DakotaT
11 years ago

>Using the word "taxes" (implying all taxation) as a substitute for "Federal income taxes" (a very specific form of taxation).

Granted, property-tax heavy taxation isn't going to work nowadays. In any case, I'm asking this out of geniune curiosity and not to be combative: Do you have a source for your claims regarding income taxes? Sure, I've heard batshit fiscal ideas from some libertarians (which is part of why I hesitate to call myself one, I prefer "Libertarian but not crazy") but I've not heard any super-duper-reactionary fiscal ideas spouted from anybody of importance.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 



I predict in the next decade, you'll see what is called a VAT tax

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FValue_added_tax&ei=OtPbUL6MBMPm2gWP_IHQDA&usg=AFQjCNEWs3ok_hJomfRy07M7_4PxY4kmDg&sig2=mcTn2a7bISLo6Myi7wgPGw&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.b2I 


The reason for this is because our treasury needs an influx of revenue and because wealthy people have become so resourceful at paying 14% of their income instead of 39% like they are suppose under current income tax codes, so this tax has become necessary - and it is exactly the type of regressive tax that kicks the little people in the nutz. Maybe a national sales tax will be implented.
UserPostedImage
Porforis
11 years ago

I predict in the next decade, you'll see what is called a VAT tax

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FValue_added_tax&ei=OtPbUL6MBMPm2gWP_IHQDA&usg=AFQjCNEWs3ok_hJomfRy07M7_4PxY4kmDg&sig2=mcTn2a7bISLo6Myi7wgPGw&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.b2I 


The reason for this is because our treasury needs an influx of revenue and because wealthy people have become so resourceful at paying 14% of their income instead of 39% like they are suppose under current income tax codes, so this tax has become necessary - and it is exactly the type of regressive tax that kicks the little people in the nutz. Maybe a national sales tax will be implented.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



I wouldn't be opposed to something along those lines, capital gains taxes also need to be bracketized based on income. However I don't see what that has to do with my previous post unless you're equating opposition to a VAT tax to wanting the polar opposite in which case the same can be said about many Democrats.

Side note - If I don't respond for a few days, I'm not avoiding the topic. We're leaving for the inlaws tomorrow morning, I'll be back Sunday just in time for the game and I should be back then. 🙂
Formo
  • Formo
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
11 years ago

What rights have you had taken from you since King Barry took over? Now be specific. How exactly is your life any different?

All you jackasses have to offer is that it's going to be this way or that way someday. If the leaders of all you sheep were so smart at forecasting the future, how come none of you are wealthy yet or better yet - smarter?

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



Who's bringing up Obummer? I haven't. This police state nonsense started long before Barack.

Did you forget about the SOPA already? That almost got through, and if it weren't for huge mega internet companies like Facebook an Google jumping all over the gubment, we'd be having some serious personal violation issues. Then there's the [url=http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr1540enr/pdf/BILLS-112hr1540enr.pdfNDAA of fiscal year 2012.[/url] That is linked to the PDF of the actual bill on the gubment's website. If the US gubment suspects you or I of terrorist activities, they can detain us indefinitely without trial. 

We continue to lose our rights to fly without being molested by poorly trained TSA agents.

C'mon man. You're making it easy for me.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Formo
  • Formo
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
11 years ago

Yes I believe that, because their goal is to not pay any taxes, and without revenue, all programs are gutted. And their rationale is that the country didn't need taxes before the two World Wars so why do we need them now? That kind of thinking drives me up a wall because it is so ass backwards to the times we are living in. The fact of the matter is that we all live in this wonderful country and to ensure that we all have happines and a chance for a good life we need to pay back to our country when we are doing well. That is what a progressive tax system is designed to do - and 30 years of trickle down moronics from the right wing has put us in the current shithole we find ourselves, but the wealthy got to gut the country of it's wealth by legalized tax evasion. It doesn't really get much simpler than that. All the social issues are wag the dog tactics to draw attention away from the thievery.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



Oh, you only slurp up the images of the Tea Party that your precious liberal media portrays them as. This post is a joke.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
DakotaT
11 years ago

If the US gubment suspects you or I of terrorist activities, they can detain us indefinitely without trial. 

