Tax cuts favor the rich?

[Patrick]

Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.

The fifth would pay $1.

The sixth would pay $3.

The seventh would pay $7.

The eighth would pay $12.

The ninth would pay $18.

The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20."Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.


The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).

The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).

The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).

The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).

The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).


Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.


"I only got a dollar out of the $20,"declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man," but he got $10!"


"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"


"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I go t only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"


"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"


The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.


The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!


And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works.
The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
Like Halliburton……………………..



For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

[BrutusTx]

Very good.

[paniro187]

you forgot the link......

www.wnd.com


:icon_bigg

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

Everyone should pay an equal percentage of earned income. Not sure how the current system works exactly, because I've not had the time to actually sit down and study it properly. But I feel that everyone should pay an equal percentage congruent with their earned income(EI). In other words, if you have 3 persons: Person A, Person B & Person C making $1000, $100,000 & $1,000,000 per year respectively and everyone, for example is to pay 20 % of ei for the year. Person A, being that he is only making $1000/yr will only pay $200 in taxes. Now with considerations to Person B who is a little better off financially, making $100,000/yr, one will find that his taxes are a bit more steep-for the very fact that he makes more than Person A, he will pay more at $20,000/yr in taxes.

Finally we have Person C who is 1) obviously, in the most financially envious position of the group & 2) going to pay significantly more taxes in that he makes so much more than the former two. With a 20% tax/yr on ei and being that Person C makes $1,000,000/yr in ei/yr, his taxes will amount to $200,000/yr. Now I realize this seems like a bit of a heavy number, but with considerations to the fact that each individual is being taxed the same percentage of income earned for the year-to reiterate: for the fact that they are equally contributing equal percentages of liquid assets to the overall fund- each individual is paying his fair share, based on his overall earned capital for the year. Now as far as I understand it, taxes are not currently done this way. Thoughts?

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

...to reiterate: for the fact that they are equally contributing equal percentages of liquid assets to the overall fund respective to their individual earned income

.

[jus10]

Everyone should pay an equal percentage of earned income. Not sure how the current system works exactly, because I've not had the time to actually sit down and study it properly. But I feel that everyone should pay an equal percentage congruent with their earned income(EI). In other words, if you have 3 persons: Person A, Person B & Person C making $1000, $10,000 & $1,000,000 per year respectively and everyone, for example is to pay 20 % of ei for the year. Person A, being that he is only making $1000/yr will only pay $200 in taxes. Now with considerations to Person B who is a little better off financially, making $100,000/yr, one will find that his taxes are a bit more steep-for the very fact that he makes more than Person A, he will pay more at $20,000/yr in taxes.

Finally we have Person C who is 1) obviously, in the most financially envious position of the group & 2) going to pay significantly more taxes in that he makes so much more than the former two. With a 20% tax/yr on ei and being that Person C makes $1,000,000/yr in ei/yr, his taxes will amount to $200,000/yr. Now I realize this seems like a bit of a heavy number, but with considerations to the fact that each individual is being taxed the same percentage of income earned for the year-to reiterate: for the fact that they are equally contributing equal percentages of liquid assets to the overall fund- each individual is paying his fair share, based on his overall earned capital for the year. Now as far as I understand it, taxes are not currently done this way. Thoughts?


Damn nice Patrick!


Sean, I couldn't have said it better!!

[Mr. Unassailable]

i dont know much about taxes.. but i now i pay alot of them.. around 16% of my earnings went to taxes last year.

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

Alice? Thoughts? Sleepy today or som'n? How do you other conservatives feel(besides Justin, thx btw) ? Liberals? Socialists?

[Crystalline]

Everyone should pay an equal percentage of earned income. Not sure how the current system works exactly, because I've not had the time to actually sit down and study it properly. But I feel that everyone should pay an equal percentage congruent with their earned income(EI). In other words, if you have 3 persons: Person A, Person B & Person C making $1000, $100,000 & $1,000,000 per year respectively and everyone, for example is to pay 20 % of ei for the year. Person A, being that he is only making $1000/yr will only pay $200 in taxes. Now with considerations to Person B who is a little better off financially, making $100,000/yr, one will find that his taxes are a bit more steep-for the very fact that he makes more than Person A, he will pay more at $20,000/yr in taxes.

