It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Liberals, You just don't get it!

page: 4
10
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 21 2018 @ 05:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: 10uoutlaw
a reply to: TinySickTears

it might work some . less money spent on court cases and prisons . Healthcare is very expensive though , might have to have millions buying a lot of smoke


millions would buy
plus the money saved not housing people in prison
plus the money saved not having cops babysit people in the side of the road while they wait for other cops and the dogs


may not foot 100% of the bill but it would go a long way

its not just the drug side of it either
there would be textiles and fibers and other products tat would carry a tax as well




I love you brother, but as of late you seem to be a fairly prolific poster, so I ask this with all humility, but punctuation and stuff is important.

A period (or full-stop if you come from the British Isles), or a comma, or (*gasp*) capitalization, would go a long way towards someone actually reading and understanding whatever words that you decide to spew. (Bring forth, for those of you who actually speak the English language)

Come on man, take pride in EVERYTHING you do!




posted on Sep, 21 2018 @ 05:32 AM
link   
a reply to: MteWamp

Not that important.
I'm not writing a thesis

I think people understand me just fine. I'm not getting graded here. Don't trip either. My phone capped those automatically



posted on Sep, 21 2018 @ 05:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: MteWamp

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MteWamp

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: MteWamp

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: MteWamp

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: Ahabstar
Taxes?

What liberals really don’t get is that Americans don’t want to be ruled over in a feudalistic society. But maybe some of them do and realize all those scary guns would really be used to correct that situation if it occurred rather quickly and decisively.

See businesses if you're looking for the feudal lords.


Jesus Christ.

It's brain damage. Has to be.
Nobody just chooses to become stupid of their own free will.

If you want to change things, quit working for "feudal lords" and start YOUR OWN business.

See that's what these "Feudal Lords" did, and it worked out great for them.

Economics is NOT A ZERO-SUM game.

POOR PEOPLE AREN'T POOR BECAUSE SOMEONE ELSE IS RICH!

Kinda need money to do that.

Meanwhile...



That's a crock of bullsnip.

There have been hundreds of thousands of people who started from NOTHING.

N-O-T-H-I-N-G.

Read the word again. N-O-T-H-I-N-G.

Yeah, I know, it just can't be YOUR fault that your life sucks, can it?

It's the RICH people. Yeah, That's it!

Take some personal responsibility, Princess, instead of bitching and moaning. How's that worked for you so far?

Sorry, Booboo, but this has already been covered. If you don't understand it by now, you may already be screwed.


It's gotten a lot harder to do that these days.

My life is pretty great, actually.

The only one bitching and moaning is yourself - just look at all the schoolyard insults you're throwing out when confronted with reality.



What schoolyard insults? How DARE you, sir. (or Ma'am, or 'it'',I don't judge, whatever you choose to call yourself)

How DARE you?


Correct - the schoolyard insults come from you.

Well I say schoolyard insults but if the best you can come up with is calling people you disagree with brain damaged I think you would get owned in any schoolyard.


I calls 'em like I sees 'em.

I'm a professional.

I know brain damage when I see it.

To quote Navarro, you need to chill, dear sir.

Let's talk about your home life. Is everything REALLY ok? Is that just a facade? Is the Mrs, (or Mr., I don't judge) causing you distress?

Why do I ask? I ask because I love. *sniff*

Look, you know how, like, football stars, and I don't mean the ones that lie to themselves, over and over, and try to convince themselves that "soccer", or "European Football, or Futbol, I don't judge" is a real sport, because, you are believing a LIE.

The TRUE essence of "Football" is elusive. It only happens once a year. In the former Confederate States of America, it's a solemn meeting of Great Men. We call it the "Iron Bowl". Look it up on Google, it's kind of a "thing".

Roll Tide.

You know, I must apologize, I actually forgot that you were there. How may I be of service on this fine and glorious morning?

Very nice to meet you, though.


