Author Topic: so.. it apears that the governator taxed the redskins... (Read 1482 times)

Saurdaukar · « **Reply #30 on:** June 24, 2004, 02:45:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
Lazs, Bodhi, and Saurdaukar (im sure of at least 2 of them, I believe all 3) where all flaming strk a few weeks back in his thread about taxes being cut instead of raised for the weathly.. What hypocracy for them all to be here condoning this action against native americans..

The Indian reservations are nothing more than a micro economic group to America.. They have their wealthy that support their communities just like our society..

But here we have the same folk always screaming for less government, less taxes condoning Just the opposite actions against another group of peoples.. Sounds like lazs is supporting these 'Womanly' issues..

I here by claim these actions:
HYPOCRITE

I cant speak for the other two, but Im certain the posts you are refering to will support what Im saying here. Im not "against taxes" Im against uneven taxes. A flat tax would be ideal, IMO.

For the wealthy (of which I am NOT a member, just so we're clear) to be forced to pay an obscenely large percentage compared to the rest of the country isnt right.

For this reason, Im glad Arnold will be going ahead with this tax. It evens things out somewhat - spreads the burden.

lazs2 · « **Reply #31 on:** June 24, 2004, 03:00:10 PM »

one more time... all bussines is good for the country.. all bussines plays by the same tax code.... except the indians.

get everyone playing by the same tax code and then start lowering the entire tax code.

they are not part of the U.S.? fine... if that is the case then to prevent them form burdening the infrastructure (roads etc.) then simply make it illegal for U.S. citizens to step onto indian soil.

either they want to be part of the community or they don't.... since it was a joint agreement... it would appear that they are of the latter persuassion.

but maybe I am just a biggot and don't understand why one race should be treated differently than another.

lazs

Sixpence · « **Reply #32 on:** June 24, 2004, 03:02:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Saurdaukar
Its a return to a logical way of doing things, quite frankly. Why shouldnt they pay taxes? Because "we" showed up 500 years ago with the grand idea to "take their country?" Thats kind of silly, if you ask me.

Lol, of course it's silly to you, you're not the indian! If you are a 60 year old indian who has been living on a reservation all his life, your opinion might differ. But in the end, for the record, you supported a billion dollar tax, and I did not.

2Slow · « **Reply #33 on:** June 24, 2004, 03:18:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sixpence
Yeah, kinda like companies who base themselves offshore to avoid taxes.

But there is a strange irony here. It was their country, you make it sound like they are not the natives they are, and the irony is the ones who were here first are the ones who live tax free when the ones who conquered the country championed tax free and now are putting a billion dollar tax on them. Makes you kinda wonder who the true American is here, the indian, or the guy who wasn't even born here putting a billion dollar tax on them.

They lost the Indian Wars. I think if President Wilson had not confered, by act of Congress, citizenship for their contribution to WWI they would be better off.

Personally, I think Congress should abrogate all Indian treaties, divide the lands amongst the current tribal members, and let free enterprise take its course. With the exception of the 5 Civilized Tribes, the Indian Tribes did not qualify for Nation recognition.

I see the clouds gathering! Yes, Congress can do this. It is legal.

Regular · « **Reply #34 on:** June 24, 2004, 03:39:51 PM »

Good for Arnuld. Sucks to be white wearing flipflops. More money for hispanics to have babie's in Cali.

More TAXES FOR KING ARNLOLD OF BELGIUM cali.

Lazs is an old ex drug hippie biker guy.LOL absinthe kicking in.

Ex con biker hippies are old.

Saurdaukar · « **Reply #35 on:** June 24, 2004, 04:04:38 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sixpence
Lol, of course it's silly to you, you're not the indian! If you are a 60 year old indian who has been living on a reservation all his life, your opinion might differ. But in the end, for the record, you supported a billion dollar tax, and I did not.

I support a billion dollar tax on people that never paid taxes before so that the residents of California who already pay outrageous taxes, might not have to pay more.

Sixpence · « **Reply #36 on:** June 24, 2004, 04:30:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Saurdaukar
I support a billion dollar tax on people that never paid taxes before so that the residents of California who already pay outrageous taxes, might not have to pay more.

