The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

[unofan]

This post brought to you by the derp that is so mathematically uninclined that he (or she) cannot understand that the average is able to move.

So you think the average american, defined as the 50th percentile, lacks one (or more) of the three things I mentioned? And even so, you would find that acceptable? Helping the bottom quintile live like the 2nd from bottom quintile does not move them in any way shape or form to above average.

By the way, I notice your belief in the doom of forthcoming martial law which kept you from wagering with me hasn't stopped you from betting on the stock market. So apparently you don't believe money will be worthless, you're just too yellow to back up your more absurd assertions.

 

[Rover]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

I'll wrap you and Fishy together in my response. Also as a side note, tax cuts are not inconsistent with Clintonomics. Simply put its putting tax rates at a level where they can pay for the spending you want to engage in. Presumably if you have that spending paid for you could cut taxes or pay down previously run up debts (both of which were done during the 90's).

There's a big part of the takers vs workers talking point that you didn't get into, which is how many of the "takers" actually WORK! See, you can be working yet be getting govt assistance, whicy by definition should free you from being labeled a moocher or a bum. So, lets put aside the elderly and the disabled as I think we all agree they should be exempt. According to Forbes (that liberal newsrag) 60% of the people paying no income taxes are WORKING Americans! Furthermore, they are paying payroll taxes, they're just not making enough for income taxes. Gee whiz, should we really be punishing these people because they don't all have Ivy League educations?

So, that leaves 40% left who are either old people or moochers. By your own estimate, its 50/50 split, so we're looking at 20% of 47% or 9% of the population getting either unemployment, welfare or food stamps and not working. Benefits are time limited in most cases so these people aren't on the dole permanently. Furthermore we're in the midst of a recession and again from the article that's adding 3% from the normal levels.

So, at the end of the day, the "workers vs takers" = 53/47 is total BS. Take out the people actually working, pluse the elderly who worked all their lives and are retired and the disabled, and you're down to single digits.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickung...ent-these-people-paying-federal-income-taxes/

So, why I like to make fun of you guys is that both of you already know this. However, that doesn't stop your ilk from still spewing what you know to be false in order to pit Americans vs each other to win votes. As I've often said, if conservatives were running the show during WWII we'd all be speaking German right now given your need to fracture people with untruthful arguments.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

So you think the average american, defined as the 50th percentile, lacks one (or more) of the three things I mentioned? And even so, you would find that acceptable? Helping the bottom quintile live like the 2nd from bottom quintile does not move them in any way shape or form to above average.

By the way, I notice your belief in the doom of forthcoming martial law which kept you from wagering with me hasn't stopped you from betting on the stock market. So apparently you don't believe money will be worthless, you're just too yellow to back up your more absurd assertions.

It's called preparing for contingencies. If you're correct, then I'll be prepared. If I'm correct, it will be irrelevant.

Also, when did I ever say that something was or was not acceptable? Not to mention, taking your example of moving quintiles also moves the average, the last time I did basic math. Always account for variable change. Never assume something remains constant.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Providing people food, shelter, and clothing is now trying to make them above average? Is this from the same derp brigade that only rich people can have refrigerators?

ah, the non-sequiter brigade chimes in again....



considering how many "poor" people have cars, televisions, cable TV service, cell phones, and air conditioning, what is your point?

My point is simple. our politics is driven more today by envy than it is by practicality. Obama wants everyone to have free cell phones, remember? our "poor" are way beyond having basic needs met. There is a controvery in NY state today because "poor" people are given debit cards which are then being used in strip clubs and bars. great use of taxpayer dollars, eh?

how do visits to strip clubs, free cell phones, and such have anything to do with a "safety" net?


and what about the human tragedy! what wasted lives of deprivation. sit around waiting for the next check to arrive? think of the potential for greatness that is languishing, unsated, due to lack of challenges in life. "vote for us and we'll feed you, but don't you dare aspire to escape from poverty or we'll take everything away from you."

sure, it keeps career politicians in office and it keeps paper-pushers busy writing each other memos, but how does it actually benefit living, breathing, people with dreams turning to dust?

The message today is the same as it was 65 years ago: "What happens to a dream deferred? Does it dry up like a raisin in the sun?"

Dammed progressives care nothing about actual real people, they deal only in abstract groups. that is shameful.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

I'll wrap you and Fishy together in my response. Also as a side note, tax cuts are not inconsistent with Clintonomics. Simply put its putting tax rates at a level where they can pay for the spending you want to engage in. Presumably if you have that spending paid for you could cut taxes or pay down previously run up debts (both of which were done during the 90's).

There's a big part of the takers vs workers talking point that you didn't get into, which is how many of the "takers" actually WORK! See, you can be working yet be getting govt assistance, whicy by definition should free you from being labeled a moocher or a bum. So, lets put aside the elderly and the disabled as I think we all agree they should be exempt. According to Forbes (that liberal newsrag) 60% of the people paying no income taxes are WORKING Americans! Furthermore, they are paying payroll taxes, they're just not making enough for income taxes. Gee whiz, should we really be punishing these people because they don't all have Ivy League educations?