Based on your own personal experience of brain damage?

Iron bowl just looks like a sissy version of Rugby.

Rest of your post too boring and off topic to reply to.



posted on Sep, 21 2018 @ 07:57 AM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

Rest of the world’s Socialized Medicine works because of a very different mindset at play with the people. Paying upwards of 65% of your earnings (and keeping around 35%) is a better deal than 90-10 as the serfs they were beforehand. Still serfs because the system is absolutely dependent upon everyone working with very low unemployment. Else buzz words like austerity appear.

But history has shown time and time again that when you have too many peasants and the lords cannot feed them, then wars must happen to thin the herd a bit and gain some resources as booty. What should really be disturbing is that America doesn’t really go to war for gains such much as it seems to war just for fun. Maybe slight population control. But usually under the guise of putting uppity countries in their place for the most part.

All that freedom and wealth leading to idle sport. Yet people like poking that bear and try to put it in a flimsy cage. Flimsy because socialism only works until the money runs out and/or people get tired of sacrificing for others.



posted on Sep, 21 2018 @ 10:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MRinder
Liberals, you just don't get it when it comes to taxes, money, and the the rich. You think taxing the rich is going pay for healthcare, college, and God knows what else. What you need to understand is that taxes are income tax, not wealth tax.

You could tax the income of the three richest men in the United States at 100pct and you would get a little over $175,000 plus 15pct of whatever stock they sold. So if they each sold 100 million in stock a year you would get another $45 million. But they could control that by selling less stock.

To clarify, Jeff Bezos gets paid $80,000/year by Amazon. Warren Buffet - $100,000 from Berkshire Hathaway.

My point is that all of that would be peanuts. So that means the cost of "free" healthcare and college would have to flow down to the middle class. So now instead you and your neighbors would be taxed for like 99 pct of that cost. Do you want your tax rate to soar?



You think that there are only three rich people to tax and after that it's middle class?

Or that Bezos only taxable income is his salary? How exactly do you think he funds his lifestyle?

You might want consider that large parts of the world already manage to have free or heavily subsidised health care and further education. Amazingly they also have rich people and a middle class.



Again, people not understanding the difference between income and wealth. Income is what you earn in a year. Wealth is all the money you have stashed away minus any liabilities. One can be a multi-millonaire with very little income just as someone can be broke making millions per year in income.

A pensioner making $50k/yr with a paid off house in Silicon Valley might be worth $2 or $3 million. A professional athlete making $5 million/yr may be broke paying for 5 baby mamas.

People like Bezos and other multi-billionaires are wealthy because of the equity they own in companies. Bezos isn't sitting on $100 billion in cash. His shares of Amazon are worth that much at current share prices, but until he actually sells shares, it is just paper wealth. He is not paying himself that much.

His lifestyle is funded from the the money he has stashed away from selling shares of Amazon and then interest/dividends from investments. Those earnings are taxed at the capital gains rate at the time of sale. For example, he may have sold $100 million worth of shares and actually has that sitting in cash. It got taxed at say 15% capital gains rate when he sold.

Now all he is doing is just living off that $100 million. If he get's 10% return on that money, that is $10 million/yr just waking up every morning. No tax policy is going to affect that $100 million now. One can live a very luxurious life on a one time large windfall without technically having any "income" as viewed by tax policy. This is what you idiot progressives don't understand.

Liberal tax policy hurts working people, namely the upper middle class and professionals. To be in the top 1% income wise in the US, you only need to make about $400k/yr. People making $400-$500k/yr have more in common with people making $100k or less than they do with people making millions and billionaires. These folks are not popping bottles on yachts with Diddy. I'm in that group. We live in the suburbs. Drive minivans.



posted on Sep, 21 2018 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

Personally I would consider the idiots to be people who can't have a discussion about tax policy without resorting to personal insults...

