bpwallace49 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Wait...so I work for 20 years and then suffer a serious accident and can no longer work. Since I no longer have income, I am no longer a "net tax payer." Therefore, you want to remove my voting rights? Seems a little harsh to me. Plus every old person on Social Security cant vote because they are receiving "gubmnet assistance" . . . or college students that dont meet the income threshold . . dont let them vote either. Hell . . . cant we just go back to the white landowner requirement . . . like was intended by the founding fathers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 http://ctj.org/pdf/ryanplan2010.pdf Has anyone else noticed that the current Repub strategy is to pit half of the people against the other half? they also wrote a report savaging the tax plan of the bowles-simpson "bipartisan fiscal commission" on essentially the exact same grounds. not to mention that's not even an analysis of the budget proposal we're talking about. check the date Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Wait...so I work for 20 years and then suffer a serious accident and can no longer work. Since I no longer have income, I am no longer a "net tax payer." Therefore, you want to remove my voting rights? Seems a little harsh to me. ah back to the good old days, before the constitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted April 5, 2011 Author Share Posted April 5, 2011 ah back to the good old days, before the constitution. Uh, this country was started due to taxation with out representation. When you tax one individual and don't tax the other, then you are diluting the representation of the one being taxed. Additionally why should someone have representation with out taxation. If you want a say in society, contribute to it. I'm not even saying you have to contribute the same as your neighbor, but at least contribute something, and don't rely on the government, or if you are relying on the government, then don't expect a say in what it does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Uh, this country was started due to taxation with out representation. When you tax one individual and don't tax the other, then you are diluting the representation of the one being taxed. Additionally why should someone have representation with out taxation. If you want a say in society, contribute to it. I'm not even saying you have to contribute the same as your neighbor, but at least contribute something, and don't rely on the government, or if you are relying on the government, then don't expect a say in what it does. So, to be sure I understand, individuals who attend college full time cannot vote but individuals who begin working at the age of 18, can vote. My parents are no longer able to vote. People with debilitating illnesses (e.g, cancer, ALS, etc) who can no longer work and may receive disability benefits can no longer vote. Is this what you are saying or are you simply saying poor people can no longer vote? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted April 5, 2011 Author Share Posted April 5, 2011 So, to be sure I understand, individuals who attend college full time cannot vote but individuals who begin working at the age of 18, can vote. My parents are no longer able to vote. People with debilitating illnesses (e.g, cancer, ALS, etc) who can no longer work and may receive disability benefits can no longer vote. Is this what you are saying or are you simply saying poor people can no longer vote? Pretty much, if you are not actively contributing to financing the government you should not have a vote. How would you like me telling you how to spend your money, but you not having the same opportunity to tell me how to spend mine? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 So, to be sure I understand, individuals who attend college full time cannot vote but individuals who begin working at the age of 18, can vote. My parents are no longer able to vote. People with debilitating illnesses (e.g, cancer, ALS, etc) who can no longer work and may receive disability benefits can no longer vote. Is this what you are saying or are you simply saying poor people can no longer vote? I'm pretty sure that's the way our forefathers' wanted it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Pretty much, if you are not actively contributing to financing the government you should not have a vote. How would you like me telling you how to spend your money, but you not having the same opportunity to tell me how to spend mine? well then, I guess we'll just disagree on this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 While the financial crisis led G.E. to post a loss in the United States in 2009, regulatory filings show that in the last five years, G.E. has accumulated $26 billion in American profits, and received a net tax benefit from the I.R.S. of $4.1 billion. Cant these poor people ever catch a break? You are a US business that wants to capitalize on the financial strength of the US and wants to do business here? Then pay your fookin taxes . . Such strategies, as well as changes in tax laws that encouraged some businesses and professionals to file as individuals, have pushed down the corporate share of the nation’s tax receipts — from 30 percent of all federal revenue in the mid-1950s to 6.6 percent in 2009. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SayItAintSoJoe Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Pretty much, if you are not actively contributing to financing the government you should not have a vote. How would you like me telling you how to spend your money, but you not having the same opportunity to tell me how to spend mine? So you would like to see an amendment to the constitution to redefine who can vote? