Next time you meet a wealthy person, thank them...

[Silat]

Originally posted by AWMac
Why don't we just outsource all American jobs to the Middle East and Mexico?

Solves all the probs... Terrorist are too dam busy working the American Dream and Illegal Immigration is drawn to a trickle...

Heh, next prob...

~Tongue in Cheek Sarc~



Mac

Sorry Mac. But your a day late on that idea. That is exactly what the corps are doing.

[Neubob]

Originally posted by lasersailor184
WRONG!


Any attempt to take ANYTHING from someone who is unwilling to give it is contradictory to the concept of ownership.

I'll sum it up for most of the people who get lost in that sentence above.



Any involuntary tax is robbery.  It is the definition of robbery:  1.  larceny by threat of violence

And for those unwilling to look it up, Larceny: the wrongful taking and carrying away of the personal goods of another from his or her possession with intent to convert them to the taker's own use.

The day taxes become voluntary is the day that governments cease to be immoral institutions.

300 million people cannot live in close proximity and work together without some sort of centralized organization. No, it does not need to be the kind we have today, but, until we evolve past some extremely deeply-rooted shortcomings, we will require something to keep us from tearing each other apart from side-effects of greed, envy, laziness, hatred and any number of other malignant motivators of the human heart.

Until this evolution changes things, drastically, we will need to maintain a governing body of some sort. The benefits of such organization come with a price. This price is commonly referred to as taxes. They are not wrongful. They may be annoying and a point of contention between groups of citizens, but they are not wrongful. Your choice of a government is voluntary. Your obligation to pay for the benefits it brings is not.

My point was that we all owe equal percentages for the benefits of an organized society. We each pay our fair share, in proportion to how much this underlying organziation has benefited us, so that we may keep and enjoy the rest. In short, there is a price to keep the things you own. An administrative fee that, ideally, gaurantees your ownership and buys you a peace of mind for the future. You have more, you pay in direct proportion to that amount, for the same peace of mind as everyone else. As it stands now, and as some people would have it, certain groups should pay their fair share and some others' share as well. At that point it becomes out-of-proportion. Some people have accounted for more than their burden of keeping their volume of stuff, while others have not accounted even for their share. I would have to agree that that is wrong.

Until you prove the inherent wrongfulness of maintaining any governing body, however, I'd omit terms such as 'robbery', and 'larceny'. As nice as it is to make such references, a serious person would not be swayed given such an emotionally-charged yet substance-less context.

Otherwise I completely agree with you.

PS:   As much the use of caps and exclamtion points could strengthen the tone of a well thought-out response, it could make you look just as silly when all you're doing is venting. In short, before raising your voice, make sure you're actually saying something worth saying. We are all guilty of this at one time or another, but, as somebody who aspires to the status of 'above average' in intellect and wisdom, you should work harder than others--in direct proportion to the intended margin of superiority, of course.

[storch]

well said neubob.

[Silat]

Originally posted by ByeBye
Are you aware of the amount of money Bill Gates has given to chartity?

Of course I am. Has nothing to do with this discussion.

[john9001]

Are you aware of the amount of money Bill Gates charges for his software?

[MrBill]

Tax debates are like two three year old's in a 500 square mile sandbox both crying over having the less sand.

How many of you realize that the federal government spends appx 5 million USD a minute?

Now add up your expected federal income tax bill for your entire lifetime and see how many minutes you could keep the fed afloat. Just a fer instance, if you pay federal income tax for 65 years you need to pay 76.9 thousand in income tax each and every one of that 65 years to run the fed for one minute

The personal federal income tax could be eliminated for everyone earning less than 100K a year with virtually no ill effect on the government, one bridge to nowhere in Alaska, more or less.

But the party of your choice would lose their lies ... uhhh talking point about how electing them is going to cut your taxes ... as if it made any difference to them in the least.

[Rolex]

Hi neubob,

I hope you didn't interpret my post into something it was not. I made no value judgement about those inheriting wealth or those who strike it rich with the benefit of some luck. The classiest of rich people will attribute timing and circumstances as significant contributing factors to their success. I also don't consider everyone in the top 1% to be the "super rich."

I like money, own a business and am one of the people Rip pointed out has to file and pay double taxes because I earn more than $80K. It is simply unfair and unreasonable. All governments want to confiscate as much as they can and it's easier to get it from the people who have it. I don't understand what posts made you leap to the idea that the tone here was "wealth equals corruption."

