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
    Zero2Cool (2h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
    Zero2Cool (3h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
    dfosterf (13h) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
    Zero2Cool (20h) : Haha
    Mucky Tundra (21h) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
    beast (22h) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
    buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
    buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
    Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
    Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
    beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
    beast (25-Mar) : Simply fined in the week to follow
    beast (25-Mar) : I agree with one NFL official, it'll probably be like some of the helmets hits, not really called by the refs on the field but simply fined
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Hip drop is not. Super confusing. Referees job is harder
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Swivel hip drop is banned
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : The hip drop enforcement will be in the form of fines, etc. Not flags
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2023 Packers Schedule
    Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Falcons
    Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
    SAINTS
    Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
    LIONS
    Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
    Raiders
    Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
    Broncos
    Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
    RAMS
    Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
    Steelers
    Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
    CHARGERS
    Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
    CHIEFS
    Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
    Giants
    Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
    BUCCANEERS
    Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
    Panthers
    Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
    Vikings
    Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
    Cowboys
    Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
    49ers
    Recent Topics
    14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    27-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    24-Mar / Around The NFL / dhazer

    24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

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