So, that leaves 40% left who are either old people or moochers. By your own estimate, its 50/50 split, so we're looking at 20% of 47% or 9% of the population getting either unemployment, welfare or food stamps and not working. Benefits are time limited in most cases so these people aren't on the dole permanently. Furthermore we're in the midst of a recession and again from the article that's adding 3% from the normal levels.

So, at the end of the day, the "workers vs takers" = 53/47 is total BS. Take out the people actually working, pluse the elderly who worked all their lives and are retired and the disabled, and you're down to single digits.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickung...ent-these-people-paying-federal-income-taxes/

So, why I like to make fun of you guys is that both of you already know this. However, that doesn't stop your ilk from still spewing what you know to be false in order to pit Americans vs each other to win votes. As I've often said, if conservatives were running the show during WWII we'd all be speaking German right now given your need to fracture people with untruthful arguments.

I love how you mix our responses because anyone who disagrees with you is a "knuckledragger". How about actually delineating what is directed at me so you might actually receive a response? Although, because you don't seem to want to have an actual discussion with anyone but rather rattle off talking points or a group's official rebuttal on talking points (which are, in and of themselves, talking points), or you wish hoot and holler similar to if your college hockey team won a game, there's not much of a reason to continue this discussion.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Yes, that's why corporate profits are at an all time high, and pay to workers has decreased over time.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Yes, that's why corporate profits are at an all time high, and pay to workers has decreased over time.

What causes corporate profits to be high? What evidence do you have that pay to workers has decreased over time, especially considering that gross pay, the last I looked at my paycheck, has not decreased?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

What causes corporate profits to be high? What evidence do you have that pay to workers has decreased over time, especially considering that gross pay, the last I looked at my paycheck, has not decreased?

It was reported this week that workers share of the pie has decreased from 59% to 54%.

I guess inflation doesn't exist on your planet. Must be nice.

 

[Jon]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

How about actually delineating what is directed at me so you might actually receive a response? Although, because you don't seem to want to have an actual discussion with anyone but rather rattle off talking points or a group's official rebuttal on talking points (which are, in and of themselves, talking points), or you wish hoot and holler similar to if your college hockey team won a game, there's not much of a reason to continue this discussion.

This is how every discussion I've ever had in the 18 years I've been online have been. Facebook, USCHO, Youtube, mid nineties chat rooms, etc...
Anyone who ever wins an argument on the internet should be declared President. Immediately.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Yes, that's why corporate profits are at an all time high, and pay to workers has decreased over time.

Automation has a tendency to do that, eh?

I'm sure that you personally never get cash from an ATM because of your solidarity with bank tellers who might have lost jobs that way?

 

[unofan]

ah, the non-sequiter brigade chimes in again....



considering how many "poor" people have cars, televisions, cable TV service, cell phones, and air conditioning, what is your point?

My point is simple. our politics is driven more today by envy than it is by practicality. Obama wants everyone to have free cell phones, remember? our "poor" are way beyond having basic needs met. There is a controvery in NY state today because "poor" people are given debit cards which are then being used in strip clubs and bars. great use of taxpayer dollars, eh?

how do visits to strip clubs, free cell phones, and such have anything to do with a "safety" net?


and what about the human tragedy! what wasted lives of deprivation. sit around waiting for the next check to arrive? think of the potential for greatness that is languishing, unsated, due to lack of challenges in life. "vote for us and we'll feed you, but don't you dare aspire to escape from poverty or we'll take everything away from you."

sure, it keeps career politicians in office and it keeps paper-pushers busy writing each other memos, but how does it actually benefit living, breathing, people with dreams turning to dust?

The message today is the same as it was 65 years ago: "What happens to a dream deferred? Does it dry up like a raisin in the sun?"

Dammed progressives care nothing about actual real people, they deal only in abstract groups. that is shameful.

And I'm once again reminded that you care most about preventing the unworthy from getting anything undeserved, even if it comes at the expense of preventing someone else from getting help they actually need. I can't believe you actually threw the strip club card out there. Clearly you never exaggerate for effect...

Since there's no way to eliminate waste completely, just shut it all down, right?

Edit: also, if we're talking about public assistance other than medicare and ss - we're essentially discussing food stamps, section 8 vouchers, and TANF, right? Food, shelter and clothing? How is that a non-sequitar?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Automation has a tendency to do that, eh?

I'm sure that you personally never get cash from an ATM because of your solidarity with bank tellers who might have lost jobs that way?

And I'm sure that's why CEO's pay increases exponentially while the average workers pay goes down or stays flat compared to inflation.

I'm here to tell you that that's as unsustainable as entitlements.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

And I'm once again reminded that you care most about preventing the unworthy from getting anything undeserved, even if it comes at the expense of preventing someone else from getting help they actually need.

I have no idea who you think you are talking to, as I have never said anything of the kind.

I'm all in favor of people getting the help they need. I merely don't think most of that help should come from government programs that require people to remain helpless for fear of forfeiting that help otherwise.