Finally we have Person C who is 1) obviously, in the most financially envious position of the group & 2) going to pay significantly more taxes in that he makes so much more than the former two. With a 20% tax/yr on ei and being that Person C makes $1,000,000/yr in ei/yr, his taxes will amount to $200,000/yr. Now I realize this seems like a bit of a heavy number, but with considerations to the fact that each individual is being taxed the same percentage of income earned for the year-to reiterate: for the fact that they are equally contributing equal percentages of liquid assets to the overall fund- each individual is paying his fair share, based on his overall earned capital for the year. Now as far as I understand it, taxes are not currently done this way. Thoughts?

I completely agree with you. I have said this before in my govt class... But it's never going to happen... I should do some research but I think it would be too complicated for system to work like this... :angry7:


O0o0o... Like my signature?? Dementia did it for me.

[mekrew]

screw taxes i just had to pay them 2200 yesterday ...

i waited til the last possible minute since they were taking $ this year

bastids !

[jus10]

Alice? Thoughts? Sleepy today or som'n? How do you other conservatives feel(besides Justin, thx btw) ? Liberals? Socialists?

Oh shit...I'm conservative???

[Crystalline]

Oh shit...I'm conservative???


Well what do you classify yourself as?

[AliceInChains02]

Alice? Thoughts? Sleepy today or som'n? How do you other conservatives feel(besides Justin, thx btw) ? Liberals? Socialists?
:keke:
i lean towards a socialist mindset, i think.
i'm somewhat in favor of taxing the hell out of the super-rich. corporations are supposed to give back to society, not to their top execs.

[Crystalline]

:keke:
i lean towards a socialist mindset, i think.
i'm somewhat in favor of taxing the hell out of the super-rich. corporations are supposed to give back to society, not to their top execs.


In a Republican's point of view, the big corporations are giving back to society by providing jobs to others. :happy3:

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

Oh shit...I'm conservative???

Based on us not disagreeing on much, at least as far as I've seen and the fact that I'm conservative (not Republican, but Conservative)...I would say you are atleast more conservative than you are liberal.

You stance on a few things will determine what you are though:

Pro choice v. Pro life
Big guv'ment v. Small Guv'ment
etc...

[jus10]

Well what do you classify yourself as?

f uckin blind 'cause I can't see that color for shit!!!!:laughing6 :laughing6 :laughing6

[Crystalline]

f uckin blind 'cause I can't see that color for shit!!!!:laughing6 :laughing6 :laughing6


What do you classify yourself as??:keke: :keke: :keke:

[AliceInChains02]

In a Republican's point of view, the big corporations are giving back to society by providing jobs to others. :happy3:

I'm all for providing jobs, but I think there should be a salary cap for the higher ups. No one needs 10 million dollars while half of the earth's population lives on less than a dollar a day. It's far fetched to say such things in capitalist america, but that's how I feel.

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

:keke:
i lean towards a socialist mindset, i think.
i'm somewhat in favor of taxing the hell out of the super-rich. corporations are supposed to give back to society, not to their top execs.

Fuk that...I'm for equality, everyone should pull their own weight. The Bourgeoisie and Proletariat alike...If we do it the way I say most top execs with a yearly ei of $4 million+ would pay more than $800k/yr in taxes...more than enough...

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

I'm all for providing jobs, but I think there should be a salary cap for the higher ups. No one needs 10 million dollars while half of the earth's population lives on less than a dollar a day. It's far fetched to say such things in capitalist america, but that's how I feel.

Can't cap a free market...this is part of the Capitalist system and why it works better. And combined with my idea, it would be perfect...

[jus10]

Based on us not disagreeing on much, at least as far as I've seen and the fact that I'm conservative (not Republican, but Conservative)...I would say you are atleast more conservative than you are liberal.

You stance on a few things will determine what you are though:

Pro choice v. Pro life
Big guv'ment v. Small Guv'ment
etc...

I've never really thought about it or classified myself as anything other than a skeptical cynic at times!:icon_bigg But I will say I am Pro-Choice but don't know about the big/smal gov't...does that help?

