Shouldn't we all be equal? - Page 3 - GoFuckYourself.com

davethedope · 09-07-2012, 03:11 PM

he doesn't believe in society, even though it's pretty much a natural state for all creatures.

it's a chicken/egg thing for sure, but it all goes back to sex.

Bryan G · 09-07-2012, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyClips

lol at everyone arguing yet ANOTHER useless point

There shouldn't be taxation because taxation is theft

Lol at you. You useless cunt

Robbie · 09-07-2012, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryan G

Lol at you. You useless cunt

Easy now. This is a discussion on politics. Things get heated. But no need to resort to childish name calling.

You do represent Mark's company on GFY, remember that.

Bryan G · 09-07-2012, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

Easy now. This is a discussion on politics. Things get heated. But no need to resort to childish name calling.

You do represent Mark's company on GFY, remember that.

Fair enough lol but this is GFY. I'd guess maybe 10% of the members are actually in this industry. Also, have you seen johnnys posts?? I stand by by statement. Its funny that people still think gfy means shit to this industry. GTS has been bashed for years here but we continue to thrive.

davethedope · 09-07-2012, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyClips

No, it's not natural at all

Forcing people into these dumps we call school at gunpoint, forcing people to pay for things at gun point, etc is NOT "natural" at all

This society is just one rung on the evolution of the natural society.

This persona of yours, while it often addresses valid points about the state of mankind, sometimes it's too ridiculous to be taken seriously.

It makes the mistake that most people who lack scholarship make- on ESPN it's called "prisoner of the moment".

This society has its flaws and weaknesses, like any organism, but it's head and shoulders ahead of anything we've seen before.

davethedope · 09-07-2012, 04:37 PM

My friend, you know nothing of nature, then.

There are so many awesome quotes about this, but here's one that should make sense.

Quote:

It is difficult to associate these horrors with the proud civilizations that created them: Sparta, Rome, The Knights of Europe, the Samurai... They worshipped strength, because it is strength that makes all other values possible. Nothing survives without it. Who knows what delicate wonders have died out of the world, for want of the strength to survive.

It's safe to assume you don't believe the family is a society?

Quote:

And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?

davethedope · 09-07-2012, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyClips

If you teach violence and aggress against kids then how can one be surprised when they are violent?

Violence is not something that is taught.

It's non-violence that must be taught.

Even a two year old quickly realizes hitting is a means to satisfaction.

davethedope · 09-07-2012, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyClips

That's where you are wrong

How is violence something that is "human nature" ?

Makes no fucking sense. Like 95% of violent criminals were abused as a child

It just is. I can't explain it, so you're right, It doesn't make sense- not just human nature- it's all animals, insects, fish, mammals.

Being abused as a child has nothing to do with anything.

You see, there's this little thing called fear. Read up on it- explains a helluvalot.

davethedope · 09-07-2012, 05:34 PM

Hit me up with Dating APIs

Robbie · 09-07-2012, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryan G

Fair enough lol but this is GFY. I'd guess maybe 10% of the members are actually in this industry. Also, have you seen johnnys posts?? I stand by by statement. Its funny that people still think gfy means shit to this industry. GTS has been bashed for years here but we continue to thrive.

Yeah, Johhny Clips has some ideas that are a little bit extreme to say the least.

But still...whether you think it has meaning or not, it's never a good idea to get too caught up in these debates for someone in your position.
If anything, you should be writing Johnny Clips in private and pretending to agree with him and see if you can't sell him a link.

DTK · 09-07-2012, 08:15 PM

Ed, I don't know if anyone has put it this way, but...

Let's say the number for each person is $5000. That means someone earning $20k/year would be paying 25% of their income in taxes, leaving them $15k to survive on. Someone earning $500k/year would be paying 1% of their income, leaving them $495k to 'survive' on.

In what universe is that in any way fair or equal?

Yanks_Todd · 09-07-2012, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmy-3-way

Mitt Romney swiped a $10-15million bailout for Bain from the US Treasury.

Sounds like he got a little more than I ever will.

How much did you swipe?

SmutHammer · 09-07-2012, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DTK

Ed, I don't know if anyone has put it this way, but...

Let's say the number for each person is $5000. That means someone earning $20k/year would be paying 25% of their income in taxes, leaving them $15k to survive on. Someone earning $500k/year would be paying 1% of their income, leaving them $495k to 'survive' on.

In what universe is that in any way fair or equal?

Well, If you asked me I would think the most fair thing is for people to pay a very very low amount to the government. That would not really hurt anyone, but It would still add up to an extra income for the gov. People who make more money, spend more money, and they are paying taxes for everything they buy. Cars, Houses etc. are all taxed every year according to there value. I think making a 20% tax on everything would be a better way to go. 10% to the state, 10% to the government. No need for tax cuts etc. at the end of the year, no bitching about the % in you have to pay, If you want to pay less taxes, Live more modest.

Kevin Marx · 09-07-2012, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DTK

Ed, I don't know if anyone has put it this way, but...

