Why Is Socialism Doing So Darn Well in Deep-Red North Dakota?

page: 9
45
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 04:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Cabin
 


What you don't understand is that "Progressive Taxes", as it is known today was invented by Karl Marx. It was Karl Marx himself who said, and I quote:

"There is only one way to kill capitalism – by taxes, taxes, and more taxes
-- Karl Marx (1818-1883)

www.anvari.org...

Not to mention that you obviously have forgotten that for example in 1961 "progressive taxes" at the top had risen to 90%, it was lowered later, but since the 1980s "progressive taxes" began to rise again. "Progressive taxes" are not only higher the higher your income... They are supposed to add up more and more with each tax that is passed. The purpose of "progressive taxes" is to make people dependable of the state, and to destroy capitalism. It has been doing so slowly since 1913.

edit on 5-4-2013 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 05:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by Cabin
 


What you don't understand is that "Progressive Taxes" were invented by Karl Marx. It was Karl Marx himself who said, and I quote:

"There is only one way to kill capitalism – by taxes, taxes, and more taxes
-- Karl Marx (1818-1883)

www.anvari.org...

Not to mention that you obviously have forgotten that for example in 1961 "progressive taxes" at the top had risen to 90%, it was lowered later, but since the 1980s "progressive taxes" began to rise again. "Progressive taxes" are not only higher the higher your income... They are supposed to add up more and more with each tax that is passed. The purpose of "progressive taxes" is to make people dependable of the state, and to destroy capitalism. It has been doing so slowly since 1913.

edit on 5-4-2013 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)


financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...

A system of taxation in which persons or corporations are assessed at a greater percentage of their income according to the theoretical ability to pay. That is, taxpayers pay more in taxes if they earn more in income. For example, taxpayers may pay 25% of their income in taxes up to a certain amount, and 35% of everything earned over that amount.


Wiki:en.wikipedia.org...



A progressive tax is a tax in which the tax rate increases as the taxable base amount increases.[1][2][3][4][5] "Progressive" describes a distribution effect on income or expenditure, referring to the way the rate progresses from low to high, where the average tax rate is less than the marginal tax rate.[6][7] It can be applied to individual taxes or to a tax system as a whole; a year, multi-year, or lifetime. Progressive taxes attempt to reduce the tax incidence of people with a lower ability-to-pay, as they shift the incidence increasingly to those with a higher ability-to-pay.
The term is frequently applied in reference to personal income taxes, where people with more income pay a higher percentage of that income in tax than do those with less income. It can also apply to adjustment of the tax base by using tax exemptions, tax credits, or selective taxation that creates progressive distribution effects. For example, a sales tax on luxury goods or the exemption of basic necessities may be described as having progressive effects as it increases a tax burden on high end consumption or decreases a tax burden on low end consumption respectively

Progressive taxation has a variety of economic effects.
[edit]Income inequality
Progressive taxation reduces absolute income inequality.[18][19] When income inequality is low, aggregate demand will be relatively high, because more people who want ordinary consumer goods and services will be able to afford them, while the labor force will not be as relatively monopolized by the wealthy.[20][21] For example, in 1950, U.S. federal taxes were 14% of GDP, the top income tax bracket rate was effectively 88%, and jobs grew by 7.7%; in contrast during 2012, federal taxes were 19% of GDP, the top tax bracket rate was 35% (but effectively much less) while jobs only grew 1.4%.
[edit]Psychological effects

In a study published in 2011, which included the use of data from 54 countries, the authors stated, "our results showed that progressive taxation was positively associated with the subjective well-being of nations", later adding, "we found that the association between more-progressive taxation and higher levels of subjective well-being was mediated by citizens’ satisfaction with public goods, such as education and public transportation."[22]



Please learn the definiton of progressive tax... Each new tax is either progressive of flat e.g. The pet tax is flat tax.... New taxes are simply passed in order for the country to survive, US is already in extreme debt, that is why new taxes are made, but that does not mean all of them are progressive, most new taxes are flat taxes. If gas tax bill was passed, it would be flat tax, as everybody pays the same amount of tax per unit of gasoline. Progressive tax system simply means that richer people have higher tax burden, while poor people have lower tax burden. The opposite of a progressive tax is a regressive tax, where the relative tax rate or burden increases as an individual's ability to pay it decreases. In between is a proportional tax, where the tax rate is fixed as the amount subject to taxation increases. Learn basic economics...Every new tax is separate, either flat, progressive or regressive.
edit on 5-4-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)
edit on 5-4-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Cabin
 


You still fail to understand that socialists and Marxists have changed and twisted the meaning of words, including socialism, and the meaning of words like "progress" and "progressive taxes". Even the word "progress" has been changed by Democrats, and leftwingers in general to mean mostly "political progress", or a change to a more leftwing form of government.