[jus10]

What do you classify yourself as??:keke: :keke: :keke:

MALE

[AliceInChains02]

Fuk that...I'm for equality, everyone should pull their own weight. The Bourgeoisie and Proletariat alike...If we do it the way I say most top execs with a yearly ei of $4 million+ would pay more than $800k/yr in taxes...more than enough...
i've never taken economics, so it's hard for me to get into these sort of discussions. All I can say is how I feel. I feel guilty when i think about, in my middle-class life, what I take for granted, and how bad so many other people have it. I feel a sort of obligation to help the less fortunate people, among many other things, but I'm still in my contemplative phase I guess.

[jus10]

Can't cap a free market...this is part of the Capitalist system and why it works better. And combined with my idea, it would be perfect...

FN :werd:

[AliceInChains02]

Can't cap a free market...this is part of the Capitalist system and why it works better. And combined with my idea, it would be perfect...

Well, I guess I shy away from capitalist ideology:happy3:

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

i've never taken economics, so it's hard for me to get into these sort of discussions. All I can say is how I feel. I feel guilty when i think about, in my middle-class life, what I take for granted, and how bad so many other people have it. I feel a sort of obligation to help the less fortunate people, among many other things, but I'm still in my contemplative phase I guess.

But that is an amirable trait...nothing to be ashamed of. You just must consider the extreme inequities exhibited in Socialist societies. Two polarizing entities: The Proletariats (super-poor) and the Bourgeoisie (super-rich).

[AliceInChains02]

But that is an amirable trait...nothing to be ashamed of. You just must consider the extreme inequities exhibited in Socialist societies. Two polarizing entities: The Proletariats (super-poor) and the Bourgeoisie (super-rich).

i'm not too familiar with socialist history, but i'm interested in learning about it, along with everything else. They might be saying the same thing about democracy 100 years from now. "It did good for a while, but this and that went wrong". Where did it go wrong for Socialism? Political systems are so complex, i think it would take a great amount of dedication to truly understand their functioning. luckily i have noam chomsky.:happy3:

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

I've never really thought about it or classified myself as anything other than a skeptical cynic at times!:icon_bigg But I will say I am Pro-Choice but don't know about the big/smal gov't...does that help?

I'm quite a skeptic too...

On the pro-choice thing, in order to better understand how to alot you, are you for all out abortion or limited/restricted abortions-meaning you are for pro-choice because you feel that women should have the choice but things such as partial birth abortions (whose ban was upheld today) should not happen because they are cruel in nature?

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

i'm not too familiar with socialist history, but i'm interested in learning about it, along with everything else. They might be saying the same thing about democracy 100 years from now. "It did good for a while, but this and that went wrong". Where did it go wrong for Socialism? Political systems are so complex, i think it would take a great amount of dedication to truly understand their functioning. luckily i have noam chomsky.:happy3:

Basically corruption. All governments face it, but democracies/republics (capitalist governments) tend to last longer because it is, arguably, harder for corruption to prevail because of the limited nature of the power distribution in democracies/republics.

[jus10]

I'm quite a skeptic too...

On the pro-choice thing, in order to better understand how to alot you, are you for all out abortion or limited/restricted abortions-meaning you are for pro-choice because you feel that women should have the choice but things such as partial birth abortions (whose ban was upheld today) should not happen because they are cruel in nature?

"I'll take limited abortions for 800 alex! Answer: Daily Double!!!"

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

"I'll take limited abortions for 800 alex! Answer: Daily Double!!!"

What is Sean's exact stance on the matter for $500...:icon_thum

[AliceInChains02]

Basically corruption. All governments face it, but democracies/republics (capitalist governments) tend to last longer because it is, arguably, harder for corruption to prevail because of the limited nature of the power distribution in democracies/republics.

so you think limiting power distribution prevents corruption?

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

so you think limiting power distribution prevents corruption?

No. I figured I was going to need to clarify that. In a democracy/republic, there are alot of individuals with small or limited amounts of power as compared to a socialist regime whereby there is a small group of individuals with alot of power. Basically being that there are lots of individuals with limited power, there is always one or a number of people able to check the other's power.

[jus10]

so you think limiting power distribution prevents corruption?

I think he's saying it limits corruption, but you can't prevent it.

