Taxation Without Representation

[JD Barleycorn]

COG is correct. The Constitution does not specifically mention voting rights. The president was elected by the Congress, the Senate was elected or selected by whatever means the states wanted, only the House was elected by a direct vote.

We also deny people the right to vote all the time. Convicted felons lose their "right" to vote and so do traitors.

After the Civil War millions were denied the right to vote until their state wrote and ratified a new constiution.

[Doove]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

They have no say over the fact that their tax rate will be 45% or greater because today's Congress can't control spending.

OR....they have no say over the fact that their tax rate will be 45% or greater because people like you don't want to pay for what we use.

What will my grandchildren say to their children when they are paying today's bill?

"Your great-grandpa's generation was filled with cheap bastards who thought everything was free"?

[Jackie S]

Doove, here is a example of one of those "cheap bastards" that thinks everything is free.

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...ail&FORM=VIRE3

And an example of those who "dont want to pay for what they use"

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...ail&FORM=VIRE1

Of course, I know that this is not what you meant, you are referring to those that are in the upper income brackets who think that taking 38 percent of their income in Federal Income Tax should be enough.

The blame can be spread. The tax code should be modified so that all income is taxed at the same rate, with no deductions, and those that are on the bottom of the scale should understand that the Country simply cannot continue to support those that are unwilling to contribute anything to the Countrys welfare.

Sooner or later, the Country is going to have to come to grips with the fact that Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" has produced nothing but greed, and 4th generation welfare famillies.

[nevergaveitathought]

Doove is an an example of those government worker union stooges who can demonstrate with signs while normal people work and their mantra is "tax me more" which translated means:

" i dont give a shit about anything except my great retirement and my salary staying higher than the private sector and my great benefits and insurance and oh yeah did i mention the month off for vacation and all those holidays and just try to make me work after 3 pm because we are not answering that phone but.... if somehow the deficit is a problem, at least politically, then raise those idiots taxes out there"


their phrase "for the children" translates to the same thing

[Af-Freakin]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

What will my grandchildren say to their children when they are paying today's bill?

BabblingOldIdiot, i think they will say grandpa was a moron 4 voting Gay Johnson & wasting his time on a hooker message board rather than earning money @ a job or effecting real political change thru a group like the teanut party.

[Whirlaway]

Sometimes AF is freaking funny...............

Originally Posted by Af-Freakin

BabblingOldIdiot, i think they will say grandpa was an idiot 4 voting Gay Johnson.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

Joe, that is a pretty slippery slope. Denying any citizen the right to vote is contrary to all of our American principles.

I do not agree with those that have committed felonies being denyed the right to vote after they have fullfilled the requirements of their sentence. I have always thought this violated the "cruel and unusual punishment" clause in the Bill of Rights as laid out in the 8th Amendment, as well as double jepordy as laid out in thye 5th.

If a person pays his debt to society, he should become full and free citizen again.

I agree with this.

Originally Posted by Doove

OR....they have no say over the fact that their tax rate will be 45% or greater because people like you don't want to pay for what we use.



"Your great-grandpa's generation was filled with cheap bastards who thought everything was free"?

I agree with this too.



We can not have tax cuts without creating a larger deficit. Not at this point. There is a point where you can do that. But not when say the Capatial gains tax is already so low.

Look , for those of you that keep lying about 50% of the nation not paying taxes. You are doing yourself and the country a disservice by doing that. The poor and middle class pay mostly for State and local government and the rich pay for the Federal Government. The Federal Government is the one in debt. The three biggest drivers of that debt are SS , Medicare and Defense. SS and Medicare have run a surplus.

So are you fellows that keep griping/lying about the poor not paying taxes willing to join reality and do one of two things. Either cut Defense spending , increase taxes or a combination to the two.

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Sometimes AF is freaking funny...............

That he/she is!

[Whirlaway]

WRONG; the right kind of tax cuts (combined with tax reform) can stimulate the economy, cause more production in the economy, and ultimately more revenue to the Federal Government.............

Originally Posted by WTF

.....


We can not have tax cuts without creating a larger deficit. ....

[WTF]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Please tell me where in the Constitution there is a right to vote.

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

COG is correct. The Constitution does not specifically mention voting rights. The president was elected by the Congress, the Senate was elected or selected by whatever means the states wanted, only the House was elected by a direct vote.

We also deny people the right to vote all the time. Convicted felons lose their "right" to vote and so do traitors.

After the Civil War millions were denied the right to vote until their state wrote and ratified a new constiution.

All JackieS said was that he thought felons should be able to vote after they paid their debt to society.

You Tea Party folks that get caught up in the Constitution at ever twist and turn , seem to have a unusually high propensity to be out of touch with reality.