I understand the difference between income and wealth perfectly well. Dividends and interest on cash holdings are also income as well and can be taxed so not sure the point of your example?

It's perfectly possible to set tax policy to pay for greater social provision or reduce inequality. There are large parts of the developed world that do just that. The ones arguing against actual reality are those saying it's not possible.



posted on Sep, 21 2018 @ 11:39 AM
link   
It’s always amusing when a chicken comes out publicly for colonel sanders. a reply to: MRinder



posted on Sep, 21 2018 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Why is anyone complaining about taxes for free health care when all you have to do is look North?

Link


Critics of Canada's single-payer health-care system call it a "cautionary tale," one that's "failing." It's universal and affordable, sure, but the quality isn't high. And the waits for procedures can be unnecessarily long: As Forbes points out, "In 2013, the average wait time for an MRI was over two months, while Canadians needing a CT scan waited for almost a month."

Overall, though, Canadians enjoy the kind of perks Americans only get if they work for the most generous, prestigious corporations. Those include free health care without deductibles as well as up to 18 months of subsidized parental leave when they have children.

They also enjoy access to high-quality education for children across the income spectrum. Even top-notch colleges and universities are cheaper than comparable institutions in the U.S.

Vice cites a 2009 Canadian study by the Centre for Policy Alternatives that found that "the vast majority of Canada's population" gets a great deal: "Middle-income Canadian families enjoy public services worth about $41,000 — or 63 percent of their income. Even households earning $80,000–$90,000 a year enjoy public services benefits equivalent to about half of their income."

In short, the study concludes, "the majority of Canadian households enjoy a higher quality of life because of the public services their taxes fund."

Americans enjoy a strong national defense. As of April 2017, the U.S. spent $611 billion on defense, which, as the Peterson Foundation points out, is "more than China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, United Kingdom, India, France and Japan combined." Additionally, "the United States has historically devoted a larger share of its economy to defense than many of its key allies."
The military accounts for about half of all discretionary spending in America.


From above link.

One could argue that spending all that money on "defense" (which we all know is in actuality, offense), would be better suited to make America great again by investing in their people and creating jobs.



posted on Sep, 21 2018 @ 03:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Edumakated

Personally I would consider the idiots to be people who can't have a discussion about tax policy without resorting to personal insults...

I understand the difference between income and wealth perfectly well. Dividends and interest on cash holdings are also income as well and can be taxed so not sure the point of your example?

It's perfectly possible to set tax policy to pay for greater social provision or reduce inequality. There are large parts of the developed world that do just that. The ones arguing against actual reality are those saying it's not possible.


Nobody is saying you can't raise taxes on the wealthy. We are just saying you can't raise an additional $2 to 4 TRILLION dollars per year without massively increasing taxes on the middle class.



posted on Sep, 21 2018 @ 03:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: superman2012
Why is anyone complaining about taxes for free health care when all you have to do is look North?

Link


Critics of Canada's single-payer health-care system call it a "cautionary tale," one that's "failing." It's universal and affordable, sure, but the quality isn't high. And the waits for procedures can be unnecessarily long: As Forbes points out, "In 2013, the average wait time for an MRI was over two months, while Canadians needing a CT scan waited for almost a month."

Overall, though, Canadians enjoy the kind of perks Americans only get if they work for the most generous, prestigious corporations. Those include free health care without deductibles as well as up to 18 months of subsidized parental leave when they have children.

They also enjoy access to high-quality education for children across the income spectrum. Even top-notch colleges and universities are cheaper than comparable institutions in the U.S.

Vice cites a 2009 Canadian study by the Centre for Policy Alternatives that found that "the vast majority of Canada's population" gets a great deal: "Middle-income Canadian families enjoy public services worth about $41,000 — or 63 percent of their income. Even households earning $80,000–$90,000 a year enjoy public services benefits equivalent to about half of their income."

In short, the study concludes, "the majority of Canadian households enjoy a higher quality of life because of the public services their taxes fund."