Let's say the number for each person is $5000. That means someone earning $20k/year would be paying 25% of their income in taxes, leaving them $15k to survive on. Someone earning $500k/year would be paying 1% of their income, leaving them $495k to 'survive' on.

In what universe is that in any way fair or equal?

DTK... How do you think it works now? You are just reversing how things work and then assuming it's fair because it "seems" balanced.

25% from the poor but 1% from the wealthy seems unfair; yet 1% from the lesser and 25% from the greater does seem fair? How so? Explain to me how a dollar to one person is different than a dollar to another person. If the argument begins that "they can afford to pay more", just rephrase and say "they can afford to be taken from more". It's legalized theft is all it is.

Take everything out of it and just suppose for a moment that we all are really equal at birth and then move forward. Assume that we are all responsible for our own lives and we truly shouldn't be required to support our neighbor (not asked to voluntarily do so, but required to). At what point does that change? At what point do we determine a man's value requires that he then must (not voluntarily, but require do) do more than others must?

If you want to say that a percentage of every dollar is equal in taxation, I'm fine with that. Everyone would be equalized; but why should a dollar further down the road (in April? in July? in September/October/November/December) be taxed differently than the dollar in January just because person B is receiving more than person A?

Take away ridiculous and unchecked government spending and you get the answer that it's all unbalanced. Person B is being asked to give more solely because he has more with no consideration other than "he can afford to give more". What if all the givers, en masse, decided to tell this great nation to go fuck itself and walked out. What then?

You have a gigantic class of people that are taking, but are not contributing (or are contributing so minimally that it's laughable in comparison to the percentage contributed by the class that just walked out).

Balance shit out and stop the spending. Require that people balance things out. Stop handing out voting as a privilege when contribution is minimal. It's a political shell game and nothing more.

GrantMercury · 09-07-2012, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Hammer

Well, If you asked me I would think the most fair thing is for people to pay a very very low amount to the government. That would not really hurt anyone, but It would still add up to an extra income for the gov. People who make more money, spend more money, and they are paying taxes for everything they buy. Cars, Houses etc. are all taxed every year according to there value. I think making a 20% tax on everything would be a better way to go. 10% to the state, 10% to the government. No need for tax cuts etc. at the end of the year, no bitching about the % in you have to pay, If you want to pay less taxes, Live more modest.

Wouldn't that discourage consumption? Would that be good for a capitalist system?

DTK · 09-07-2012, 10:32 PM

Kevin, first off, you're taking what I said about a specific idea (everyone pays the exact same dollar amount) and twisting it into a completely different argument. and yeah, i'm a bit of an economics nerd, so i do know how it works now.

Generally, i either disagree with or find irrelevant most everything you said.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Marx

Take everything out of it and just suppose for a moment that we all are really equal at birth and then move forward.

For me, that part of what you're saying dies right there. Obviously we aren't aren't anything remotely resembling equal at birth, so we're looking at an ivory tower discussion. I prefer to save those for when i'm really baked and in one of those 'in a perfect world...' moods.

The january/march/september thing is nonsense. We figure these things on an annual basis.

The people you're referring to (the poor, mostly) contribute next to nothing because they have next to nothing. You know the saying 'you cant squeeze blood from a rock'? There ya go. Blaming the poor for the current state of our economy is not only far right-wing class warfare at it's finest, but it's factually inaccurate. I'm pretty sure destitute, poorly educated people weren't running Citi, BofA, Chase etc when they were creating and pushing mortgage products that were destined to drive us to the brink of a second Great Depression. In fact, i'm certain it was very wealthy, very amoral people running that show.

Stop handing out voting as a privilege? Are you fucking shitting me? You're basically talking about going back to feudalism. I'll pass.

That said, i do agree that current spending is not sustainable. The military budget needs to come down drastically, but in an orderly fashion. Cutting the DoD budget in half overnight would be economically disastrous. Also, did you know we spend $50 Billion (with a B) per year on the stupid, corporate-profit motivated, utterly fucking pointless War on (some) Drugs??

Here's the immediate problem: history has shown time and again that austerity in tough economic times ALWAYS leads to disaster. Fortunately, we currently have a once in a lifetime opportunity to borrow money for virtually nothing (adjusted for inflation, it's actually free money) so we can continue to stimulate an economy that desperately needs it.

GrantMercury · 09-07-2012, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Marx

just suppose for a moment that we all are really equal at birth and then move forward.

But we're not. Never will be. There are heirs to enormous fortunes that don't lift a finger.

If the government takes the same from the rich heir that they take from the schoolteacher, there won't be enough money to run anything.

We can't have this system which allows 400 people to have more than 1/2 the country and then expect everyone to pay the same in taxes. It can't work.

So higher taxes is one of the heavy crosses millionaires have to bear.

Or we can have socialism, I guess, where everyone has the same amount. Then nobody can bitch about having to pay more in taxes than a firefighter or special ed teacher.

Quote:

It's so hard for one person to tell another person what constitutes being "rich", or what tax rate is "too much." But I've done some math that indicates that, considering the hole this country is in, if you are earning more than a million dollars a year and are complaining about a 3.6% tax increase, then you are by definition a greedy asshole.