We continue to lose our rights to fly without being molested by poorly trained TSA agents.

C'mon man. You're making it easy for me.

Originally Posted by: Formo 



And at what regularity is this happening? Give me some cold hard facts and I'm sure it is way less than 1% of our population being detained. You're talking about an administrative law that happened because of an invasion of our country. When the Japanese Americans were detained without doing anything wrong during WWII, they just sucked it up, didn't whine about it at all.
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
11 years ago
There you go again, DakotaT.

Ok, time for you to put your brains where your mouth is....

Please provide some evidence that government produces more value than it costs. I'll even allow you to provide "indirect" benefits that come from "public goods". I'll also allow you to count as "benefit" any "other costs" that are saved as a result of having government do X, Y, or Z for us. You can do it for government overall, or just for the feds if you want.

I'll only require three things of you. (These are what I would require of one of my undergraduate econ majors, and you're a heckuva lot smarter than most of them.)

1. The evidence must be "quantitative" or otherwise empirical. No mere waving of one's arms about all the things government does for A, B, C, and D. You have to put a number on the benefit and you have to compare it to the amount of spending required to get that benefit. (As a bona fide producer of real economic value (i.e., that nectar of yours!) in excess of the costs of production, I know you know the difference between expenditure to make something (e.g. your labor and overhead costs) and the benefit created by said expenditure (in your case, a good measure of the benefit of much honey is the price people will pay for it).

2. If the benefit is indirect (i.e., we pay government for X and therefore we get more of the valuable thing Y), you must explain the logic whereby more X leads to more Y AND provide empirical evidence of how much X gets how much Y.

3. If the expenditure works primarily a "transfer payment" (i.e., it takes $$$ out of Peter's pocket, e.g., through taxes, and puts it in Paul's pocket), you must provide quantitative evidence that the extra value that Paul will produce over and above the costs of administering that transfer payment (i.e., the IRS and its enforcers, extra CPAs and tax lawyers and lobbyists that Peter will hire to reduce the transfer, extra CPAs and lawyers and lobbyists that Paul will pay to increase the transfer.

I'll even let you get the help of anyone else here considers themselves something other than a "bat shit libertarian" or "even crazier anarchist" to help you out. I'm not sure that allows you to use the slayer of zombies to help you or not, but I'm pretty sure it allows you to draw from anyone else here other than yours truly. Even vikesrule (who, except for that ND v. MN thing, I think you pretty much agree with) and Formo (who, I'm pretty sure you don't).

If you, by yourself or together with the massed intelligence of PackersHome-1, can do all three of the above provide credible sources for your numbers other than a political speech, ad, or editorial ... heck, if you can provide empirical evidence for two of the three, I'll abandon anarchism and vote for whichever Presidential candidate you wish in 2016.

So, yes, I'm giving you until the 12:01 a.m. on the first Tuesday of November, 2016.

I am not, however, going to hold my breadth.

Go to it.

[grin1]
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Formo
  • Formo
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
11 years ago

And at what regularity is this happening? Give me some cold hard facts and I'm sure it is way less than 1% of our population being detained. You're talking about an administrative law that happened because of an invasion of our country. When the Japanese Americans were detained without doing anything wrong during WWII, they just sucked it up, didn't whine about it at all.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



Really? That was absolutely wrong too. The Japanese are weird people anyway, so how would you know what they truly felt? Regardless, it doesn't make what we did to them any more right.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Formo
  • Formo
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
11 years ago

There you go again, DakotaT.

Ok, time for you to put your brains where your mouth is....

Please provide some evidence that government produces more value than it costs. I'll even allow you to provide "indirect" benefits that come from "public goods". I'll also allow you to count as "benefit" any "other costs" that are saved as a result of having government do X, Y, or Z for us. You can do it for government overall, or just for the feds if you want.

