Strange times: Republicans block tax credits -- as a protest

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 16 2014 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Cuervo

I am not blaming people born in poverty but I do blame the dummies that do not plan for their future.

Is it fair that a child is born to parents who can't even take care of themselves?




posted on May, 16 2014 @ 12:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Euphem
a reply to: Cuervo

Why is a minimum wage employee living in the same building as the CEO?


Because the CEO wants to slum it up? I don't know, ask him. I used $1,000/month rent as an example because, in many places, it's about as cheap as you can get.



originally posted by: Euphem
If they can't afford rent that high move to a different building, or get a roommate. This is common sense stuff.


Look, I'm not going to keep making excuses for people. If you can't see why it's evil to ask a starving, barely-housed family for more money, there's nothing I can say to convince you.

My whole point was 10% of a poor person's income is FAR more devastating than 10% of a rich person's.

The RNC voting down this bill is further evidence that views like yours are fed to people in order to support that very same hypocrisy of "Less taxes! Less taxes! Unless their poor!"
edit on 16-5-2014 by Cuervo because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: Cuervo

I am not blaming people born in poverty but I do blame the dummies that do not plan for their future.

Is it fair that a child is born to parents who can't even take care of themselves?



I don't know where you are from but I'm getting the impression that your exposure to poverty is from a vantage point that taints your perspective. Not only is your black-and-white view of poverty inaccurate but it's insulting to just about any poor bastard out there who never had anything handed to him whilst listening to people tell them to pull themselves up by their proverbial (and quite non-existent) bootstraps.

A person born into poverty who doesn't plan ahead dies of malnutrition and exposure. A person born into wealth who doesn't plan ahead might have to get a job someday and retire with a less expensive house and perhaps have to downsize to one car.

To think that "planning ahead" is the largest determining factor of personal wealth in America is just plain silly.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 12:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Cuervo

Did you read the part where I said I am NOT blaming people born into poverty but the ones that are living in poverty and bringing more problems onto themselves and their children's.

You are right on that you know nothing of my life, my parents were smart enough not to chew more then they can swallow.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 12:42 PM
link   
It does sound good that these tax credits have been stopped.

In England tax credits have destroyed the economy. Very few people can earn as much as the hand-outs, so it is stifling careers and destroying businesses.

A brief look at the bill did make it sound pretty evil. Preferential treatment for killers, so they have an advantage over peaceful job-seekers. Yet another hand-out for dead-beat "homeowners" who have already been coining it in from ZIRP and mortgage forbearance. Who thinks up this idiocy?

Great that the Republicans are standing up for democracy too!



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 12:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan
The only fair tax .... a flat tax. Everyone pays the same percentage. No tax credits. No loopholes. No off shore accounts. No 'get out of paying taxes' for ANYONE, be they rich or poor. Flat tax for all. IMHO.


A flat tax is far from fair.

A flat tax would have to cater towards the middle income earners...it would be set by whatever the politicians think is the most they could afford. That directly benefits the rich because they will get lower taxes...it would suck for the poor because they get higher taxes.

A fair tax is not the same as a flat tax...a flat tax system is anything but fair.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 01:19 PM
link   
I think this no vote was more about sticking it to Obama but its the citizens that suffer. Statue quo for republicans. Yet another bad press day for republicans in a election year.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 01:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: LDragonFire
I think this no vote was more about sticking it to Obama but its the citizens that suffer. Statue quo for republicans. Yet another bad press day for republicans in a election year.


But the citizens who chose not to kill other people will benefit through greater access to jobs. Citizens who rent (generally poorer) will benefit through not having to give a triple-handout to their wealthier home-owning neighbors. Surely these two things are good.

Also, if you like democracy ( I'm not a big fan myself) then you will approve of the Republicans insisting on things being properly debated and amended before passing.

I'm not a Republican, but regardless of partisan politics, a stupid bill has been stopped. Surely that's a good thing?



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 01:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Cuervo

When did I say what my views were? I was only replying to your comment about the CEO, and the minimum wage worker living in the same building. I believe everyone should pay taxes, and the wealthy should have to pay more.

With that being said I don't believe in handouts. This entitled culture we have these days with the $15/hr minimum wage fast food strikes is beyond ridiculous. That entitled view that many have is very dangerous and will lead to our great nations destruction.



posted on May, 17 2014 @ 12:45 AM
link   
ok how about this
no flat tax and no progressive taxation

your taxes should instead be determined by your use of infrastructure
if you own a business (or are a sharehoder in a business) that is sending tens or hundreds of large trucks a day you will be taxed tens or hundreds of times higher than someone who causes very little wear and benefits much less from that infrastructure

sounds fair right? everybody would pay based on how much they actually use
if you rely on the infrastructure a lot and are putting a lot of stress on it why should you pay the same as someone as someone who profits very little from it?

who has more to lose if the infrastructure is not there? the millionaire/billionaire or the poor schmuck barely scraping by who would probably be better off just living off the land
(if such a thing were still an option ....... not like you can just go chop your own trees and build your own home on some random piece of free land)
edit on 17-5-2014 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2014 @ 05:52 AM
link   
Less taxes is the solution. All u have to do is shrink the government to offset it. It's simple math. U want to leave the money w the people or else the politician would spend it on themselves. It's funny that people want more taxes it not like u will get any part of it.





top topics
 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join