like we were doing anything especially terrible. Sure it is terrible and we shouldn't be up to those type things.[/QUOTE]

So you actually think terrible and especially terrible is a distinction worth getting your panties in a knot over multiple posts?

Not that what you posted wasn't just an enormous pile of BS to begin with.

Pretty lame eh?
 
Look, our testicle shocking machine doesn't go over 100V. This is America, we're not savages.

EDIT: fuck! Now they know our tactics and they'll just train to resist a 100V ball-shock.
 
[quote name='IRHari']Jimmy Fallon had a great joke on his show. Sarah Palin said the GOP isn't the party of NO, they're the party of HELL NO! Not to be outdone, Biden said the Democrats are the party of fuck YEAH![/QUOTE]
When it comes to any opportunity to spend money, that's pretty damn accurate.

[quote name='SpazX']Look, our testicle shocking machine doesn't go over 100V. This is America, we're not savages.

EDIT: fuck! Now they know our tactics and they'll just train to resist a 100V ball-shock.[/QUOTE]

Nah, you can impulse buy those at any corner market in San Francisco, I hear.
 
[quote name='BigT']And, what is the reasonable thing to do when one's revenue goes down?
A. Try to tax people more to increase revenue.
B. Cut spending.
C. Downsize staff and cut their benefits.

In California, the answer seems to be "A," while "B" and "C" are impossible. This is why we are on our way to become the next Greece![/QUOTE]

It should be a combination of the above.

B. first as there's always wasteful spending. But that shouldn't involve laying off teachers, combining schools, increasing class sizes etc. when our education systems already sucks compared to most other world powers. Nor cutting other essential services, letting infrastructure decline etc.

A. Should come next. First focus on closing any loopholes, then increases taxes on higher incomes, increase avoidable taxes like sin taxes etc. Don't want to increase taxes on the lower and middle class during a recession.

C. Should be a last option, beyond useless/redundant positions that get cut as part of A.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']It should be a combination of the above.

B. first as there's always wasteful spending. But that shouldn't involve laying off teachers, combining schools, increasing class sizes etc. when our education systems already sucks compared to most other world powers. Nor cutting other essential services, letting infrastructure decline etc.

A. Should come next. First focus on closing any loopholes, then increases taxes on higher incomes, increase avoidable taxes like sin taxes etc. Don't want to increase taxes on the lower and middle class during a recession.

C. Should be a last option, beyond useless/redundant positions that get cut as part of A.[/QUOTE]

Yep increase taxes on the people who create the jobs...great idea.

You cannot tax and spend your way out of a recession.

The tax on higher income is already nearly 50%, and you want to go higher? what is the limit? 60, 70, 80%? What is the breaking point? If we raise taxes on the "rich" everytime we hit a roadblock in our economy they will just leave. You all agree there is wasteful spending so why can't we work to cut that before we kill job creation?

Also how would you feel if you worked your butt off and you finally make 100k a year in gross income, but then the government took 50% so you are back to making 50K. I think that would kill any initiative to succeed. But they can afford it right? they are evil rich people who are laughing in their money banks, while the rest of america suffers. Not that they pay for 90% of all the programs to help the low income people, but they are still big jerks, right they have to be they are rich.
 
[quote name='Knoell']The tax on higher income is already nearly 50%, and you want to go higher? what is the limit? 60, 70, 80%?[/QUOTE]

horseshit. it's not even 35%, and it was close to 70% back before Reagan came into office - the same time we started ratcheting up annual deficits like we were going out of style.

but of course we didn't have any rich people until after Reagan came into office either.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Also how would you feel if you worked your butt off and you finally make 100k a year in gross income, but then the government took 50% so you are back to making 50K. I think that would kill any initiative to succeed.[/QUOTE]

That doesn't make any sense. Federal income tax rates are applied gradually, so even if the highest bracket was 50% you wouldn't suddenly be making 90k, get to 100k and then bam you're back down to 50k. You'd obviously be making more money the entire way up, there would just be more taxes applied to money past the previous brackets. Your initiative is the fact that you'll still be making more money with each raise unless your taxes are over 100%.