I've put in plenty of volunteer labor organizing private assistance to those who need it and I'm fairly confident that my charitable donations run at a higher percentage of my take-home pay than yours do.

My concern is that well-intentioned programs, by ignoring incentives, are creating additional levels of dependency rather than helping people become self-sufficient. You have never once responded to that concern; instead you make up stuff I never said merely to mock it. I guess you worship at the altar of your Master and are a good acolyte for him, eh?

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

And I'm once again reminded that you care most about preventing the unworthy from getting anything undeserved, even if it comes at the expense of preventing someone else from getting help they actually need. I can't believe you actually threw the strip club card out there. Clearly you never exaggerate for effect...

Since there's no way to eliminate waste completely, just shut it all down, right?

Edit: also, if we're talking about public assistance other than medicare and ss - we're essentially discussing food stamps, section 8 vouchers, and TANF, right? Food, shelter and clothing? How is that a non-sequitar?

Here's an honest question for you, and I expect it to be answered: What is the end result that, in your mind, will create satisfaction when it comes to these people, in terms of not only what they receive (if anything), but what they give in order to receive what they receive (if anything)?

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

And I'm sure that's why CEO's pay increases exponentially while the average workers pay goes down or stays flat compared to inflation.

I'm here to tell you that that's as unsustainable as entitlements.

And what initiatives, do you suppose, are being taken by all parties concerned in order for these variables to be at the levels they presently stand, and not somewhere else?

 

[unofan]

Here's an honest question for you, and I expect it to be answered: What is the end result that, in your mind, will create satisfaction when it comes to these people, in terms of not only what they receive (if anything), but what they give in order to receive what they receive (if anything)?

Perfect world, or grounded in reality?

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Perfect world, or grounded in reality?

You may answer that question however you see fit. If one wouldn't satisfy you, then don't answer as such.

 

[Rover]

I love how you mix our responses because anyone who disagrees with you is a "knuckledragger". How about actually delineating what is directed at me so you might actually receive a response? Although, because you don't seem to want to have an actual discussion with anyone but rather rattle off talking points or a group's official rebuttal on talking points (which are, in and of themselves, talking points), or you wish hoot and holler similar to if your college hockey team won a game, there's not much of a reason to continue this discussion.

Oh stop your crying already. Somebody puts you in your place and you go on a whiny diatribe. My advice is for you to grow a thicker skin. Sadly like many a con, you're not used to getting challenged. You're coming off like Mitt Romney after the moderator told him that Obama did indeed label the Liyba attacks as terrorism.

I crushed the idea that most of the un-income taxed masses are moochers. I noticed nobody gave a rebuttal to that. Feel free to, as without getting all "mathy" on you again, I say less than 10% of the population is receiving benefits without having a job or being elderly/disabled. If anybody has a counter-argument, throw it out here. I'm also saying of that 9%, some are students, some on unemployment which is a finite benefit and some are welfare which is also a finite benefit in almost all cases.

So, put your money where your mouth is. Who would you like to pay more, beyond the people not working and not actively looking for work? Seniors? The Disabled? People who are working but not making enough to pay income taxes? How exactly would this work in your opinion, and how much $$$ do you hope to raise by increasing taxes on these people? Feel free to offer up some specifics, if you dare...

 

[unofan]

You may answer that question however you see fit. If one wouldn't satisfy you, then don't answer as such.

Ill get to this when I'm at a real keyboard.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Oh stop your crying already. Somebody puts you in your place and you go on a whiny diatribe. My advice is for you to grow a thicker skin. Sadly like many a con, you're not used to getting challenged. You're coming off like Mitt Romney after the moderator told him that Obama did indeed label the Liyba attacks as terrorism.

I crushed the idea that most of the un-income taxed masses are moochers. I noticed nobody gave a rebuttal to that. Feel free to, as without getting all "mathy" on you again, I say less than 10% of the population is receiving benefits without having a job or being elderly/disabled. If anybody has a counter-argument, throw it out here. I'm also saying of that 9%, some are students, some on unemployment which is a finite benefit and some are welfare which is also a finite benefit in almost all cases.

So, put your money where your mouth is. Who would you like to pay more, beyond the people not working and not actively looking for work? Seniors? The Disabled? People who are working but not making enough to pay income taxes? How exactly would this work in your opinion, and how much $$$ do you hope to raise by increasing taxes on these people? Feel free to offer up some specifics, if you dare...

One simple request, tell me exactly what you are saying about what I specifically said, and you're making a big song and dance. Oh well, that debate is obviously over, so I may as well turn to what you mentioned.

I am a proponent of a hybrid of the proposed FairTax and 9-9-9 systems. One reason is from a standpoint of equality. There is no more class difference. Everyone is equal. It's a flat number. Two, you are taxing transactions once and only once. Need to purchase a product? One entity pays the tax. Need to purchase a service? One entity pays the tax. Wish to purchase an asset? One entity pays the tax. Three, there's no more favoritism in the country. No one transaction is better than another. As for micro-details, it would take me a little while to bang it out, but that's what I see as the way to do it.