And let's be clear: that's 3.6% only on income above 250 grand -- your first 250, that's still on the house.

-- Bill Maher

Barry-xlovecam · 09-07-2012, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Marx

[W]hat if all the givers, en masse, decided to tell this great nation to go fuck itself and walked out. What then?

You have a gigantic class of people that are taking, but are not contributing (or are contributing so minimally that it's laughable in comparison to the percentage contributed by the class that just walked out).

Balance shit out and stop the spending. Require that people balance things out. Stop handing out voting as a privilege when contribution is minimal. It's a political shell game and nothing more.

Don't let the door hit you where the good lord split you.
So, the the established laws on voting rights mean nothing to you. So how do we decide who can vote just white landowners like us? Disenfranchise the less productive citizens. OK let's start with old people they are beyond their working years, then we can go after the disabled they are not net tax contributors -- who's next? The poor they are too lazy to work.
Do us all a favour move to Belarus you might like it there.

SmutHammer · 09-07-2012, 11:30 PM

So you guys think people should be given handouts? and also it seems you are saying that the rich people are better than you?

I don't have alot of money, but what I do have I work hard for, Hopefully I can leave alot to my children so they can be those people you guys seem to hate. Guess you are ok with your kids being poor? anyways..... If it were up to me, Starting tomorrow there would be no handouts. no food stamps notta! But I would have programs set up that anyone in need could get a job from the state/government.

_Richard_ · 09-07-2012, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Hammer

So you guys think people should be given handouts? and also it seems you are saying that the rich people are better than you?

I don't have alot of money, but what I do have I work hard for, Hopefully I can leave alot to my children so they can be those people you guys seem to hate. Guess you are ok with your kids being poor? anyways..... If it were up to me, Starting tomorrow there would be no handouts. no food stamps notta! But I would have programs set up that anyone in need could get a job from the state/government.

do you think 'rich people' should be given handouts?

SmutHammer · 09-07-2012, 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

do you think 'rich people' should be given handouts?

They are not. Paying a lower % that = more $ is not a handout.

_Richard_ · 09-07-2012, 11:43 PM

you didn't answer the question, which kinda tells me you're avoiding doing so.

_Richard_ · 09-07-2012, 11:44 PM

if i were to provide examples of 'micro loans' being given out to 'rich people' for little or no benefit to the nation, would you start fighting for your country?

or continue boot licking?

_Richard_ · 09-07-2012, 11:47 PM

well boot licker?

_Richard_ · 09-07-2012, 11:48 PM

BOOT LICCKERRR

_Richard_ · 09-07-2012, 11:52 PM

alright fine. once you spit all that leather, polish, and now i see sand out of your mouth

you just ask, eh?

not the first time Canadians have told you guys what's what

DTK · 09-07-2012, 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Hammer

So you guys think people should be given handouts? and also it seems you are saying that the rich people are better than you?

If it keeps them from living under bridges and eating out of dumpsters? Yes.

I'm absolutely NOT saying that 'the rich people' are better than me. Don't know if that question was particularly directed to me, but i'm 1,000,000,000,000% sure i never said anything of the sort.

Robbie · 09-08-2012, 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DTK

Let's say the number for each person is $5000. That means someone earning $20k/year would be paying 25% of their income in taxes, leaving them $15k to survive on. Someone earning $500k/year would be paying 1% of their income, leaving them $495k to 'survive' on.

In what universe is that in any way fair or equal?

Tonight at every strip club in town...some girls will make $2000, some will make $200. They ALL will pay exactly $125 to the house.
It's "fair" because they both get the same things for their money (bouncers, dj, bar tipout)

If we both paid the same amount of taxes but you were poor, you would still get the better deal because you would probably be getting far more back than what you put in in social services and welfare and food stamps...whereas the rich guy doesn't get any of that.

If you and I had a business together and we both worked on commission and were required to put money back into the business account each week...and you made more than I did...would you be okay with me putting in LESS than you did? Even though we would both profit equally from that pot of money being returned to the company?

No.

I can't think of any circumstance where one person having to pay more is acceptable EXCEPT with taxation.

But that really isn't the problem...the problem is the federal govt. is spending 7 million dollars a MINUTE.
Slow that shit down to a sane level and taxes are no longer needed to be high for anyone.

Robbie · 09-08-2012, 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DTK

If it keeps them from living under bridges and eating out of dumpsters? Yes.
.

It doesn't. The "War On Poverty" was started in 1965 by Lyndon Johnson. So far there has been over 10 TRILLION dollars put into it.
But as usual...I doubt that even a fraction of that actually went to help poor people. The majority of it goes into the pockets of corrupt bureaucrats.

DTK · 09-08-2012, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

Tonight at every strip club in town...some girls will make $2000, some will make $200. They ALL will pay exactly $125 to the house.
It's "fair" because they both get the same things for their money (bouncers, dj, bar tipout)

If we both paid the same amount of taxes but you were poor, you would still get the better deal because you would probably be getting far more back than what you put in in social services and welfare and food stamps...whereas the rich guy doesn't get any of that.