State income taxes don't necessarily work that way, but they're generally much lower anyway (and if you look at the states with higher income taxes they probably work the same way as federal).
 
[quote name='Msut77']So you actually think terrible and especially terrible is a distinction worth getting your panties in a knot over multiple posts?

Not that what you posted wasn't just an enormous pile of BS to begin with.

Pretty lame eh?[/QUOTE]

What I am saying is that while us Americans are arguing over ridiculous things such as waterboarding, other countries are gaining ground on us fast. Open your eyes man, the world is not the socialist utopia you want it to be.

Every great empire in history has fallen because its people become complacent, overindulgent, and fat (not in the weight sense). I think America is finally hitting that stage in which the people are just to lazy to do the work to succeed like they used to. They want the government to create a utopia in which everyone wins, and there are no losers. That is impossible and yet we still try and it will be our downfall.

We take our safety in the world for granted because we think noone would attack us. "Never, the world is to advanced for those type of wars." You all are wrong, we are giving trillions of dollars in debt to china, and all of our manufacturing jobs are going over there. What do you think would happen if China called in the debt we owe, and turned their manufacturing power into militaristic production? That is just one example. We are not invincible, so yes trivial things such as waterboarding do not get my "panties in a bunch".
 
Taxes on the higher brackets pre-Reagan were much higher than they are now, and the country grew dramatically through the 50s, 60s etc. So taxes stymieing growth, driving the rich to other countries is horseshit as Myke put it, and just a prime example of unfounded conservative rhetoric.

And there's no tax bracket that's near 50%. The highest currently is 35% and that kicks in for making more than $373,651 (single or married filing jointly).

So there's plenty of room for raising taxes. Adding more brackets--should someone making $375K be in the same bracket as someone making $2 million? $10 million? Even at lower levers, the 33% bracket is pretty wide: $171-185-$373,650. So there's room to tweak theses lower brackets and make things like $150k-199,999 33%, $200K-249,999K 34%, $250K-299,99K, 35% and so forth.

Raising taxes doesn't have to mean big increases for any one group.

Also, your math is off in your 100K example as you're entire income isn't taxed at your bracket rate. Currently you're first $8,375 will be taxed at 10%, then $8,376-34,000 at 15% and so on up to the 35% max. So as others have said, bring some facts to your posts, or you're really adding nothing here but being another dolt posting opinions and partisan rhetoric with nothing to back either up.


As for the rhetoric part of your post, I'm not some college kid making peanuts and wanting to tax the evil rich. I'm in my first year out of grad school and will make $65-75K this year. My girlfriend makes even more as she's been working 2 years longer, so we'd 3rd from top bracket if we got married and have a pretty reasonable chance of being in the next bracket in 10 years or so and maybe even the highest if we both really excel.

I'm willing to pay a bit more taxes to sure up the education system and other necessities. I've been successful and have no problem caring more of the burden as I can handle it. A 1-2% increase in my brackets is something I wouldn't even really notice.

And yes cutting wasteful spending is part of it, and needs to happen first. Quit fighting stupid, pointless wars and invest that money domestically. But that alone is only a drop in the bucket and higher taxes will be needed to sure up education, hopefully eventually move to universal health care, and the other things I want to see happen even if it means higher taxes for those of us in the upper half of the tax brackets.
 
[quote name='Knoell']What I am saying is that while us Americans are arguing over ridiculous things such as waterboarding, other countries are gaining ground on us fast. Open your eyes man, the world is not the socialist utopia you want it to be.

Every great empire in history has fallen because its people become complacent, overindulgent, and fat (not in the weight sense). I think America is finally hitting that stage in which the people are just to lazy to do the work to succeed like they used to. They want the government to create a utopia in which everyone wins, and there are no losers. That is impossible and yet we still try and it will be our downfall.