[AliceInChains02]

No. I figured I was going to need to clarify that. In a democracy/republic, there are alot of individuals with small or limited amounts of power as compared to a socialist regime whereby there is a small group of individuals with alot of power. Basically being that there are lots of individuals with limited power, there is always one or a number of people able to check the other's power.

I thought socialism was supposed to have the power more widely distributed, but that may be social-anarchism. anyways, gotta go to class now:hello:

[Rick H.I.C.]

Good one Patrick!

Flat rate taxes would work well for equality to all. It would have to be fairly high for the spoiled system we have today with all the misappropiated funds. Most socialists and liberals would cry and whine because they might actually have to work for a living instead of a do it for me, it's everybody elses fault mentality.

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

I thought socialism was supposed to have the power more widely distributed, but that may be social-anarchism. anyways, gotta go to class now:hello:

That's the idea but then again, if we examine real-world examples-across the board, the most power has been distributed to the least people and those powerful individuals live the lives of kings while the Prolelariats have struggled to simply survive. Have you read 1984 by Orwell? You should check it, good read and hopefully it'll give you a lil more insight as to the intricacies of living in a socialist regime.

[Rick H.I.C.]

I thought socialism was supposed to have the power more widely distributed, but that may be social-anarchism. anyways, gotta go to class now:hello:
It's gives government most all power to control all decisions for the betterment of it's people. Yeah that works well. :angry7:
Example: see N Korea, Cuba

[jus10]

That's the idea but then again, if we examine real-world examples-across the board, the most power has been distributed to the least people and those powerful individuals live the lives of kings while the Prolelariats have struggled to simply survive. Have you read 1984 by Orwell? You should check it, good read and hopefully it'll give you a lil more insight as to the intricacies of living in a socialist regime.

or we could all vote for Hilary and see what it's like then! :keke:



I kid, I kid...I have heard that was a great read though, seriously.

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

It's gives government most all power to control all decisions for the betterment of it's people. Yeah that works well. :angry7:
Example: see N Korea, Cuba

E-ZACTLY :icon_thum

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

or we could all vote for Hilary and see what it's like then! :keke:



I kid, I kid...I have heard that was a great read though, seriously.

Lol...sad thing is, we may just experience it after all. If she wins-we defintely need to rethink who we vote into Congress. The executive and legislative branches need to always contrast one another for optimum effectiveness.

Definately a good read...anyone reading the new Tenet book

[jus10]

Lol...sad thing is, we may just experience it after all. If she wins-we defintely need to rethink who we vote into Congress. The executive and legislative branches need to always contrast one another for optimum effectiveness.

I think that should be a part of checks and balances...not only power but ideology and such.

[Moody]

:keke:
i lean towards a socialist mindset, i think.
i'm somewhat in favor of taxing the hell out of the super-rich. corporations are supposed to give back to society, not to their top execs.
Are you serious?

[Moody]

i dont know much about taxes.. but i now i pay alot of them.. around 16% of my earnings went to taxes last year.
That's it?

[Moody]

I'm all for providing jobs, but I think there should be a salary cap for the higher ups. No one needs 10 million dollars while half of the earth's population lives on less than a dollar a day. It's far fetched to say such things in capitalist america, but that's how I feel.
Then leave. :icon_thum

[Moody]

I've never really thought about it or classified myself as anything other than a skeptical cynic at times!:icon_bigg But I will say I am Pro-Choice but don't know about the big/smal gov't...does that help?
I avoid the labels as well. An intelligent being looks at all his options before deciding on an issue. Although, I may fall into the pessimistic optimist category or was it optimistic pessimist? :keke:

[alrova]

i think i pay like 26% and i am not even a resident LOL

[Moody]

i've never taken economics, so it's hard for me to get into these sort of discussions. All I can say is how I feel. I feel guilty when i think about, in my middle-class life, what I take for granted, and how bad so many other people have it. I feel a sort of obligation to help the less fortunate people, among many other things, but I'm still in my contemplative phase I guess.
How about joining the Peace Corps or Red Cross? Or are you one of those guys who like to talk about it instead of being about it?