If you and I had a business together and we both worked on commission and were required to put money back into the business account each week...and you made more than I did...would you be okay with me putting in LESS than you did? Even though we would both profit equally from that pot of money being returned to the company?

No.

I can't think of any circumstance where one person having to pay more is acceptable EXCEPT with taxation.

But that really isn't the problem...the problem is the federal govt. is spending 7 million dollars a MINUTE.
Slow that shit down to a sane level and taxes are no longer needed to be high for anyone.

You know, considering the fact that our current elected government (federal & state especially) is a whorehouse, you might be on to something

but i think those are both very flawed analogies.

in terms of spending....

Quote:

Originally Posted by DTK

That said, i do agree that current spending is not sustainable. The military budget needs to come down drastically, but in an orderly fashion. Cutting the DoD budget in half overnight would be economically disastrous. Also, did you know we spend $50 Billion per year on the stupid, corporate-profit motivated, utterly fucking pointless War on (some) Drugs??

Here's the immediate problem: history has shown time and again that austerity in tough economic times ALWAYS leads to disaster. Fortunately, we currently have a once in a lifetime opportunity to borrow money for virtually nothing (adjusted for inflation, it's actually free money) so we can continue to stimulate an economy that desperately needs it.

SmutHammer · 09-08-2012, 01:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

if i were to provide examples of 'micro loans' being given out to 'rich people' for little or no benefit to the nation, would you start fighting for your country?

or continue boot licking?

who gives a fuck about that? So I'm suddenly going to feel bad for the worthless fucks sitting at home collecting welfare and not even trying to get a job or do anything with their life?

Kevin Marx · 09-08-2012, 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DTK

Kevin, first off, you're taking what I said about a specific idea (everyone pays the exact same dollar amount) and twisting it into a completely different argument. and yeah, i'm a bit of an economics nerd, so i do know how it works now.

Generally, i either disagree with or find irrelevant most everything you said.

For me, that part of what you're saying dies right there. Obviously we aren't aren't anything remotely resembling equal at birth, so we're looking at an ivory tower discussion. I prefer to save those for when i'm really baked and in one of those 'in a perfect world...' moods.

The january/march/september thing is nonsense. We figure these things on an annual basis.

The people you're referring to (the poor, mostly) contribute next to nothing because they have next to nothing. You know the saying 'you cant squeeze blood from a rock'? There ya go. Blaming the poor for the current state of our economy is not only far right-wing class warfare at it's finest, but it's factually inaccurate. I'm pretty sure destitute, poorly educated people weren't running Citi, BofA, Chase etc when they were creating and pushing mortgage products that were destined to drive us to the brink of a second Great Depression. In fact, i'm certain it was very wealthy, very amoral people running that show.

Stop handing out voting as a privilege? Are you fucking shitting me? You're basically talking about going back to feudalism. I'll pass.

That said, i do agree that current spending is not sustainable. The military budget needs to come down drastically, but in an orderly fashion. Cutting the DoD budget in half overnight would be economically disastrous. Also, did you know we spend $50 Billion (with a B) per year on the stupid, corporate-profit motivated, utterly fucking pointless War on (some) Drugs??

Here's the immediate problem: history has shown time and again that austerity in tough economic times ALWAYS leads to disaster. Fortunately, we currently have a once in a lifetime opportunity to borrow money for virtually nothing (adjusted for inflation, it's actually free money) so we can continue to stimulate an economy that desperately needs it.

I didn't suppose you didn't know anything about taxation or economics, I merely saw the way you phrased the fairness of the numbers and responded to that. No offense intended.

I disagree with you regarding our equality at birth. Just because my parents were in a different state than your parents (could have been more affluent, could have been less; I think my parents combined income prior to me leaving home never topped 50K/yr which would mean at birth they may have been in the 15-20k range) doesn't change the fact that each of us at birth essentially has the same potential. Once you see that, everything else changes.

I understand your "ivory tower" indication, but things have to be looked at from every scenario, not just the politically correct one.

I agree the poor contribute next to nothing, but realistically, from an income standpoint, they contribute nothing at all. For all intents and purposes, all the other taxes on the table are distributed equally (property, vehicle, fuel), so why is income not done so? It's always an interesting question I believe.

I do not blame the poor for the state of the economy, I put that squarely on congress, not one iota on the poor. BTW, your indication that the bankers were to blame it only partly correct; they were supported and encouraged by Congress - on both sides of the aisle.

I knew the "voting privilege" statement would cause problems; I don't suggest feudalism. However, if you don't see the inherent problem in a welfare class voting on their own benefits I guarantee we will never be able to agree on it. I don't even feel that the wealthy should be voting on things that affect them. Conflict of interest doesn't belong in a voting process - anywhere/anytime/anyhow. Class welfare is how elections are won. Convince people that their lot in life is the fault of the other party. It's happening this year, it happened 2 years ago, 4 years ago...etc.

