Taxes

all this cock talk will only bring more trolls...
care to simply explain why the capital gains tax is so high?

 

How is it fair?

 

Jo King asked a quite legitimate question, "When you tax someone more than someone else it's not fair for anyone. Just because you lack the ambition to earn more doesn't mean someone who does should pay for you.", exemplifying a primary fallacy with the Marxist based progression of Socialism eventually resulting in a Communist based utopian society where everyone is equal.

Step 1. "From each according to their abilities, to each according to their contribution."

Step 2. "From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs."

A few relevant facts which until recognized and taken into account will result in irrational government and unsustainable debt.

1. Each individual human being is unique differing in many ways from each other.

2. Sustaining ones life requires ones effort. Occupying space in a society is not an income producing occupation.

3. Societies are created by individuals who are productive in ways that make the needs and/or desirable wants of one another available through a trade process agreeable to both producer and consumer.

4. Governments are not created as charitable organizations.

 

If you have more than you need, to be able to adequately supply your family and make a charitable contribution to society, it's damn well your responsibility to act like a responsible member of society and pay back into the community.

If you don't choose to do so, but rather, simply choose to accumulate wealth, for your own selfish gains, then fuck you. I hope and pray that they tax your ass to hell.

Too many rich fucks are fucking the hell out of the system at the expense of the rest of us. Just look at the wall street fucks who are getting sent away for basic greed motivated accumulation of wealth, on the backs of others. Take a look at how technology is being used, these days, to make computer directed transactions, buying and selling in mere moments of time, to assure a profit. This causes all kinds of damage to the sense of "fairness" in the system.

It's as if "what's fair" has turned into "whatever you can get away with".

Fuck all. It's time some of us caught a break, for a change. Fisherman JoKing is just fortunate enough to have a job that pays well. Fuck all that talk about how "difficult" it is. It's just a calculated risk, and not "suicide", after all. I've done hard work myself, probably harder than he has. I didn't have the luxury of having several months off for travel, either. He just wants to hang onto the "lucky stick".

People who have more than they need ought to have learned to share. That's all.

And I'm not saying JoKing doesn't share. I do know some things about his life, and he's not an entirely selfish person. But shit, we're not talking about him only. We're talking about the fat cats who hide in the shadows, freed from scrutiny by a team of attorneys. That includes the fucking U.S. government. Fucking thieves and scoundrels.

"Let them eat cake", my ass.

You keep pushing people into a smaller and smaller corner, you might as well just send them to the camps, isolate them in a ghetto, or promise them a shower and give them the gas.

Oh,,that's right,,it's been done already.

Fuck this. The pressure builds, the dam breaks, and shit's gonna happen.

 

Basically it boils down to a case of 'greed vs envy'.
Anyone who possesses wealth beyond what 'you' feel is adequate is a thief, and therefore guilty of having stolen from anyone who you deem to be poor?

It looks like the Department of Education needs to introduce mandatory anger management classes into the school system before a real class warfare battle begins to emerge based on the irrational rhetoric found on most left leaning forums.

 

What it boils down to, is there are cowards who hide who they are, claiming that they have a right to do what they want, fuck everyone else...

Then there are those who actually have informed opinions, based on the idea of co-operation and community, who are open about who they are and don't hide behind the anonymity of the internet.

The cowards, are claiming they should be able to keep whatever it is that they can take, regardless of whom it hurts.

These are the same people that would horde food in a disaster and laugh at those who had none, even though their food was just stolen from those same people.

The fact that those type of people exist, is why we can't leave it up to each individual to decide to do it on their own.

Funny thing is you just have to look at those who are speaking in order to make a judgement on who is speaking with honor and forthrightness and who is talking out of their ass...

The ass talkers, are hiding who they are.

If you don't have the balls to speak your opinion openly, without hiding who you are, then your opinion means nothing.

 

Those are some strong words Mr. Chronic Tom, assuming that must be your real name/surname.
Those people, the cowards you refer to, could you name just one or two so we might know who they are and discuss their crimes individually?

I find it best to not pass judgment on the person(s) I'm talking with recognizing the fact that often what they are presenting as 'informed opinions' are simply 'misinformed opinions' which can be easily formed by not having all the facts, or sometimes just wrong facts.

 

You are an idiot if you don't know who I am, seems it is said multiple times all over this website, as well as many other places on the net.