I'll only require three things of you. (These are what I would require of one of my undergraduate econ majors, and you're a heckuva lot smarter than most of them.)

1. The evidence must be "quantitative" or otherwise empirical. No mere waving of one's arms about all the things government does for A, B, C, and D. You have to put a number on the benefit and you have to compare it to the amount of spending required to get that benefit. (As a bona fide producer of real economic value (i.e., that nectar of yours!) in excess of the costs of production, I know you know the difference between expenditure to make something (e.g. your labor and overhead costs) and the benefit created by said expenditure (in your case, a good measure of the benefit of much honey is the price people will pay for it).

2. If the benefit is indirect (i.e., we pay government for X and therefore we get more of the valuable thing Y), you must explain the logic whereby more X leads to more Y AND provide empirical evidence of how much X gets how much Y.

3. If the expenditure works primarily a "transfer payment" (i.e., it takes $$$ out of Peter's pocket, e.g., through taxes, and puts it in Paul's pocket), you must provide quantitative evidence that the extra value that Paul will produce over and above the costs of administering that transfer payment (i.e., the IRS and its enforcers, extra CPAs and tax lawyers and lobbyists that Peter will hire to reduce the transfer, extra CPAs and lawyers and lobbyists that Paul will pay to increase the transfer.

I'll even let you get the help of anyone else here considers themselves something other than a "bat shit libertarian" or "even crazier anarchist" to help you out. I'm not sure that allows you to use the slayer of zombies to help you or not, but I'm pretty sure it allows you to draw from anyone else here other than yours truly. Even vikesrule (who, except for that ND v. MN thing, I think you pretty much agree with) and Formo (who, I'm pretty sure you don't).

If you, by yourself or together with the massed intelligence of PackersHome-1, can do all three of the above provide credible sources for your numbers other than a political speech, ad, or editorial ... heck, if you can provide empirical evidence for two of the three, I'll abandon anarchism and vote for whichever Presidential candidate you wish in 2016.

So, yes, I'm giving you until the 12:01 a.m. on the first Tuesday of November, 2016.

I am not, however, going to hold my breadth.

Go to it.

[grin1]

Originally Posted by: Wade 



lol Funny. But I won't help him. He's on his own. 🙂
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
11 years ago
P.s. I'm pretty sure Kevin will be willing to break my last post into a new thread so we can all watch how this evidence accumulates.

Wouldn't you, Kevin?

We could call it the "Evidence that Wade is Full of Shit in His Government Hate" thread, or something similar.


And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
11 years ago
P.P.S. Merry Third Day of Christmas, everyone!!