We agree on spending; Nice. I knew there was some common ground somewhere. I also agree with you on cuts to the DoD being disastrous. The GOP needs to stop having their sacred cows as does the Dems. Yes the war on drugs is stupid, as is the war on poverty, etc. There are certainly better ways to do things. The status quo makes for great headlines and political battles.

Borrow money adjusted for inflation that's actually free? I love that you know economics and I don't but I still get to the point that the money is borrowed. Just because the interest is whacked out doesn't mean the principal isn't still there. Overspending is overspending. Also, government stimulation of an economy has historically never worked either. If you wanna raise taxes; do it fairly (don't hack on the wealthy, make it equal across the board. A dollar is a fuckin dollar no matter the time of year or when it's earned. Just because someone has more of them doesn't change that fact). Also, stop letting deductions happen for everyone, everything. Make a dollar a dollar and tell everyone to share equally; including businesses.

Barry-xlovecam · 09-08-2012, 08:13 AM

Let me pose a question?

Who lost the property equity (real equity not the inflated values of 2006 -2007 before the crash)?

I did and I know some of you did too.

I was 15 years from retirement age in 2008 -- part of my retirement was stolen from me by greedy fucks. I worked for years to pay my home property down to free and clear not having a mortgage to pay was a retirement goal -- still achieved but at a cost. Leverage potential for an emergency lost ...

So for me to watch you defend some of the same people that stole from me, and maybe you too, is bizarre, illogical and disturbing behavior.

Kevin Marx · 09-08-2012, 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrantMercury

But we're not. Never will be. There are heirs to enormous fortunes that don't lift a finger.

If the government takes the same from the rich heir that they take from the schoolteacher, there won't be enough money to run anything.

We can't have this system which allows 400 people to have more than 1/2 the country and then expect everyone to pay the same in taxes. It can't work.

So higher taxes is one of the heavy crosses millionaires have to bear.

Or we can have socialism, I guess, where everyone has the same amount. Then nobody can bitch about having to pay more in taxes than a firefighter or special ed teacher.

-- Bill Maher

A bank has more money than I do, so therefore I should be allowed to go in and appropriate some of it for my own means? Ok, that's clearly theft.

Bill Gates has more money than we all do, so therefore, 10,000 of us should be allowed to go in and appropriate a large portion of his earnings just to balance things out? OK, that sounds like theft too.

How about we get our representatives to change things so that big earners have it removed automatically and we'll call it taxation? Yeah, that sounds fair......

All three scenarios are the same thing. It's forceful taking. If you give 10 cents of your dollar and I end up giving 23 cents, that extra 13 is because I am being forced to give it, plain and simple. Just because I can "afford" to doesn't change that it's being forcefully taken.

Socialism doesn't work. It sounds nice, but it just doesn't work.

I appreciate the firefighters and the teachers and the soldiers and the garbagemen, but honestly, WTF do they always get brought out for the argument? Why do people forget that these jobs were chosen and not forced? I don't know of a single teacher where they have ever said..... "I was forced to be a teacher"... Same goes for firefighters, policemen, soldiers, politicians. Stop the idea that this "public service" is actually public service. These people chose these jobs!!!! They accepted the contracts to work there when they started.... And at that point people disagreed about the wage. That's fuckin irony right there people. "I'll take the job, thanks. I didn't want to be unemployed" ..... to ...... "You expect me to work for these wages??? Are you kidding me??? What do you think I am, an animal?!?!?!?!"

I don't teach because I saw the wages they earn and I chose a different field. I don't actually work in the field I was educated in because the monetary and time aspects of it were different than I desired at the time. I have a wife, I have a family, I have faced economic struggle and disaster yet I still pressed on. Why should I feel sorry for a single one of them? They can do exactly the same. Continue with what ya got or move on. BTW, my life didn't change overnight, it took almost a decade. They should expect it to not come overnight either. Pick up a book and educate yourself. Buy some better clothing to represent yourself in a new way. Do the things that make yourself marketable. You cannot change earnings from 20K to 150K overnight, but you can certainly do better over time and stop bitching that no one will help you. Help yourself. It's the only way out of being in a problem.

Stop taking other people's money and find ways to achieve your own success. Everything else is just class oriented legalized theft.

Kevin Marx · 09-08-2012, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

Don't let the door hit you where the good lord split you.
So, the the established laws on voting rights mean nothing to you. So how do we decide who can vote just white landowners like us? Disenfranchise the less productive citizens. OK let's start with old people they are beyond their working years, then we can go after the disabled they are not net tax contributors -- who's next? The poor they are too lazy to work.
Do us all a favour move to Belarus you might like it there.

It was merely a statement, and not a fuck off to the world; yet everyone gets so aggravated by the scenario and says ok... fuck off and leave.