Did you know that back in the "Wild West" "progress" was found in REPUBLICAN cities? If people wanted to be in cities were inventors prospered, and where technology was being applied first, they moved to REPUBLICAN cities, where "progress" was found, but not the progress of "political change" as it is known now, but REAL PROGRESS...

Did you know that New York during the time it was built and as it grew at first was a REPUBLICAN city?...

Did you know that DEMOCRATS were the rich landowners in the south who wanted to keep slavery?...

Did you know that REPUBLICANS were the ones who abolished slavery, and many REPUBLICAN cities were the first, and only ones to abolish slavery, even before Lincoln decided to do abolish slavery completely?...

Did you know that the REPUBLICAN PARTY was known as the party of the people, until leftwingers started corrupting it, and changing who each party represented.

The REPUBLICAN party represented the people originally, including the poor, and you will even find it in the Constitution that the founding fathers agreed, even if just on paper, that a REPUBLICAN form of government should be guaranteed to every state in the Union, because it was/is the one form of government that guarantees individual rights to EACH AND EVERY PERSON.


U.S. Constitution - Article 4 Section 4



Article 4 - The States
Section 4 - Republican Government

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

www.usconstitution.net...

Yet these facts, and many more, have been changed, and most Americans have even forgotten their true history because of the leftwinger elites who have been slowly brainwashing Americans, and slowly implementing leftwinger/socialist programs...

These days Democrats, and leftwingers in general CLAIM that "no one knows what the founding fathers meant by REPUBLICAN form of government"...


Marx changed, and transformed the meaning of the word "progressive taxation", and it's definition can even be found under one of the main principles of communism, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need", that is also the principle of "progressive taxes. His definition of "progressive taxes" is what we know these taxes for. The goal of these taxes are to destroy capitalism completely and transform former capitalist nations into socialist nations, and their final goal of communism.

edit on 5-4-2013 by ElectricUniverse because: add comments.



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 06:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by Cabin
 


You still fail to understand that socialists and Marxists have changed and twisted the meaning of words, including socialism, and the meaning of words like "progress" and "progressive taxes". Even the word "progress" has been changed by Democrats, and leftwingers in general to mean mostly "political progress", or a change to a more leftwing form of government.

Did you know that back in the "Wild West" "progress" was found in REPUBLICAN cities?
Did you know that New York during the time it was built and as it grew at first was a REPUBLICAN city?...
Did you know that REPUBLICANS were the ones who abolished slavery, and many REPUBLICAN cities were the first, and only ones to abolish slavery?...

Yet these facts, and many more, have been changed, and most Americans have even forgotten their true history because of the leftwinger elites who have been slowly brainwashing Americans, and slowly implementing leftwinger/socialist programs...

Marx changed, and transformed the meaning of the word "progressive taxation", and it's definition can even be found under one of the main principles of communism, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need", that is also the principle of "progressive taxes. The goal of these taxes are to destroy capitalism completely and transform former capitalist nations into socialist, and the final goal of communism.



Historically words and their definition have changed, although we live in our current world and here progressive taxation is a tax system, where tax % rises with the rise of income and that is overally better for the society and reduces the wealth gap more than flat taxes.

We are not talking about historical meanings, but meanings of nowadays. Many symbols historically meant other things, although their meanings have changed. Historically eye symbolised intelligence, moral conscience and truth, nowadays people associate with surveillance.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need", that is also the principle of "progressive taxes - that actually is not that far from progressive tax system definition. Wealth distribution from richer (with abilites) to poorer (with needs). Stronger helping the weaker ones. I see nothing wrong with it. Wealth cap will always exist although progressive tax system reduces it.