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    packerfanoutwest (3h) : 49ers are underdogs at Packers, ending streak of 36 straight games as favorites
    Zero2Cool (11h) : 49ers might be down their QB, DL, TE and LT?
    packerfanoutwest (22-Nov) : Jaire Alexander says he has a torn PCL
    Zero2Cool (20-Nov) : Even with the context it's ... what?
    Mucky Tundra (20-Nov) : Matt LaFleur without context: “I don’t wanna pat you on the butt and you poop in my hand.”
    beast (20-Nov) : We brought in a former Packers OL coach to help evaluate OL as a scout
    beast (20-Nov) : Jets have been pretty good at picking DL
    Zero2Cool (20-Nov) : He landed good players thanks to high draft slot. He isn't good.
    Zero2Cool (20-Nov) : He can shove his knowledge up his ass. He knows nothing.
    beast (20-Nov) : More knowledge, just like bring in the Jets head coach
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : What? Why? Huh?
    beast (19-Nov) : I wonder if the Packers might to try to bring Douglas in through Milt Hendrickson/Ravens connections
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : The Jets fired Joe Douglas, per sources
    packerfanoutwest (19-Nov) : Jets are a mess......
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : Pretty sure Jets fired their scouting staff and just pluck former Packers.
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : Jets sign Anders Carlson to their 53.
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : When you cycle the weeks, the total over remains for season. But you get your W/L for that selected week. Confusing.
    packerfanoutwest (19-Nov) : the total and percentage are the same as the previous weeks
    packerfanoutwest (19-Nov) : the total and percentage are the same as the previous weeks
    packerfanoutwest (19-Nov) : the totals are accurate..nrvrtmind
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : I don't follow what you are saying. The totals are not the same as last week.
    packerfanoutwest (19-Nov) : ok so then wht are the totals the same as last week?
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : NFL Pick'em is auto updated when NFL Scores tab is clicked
    Martha Careful (19-Nov) : The offense was OK. Let's not forget the Bear defense is very very good.
    packerfanoutwest (19-Nov) : Who updates the leaderboard on NFLPickem?
    beast (19-Nov) : Has the Packers offense been worse since the former Jets coach joined the Packers?
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : Offense gets his ass in gear, this could be good.
    Zero2Cool (19-Nov) : Backup QB helped with three wins. Special Teams contributed to three wins.
    bboystyle (18-Nov) : Lions played outside thats why. They scored 16 and 17 in the only 2 outside games this year
    Zero2Cool (18-Nov) : The rest of the NFL is catching up to Packers ... kicking is an issue throughout league
    packerfanoutwest (18-Nov) : Packers DL Kenny Clark: We knew 'we were going to block' Bears' game-winning field goal attempt
    Zero2Cool (18-Nov) : Lions seem to be throttling everyone, but only (only) got 24 lol maybe the rain is why
    Zero2Cool (18-Nov) : Packers vs Lions game doesn't seem so bad.
    beast (18-Nov) : Dennis Green "They are what we thought they were, and we let them off the hook!"
    Martha Careful (17-Nov) : comment of the day Z2Cool "Bears better than we want to admit. Packers worse than we think. It's facts."
    Mucky Tundra (17-Nov) : my worst case scenario: Bears fix their oline and get a coach like Johnson from the Lions and his scheme
    Zero2Cool (17-Nov) : Bears get OL fixed amd we might have a problem
    buckeyepackfan (17-Nov) : Pretty sure they already have scouting reports on guys who aren't even starting for their college team. The future is now for me.
    buckeyepackfan (17-Nov) : I tend to let Gute and Co. Worry about the future.
    beast (17-Nov) : That's great news and Packers need to keep upgrading their OL, DL and DBs this off-season, so missing one guy doesn't kill them
    beast (17-Nov) : That's great news and Packers need to keep upgrading their OL, DL and DBs this off-season, so missing one guy doesn't kill them
    buckeyepackfan (17-Nov) : Jaire and Evans Williams are both ACTIVE! Good news.
    Martha Careful (17-Nov) : The badgers really need to change the whole offensive scheme. No draws no screens plus the quarterback is marginal
    Cheesey (17-Nov) : If the Badgers had a decent QB, they would have won. The guy can't hit a wide open receiver
    Martha Careful (17-Nov) : chop block
    Martha Careful (17-Nov) : there was a very questionable job Block call that upon viewing replay was very borderline
    beast (17-Nov) : How so? (I didn't watch)
    Zero2Cool (17-Nov) : Badgers got hosed vs Oregon
    packerfanoutwest (16-Nov) : damn,he hasn't played since week 2
    Mucky Tundra (15-Nov) : poor guy can't catch a break
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2024 Packers Schedule
    Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
    Eagles
    Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
    COLTS
    Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
    Titans
    Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
    Rams
    Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
    CARDINALS
    Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
    TEXANS
    Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Jaguars
    Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
    49ERS
    Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
    DOLPHINS
    Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
    Seahawks
    Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
    SAINTS
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 12:00 PM
    Vikings
    Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
    BEARS
    Recent Topics
    13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    21-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    21-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    21-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    21-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    21-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    19-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    19-Nov / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

    19-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    19-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.