Do I have an opinion about the new wealth created from sports and entertainment, IPO underwriting and skyrocketing compensation for non-founding managers of public companies? Yes, I do. I don't think it contributes much back to the economy and society in long-term jobs. Retained earnings of companies that produce something of value do that, be it a product or service. People who build companies do that. The new wealth is coming to people who do not create jobs with their wealth.

Tax reductions for the rich have not spurred private sector jobs beyond normal, historical job creation numbers. Real wages are down. Payroll jobs growth is below historical levels for recessions with non-payroll (less desirable) jobs increasing, but still not bringing the total job creation to anything close to normal, rising economy levels. Jobs are being created fastest using government (tax/our) money, not from the private sector. It's increasing the number of workers beholding to the government.

Do I want my taxes to increase? Of course not. I don't know anyone without an agenda who would not support a fair, flat income tax and tax relief for companies that create jobs. Everyone could get tax relief that way. Attorneys created this tax mess as a convoluted, self-perpetuating money tree for tax attorneys. We don't need more tax accountants and tax attorneys. We need a simple, fair system that moots their existence and redirects the money in their industry toward jobs that provide a service or product (real jobs).

My value judgment is this: I don't have much respect for those who create their wealth from trickery, political influence and lobbying, manipulation near the boundaries of legality or seekers of regulatory loopholes and omissions. I don't see any value in it. Every person who produces something, provides a service of value or creates their own business doing the same gets my respect.

I don't think everyone is corrupt, but SEC regulations, labor unions, minimum wages, worker protection laws and anti-trust laws came about because some of those old tycoons with wealth and control were corrupt.

[lasersailor184]

Until this evolution changes things, drastically, we will need to maintain a governing body of some sort. The benefits of such organization come with a price. This price is commonly referred to as taxes. They are not wrongful. They may be annoying and a point of contention between groups of citizens, but they are not wrongful. Your choice of a government is voluntary. Your obligation to pay for the benefits it brings is not.

Governments and religions have been the cause of every single thing that is wrong with this world.  There is not a single item you can pick out that is wrong that is not caused by governments and religion.  And yet you think we need them?  INCONCEIVABLE!

Let me reiterate this, because it went way over your head.  If someone takes something from you without your choice, it is robbery.   To think that it is right to take what is not yours is Socialism.


YOU ARE A SOCIALIST.

My point was that we all owe equal percentages for the benefits of an organized society. We each pay our fair share, in proportion to how much this underlying organziation has benefited us, so that we may keep and enjoy the rest. In short, there is a price to keep the things you own. An administrative fee that, ideally, gaurantees your ownership and buys you a peace of mind for the future.

You know what that's called?

[SIZE=8]EXTORTION.[/SIZE]

I'm going to throw in a quote here.  Mega bonus points to you if you can identify it without looking it up.  It is the reason why we are most important, not the country or the government.

Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

Have at it.

Until you prove the inherent wrongfulness of maintaining any governing body, however, I'd omit terms such as 'robbery', and 'larceny'. As nice as it is to make such references, a serious person would not be swayed given such an emotionally-charged yet substance-less context.

It's simple to show the wrongfulness of any government.  It's a one question quiz with just a yes or no answer.  If the answer is yes, the government is filled with criminals.  If it is no, you've just discovered utopia.  Don't get too excited at the use of utopia, it is obtainable, easily.  Anyway, here's the quiz.

1.) Does the government take the property of the people when the people don't consent?
A. Yes
B. No


Don't get too excited about the quiz either.  It's a pseudo trick question, but not as in there is no right or wrong answer, or the answer isn't one of those two.  But more of that there has never been a government / country in which a person can choose B.

a serious person

When you say a serious person, you really mean an indoctrinated socialist.  Don't take this as an insult though.  It's very easy to be a socialist and to take other people's money by force.  And every single thought that is drilled in your brain from Pre-school through college is that there's nothing wrong with it.

Otherwise I completely agree with you.

You can make no concessions if you agree with me.  Any concession puts you in contention with me.

PS: As much the use of caps and exclamtion points could strengthen the tone of a well thought-out response, it could make you look just as silly when all you're doing is venting. In short, before raising your voice, make sure you're actually saying something worth saying. We are all guilty of this at one time or another, but, as somebody who aspires to the status of 'above average' in intellect and wisdom, you should work harder than others--in direct proportion to the intended margin of superiority, of course.

I don't aspire to anything but to have my actions speak for how great I am.

[Neubob]

Originally posted by Rolex

My value judgment is this: I don't have much respect for those who create their wealth from trickery, political influence and lobbying, manipulation near the boundaries of legality or seekers of regulatory loopholes and omissions. I don't see any value in it. Every person who produces something, provides a service of value or creates their own business doing the same gets my respect.