We take our safety in the world for granted because we think noone would attack us. "Never, the world is to advanced for those type of wars." You all are wrong, we are giving trillions of dollars in debt to china, and all of our manufacturing jobs are going over there. What do you think would happen if China called in the debt we owe, and turned their manufacturing power into militaristic production? That is just one example. We are not invincible, so yes trivial things such as waterboarding do not get my "panties in a bunch".[/QUOTE]

Good lord, son, what's goin' on here? Looks like someone just rolled their brand new set of Conservative talking point dice and scored got YAHTZEE.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Good lord, son, what's goin' on here? Looks like someone just rolled their brand new set of Conservative talking point dice and scored got YAHTZEE.[/QUOTE]

No shit. He's like thrust before he got even lazier and stopped putting any effort into posting his talking points.
 
[quote name='SpazX']That doesn't make any sense. Federal income tax rates are applied gradually, so even if the highest bracket was 50% you wouldn't suddenly be making 90k, get to 100k and then bam you're back down to 50k. You'd obviously be making more money the entire way up, there would just be more taxes applied to money past the previous brackets. Your initiative is the fact that you'll still be making more money with each raise unless your taxes are over 100%.

State income taxes don't necessarily work that way, but they're generally much lower anyway (and if you look at the states with higher income taxes they probably work the same way as federal).[/QUOTE]

Wrong, For example even at the low, low, income level of 20K gross. A person would have to pay about 15% in taxes. If they are feeling especially productive, and get a second job, or work alot of overtime, and increase their income to 34,000 they suddenly have to pay 25% taxes.

Same thing goes with the income bracket of 82,400, once you pass this milestone, you pay from 25% to 28% which 3% doesn't seem that bad right? Wrong, that three percent all by itself is an additional $2,472-5,155 dollars in taxes.Which in addition to the rest of the 25%, plus state tax, plus social security, plus medicare, etc

Im sure you can see how the people who make 82 thousand are paying through the nose in taxes.
 
Are you bitching about manufacturing jobs going to China now Knoell? That's just private industry seeking profit, you certainly wouldn't want to stop that.

EDIT: And you don't understand how taxes work. I remember when RAM didn't either, it's fine, I'm sure a lot of people don't, I explained it to him. He didn't have the "I know better" attitude while not knowing though.

You pay the rate per bracket on money in that bracket. If the bracket goes from 10% at 20k to 15% at 30k you'd pay 10% on 20k and 15% on the additional $10k.
 
[quote name='Knoell']What I am saying is that while us Americans are arguing over ridiculous things such as waterboarding, other countries are gaining ground on us fast. Open your eyes man, the world is not the socialist utopia you want it to be.[/QUOTE]

Are you arguing we're losing on edge on torture? Are we going to have a torture gap?

[quote name='Knoell'] Every great empire in history has fallen because its people become complacent, overindulgent, and fat (not in the weight sense). I think America is finally hitting that stage in which the people are just to lazy to do the work to succeed like they used to. They want the government to create a utopia in which everyone wins, and there are no losers. That is impossible and yet we still try and it will be our downfall.
[/QUOTE]

1. Isn't being an empire a bad thing?
2. Maybe people realize hard work doesn't pay off. Maybe people realize certain levels can't be reached by virtue of their birth.
3. Welfare doesn't stop at the poor.

[quote name='Knoell'] We take our safety in the world for granted because we think noone would attack us. "Never, the world is to advanced for those type of wars." You all are wrong, we are giving trillions of dollars in debt to china, and all of our manufacturing jobs are going over there. What do you think would happen if China called in the debt we owe, and turned their manufacturing power into militaristic production? That is just one example. We are not invincible, so yes trivial things such as waterboarding do not get my "panties in a bunch".[/QUOTE]

You're arguing the virtues of waterboarding. If you're worried about China crushing us with cheap plastic tanks, you can create a thread for that.
 
^ um, no, knoell. if you continue to deny the incremental application of increased tax rates and genuinely want to argue it's possible to earn more, yet less, by entering into a higher tax bracket, you'll find yourself on the lazy/troll ignore list like thrustbucket.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Taxes on the higher brackets pre-Reagan were much higher than they are now, and the country grew dramatically through the 50s, 60s etc. So taxes stymieing growth, driving the rich to other countries is horseshit as Myke put it, and just a prime example of unfounded conservative rhetoric.