2- sure the voting laws mean something to me, which is why I question them; and no I don't advocate "wealthy landowners". I do however have a problem with conflict of interest. No one should be allowed to vote for that which benefits them. It's just a problem. If you are going to take from one person to give to another, then the receiver should have no say in what is being taken (trust me, this is not a statement against the poor, it's against receivers of any benefits... be it welfare recipients, corporations, States, etc). If you allow a receiver to determine the benefits what we get is what's occurring right now. They will elect representatives that care about reelections and therefore do everything they can to increase benefits. It's happening on both sides people, not just with welfare recipients.

3- Not interested in moving to Belarus, but a visit sounds nice. I've seen some very hot Czech and Russian women in my days, might be worth a trip over.

The USA is the greatest nation on earth. WTF are we allowing the politicians to ruin it? Especially in the name of special interests (and yes, welfare recipients of all kinds are just special interests, including foreign states).

Barry-xlovecam · 09-08-2012, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Marx

2- sure the voting laws mean something to me, which is why I question them; and no I don't advocate "wealthy landowners". I do however have a problem with conflict of interest. No one should be allowed to vote for that which benefits them. It's just a problem. If you are going to take from one person to give to another, then the receiver should have no say in what is being taken (trust me, this is not a statement against the poor, it's against receivers of any benefits... be it welfare recipients, corporations, States, etc). If you allow a receiver to determine the benefits what we get is what's occurring right now. They will elect representatives that care about reelections and therefore do everything they can to increase benefits. It's happening on both sides people, not just with welfare recipients.

Since the time of ancient Athenian Democracy (c. 508 BC) people have voted their own self interest; the alternative is an king, emperor, or dictator. BTW, my paternal grandfather fled Belarus ( called White Russia during the Bolshevik revolution) just prior to the revolution (1911). They still have a dictator strong man in Belarus and life is still shit there just like when my grandfather left.

America has a real problem -- 20% of the people here are surplus. Sad to say but there is little opportunity for them. Some are disadvantaged or repressed and some are just lazy or worthless. Problem is there is no humane solution for this.

Lets all donate $20,000 for a Martian colony ( Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, the Koch Bros, et al. ... can donate $20 Million each-- they wont miss it (make it tax deductible )) and put them on a spaceship and let them figure it out!!! Probably, most of us would be better off that remained, LOL.

DTK · 09-08-2012, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Marx

Borrow money adjusted for inflation that's actually free? I love that you know economics and I don't but I still get to the point that the money is borrowed. Just because the interest is whacked out doesn't mean the principal isn't still there.

Poor choice of words on my part. What i should have said is "interest free loan"

Robbie · 09-08-2012, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DTK

What i should have said is "interest free loan"

That happens all the time in real life too.

If 2 people go to a car lot today...and one of them is incredibly wealthy and has a stellar credit rating...he will get 0% interest on his car loan.

If the other guy is a normal joe and has skipped paying some bills and fucked his credit up, he's going to have his loan done through a company that is going to charge him 7 to 8% interest (or more) for that car.

I personally don't think the federal govt. should be giving out loans (or doing 99% of the things they do). But IF you are going to give out loans, you are probably going to try to give them to big companies with lots of capital and the ability to pay them back with a proven track record. Right?

Especially if those companies are campaign contributors and cronies.

BlackCrayon · 09-08-2012, 11:41 AM

Quote:

No one should be allowed to vote for that which benefits them.

how would that work?

Robbie · 09-08-2012, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

how would that work?

It wouldn't. I think he's just saying "in a perfect world" it would be that way.

Barry-xlovecam · 09-08-2012, 11:45 AM

I just borrowed money at 1.99% for a year that I can repay in that time -- inflation is really like 6% a year now. So, I use that money and make 4% -- better than what a CD pays for a year.

Bullshit and we all know it LOL

Quote:

CONSUMER PRICE INDEX ? JULY 2012
The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) was unchanged in July on a seasonally adjusted basis, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Over the last 12 months, the all items index increased 1.4 percent before seasonal adjustment.

Been to the grocery store this week? Bought gasoline?

1-year CD

1.10% APY ($1000 min. balance)

Who is zooming who?

TY Ben Bernake

Robbie · 09-08-2012, 11:57 AM

Jut don't run up your American Express card. I was late by 2 days on one of my AMEX cards...and they raised the rate to 27% on all 3 of my AMEX cards because I was late on a payment!!!

And it will stay that way for 12 months....unless I am late on another payment, which will extend it further!

Damn credit card companies don't fuck around.

So now on just one of my AMEX cards I'm paying $618 a month in interest.

Barry-xlovecam · 09-08-2012, 12:20 PM

Well, the simplest thing to do would be just to pay them off and renegotiate from a position of strength.

No one should borrow more money than they can immediately repay but I understand that is seldom the case.

That is a case of predatory lending that you cite? But the conditions of the loan were disclosed. Unfortunate circumstances. You could hard ball a cash settlement probably if you could pay them off. The gambit is a lot of legal expense to collect their vigorish, it's a bluff that can work.

27% is loansharking in today's market.

sidebar: we once had the interest on a 3rd mortgage we wrote discharged by a judge as "unconscionable." The ratio was just 1.5x the ''going rate.'' Turned out the property was adjacent to a hazardous waste dump in La Puente CA So, who got fucked on the deal? It was just $38K (1983).