Uh huh. Once you start looking for things to tax, it snowballs.

rpm · « **Reply #37 on:** June 24, 2004, 04:38:42 PM »

"Them dang Injuns been livin life too easy for too long. Do they think they are speshal or sumthun? Ain't like we wuz Nazi's an stole their land and tried to wipe them out er nuthin."

This rant has been brought to you by NeoCon!
NeoCon, making double standards standard all across America!

B17Skull12 · « **Reply #38 on:** June 24, 2004, 05:59:37 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
I'm confused. Are you guys in favor of taxes now? Or were you against taxes before you were for taxes? Flip-floppers.

-- Todd/Leviathn

the casino's are the one paying the taxes, and unless if you gamble not the people of CA;)

Munkii · « **Reply #39 on:** June 24, 2004, 06:57:22 PM »

I don't see how people are freaking out about this. Voluntary taxes are not a big deal on "vices". Taxes on gambling, smoking, alcohol, and other things that aren't necesarry (housing, clothes, gas) are great revenue builders with no ill effects on anyone except those that choose to participate.

I realize this is more about taxing the Indians.. but in all reality they are taxing the Casino.. which is a business and should be succeptable to any and all corporate taxes. Giving a tax break and entitlement programs to the Indians for something that happened 50 generations back seems a little rediculous to me.. I have enough Indian blood to get a CDIB but I don't feel I earned anything special by having a great great grandfather that was full blood Apache.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #40 on:** June 24, 2004, 07:02:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Munkii
Giving a tax break and entitlement programs to the Indians for something that happened 50 generations back seems a little rediculous to me.. I have enough Indian blood to get a CDIB but I don't feel I earned anything special by having a great great grandfather that was full blood Apache.

1/8 Pima here, and I agree with your view... but Wounded Knee was only 5 or 6 generations ago and you and I could have met someone alive at the time.

Munkii · « **Reply #41 on:** June 24, 2004, 07:12:22 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
1/8 Pima here, and I agree with your view... but Wounded Knee was only 5 or 6 generations ago and you and I could have met someone alive at the time.

Sarcasm and exaggeration..

I actually don't mind some of the entitlement programs, and infact think they help a lot where some of the Indian populations are rather poor. The tuition breaks are a god-send a lot of the time.. if I hadn't qualified for grants I had considered trying to trace my family back through the rolls trying to get a card and the tuition.

Dago · « **Reply #42 on:** June 24, 2004, 07:17:31 PM »

I think everyone is against taxes in general, but I think the issue here, and maybe the cheers for Arnold stem from the idea that if there must be taxes, everyone should share in paying them equally.

dago

Leslie · « **Reply #43 on:** June 24, 2004, 10:00:05 PM »

I had considered making a post about this subject several months ago, but thought better of it. Didn't want to get any Indians upset with me. Also don't know much about it. I know this thread is about slot machines in bingo halls. You start off with slot machines and bingo, and you eventually end up with twentyone (blackjack), poker, craps, Keno, Pharoh, Bacarrat, roulette, etc, etc, etc...

In my opinion, bringing casinos in is not in the best interests of a community. There's a lot of potential for corruption, meaning the money supposedly earmarked for community improvements, is channeled somewhere else. If the money was strictly regulated and accounted for, that would be different. Then it might do some good, aside from the deleterous effects of gambling and the problems it brings. Do Indian casinos have a gambling commission? I don't know.

I have never visited a reservation, but have been left under the impression they are in bad shape. If so, why? Seems like with all that money, reservations should be thriving communities.

I realize operating a casino is expensive, and have heard the Indian casinos are owned by Asian investors. Most of the money goes there? It should be taxed, or even better, completely frozen. Some of that money possibly could be funding terrorists, for all we know. If all of it was going to the American Indians, as it should be, I have no problem with that at all.

About taxation of casinos on reservations...everyone should pay their fair share of taxes. Taxes are necessary if you live here. There was a time when the Native Americans needed a break. They were a defeated nation in war, and needed to be helped out. If the idea of granting the privilege of having something like casinos was meant to help the Indians, then why is it not working?

Les

Leslie · « **Reply #44 on:** June 24, 2004, 10:13:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
"the redskins"?

I think that the word is okay for describing some sort of sports team, but in this context it's out of fashion.

That's true Sandman. Not all Indians were redskins. Some were fairly darkskinned, and others like the Cherokees had offshoots of Scottish ancestry. They were blue eyed blonds, and white as you and me.

Les