[Cherub]

How about joining the Peace Corps or Red Cross? Or are you one of those guys who like to talk about it instead of being about it?
ding ding ding we have a winner

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

I avoid the labels as well. An intelligent being looks at all his options before deciding on an issue. Although, I may fall into the pessimistic optimist category or was it optimistic pessimist? :keke:

Just because you label yourself one thing or the other doesn't mean you don't examine independent circumstances and make decisions based upon the individual merits of each case. It is simply a means of determining whether you are generally more one way or the other. A general litmus of where it is you stand...generally.

[Moody]

It's gives government most all power to control all decisions for the betterment of it's people. Yeah that works well. :angry7:
Example: see N Korea, Cuba
I am wondering if Alice's reality does not include current world events?

[Moody]

Just because you label yourself one thing or the other doesn't mean you don't examine independent circumstances and make decisions based upon the individual merits of each case. It is simply a means of determining whether you are generally more one way or the other. A general litmus of where it is you stand...generally.
Libertarian, i avoid them... but I certainly can provide you with one. :icon_thum

[Moody]

i think i pay like 26% and i am not even a resident LOL
Then add in your state taxes and hidden taxes you do not notice on bills and you are pushing close to 40 - 50%. :eek3:

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

Libertarian, i avoid them... but I certainly can provide you with one. :icon_thum

That's more your political affiliation...to me, and I may be alone in this respect, but there are only two types of people: Liberal thinkers & Conservative thinkers. There is a strong dichotomy in the too. You can float between them but generally, you are more one than the other. Another thing is that while they are genrally associated with one another, again, to me Conservatives are not synonymous with Republicans and Liberals are not synonymous with Democrats. In other words, you can have more conservative Dems and more liberal Republicans. Just my thoughts...

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

*two

[Moody]

That's more your political affiliation...to me, and I may be alone in this respect, but there are only two types of people: Liberal thinkers & Conservative thinkers. There is a strong dichotomy in the too. You can float between them but generally, you are more one than the other. Another thing is that while they are genrally associated with one another, again, to me Conservatives are not synonymous with Republicans and Liberals are not synonymous with Democrats. In other words, you can have more conservative Dems and more liberal Republicans. Just my thoughts...
Ah, yes I have to agree... I am so conservative that I appear to liberal at times. :icon_thum

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

Ah, yes I have to agree... I am so conservative that I appear to liberal at times. :icon_thum

The sarcasm is killin' me inside...:keke:

but for the record, that is actually NOT what I am saying

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

What I am saying is that you can have Democrats who are more conservative, example, Jim Webb and Republicans who are more liberal, example, Giuliani or Schwarzenegger.

[AliceInChains02]

That's the idea but then again, if we examine real-world examples-across the board, the most power has been distributed to the least people and those powerful individuals live the lives of kings while the Prolelariats have struggled to simply survive. Have you read 1984 by Orwell? You should check it, good read and hopefully it'll give you a lil more insight as to the intricacies of living in a socialist regime.

Who hasn't read 1984?:happy3:
I think only radical liberal nutjobs are supposed to reference it though(jk)
Have you seen Brazil? Was directed by Terry Gillam of monty python, often called 1984 1/2. Pretty neat movie.
So the idea of socialism isn't necessarily bad. If what in fact happens under these "socialist" govts of the past is a few people taking over, then I wouldn't think that's really socialism.

[Moody]

What I am saying is that you can have Democrats who are more conservative, example, Jim Webb and Republicans who are more liberal, example, Giuliani or Schwarzenegger.
Oh no... I was agreeing with what you were saying. I was just replying to your question about my position.

[Moody]

Who hasn't read 1984?:happy3:
I think only radical liberal nutjobs are supposed to reference it though(jk)
Have you seen Brazil? Was directed by Terry Gillam of monty python, often called 1984 1/2. Pretty neat movie.
So the idea of socialism isn't necessarily bad. If what in fact happens under these "socialist" govts of the past is a few people taking over, then I wouldn't think that's really socialism.
The directors cut of Brazil is crazy long!

[AliceInChains02]

It's gives government most all power to control all decisions for the betterment of it's people. Yeah that works well. :angry7:
Example: see N Korea, Cuba
Isn't Cuba communist? Maybe a subtle difference I guess.