People get pissed when I read the fine print, and when in person, strike out the objectionable parts of the deal -- if they don't want to make acceptance on my terms (generally reasonable) I know that someone else will -- this goes for doctors, hospitals and lawyers too.

directfiesta · 09-08-2012, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Hammer

Well, If you asked me I would think the most fair thing is for people to pay a very very low amount to the government. That would not really hurt anyone, but It would still add up to an extra income for the gov. People who make more money, spend more money, and they are paying taxes for everything they buy. Cars, Houses etc. are all taxed every year according to there value. I think making a 20% tax on everything would be a better way to go. 10% to the state, 10% to the government. No need for tax cuts etc. at the end of the year, no bitching about the % in you have to pay, If you want to pay less taxes, Live more modest.

Thinking it is dumb... but writing it makes you the dumbest ...

Barry-xlovecam · 09-08-2012, 12:31 PM

There should be a federal usury limit -- maybe 3 times the prime rate (3.25% today).

Even if it restricted lending some the negative effects of high interest rates are dragging the economy down.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act was so watered down to the point it had no teeth. Better luck next time.

directfiesta · 09-08-2012, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Hammer

If it were up to me, Starting tomorrow there would be no handouts. no food stamps notta! But I would have programs set up that anyone in need could get a job from the state/government.

didn't take you long that have handouts again : 10 words or so ...

I hope you get elected and take care of the budget ... bye bye USA ...

crockett · 09-08-2012, 12:58 PM

I'm not an economist nor do I play one on the internet but I've always thought a flat tax would be pretty interesting.

Perhaps a flat tax on anything you buy. This way you are only taxed on what you spend.

The draw back with this is it would likely curb spending and likely create a large black market & encourage people to buy things out side the country.

Secondary option would be a flat tax on income, but there are problems with that as well.

Either way I think it's shit that we pay so many different taxes on the same dollar. If the forefathers of this country were alive today, they would have already started a revolution.. Also before we cue the right wing retards.. Yes both Republicans & Democrats are to blame for taxes.. So quit bitching about the left as if they are the only ones to ever tax you.

Robbie · 09-08-2012, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

[INDENT]Well, the simplest thing to do would be just to pay them off and renegotiate from a position of strength.

I'm just paying them all $1,000 a month until I get them paid down.

I use my AMEX cards to do business (last big purchase was camera gear and an HD on cam monitor and a pretty bad ass 10 grand computer for rendering video), so just paying them off completely isn't really in the cards.

But yeah...since that happened I've only used them in times of "emergency" as I continue to pay them down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by crockett

likely create a large black market & encourage people to buy things out side the country.

That's true. If you're like me...I already negotiate everything I can. From doctors, to dentists, to car repair, etc.
I ask them for a "cash" price. They subtract the sales tax and a nice percentage more (since it's also money under the table for their business).
So that's already prevalent on sales tax.

But so is people cheating on their taxes and also ALL of us deducting everything we can think of.

I still think it would bring in more federal revenue (even though I don't think they need more...I think they need to stop spending)

DTK · 09-08-2012, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Marx

No one should be allowed to vote for that which benefits them.

Come on man, EVERYONE votes in their perceived best interest.

Here's where it gets insidious: Since the Citizen's United ruling, any organization or individual can contribute an unlimited amount of money to Super PACs etc. Thus, they can not only vote in their best interest, they can also spend as much as they like to influence how others vote. Did you know that by themselves, the Koch Brothers are committed to spending $100 Million(just .0025% of their combined net worth) pushing their extreme right wing (really, social darwinist) agenda?

When 2 guys can spend what would take 1 Million mere mortals scraping together $100, we no longer have a democracy. We have a plutocracy.

Also, the Koch's, along with American Legislative Exchange Council link (check out the roster of companies on their board) are the prime movers behind the Voter ID laws that have been springing up in battleground and/or tea party states. Why? Because the vast majority of people whom they're trying to disenfranchise vote democratic.

Fortunately, they're very likely to be struck down because they violate parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. In fact, Texas' attempt has already been struck down due to being racially discriminatory. Because of Texas' history in terms of racism, they're required to immediately submit any changes to their voting laws to the DoJ for review

So what we've been seeing over the last couple years is a complete perversion of the political process. Really, imo it's an attempted hostile takeover of the US by extremely deep-pocketed organizations and individuals.

GrantMercury · 09-08-2012, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Marx

Socialism doesn't work. It sounds nice, but it just doesn't work.

Neither does unfettered capitalism. That's why we have regulations in place. That's why we have a progressive tax system.

09-07-2012, 08:15 PM	#111
DTK Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: The 510 Posts: 4,545	Ed, I don't know if anyone has put it this way, but... Let's say the number for each person is $5000. That means someone earning $20k/year would be paying 25% of their income in taxes, leaving them $15k to survive on. Someone earning $500k/year would be paying 1% of their income, leaving them $495k to 'survive' on. In what universe is that in any way fair or equal? __________________ Arguing whether the Democratic or Republican party is better is like debating which steaming pile of shit is slightly less stinky.