Also the objectives of parties have changed historically.
edit on 5-4-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 06:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cabin

Historically words and their definition have changed, although we live in our current world and here progressive taxation is a tax system, where tax % rises with the rise of income and that is overally better for the society and reduces the wealth gap more than flat taxes.
...


You are wrong. What these "progressive taxes" have done is given power to the Federal Reserve, which is owned by international bankers through the IRS, and in general it has become worst for every person.

In this day and age these progressive taxes have made it possible that "private property" is owned exclusively by the Feds, even if after having paid your house in full you don't/can't pay your yearly taxes, the government will repossess your house or land... Even if those taxes are only $100 dollars and you paid for your house $140,000 U.S.D...

The international socialist/fascist bankers who own the Federal Reserve have changed the rules, and implemented "progressive taxes" which have slowly eroded every American's inherent right, including the right to own a house and or land...

In some states in the U.S. they have implemented heavy taxes on inheritance, which btw under communism inheritance is completely abolished, which the leftwingers in powers are trying to accomplish through "progressive taxation", by eroding this right with their taxation of inheritance.

If your father built, or paid for the house that he passed to you, it should be yours and you shouldn't pay one penny to the government, yet the "inheritance tax" is trying to slowly get rid of your right to inherit what your father/family owned. This tax is not only for the rich, and the rich elites are in fact the ones in charge of this so they don't lose their own inheritances, but you will lose yours, and that of every average American...

Is the United States better today because of these "progressive taxes"?... We have more debt than EVER before, and the Feds just keep printing PAPER money which further puts us not only in more debt, but makes sure that when the financial crash comes, and it will come, it will be 100,000 times worse than if they had allowed the "too big to fail" to actually fail as they should have done, and Obama, and leftwingers in general wouldn't have "redistributed" our money to pay the "too big to fail" banks, and their CEOs...

You are claiming "society" is better for "progressive taxes", yet the real world shows a different picture to what you are TRYING to portray...

We are in an economic crisis, unemployment is still very high, and it has gotten to the point that a large percentage of Americans have had to move in with other family members, and are not found in the "unemployment system" because you can only be in unemployment for a short time, and then they take you off it even if yu haven't found a job yet. So there is an "illusion" that unemployment is low, but in truth it is just under-reported.

How can anyone in their right mind claim this is "best for society"?...


edit on 5-4-2013 by ElectricUniverse because: add comments.



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 06:34 AM
link   
You discuss why taxation x is better than y, when the biggest most profitable companies in the USA and elsewhere pay next to NO taxes at all.

That is the real problem.

If worldwide flat taxes for every business or person is better than progressive taxing is a thing we could discuss if everyone would pay taxes.

A bank which is controlled by a democratic system is an institution which should help small and medium sized businesses to expand. Every dollar of profit can then be put into infrastructure and education.

If the political system is corrupt, then the money will bypass the public sector and wander into the pockets of a rich clique, which supports each other over decades untill they manage to bring the next generation to power and office.



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 10:30 AM
link   
"Is the United States better today because of these "progressive taxes"?... We have more debt than EVER before, and the Feds just keep printing PAPER money which further puts us not only in more debt, but makes sure that when the financial crash comes, and it will come, it will be 100,000 times worse than if they had allowed the "too big to fail" to actually fail as they should have done, and Obama, and leftwingers in general wouldn't have "redistributed" our money to pay the "too big to fail" banks, and their CEOs..."

Wow,

you know that President Bush pushed the bail out of banks and comapnies through the Senate? Obama had to deal with those additional 700bil in dept.
It's not a problem of democrats and republicans it's a systematic probelm, where the power of politicians is corrupted, because big money paid for their election. The customer is always right, even if he bought a congressman or senator.



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by pjfry

Wow,

you know that President Bush pushed the bail out of banks and comapnies through the Senate? Obama had to deal with those additional 700bil in dept.
It's not a problem of democrats and republicans it's a systematic probelm, where the power of politicians is corrupted, because big money paid for their election. The customer is always right, even if he bought a congressman or senator.


Yes he did, and he was wrong for doing that. Bush did a lot of things that imo were wrong, and I stated in previous posts in this thread that there have been many Republicans in power that have gone against what it means to be Republican and have backed UnConstitutional laws/bills.