Americans enjoy a strong national defense. As of April 2017, the U.S. spent $611 billion on defense, which, as the Peterson Foundation points out, is "more than China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, United Kingdom, India, France and Japan combined." Additionally, "the United States has historically devoted a larger share of its economy to defense than many of its key allies."
The military accounts for about half of all discretionary spending in America.


From above link.

One could argue that spending all that money on "defense" (which we all know is in actuality, offense), would be better suited to make America great again by investing in their people and creating jobs.


What do you think the defense budget should be?



posted on Sep, 21 2018 @ 03:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: MRinder

originally posted by: superman2012
Why is anyone complaining about taxes for free health care when all you have to do is look North?

Link


Critics of Canada's single-payer health-care system call it a "cautionary tale," one that's "failing." It's universal and affordable, sure, but the quality isn't high. And the waits for procedures can be unnecessarily long: As Forbes points out, "In 2013, the average wait time for an MRI was over two months, while Canadians needing a CT scan waited for almost a month."

Overall, though, Canadians enjoy the kind of perks Americans only get if they work for the most generous, prestigious corporations. Those include free health care without deductibles as well as up to 18 months of subsidized parental leave when they have children.

They also enjoy access to high-quality education for children across the income spectrum. Even top-notch colleges and universities are cheaper than comparable institutions in the U.S.

Vice cites a 2009 Canadian study by the Centre for Policy Alternatives that found that "the vast majority of Canada's population" gets a great deal: "Middle-income Canadian families enjoy public services worth about $41,000 — or 63 percent of their income. Even households earning $80,000–$90,000 a year enjoy public services benefits equivalent to about half of their income."

In short, the study concludes, "the majority of Canadian households enjoy a higher quality of life because of the public services their taxes fund."

Americans enjoy a strong national defense. As of April 2017, the U.S. spent $611 billion on defense, which, as the Peterson Foundation points out, is "more than China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, United Kingdom, India, France and Japan combined." Additionally, "the United States has historically devoted a larger share of its economy to defense than many of its key allies."
The military accounts for about half of all discretionary spending in America.


From above link.

One could argue that spending all that money on "defense" (which we all know is in actuality, offense), would be better suited to make America great again by investing in their people and creating jobs.


What do you think the defense budget should be?


Anything more in line with the rest of the world would be a start.



posted on Sep, 21 2018 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: superman2012

originally posted by: MRinder

originally posted by: superman2012
Why is anyone complaining about taxes for free health care when all you have to do is look North?

Link


Critics of Canada's single-payer health-care system call it a "cautionary tale," one that's "failing." It's universal and affordable, sure, but the quality isn't high. And the waits for procedures can be unnecessarily long: As Forbes points out, "In 2013, the average wait time for an MRI was over two months, while Canadians needing a CT scan waited for almost a month."

Overall, though, Canadians enjoy the kind of perks Americans only get if they work for the most generous, prestigious corporations. Those include free health care without deductibles as well as up to 18 months of subsidized parental leave when they have children.

They also enjoy access to high-quality education for children across the income spectrum. Even top-notch colleges and universities are cheaper than comparable institutions in the U.S.

Vice cites a 2009 Canadian study by the Centre for Policy Alternatives that found that "the vast majority of Canada's population" gets a great deal: "Middle-income Canadian families enjoy public services worth about $41,000 — or 63 percent of their income. Even households earning $80,000–$90,000 a year enjoy public services benefits equivalent to about half of their income."

In short, the study concludes, "the majority of Canadian households enjoy a higher quality of life because of the public services their taxes fund."

Americans enjoy a strong national defense. As of April 2017, the U.S. spent $611 billion on defense, which, as the Peterson Foundation points out, is "more than China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, United Kingdom, India, France and Japan combined." Additionally, "the United States has historically devoted a larger share of its economy to defense than many of its key allies."
The military accounts for about half of all discretionary spending in America.


