What makes you think I want to punish successful people? I'm talking about rich people, not successful people. And I'm talking about taxation, not punishment.
An idea for bipartisan tax reform
- Thread starter Oneuli
- Start date
What makes you think I want to punish successful people? I'm talking about rich people, not successful people. And I'm talking about taxation, not punishment.
Hold on...you said that your support about tax cuts has nothing to do with economics, which means it's all an emotionally-charged subject with you.
You're too emotional.
If you think taxation is theft, then you're an idiot.
We know...you don't like taxes but you like all the things taxes pay for.
You're a confused person.
Great, so what is the economic argument in favor of your tax cuts? Be sure to cite empirical evidence, not your personal fantasies and theories.
Right...so there's no fiscal or economic reasoning for it...just your emotion.
Smile more.
No they don't. That's a lie. You're disseminating propaganda now because you have not thought this through for yourself.
When you base your entire belief system on lies, you end up posting shit like this^
Lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie.
In terms of specialized treatment, national wait times were shortest for medical oncology (3.7 weeks).
https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/health-care-wait-times-hit-20-weeks-in-2016-report-1.3171718
Medical oncology = cancer specialists.
Kill yourself.
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
Not emotional at all Toby
I didn’t say taxes in an of themselves are immoral. There is a level of taxation that is required for a nation to run
Let’s be clear when I speak of this issue I am referring mostly to federal income taxes.
I believe that taxing income directly in the form of an income tax is immoral. It is confiscation of personal property.
You make assumptions that “you like what taxes pay for” which is the point where you blather on about roads and cops and firefighters blah blah blah.
If the Federal government kept spending to those things specifically outlined in the original Constitution we could get by with excise taxes and tariffs to fund the federal government.
As the US Constitution outlined everything else should be left to the states.
Our fundamental disagreement is that I believe in individual liberty and private property. You do not. You believe EVERYTHING belongs to the government. It is infused in everything you say
Your singular argument for tax cuts is an emotional one...you even said so yourself that it's based in morals, which is all about emotion. Your personal emotions regarding taxation. You make emotional arguments like that because you can't make any other type of argument.
Also, it's laughable that you would screech about "morality" as you support a President who cheated on all three of his wives, pays off porn stars, and barges into the dressing rooms of teenage girls.
Way to walk back what you said before, which was this:
So now you're flip-flopping and/or redefining the parameters because you realized halfway through your argument that your position is stupid and untenable.
MOVE. THOSE. GOALPOSTS!
You're not clarifying, you're redefining.
Much like how you redefined yourself after Bush the Dumber by stapling a teabag to your face and pretending to care about the debt.
This position makes no sense...why is it confiscation if the feds do it, but not your state?
I expect another goalpost shift now.
Yeah, all those pesky social services you are fundamentally opposed to, yet wholly rely on to continue your meaningless existence.
It's your stupid opinion for what you think the federal government can and cannot do. And every single time, your stupid opinion is not validated by the courts. So what happens is that you try and foist your subjective opinion as the baseline standards when you've done nothing to earn that entitlement and accommodation.
This is a lazy argument that doesn't stand to scrutiny.
You all told us that Medicare was unconstitutional back in the day, even though it was upheld by the courts.
You all told us that Social Security was unconstitutional back in the day, even though it was upheld by the courts.
You all told us that the ACA was unconstitutional, even though it was upheld by the courts.
So your kind has been wrong about this shit for the last 80 years, so why would you start being right now?
Seems that you don't know shit about the Constitution, since you keep finding yourself on the wrong side of it.
They've had white America fooled for decades......
No you don't.
You believe in accommodation of your perspective because you think you're entitled to it.
But you're not entitled to shit.
Entitlements are earned, and you haven't earned anything.
Please link to any post of mine where I say that.
You are having a temper tantrum and are trying to foist a straw man on me because your fundamental beliefs are a crock of shit, and you know it.
Adolf_Twitler
Verified User
The tax law enacted in December 2017 opened the door to a whole new level of tax-avoidance games primarily available to wealthy individuals and businesses and big corporations.
Read all about it here:
https://www.americanprogress.org/is...s-wealthy-corporations-will-game-new-tax-law/
Read all about it here:
https://www.americanprogress.org/is...s-wealthy-corporations-will-game-new-tax-law/
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
Not at all. I was responding to your reductionist reasoning.
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
Not redefining at all. If you circle back to this entire debate it centers around the federal income tax code. That is what you harp on incessantly about changing
I don’t argue about income tax cuts on the basis of economics because to do so would be accepting the premise that I think it is OK for the government to tax income. I reject that premise and therefore condone myself to the morality of the government confiscating a citizens property to essentially give to another citizen.
That I don’t accept your flawed premises is what upsets you