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Our forefathers terrorized and killed the natives who lived here, then whipped blacks and kept them as pets. yessir, their thoughts and ideas should be held in the higest regard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 here we go... NANCY PELOSI: "In one of the bills before us, six million seniors are deprived of meals -- homebound seniors are deprived of meals. People ask us to find our common ground, the middle ground. Is middle ground three million seniors not receiving meals? I don't think so. We've got to take this conversation from a debate about numbers and dollar figures and finding middle ground there to the higher ground of national values. I don't think the American people want any one of those six million people to lose their meals or the children who are being thrown off of Head Start and the rest of it." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 here we go... Why do you hate old people? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Why do you hate old people? I don't, I just want them to die when they ought to, and eat cat food in the meantime Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted April 5, 2011 Author Share Posted April 5, 2011 Our forefathers terrorized and killed the natives who lived here, then whipped blacks and kept them as pets. yessir, their thoughts and ideas should be held in the higest regard Who brought them up again? Name one nation that is 200 years old that didn't attack the indigenous peoples of their land, and didn't have slaves please. I guess we shouldn't look to history for anything. There is no reason to hold the Magna Carta, The US Constitution, The Law of the Twelve Tablets, The Codex, as well as all philosophy prior to the mid 19th century. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Such strategies, as well as changes in tax laws that encouraged some businesses and professionals to file as individuals, have pushed down the corporate share of the nation’s tax receipts — from 30 percent of all federal revenue in the mid-1950s to 6.6 percent in 2009. Which kinda makes you wonder why corporations are always bleating about taxes being too high. It's like the wealthy and their apologists - taxes are ALWAYS too high, regardless of the actual level, marginal or actual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 I don't, I just want them to die when they ought to, and eat cat food in the meantime No chit . . . and stop using up all that gol danged social security with all those newfangled medical ways to live longer . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted April 5, 2011 Author Share Posted April 5, 2011 Which kinda makes you wonder why corporations are always bleating about taxes being too high. It's like the wealthy and their apologists - taxes are ALWAYS too high, regardless of the actual level, marginal or actual. Compare them to corporate taxation in countries we compete with rather than with history and you might have something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 I don't, I just want them to die when they ought to, and eat cat food in the meantime I feed our cat in the morning and what's inside that can looks quite nice...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Compare them to corporate taxation in countries we compete with rather than with history and you might have something. Seriously? Lower than 6.6%? In countries that offer paved roads, rail links, educated work forces and suchlike? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Who brought them up again? Name one nation that is 200 years old that didn't attack the indigenous peoples of their land, and didn't have slaves please. I guess we shouldn't look to history for anything. There is no reason to hold the Magna Carta, The US Constitution, The Law of the Twelve Tablets, The Codex, as well as all philosophy prior to the mid 19th century. Compare them to corporate taxation in countries we compete with rather than with history and you might have something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Compare them to corporate taxation in countries we compete with rather than with history and you might have something. Were we not competing with other countries from 1950-2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted April 5, 2011 Author Share Posted April 5, 2011 Apples and oranges, I would have thought you would have been smart enough to recognize the difference. I guess I've been giving you too much credit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted April 5, 2011 Author Share Posted April 5, 2011 Were we not competing with other countries from 1950-2009 Many of those from 1950's had totalitarian governments which impeded commercial advancement. Who are our largest competitors? Do they currently have more freedom than they did in the 1950's? What is the corporate tax rate of our largest competitors? Compare apples to apples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Which kinda makes you wonder why corporations are always bleating about taxes being too high. It's like the wealthy and their apologists - taxes are ALWAYS too high, regardless of the actual level, marginal or actual. compared with other countries, we have higher corporate rates, but more write-offs and loopholes. ryan's plan involves lower rates and fewer write-offs and loopholes -- with personal income taxes and corporate taxes alike. again, this is also a feature of the bowles-simpson fiscal commission tax reform plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.