You see, if the root of the problem is not taken care of, this same problem will happen again, and again, and again... The problem has been caused by the leftwinger/progressive programs and laws which allowed for the corruption of the entire political and economic system in the Republic of the United States.

Any RINO in power who backs any UnConstitutional law and programs is as bad as the "progressives" who caused the problem to start with.



edit on 5-4-2013 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by pjfry
You discuss why taxation x is better than y, when the biggest most profitable companies in the USA and elsewhere pay next to NO taxes at all.

That is the real problem.
...


Wow... You are so wrong it is not even funny... The United States happens to have the HIGHEST CORPORATE TAX RATE IN THE WORLD... Before March 2012 the United States had the second highest corporate tax rate in the world after Japan...

This is part of the reason why so many companies have been moving out of the United States to avoid such taxes... It is a great part of the reason why many Americans have lost their jobs, and many forms of infrastructure/manufacturing have closed the doors in the United States and moved to other countries...

BTW, what are the main nations that these giant corporations have moved to for the most part? Socialist countries like India, and communist countries like China...



edit on 5-4-2013 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 





I did no such thing, you are the one trying to twist what I have been writing simply because YOU have no real argument at all.

First of all, the nations I was saying are not socialist are WESTERN NATIONS some of you CLAIM are socialist... And yes they are TURNING socialist...


Yes you did!!!! READ YOUR OWN posts.

Look at your second, Oops, you did it again!

They are not socialist, but they are turning socialist, but you claimed earlier "a nation can only be socialist if there is no such thing as private property."

The earlier poster you were responding to when you made all these conflicting statements wasn't claiming that these European Nations were socialist, they pointed out that these nations had a mix of socialism. What the heck does turning socialist mean if not a mix of socialism?


Leftwingers such as yourself LOVE, just LOVE to twist what is being said, and proclaim everything that is good in the world "is socialist"...

If you are not smart enough to keep up with the argument then you probably shouldn't participate at all in the discussion...


Where have I ever said that "everything that is good in the world "is socialist"... ?"

I see socialism as just another version of the free market concept, just another propaganda scam.

Until you get smart enough to keep track of what propaganda nonsense you are throwing up on the boards, you shouldn't participate at all in the discussion.

Well, the court does need a clown, so nevermind.



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 10:30 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


WOW, such delusional propaganda.

FACT - as taxes have become less progressive and corporate de-regulation has been pushed forward, the US has gone deeply into debt, spending by repub controlled admins accelerated, government got bigger, and the bankers got more corrupt.

The policies you support have created all the problems.

Look at how things were done in the sixties compared to the Reagan 80ties, and the GW era after the free market dreamers put their policies into place.

Corporate scams took down the US economy.

The bailout was pushed by repubs in congress, and the democrats went along because aassive failure meant that the boomers retirement funds would have disappeared.

At least Obama put conditions on the loans that stopped corporate exec bonuses, which your corporate slugs/repubs opposed.

After what repubs have done to this country, how could anyone support them. Clinton turned things around, and his policies brought prosperity to the US and right wing wackos hated him as much as they hate Obama.

At what point do you wake up and realize how badly repub policies have been for this country?



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 12:15 AM
link   
Socialism has always end up the same Everyone is equal, poor, and dependent on government for control. Government insiders become billionaires monopolize the economy and live in palaces. Pretty freaking simple. Only the crony government would want u to believe socialism is a good thing because it would make them rich not the people.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Cabin
 


Wrong taxes are passed to eliminate competition for the insiders that run government. U tax your competition to put them out of business while u are exempt and end up monopolizing the economy. This is why insiders like the IMF and World bank pays ZERO taxes while everyone else suffers.



posted on Apr, 6 2013 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by amfirst1
 


Socialism is a boogeyman to scare little children into turning control of the country over to the banker who would be the new kings.

I prefer democracy over imperialism any day, and it is democracy the the people preaching socialism hate. This is why they create boogeyman like socialism.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 03:21 AM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


WRONG... I presented the facts, you MADE up your own facts. But like always since you can't present proof all you can do is offer insult, which like always fails miserably since it is obvious you love to twist what people you disagree with say to further your own agenda and propaganda.