Not only that, but if you click on my msn button just to the left of these posts, it gives you my email address, which is my real name... but I guess that may be too complicated for you to figure out.

I stand behind my opinions with who I am.

I think those that try to argue their opinions from a position of anonymity are cowards. As the opinions of cowards mean nothing to me, it makes it quite simple for me to put a value on what those who are attacking me from hiding have to say.

 

24k in a right to work state would be considered a good job.
looking at my taxes i could go for paying only $7800

 

Two things about that... If 24k would be a good job where you are, then it is likely the poverty line where you are is much lower then 24k. That means your claimed wage of 160k would be in a higher position then it currently is.

 

I would like everyone who is against this idea, to explain to everyone exactly what they think should happen to people who, for whatever reason (such as disability as an example) can't work, in their type of society.

My reasoning is quite simple... I wouldn't want someone I cared about to starve to death or die from exposure to the elements... as pretty much everyone is cared about by someone else, I would think that everyone would realized that it should apply to everyone.

Then, I would like those same people to explain what happens in 100 years (or however long it takes to get there), when automation has reached the point that employees aren't needed for 90% of what they are right now...

Should we embark on a plan of slaughter to remove the excess people from society at that time, or just let them starve and lay where they fall?

 

I believe that the problem here is that Tom is discussing money more from a philosophical angle. This is difficult because everyone is born and raised in an environment in which everything revolves around money. Virtually everything is connected to it. It is seen and thought of as not only the means of survival, but the very essence of happiness itself. There is no denying that it is attached to our sense of well-being, our sense of social standing, our sense of accomplishment, our sense of worth; sadly, it's how a lot of us measure ourselves.

Until we create a different reality against which to compare the present reality, we're not bound to understand what has been created for us by others.

Who can say whether a lawyer pursues his position from a place of compassion for those who need defending, or whether a doctor pursues such a practice out of a real desire to make people feel better, or whether all is done in the interest of self?

Animals don't think that if they kill or store twice as much as their neighbor, that they'll be better off. They would be unable to consume the extra, and it would rot. If money ruled their lives, I suppose they might consider getting an operation which would increase the capacity of their stomach to accomodate the extra unneeded meat. But then they'd come down with a bad case of gout (as opposed to a good case of gout? Hmm, I'm going to have to reassess that term) or they'd soon find themselves on the fast track to type 2 diabetes or something like that. Hording is counter-productive to a healthy animal and a healthy environment. Philosophically, it's the same with humans.

 

Sorry if I misrepresented your position, Tom. I should have said that this is actually my own view.

 

no worries... I don't think I agree that I am discussing this from a philisophical point of view, but most of the rest of what you say is right.

 

CT: I don't really care who you are, after all what use would that information be to me?

It appears you were simply denigrating those who disagree with you, when I thought you were complaining about those who possess great amounts of wealth or money.

 

No, actualy, I have been waiting for someone to offer constructive criticism and discuss the idea... those that offered stupidity and attacks have them returned to them.

However, as for the what use would that information be to you?

Well for one, it would give you a concrete example of someone standing up and stating their opinions and ideas without feeling the need to hide behind the anonymity of false names.

Those who feel the need to hide in order to express their opinions, obviously have no faith in those opinions... if they did, they wouldn't have to hide to argue them... now would they?

All these wonderful examples of how cowardly people can be...

"Fuck them, let them die" says the hidden person...

Just to be clear, I don't expect you, or those like you, to understand this concept at all... if you did, you would then have to slap the shit out of yourself for being such a coward.

 

CT:
If you lack the sensibility to understand 'why' the more intelligent persons don't post their real names or other personal information on the Internet or other places for public access then I only hope for your sake it doesn't bite you on the ass some day. If we were to meet face to face I would have no problem identifying myself and expressing the same words as I have here.

The problem I see is not 'who' you are, but simply 'what' you believe.

 

See, you misunderstand... I quite clearly understand why some people don't post thier real info online... there are many valid reasons for doing so. There is nothing wrong with choosing to be anonymous on the net.

Unless of course, you use that anonymity to attack people... THAT makes you a coward.

 

CT:

Are you trying to claim that I have been attacking you?

 

No, I am pointing out the difference between 'being anonymous' and being 'anonymous and attacking someone'.