'Socialism refers to a broad array of doctrines or political movements that envisage a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by the community.[1] This control may be either direct—exercised through popular collectives such as workers' councils—or indirect—exercised on behalf of the people by the state. As an economic system, socialism is often characterized by state or community ownership of the means of production.'
"the Soviet Union developed a bureaucratic and authoritarian model of social development, which was condemned by moderate socialists, Trotskyists and others for undermining the initial democratic and socialist ideals of the Russian Revolution"
if we're going to completely discredit a political ideology, i think it deserves it's own thread, but something tells me most people probably would not know and/or care enough about it to participate.

[AliceInChains02]

The directors cut of Brazil is crazy long!
Never seen The Director's Cut, I don't think. The version I watched was pretty long. is the DC worth watching in your opinion?

[AliceInChains02]

Then leave. :icon_thum
planning on it, buddy:icon_thum

[AliceInChains02]

How about joining the Peace Corps or Red Cross? Or are you one of those guys who like to talk about it instead of being about it?

I'm trying to figure out what exactly I want to do. I wish I could just rush off to the first charitable cause I could find and get involved with it, but I think it's a large decision and I'm pretty deliberate, and like I said..contemplative.
Though I'll make sure to rub it in your face when I do go out to make the world a better place.:keke:

[AliceInChains02]

I am wondering if Alice's reality does not include current world events?

Gigolo? How did you get on Moody's account, you bastard!
:keke:
I am wondering why you keep dogging me. Sorry if I offended you when I talked badly of capitalism.

[MadseasoN]

Isn't Cuba communist? Maybe a subtle difference I guess.

'Socialism refers to a broad array of doctrines or political movements that envisage a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by the community.[1] This control may be either direct—exercised through popular collectives such as workers' councils—or indirect—exercised on behalf of the people by the state. As an economic system, socialism is often characterized by state or community ownership of the means of production.'
"the Soviet Union developed a bureaucratic and authoritarian model of social development, which was condemned by moderate socialists, Trotskyists and others for undermining the initial democratic and socialist ideals of the Russian Revolution"
if we're going to completely discredit a political ideology, i think it deserves it's own thread, but something tells me most people probably would not know and/or care enough about it to participate.


Hey bro, I'm not trying to bad mouth you when I say this - but it's easy to sing 'Imagine' and to support socialistic 'Robin Hood' ideas when you're just a student living at home and have no real financial burden.

Wait 10 years from now when you're bustin' your a$$ all week to feed your family. The government will be taking around 25-30% off the top then whatever is left over is taxed roughly 20% by hidden taxes and other BS. In fact, 10 years from now it'll be even worse.

[AliceInChains02]

Hey bro, I'm not trying to bad mouth you when I say this - but it's easy to sing 'Imagine' and to support socialistic 'Robin Hood' ideas when you're just a student living at home and have no real financial burden.

Wait 10 years from now when you're bustin' your a$$ all week to feed your family. The government will be taking around 25-30% off the top then whatever is left over is taxed roughly 20% by hidden taxes and other BS. In fact, 10 years from now it'll be even worse.

So democracy is a more monetarily satisfying ideology? I am not trying to say I know it all, as a matter of fact I have said many times I know little about economics or politics, just trying to understand how it works.

[Moody]

planning on it, buddy:icon_thum
Wish I could find a better place to go but I haven't yet... Going to Holland soon. I will let you know what I think about it when I get back. Hopefully I can still think when I get back. :laughing6

[MadseasoN]

So democracy is a more monetarily satisfying ideology? I am not trying to say I know it all, as a matter of fact I have said many times I know little about economics or politics, just trying to understand how it works.

I think true capitalism is ideal. We don't have true capitalism in the US and we don't have a true democracy.

Check out this website. I personally agree with 99% of the ideas on this site.

http://www.capitalism.org/

[Moody]

Hey bro, I'm not trying to bad mouth you when I say this - but it's easy to sing 'Imagine' and to support socialistic 'Robin Hood' ideas when you're just a student living at home and have no real financial burden.

Wait 10 years from now when you're bustin' your a$$ all week to feed your family. The government will be taking around 25-30% off the top then whatever is left over is taxed roughly 20% by hidden taxes and other BS. In fact, 10 years from now it'll be even worse.
Agree,

Exactly why I give you a hard time sometimes Alice. I used to think alot like you. Hopefully we are all learning from these discussions. I certainly can't wait until we all live in a Euphoric Utopia, Skateboard during the week and race / ride motocycles on the weekend. :icon_bigg

[Rick H.I.C.]