I'm with you on this, and maybe in my haste to respond to your usage of the words 'luck' and 'thief' I may have taken one or two steps too many. Lucky people tend to create their own luck, usually by raising the chance of success through preparation and perseverence. That way, when the right opportunity does come around, it becomes known as 'being at the right place at the right time', verses, 'missing the chance of a lifetime'. Sometimes that chance takes years of planning, trying, failing, refining, replanning and trying again. Sometimes, as is the case of your dotcomers, it happens the first time out. I have no issue with either one. Wealth is created and inevitably recycled into the economy whether the fortune took 10 years to make, or 10 months.

As far as thieves go, I'm pretty simplistic on that (for me, proximity to the legal boundary is less important than to some others, so long as that boundary remains uncrossed). A thief belongs in jail. Taxes are irrelevant.

If you're a business owner with a good plan, high hopes and big dreams, I have nothing but support and respect for you. In an effort to keep this post brief and unencumbered with useless sentiments, I will conclude by saying that if and when you do strike it rich, I will still have nothing but support and respect for you.

[Rolex]

Here's another quote to ponder, lasersailor:

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell

[lasersailor184]

"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money." - Margaret Thatcher.

[Neubob]

Originally posted by lasersailor184
Governments and religions have been the cause of every single thing that is wrong with this world.  .

No, human self-awareness took care of that.

I doubt anything you said in your previous post went over anyone's head, Sailor. Your simplistic definitions, black and white categorizations, unyielding certainty in your own rightness, sweeping generalizations, inability or unwillingness to distinguish between what is academically-theoretical and practically feasible, coupled with your laughably condescending tone, size-8 text and liberal usage of unnecessary punctuation leave nothing to argue over--as that is all your argument consists of.

I'd gladly spend the better part of the night posting reponses regarding the necessity of government, the necessity of taxes, the failings of human nature and our need to compensate for such through external control, as well as the inherent logic in assigning burden in direct proportion benefit, but all those things are clearly over your head.

As for your actions making you great. I sure hope you're using another part of your brain on them than you are on your words.

[Rolex]

Your public education was sponsored by other people's tax money. You attend a tax-supported university, lasersailor. A little gratitude to all the of the "other people" who have paid for your education would be nice. If you believe your own principles, you should quit that socialist(ic - Thrawn effect) institution.

You cannot afford a $14.95/mo. subscription to Aces High, yet have the world figured out enough to lecture us on humanity, political philosophy and economics? Oh my...

[lasersailor184]

I'd gladly spend the better part of the night posting reponses regarding the necessity of government, the necessity of taxes, the failings of human nature and our need to compensate for such through external control, as well as the inherent logic in allocating burden according to benefit, but all those things are clearly over your head.

Do it.  I've already won this argument.  But I'd love for you to waste your time.  Hopefully with more research into the topic you'd realize how rediculous some of the things you are saying actually are.

No, human self-awareness took care of that.

Disagree.  Human self-awareness leads to all the great things in mankind.  But if you're taking such a defeatist attitude right from the beginning, it's easy to see how you would think we need governments.  How we are incapable of anything without governments.  Without people telling us what to do.



The revolutionaries of the 1700's would be ashamed of the state of modern america.

Your public education was sponsored by other people's tax money. You attend a tax-supported university, lasersailor. A little gratitude to all the of the "other people" who have paid for your education would be nice. If you believe your own principles, you should quit that socialist(ic - Thrawn effect) institution.

My education was paid for by my parents.  Yet money was still extorted from them to pay for other people's education.  

My university is one of the least supported universities in the US (in the public school sphere), yet still has the highest tuitions.  But I still choose to go there because their engineering program is the best there is to offer.  But free market economics might be a little bit too difficult for you to comprehend.

You cannot afford a $14.95/mo. subscription to Aces High, yet have the world figured out enough to lecture us on humanity, political philosophy and economics?

Yes.  I see the greatness in mankind, and recognize that it will never happen while goverments and religions are in power.  I see that politicians are the cause of all of this, and will be the first ones up against the wall.  And I see the economics behind paying for food, books and schooling over the (amazing) Aces High 2.

[Neubob]

lol, okay sailor.

Just promise everyone here one thing: If, in the course of your work in the legendary engineering program of one of the toughest engineering schools in the nation, they ever teach you to isolate and package your talent for self-delusion, you'll give us all a big heads-up before the IPO comes out.

Until then, keep shouting.

PS:   The founders of this nation established a government.