It was BILL CLINTON a PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT who repealed the Glass-Steagall law, and it was done to claim that regulations are needed. You, like many others have accepted this lie, and once again fallen for it yet again...

Most major wars the United States has been in was started by DEMOCRATS. Even Clinton started the war on Iraq, code named Operation Desert Fox, by bombing Iraq for 4 days before Bush sent the troops in... Not to mention that Clinton called for a coalition to start a ground war against Iraq. Bush just followed through what Clinton started.

Although Democrats in power are not the only ones following the master plan of the elites, many Republicans in power have been bought, and corrupted by the socialist/fascist system set up by "Progressive Democrats" known as the Federal Reserve...

You are so easily brainwashed and manipulated that I pity you for it.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 03:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b

Socialism is a boogeyman to scare little children into turning control of the country over to the banker who would be the new kings.


Tell that to the 140-170 or so million of people who have been murdered by socialist regimes in the last 100 years...

Tell that to the millions more imprisoned in gulags, concentration camps, and indoctrination camps because they would not bow down to the "socialist utopia"...



Originally posted by poet1b
I prefer democracy over imperialism any day, and it is democracy the the people preaching socialism hate. This is why they create boogeyman like socialism.


Yeah, so did several dictators and other dictator wannabes...

The Republic of the United States is a CONSTITUTIONAL REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC... Not a "democracy"...

Democracies are "mob rule", which lead to the "proletariat dictatorship/revolution"...


Democracy is the road to socialism.

KARL MARX

thinkexist.com...



Democracy is indispensable to socialism.

Vladimir Lenin

www.brainyquote.com...



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 05:14 AM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


Taxes were more progressive in the sixties than they are now, and the US was far better off then than now.

Everyone on the board knows this to be true.

In other words, your posts indicate that you cling to a fantasy, rather than face the realities of this world.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


Do you really think democracy is a bad form of government?

The US is the first democratic style government, and is the democratic form of government that has enabled the US to become so successful.

If you are actually opposed to democratic style government, the US constitution, then what form of government do you think should be put in place



posted on Apr, 8 2013 @ 03:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


Do you really think democracy is a bad form of government?

The US is the first democratic style government, and is the democratic form of government that has enabled the US to become so successful.

If you are actually opposed to democratic style government, the US constitution, then what form of government do you think should be put in place



I wouldn't bother arguing with Electric Universe, this person is caught in extremist views, and also tends to wrap their mistakes up in a bunch of rhetoric instead of face responsibility for what they say. That has happened to me in the past, and in fact, I didn't even see it at the time, no matter how many times someone(s) would point it out to me. This came from actually being afraid of others; not trusting others; being terrified of their influence- the wall of round -about text is a defensive system.

We should maybe start a separate thread about Democracy (or perhaps just do a search?) because are some big misunderstandings out there. America is not a Democracy- at most it could said to be a Representative Democracy. It is a Republic. There are quite a few of those in the world, it is the most common form of government.
In a direct Democracy, the soveriegnty (power) resides in the masses, the majority. Majority Rule.

The founders of the USA were intent on NOT having that happen, but instead the sovereignty being in the individual... they did not want the minority subject to the choices of the majority. The individual having to submit to the will of others.

The first Democracy actually known as being in Athens around 500 BC. Some "unpure" deomcratic systems existed also in Mesopotamia, Sparta. Corsica was one of the first more modern societies to put "purer" democracy into action 1755, and the French Revolution was a big moment of democracy 1848. At that time many european countries broke out in revolutions, to install more democracy in place of systems like monarchy. (kinda like the current arab uprising we have now).

The States sort of lagged behind because of slavery. Right to vote was not accorded to everyone (including women and blacks) until 1965. The right to vote is the most important point when considering Democracy.

There just is NO perfect, ideal, system! They all have their drawbacks and benefits, and they all suffer the problem of entropy with time, especially if they are close to these "pure" or extreme types.



posted on Apr, 8 2013 @ 03:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 


I've always liked Winston Churchill's quote on Democracy.


It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. Sir Winston Churchill British politician (1874 - 1965)


Certainly no socialist, although I'm sure someone in this thread probably thinks he was.





new topics

top topics



 
45
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join