People twist the Constitution to mean what they want it to mean. Our founding Fathers never intended for this country to spend the amount of money we do on the military defending the world. It was meant to defend this country , not the world but most of you have no problem twisting the Constitution into spending endlessly on the Military. COG, I know you already know this so I was not speaking of you, JD not so sure....

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

WRONG; the right kind of tax cuts (combined with tax reform) can stimulate the economy, cause more production in the economy, and ultimately more revenue to the Federal Government.............

No we are spending to much, way more than we are taking in.

If you understood the Laffer Curve, you would understand that there is a point where cutting taxes that are already to low will not generate more revenue.

I do agree with you that we need to revamp our tax code. It is not fair and is written for special interest groups.

But from a standpoint of what we want , we do not pay enough in taxes. The proof is in the pudding.

You have to understand that Defense is where cuts have to be made. SS and Medicare are running a surplus. Now i guess you could shift all the taxes currently on SS to Defense. The special interests groups that benifit from that would be happy , I suppose.

There are three drivers of the Federal Budget. Defense, SS and Medicare. All other is chicken feed.

You can cut the benifits to SS and Medicare but look what happens when you try. DEATH PANELS is what Sara Palin screams.

[Whirlaway]

Your whole premise is based on "from a stand point of what we want we don't pay enough"......

It should be "we demand too much that we cannot afford, or are not willing to pay for".

You are arguing for both spending cuts and tax cuts !

Which is it WTF, we spend too much or we are not taking in enough?

I say; cut spending drastically. Then when Congress proves it can seriously cut spending, we talk about raising taxes.....but it is BS to maintain that we raise taxes on the already broken promises that spending cuts will happen................it has never happened !

Conservatives have been bamboozled into that logic before - NEVER AGAIN !

[nevergaveitathought]

instead of trying to redistribute the producers of this country's wealth..obama should try to redistribute their work ethic

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Sometimes AF is freaking funny...............

Never intentionally.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Your whole premise is based on "from a stand point of what we want we don't pay enough"......

It should be "we demand too much that we cannot afford, or are not willing to pay for".

!

I can not see the difference in the two statements.

But to clear up what I said is that right now our taxes are to low for what we want. That is just a hard fact. The deficit would not be what it is without that cold hard fact.

To fix this math problem we have three choices.

1) Raise taxes.
2) Cut spending
3) A combination of the two.

Now we can do like Reagan which lowered out Federal taxes while raising our SS and gas taxes which seems regressive in nature but if that is how they choose to do this, fine by me.

But we will just be in this same spot in 20-30 years. If you do not cut the Defense budget. That is why it appears we are in such a mess, because the SS/Medicare surplus is running out. The combined accounting of these two taxes (Federal and FICA) hides the true cost of Defense spending. That is why LBJ did this little accounting trick back in the 60's.


But we need to be clear, we can cut benifits and raise SS taxes but without cutting Defense spending , we will be right back in this hole. The Defense Budget is like the Ant and the Grasshopper. SS is the Ant, saving a surplus, the Grasshopper is eating away all the Ant's surplus.

Sure if you combine these two's savings you see a deficit. What many on the right seem to want is for the Ant to work harder and the Grasshopper to keep on keeping on.

IMHO, the only way you will have this country cut Defense spending is to make the rich pay for it. They are the one's that seem to benifit the most from it. Were they to have to actually pay for the Grasshopper , instead of letting the Grasshopper take savings from the poorer Ants then and only then will you see a change in attitudes in this country.

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

You are arguing for both spending cuts and tax cuts !

Which is it WTF, we spend too much or we are not taking in enough?

!

I have said we both spend to much and take in to little. That is why we have a deficit. I'm not sure how I can make this any plainer.

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

I say; cut spending drastically. Then when Congress proves it can seriously cut spending, we talk about raising taxes.....but it is BS to maintain that we raise taxes on the already broken promises that spending cuts will happen................it has never happened !

Conservatives have been bamboozled into that logic before - NEVER AGAIN !

Conservatives did not get bamboozled. They do not want to cut Defense spending! See wtf Reagan did. Liberals then demand more spending on their pet projects.

You have to be willing to cut Defense spending if you are serious about cutting the deficit. You also have to be willing to live wil the huge jolt to the nation if you want to do this in one fell swoop.

That is the problem, we can not really do it in one fell swoop and then we move on to some retarded Zimmerman case instead of focusing on the oncoming train.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

instead of trying to redistribute the producers of this country's wealth..obama should try to redistribute their work ethic

This is the same old class warfare act that the defenders of the rich always pull. They never seem to see the other side's POV.

Every single tax ever devised redistributes the wealth in one form or other.

When you want to cut taxes on the wealthy and raise FICA taxes, you redistribute the wealth from the middle class to the rich.

When you open trade borders with poor countries you redistribute middle class manufacturing jobs from the richer country to the poorer one and the rich get richer in the process.