Wish I could find a better place to go but I haven't yet... Going to Holland soon. I will let you know what I think about it when I get back. Hopefully I can still think when I get back. :laughing6
:laughing6

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

Who hasn't read 1984?:happy3:
I think only radical liberal nutjobs are supposed to reference it though(jk)
Have you seen Brazil? Was directed by Terry Gillam of monty python, often called 1984 1/2. Pretty neat movie.
So the idea of socialism isn't necessarily bad. If what in fact happens under these "socialist" govts of the past is a few people taking over, then I wouldn't think that's really socialism.

Nope hadn't seen it (Brazil, I presume you are talking about a movie), I'll check it out. Your right, the idea isn't bad, the problem is that human nature prevents the actual implementation of pure socialism. We are a greedy species which always asks "more?".

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

Oh no... I was agreeing with what you were saying. I was just replying to your question about my position.

Oh ok...my bad :icon_bigg

[Rick H.I.C.]

Agree,

Exactly why I give you a hard time sometimes Alice. I used to think alot like you. Hopefully we are all learning from these discussions. I certainly can't wait until we all live in a Euphoric Utopia, Skateboard during the week and race / ride motocycles on the weekend. :icon_bigg
+1, I'll add that if you stay in that state of mind as you grow in this world, then you obviuosly have been going through it with blinders, a closed mind. (fantasy land, i e liberal :keke: )

[MadseasoN]

Agree,

Exactly why I give you a hard time sometimes Alice. I used to think alot like you. Hopefully we are all learning from these discussions. I certainly can't wait until we all live in a Euphoric Utopia, Skateboard during the week and race / ride motocycles on the weekend. :icon_bigg

I did too.

The biggest problems we have in this country are entitlement and personal responsibility. Some folks think that they're entitled to things and the higher earners end up paying for their entitlements and irresponsible behavior.

And .... I like this Utopia place you're talking about. I can't wait!

[Moody]

Never seen The Director's Cut, I don't think. The version I watched was pretty long. is the DC worth watching in your opinion?
Could be if you have that kind of time to dedicate to it.

[CaJuNsOuLjA]

Isn't Cuba communist? Maybe a subtle difference I guess.

'Socialism refers to a broad array of doctrines or political movements that envisage a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by the community.[1] This control may be either direct—exercised through popular collectives such as workers' councils—or indirect—exercised on behalf of the people by the state. As an economic system, socialism is often characterized by state or community ownership of the means of production.'
"the Soviet Union developed a bureaucratic and authoritarian model of social development, which was condemned by moderate socialists, Trotskyists and others for undermining the initial democratic and socialist ideals of the Russian Revolution"
if we're going to completely discredit a political ideology, i think it deserves it's own thread, but something tells me most people probably would not know and/or care enough about it to participate.

Communists' can be Socialists' but Socialists' are not always Communists' :icon_bigg

[AliceInChains02]

Hopefully I can still think when I get back. :laughing6

We'll be on a level playing field then, right?:keke:

[AliceInChains02]

I think true capitalism is ideal. We don't have true capitalism in the US and we don't have a true democracy.

Check out this website. I personally agree with 99% of the ideas on this site.

http://www.capitalism.org/

I'll check the site out. I like what Noam Chomsky has to say about a lot of things, myself. I haven't heard him explain socialism in great detail, but if i was to learn it from anywhere i think I'd prefer Chomsky.

[MadseasoN]

I'll check the site out. I like what Noam Chomsky has to say about a lot of things, myself. I haven't heard him explain socialism in great detail, but if i was to learn it from anywhere i think I'd prefer Chomsky.

Here's an excerpt from the Capitalism.org website that I can agree with:
Statism
What is statism?
Under statism, government is no longer a policeman, but a gang of thugs with the legal power to initiate force in any manner they please against a legally disarmed citizen.

What are some examples of statism?
Variants of statism include: socialism, nazism (national socialism), theocracy, [pure] democracy, communism, fascism, tribalism, etc.