From above link.

One could argue that spending all that money on "defense" (which we all know is in actuality, offense), would be better suited to make America great again by investing in their people and creating jobs.


What do you think the defense budget should be?


Anything more in line with the rest of the world would be a start.


So would you be satisfied if it were cut in half or is that too much or not enough of a cut?



posted on Sep, 21 2018 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: MRinder

If they cut it in half or 5/8's or whatever number you want to throw out there, it wouldn't matter if they didn't invest that money in their peoples health and welfare.



posted on Sep, 21 2018 @ 03:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: MRinder

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Edumakated

Personally I would consider the idiots to be people who can't have a discussion about tax policy without resorting to personal insults...

I understand the difference between income and wealth perfectly well. Dividends and interest on cash holdings are also income as well and can be taxed so not sure the point of your example?

It's perfectly possible to set tax policy to pay for greater social provision or reduce inequality. There are large parts of the developed world that do just that. The ones arguing against actual reality are those saying it's not possible.


Nobody is saying you can't raise taxes on the wealthy. We are just saying you can't raise an additional $2 to 4 TRILLION dollars per year without massively increasing taxes on the middle class.


How much does the US currently pay just for health care? How much of that is paid by the middle class?



posted on Sep, 21 2018 @ 07:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MRinder

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Edumakated

Personally I would consider the idiots to be people who can't have a discussion about tax policy without resorting to personal insults...

I understand the difference between income and wealth perfectly well. Dividends and interest on cash holdings are also income as well and can be taxed so not sure the point of your example?

It's perfectly possible to set tax policy to pay for greater social provision or reduce inequality. There are large parts of the developed world that do just that. The ones arguing against actual reality are those saying it's not possible.


Nobody is saying you can't raise taxes on the wealthy. We are just saying you can't raise an additional $2 to 4 TRILLION dollars per year without massively increasing taxes on the middle class.


How much does the US currently pay just for health care? How much of that is paid by the middle class?


You should probably DuckDuckGo that.



posted on Sep, 21 2018 @ 10:05 PM
link   
a reply to: TinySickTears

My guess is it will happen within 2 or 3 election cycles. Hope they don't blow all the money on themselves .



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 02:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: MRinder

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MRinder

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Edumakated

Personally I would consider the idiots to be people who can't have a discussion about tax policy without resorting to personal insults...

I understand the difference between income and wealth perfectly well. Dividends and interest on cash holdings are also income as well and can be taxed so not sure the point of your example?

It's perfectly possible to set tax policy to pay for greater social provision or reduce inequality. There are large parts of the developed world that do just that. The ones arguing against actual reality are those saying it's not possible.


Nobody is saying you can't raise taxes on the wealthy. We are just saying you can't raise an additional $2 to 4 TRILLION dollars per year without massively increasing taxes on the middle class.


How much does the US currently pay just for health care? How much of that is paid by the middle class?


You should probably DuckDuckGo that.


What a great idea.

Seems average family pays about 10k a year for cover. That sounds a lot but at least it means you are fully covered... wait seems you also pay before your cover locks in. Another 8k a year on average. If little Jimmy falls out a tree it's getting expensive.

Still with lower taxes you guys must have loads of savings to cover these kind of things. Only again the search engine thingy suggests an average of just 4k with over half having less than 1k.

Still private systems are way more efficient aren't they? So you must pay at lot less than other countries. Only thing is it looks like you pay almost twice per capita what other developed countries do.

Maybe, just maybe, paying for some things with taxation isn't always such a bad deal.



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 09:04 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

Sshhhh. You're starting to make sense. People that hate Liberals don't like that.



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Kharron

Say it with me: income tax only taxes income. Rich people don't have "income." They have investment vehicles to grow their wealth. Income is for the pleebs.



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 09:16 AM
link   
I agree that we need to tax wealth instead of income.







 
10
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join