And there's no tax bracket that's near 50%. The highest currently is 35% and that kicks in for making more than $373,651 (single or married filing jointly).

So there's plenty of room for raising taxes. Adding more brackets--should someone making $375K be in the same bracket as someone making $2 million? $10 million? Even at lower levers, the 33% bracket is pretty wide: $171-185-$373,650. So there's room to tweak theses lower brackets and make things like $150k-199,999 33%, $200K-249,999K 34%, $250K-299,99K, 35% and so forth.

Raising taxes doesn't have to mean big increases for any one group.

Also, your math is off in your 100K example as you're entire income isn't taxed at your bracket rate. Currently you're first $8,375 will be taxed at 10%, then $8,376-34,000 at 15% and so on up to the 35% max. So as others have said, bring some facts to your posts, or you're really adding nothing here but being another dolt posting opinions and partisan rhetoric with nothing to back either up.


As for the rhetoric part of your post, I'm not some college kid making peanuts and wanting to tax the evil rich. I'm in my first year out of grad school and will make $65-75K this year. My girlfriend makes even more as she's been working 2 years longer, so we'd 3rd from top bracket if we got married and have a pretty reasonable chance of being in the next bracket in 10 years or so and maybe even the highest if we both really excel.

I'm willing to pay a bit more taxes to sure up the education system and other necessities. I've been successful and have no problem caring more of the burden as I can handle it. A 1-2% increase in my brackets is something I wouldn't even really notice.

And yes cutting wasteful spending is part of it, and needs to happen first. Quit fighting stupid, pointless wars and invest that money domestically. But that alone is only a drop in the bucket and higher taxes will be needed to sure up education, hopefully eventually move to universal health care, and the other things I want to see happen even if it means higher taxes for those of us in the upper half of the tax brackets.[/QUOTE]

You bring some facts to your post, you forgot to add the other taxes.

Also I would like to say that I dont mine paying taxes to help educate or even help low income people. It is the government WASTE that is the problem, you people seem to get that mixed up alot. Conservatives are not against helping the low income people, we want to cut the government waste out. We cannot keep escalating our spending, saying "oh but its needed, it really is" and then not cut any of the other programs that are "needed". Is that so hard to understand?
 
[quote name='Knoell']Wrong, For example even at the low, low, income level of 20K gross. A person would have to pay about 15% in taxes. If they are feeling especially productive, and get a second job, or work alot of overtime, and increase their income to 34,000 they suddenly have to pay 25% taxes.

Same thing goes with the income bracket of 82,400, once you pass this milestone, you pay from 25% to 28% which 3% doesn't seem that bad right? Wrong, that three percent all by itself is an additional $2,472-5,155 dollars in taxes.Which in addition to the rest of the 25%, plus state tax, plus social security, plus medicare, etc

Im sure you can see how the people who make 82 thousand are paying through the nose in taxes.[/QUOTE]

I'm glad you're not a spokesperson for heterosexuality. Otherwise, I'd SOOOO be choking on a dick right now.
 
[quote name='Knoell']we want to cut the government waste out.[/QUOTE]

Time to play the "What is this a picture of?" game again.

bullshit_pile.jpg


http://www.peaholmquist.com/bullshit/images/bullshit_pile.jpg
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Are you arguing we're losing on edge on torture? Are we going to have a torture gap?



1. Isn't being an empire a bad thing?
2. Maybe people realize hard work doesn't pay off. Maybe people realize certain levels can't be reached by virtue of their birth.
3. Welfare doesn't stop at the poor.



You're arguing the virtues of waterboarding. If you're worried about China crushing us with cheap plastic tanks, you can create a thread for that.[/QUOTE]

1. Where in that post was I arguing the virtues of waterboarding? Also where was I saying that we are losing an edge on torturing.