What is the key principle underlying statism?
In form many of these systems differ, in theory and blood stained practice they all unite upon the same fundamental collectivist ethical principle: man is not an end to himself, but is only a tool to serve the ends of others. Whether those "others" are a dictator's gang, the nation, society, the race, (the) god(s), the majority, the community, the tribe, etc., is irrelevant -- the point is that man in principle must be sacrificed to others.

What is the opposite of statism?
The opposite of statism is capitalism.


How does capitalism differ from statism?
Only capitalism declares that each and every man, may live his own life for his own happiness, as an end to himself, not by permission of others, but by right, and that government's sole responsibility is to protect those rights, and never violate them, because they are inalienable.

[jus10]

How does capitalism differ from statism?
Only capitalism declares that each and every man, may live his own life for his own happiness, as an end to himself, not by permission of others, but by right, and that government's sole responsibility is to protect those rights, and never violate them, because they are inalienable.

Nice....:nod:

[AliceInChains02]

i think i like wikipedias explanations more...a bit more in depth

[paniro187]

Good one Patrick!

Flat rate taxes would work well for equality to all. It would have to be fairly high for the spoiled system we have today with all the misappropiated funds. Most socialists and liberals would cry and whine because they might actually have to work for a living instead of a do it for me, it's everybody elses fault mentality.liberal bashing. and socialist bashing. blah blah work for a living blah blah they don't work blah blah spew forth what every other back woods con says ...........

[busa5225]

sounds like a lot of red tape...

[aznhero913]

sorry pat i disagree with you here. There are 2 handouts in this country one is called welfare the other is called subsidy. The handout in $ is the nearly the same. The amount of people recieving each is not. That little story is very slanted and does not even portary the situation. Haliburton going to Dubai, that isnt the first company to do something like this. AOL,HP,etc are going to places like india and dubai for cheaper labor. BTW its called the cayman islands, thats where all these fortune 500 companies buy a po box and escape literally billions of dollars of taxes. As far as scaring them away, they have set those up a long time ago. Next you got loop holes in the taxes, and if you dont believe me that its the size of the hole in our ozone give the cpa firm of a Fort. 500 a call and ask how much they saved that company. Oh finally these lobbyist for these companys get this money back from the govt through their pork programs. The 3 major contributors for the republican party are boeing, lockheed aerospace, and haliburton. Saying that, i wont get into the increase in buisness they saw after the war started in iraq. my .02

[pester]

i dont know much about taxes.. but i now i pay alot of them.. around 16% of my earnings went to taxes last year.

hell last year i paid almost 7000 and didnt get shit back lol

[pester]

In a Republican's point of view, the big corporations are giving back to society by providing jobs to others. :happy3:

and if they dont give us jobs they wont have corp lol

[logan5]

I suggest you all take a good look at the Libertarian party. I suspect you'll find most of you will actually fall inline with what the Libertarians are about.

[RogerT]

Patrick was right, some just can't understand.

For those that do, jump on the bandwagon and go as far up as you can. $$$$

[haygood]

The problem with the flat tax rate idea is that some people out there really only earn barely enough to get by. The idea behind the graduated tax is that people who earn enough to afford more than basic necessities should help those who can't. Here's the kicker... When taxes are reduced, contributions to charitable organizations grow more than taxes are reduced. Hard to believe, isn't it? So people don't mind helping the poor to some degree. I think most just have a problem with a "capatalist" government forcing them to do so.

As for the 4mil + earners, it is a lot like complaining that athletes earn too much... People pay for the goods, the ball tickets etc. What else are you going to do with the money except pay it out to someone? Crazy how it never gets to the lowest rungs except in a few companies. Most of those end up spending tons of it paying it back to the low end anyway.

[sillywabbit]

Quite an eloquent way of putting our tax system.

Leaves me almost speechless. I'll just say, Thanks for the free beer.
=]

[AVILES]

I suggest you all take a good look at the Libertarian party. I suspect you'll find most of you will actually fall inline with what the Libertarians are about.

Yes, I agree...I am a member of the Libertarian Party and many of your statements seem to side with the Libertarian position....Basically, Libertarians are economically conservitive and socially liberal...I good position for one who is in the middle of the two extremes (Republicans and Democrats)...