09-08-2012, 08:13 AM	#133
Barry-xlovecam It's 42 Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Global Posts: 18,083	Let me pose a question? Who lost the property equity (real equity not the inflated values of 2006 -2007 before the crash)? I did and I know some of you did too. I was 15 years from retirement age in 2008 -- part of my retirement was stolen from me by greedy fucks. I worked for years to pay my home property down to free and clear not having a mortgage to pay was a retirement goal -- still achieved but at a cost. Leverage potential for an emergency lost ... So for me to watch you defend some of the same people that stole from me, and maybe you too, is bizarre, illogical and disturbing behavior.

09-08-2012, 11:57 AM	#142
Robbie Leaner, Meaner, Faster Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Vegas Posts: 20,959	Jut don't run up your American Express card. I was late by 2 days on one of my AMEX cards...and they raised the rate to 27% on all 3 of my AMEX cards because I was late on a payment!!! And it will stay that way for 12 months....unless I am late on another payment, which will extend it further! Damn credit card companies don't fuck around. So now on just one of my AMEX cards I'm paying $618 a month in interest. __________________ -Robbie ClaudiaMarie.Com

09-08-2012, 12:20 PM	#143
Barry-xlovecam It's 42 Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Global Posts: 18,083	Well, the simplest thing to do would be just to pay them off and renegotiate from a position of strength. No one should borrow more money than they can immediately repay but I understand that is seldom the case. That is a case of predatory lending that you cite? But the conditions of the loan were disclosed. Unfortunate circumstances. You could hard ball a cash settlement probably if you could pay them off. The gambit is a lot of legal expense to collect their vigorish, it's a bluff that can work. 27% is loansharking in today's market. sidebar: we once had the interest on a 3rd mortgage we wrote discharged by a judge as "unconscionable." The ratio was just 1.5x the ''going rate.'' Turned out the property was adjacent to a hazardous waste dump in La Puente CA So, who got fucked on the deal? It was just $38K (1983). People get pissed when I read the fine print, and when in person, strike out the objectionable parts of the deal -- if they don't want to make acceptance on my terms (generally reasonable) I know that someone else will -- this goes for doctors, hospitals and lawyers too.

09-08-2012, 12:31 PM	#145
Barry-xlovecam It's 42 Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Global Posts: 18,083	There should be a federal usury limit -- maybe 3 times the prime rate (3.25% today). Even if it restricted lending some the negative effects of high interest rates are dragging the economy down. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act was so watered down to the point it had no teeth. Better luck next time.

09-07-2012, 03:11 PM	#101
davethedope Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 532	he doesn't believe in society, even though it's pretty much a natural state for all creatures. it's a chicken/egg thing for sure, but it all goes back to sex.

09-07-2012, 05:34 PM	#109
davethedope Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 532	Hit me up with Dating APIs

09-07-2012, 11:30 PM	#119
SmutHammer Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 4,250	So you guys think people should be given handouts? and also it seems you are saying that the rich people are better than you? I don't have alot of money, but what I do have I work hard for, Hopefully I can leave alot to my children so they can be those people you guys seem to hate. Guess you are ok with your kids being poor? anyways..... If it were up to me, Starting tomorrow there would be no handouts. no food stamps notta! But I would have programs set up that anyone in need could get a job from the state/government.

09-07-2012, 11:43 PM	#122
_Richard_ Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Earth Posts: 30,989	you didn't answer the question, which kinda tells me you're avoiding doing so.

09-07-2012, 11:44 PM	#123
_Richard_ Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Earth Posts: 30,989	if i were to provide examples of 'micro loans' being given out to 'rich people' for little or no benefit to the nation, would you start fighting for your country? or continue boot licking?

09-07-2012, 11:47 PM	#124
_Richard_ Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Earth Posts: 30,989	well boot licker?

09-07-2012, 11:48 PM	#125
_Richard_ Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Earth Posts: 30,989	BOOT LICCKERRR

09-07-2012, 11:52 PM	#126
_Richard_ Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Earth Posts: 30,989	alright fine. once you spit all that leather, polish, and now i see sand out of your mouth you just ask, eh? not the first time Canadians have told you guys what's what

09-08-2012, 12:58 PM	#147
crockett in a van by the river Industry Role: Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 76,806	I'm not an economist nor do I play one on the internet but I've always thought a flat tax would be pretty interesting. Perhaps a flat tax on anything you buy. This way you are only taxed on what you spend. The draw back with this is it would likely curb spending and likely create a large black market & encourage people to buy things out side the country. Secondary option would be a flat tax on income, but there are problems with that as well. Either way I think it's shit that we pay so many different taxes on the same dollar. If the forefathers of this country were alive today, they would have already started a revolution.. Also before we cue the right wing retards.. Yes both Republicans & Democrats are to blame for taxes.. So quit bitching about the left as if they are the only ones to ever tax you. Last edited by crockett; 09-08-2012 at 01:00 PM..