2. Empire was for lack of a better word to suit the countries of the past. I guess empires are evil now.

3. When did I say anything about the rich or the poor, see it is you close minded people who think that I am just talking about the "poor" poor people.

4. What the hell are you talking about some people realize some things cant be achieved by the virtue of their birth? who is the racist now lol. I know this sounds corny, but this is America and every ethnicity has become successful in one way or another. The virtue of your birth, black or white, poor, or rich, has little to do with it.

5. I am not complaining about China taking jobs, I am warning that China produces billions of products in their manufacturing products. What happens if they turn that power into militaristic production? They have the people, the power to manufacture, and trillions of dollars to call in on us. Noone else is worried?
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn'] I'm glad you're not a spokesperson for heterosexuality. Otherwise, I'd SOOOO be choking on a dick right now.[/QUOTE]

like i said, too scared to actually debate it. Resort to insults and misconceptions to pull people off the actual point. go choke on that dick, you deserve it.
 
I think we already corrected the post he made the dick reference for, so he doesn't have to.

And I'm pretty sure social security and medicare taxes are a flat percentage (somebody correct me if I'm wrong), so they also can't possibly act in the way you said.
 
[quote name='SpazX']I think we already corrected the post he made the dick reference for, so he doesn't have to.

And I'm pretty sure social security and medicare taxes are a flat percentage (somebody correct me if I'm wrong), so they also can't possibly act in the way you said.[/QUOTE]

Sigh, So whats the limit then? Since government spending is the solution, why not take everyones money and distribute it evenly? thatll solve all of the problems right?
 
[quote name='Knoell']like i said, too scared to actually debate it. Resort to insults and misconceptions to pull people off the actual point. go choke on that dick, you deserve it.[/QUOTE]

To restate what SpazX and others have stated, you're wrong.

If you want to lump sales, medicaid/medicare, state and federal taxes together, you're getting close to correct.

However ... as people earn more money, they learn how to conceal it legally.

For example, a poor person holds debt through a credit card. The interest rates are variable, higher and can't be deducted on taxes.

A rich person holds the same debt through a mortgage. The interest rate can be fixed, is almost always lower and can be deducted on taxes.

Now, there are several people here capable of schooling you. Are you willing to learn?
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']To restate what SpazX and others have stated, you're wrong.

If you want to lump sales, medicaid/medicare, state and federal taxes together, you're getting close to correct.

However ... as people earn more money, they learn how to conceal it legally.

For example, a poor person holds debt through a credit card. The interest rates are variable, higher and can't be deducted on taxes.

A rich person holds the same debt through a mortgage. The interest rate can be fixed, is almost always lower and can be deducted on taxes.

Now, there are several people here capable of schooling you. Are you willing to learn?[/QUOTE]

not sure what you are talking about here, but it is nice to see you stopped talking about dick.
 
And to think some took issue here when I refer to the cons who post here as the clown car crew.

Knoell is another one come tumbling out, hurling pies and tripping over his floppy shoes.

Knoell if you actually want to learn a few things and start being rational I can recommend a few books.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Sigh, So whats the limit then? Since government spending is the solution, why not take everyones money and distribute it evenly? thatll solve all of the problems right?[/QUOTE]

Slippery slopes?

If you've accepted how taxes work, then we can move past that. What the tax rates should be is a different question, but to say that it's at its maximum now is just making things up. The fact that taxes used to be much higher in the higher tax brackets and yet the country did quite well goes against your original point, so if you want to use a different argument then go ahead.
 
[quote name='Msut77']And to think some took issue here when I refer to the cons who post here as the clown car crew.

Knoell is another one come tumbling out, hurling pies and tripping over his floppy shoes.

Knoell if you actually want to learn a few things and start being rational I can recommend a few books.[/QUOTE]

Im still waiting for your proof buddy. Again with the insults, really?
 
[quote name='Knoell']Im still waiting for your proof buddy. Again with the insults, really?[/QUOTE]

You've been consistently wrong on every tangent you start out on. What proof on which topic unrelated to the thread are you waiting on?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top