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.
Originally posted by doobydoll No I don't work, and I don't claim any government assistance either because I have an income.
So, you have no income, yet have access to the internet?? Now that is an interesting situation.
Oh boo hoo. You don't believe me. What ever shall I do.
Don't worry, as I am not late, because I don't depend on a Govt to steal from others, to provide for me.
Every wonder why your on the bottom. Probably not, as I am sure it is the fault of the Rich, and the Govt will be right along to help you out.
Um, maybe you missed the whole conversation, but, Govt is coming after people like me. And I still don't see how the "working poor" are getting squeezed, as anyone below $30k a year isn't paying much in income taxes. But, you go ahead and march on with that banter, of tax the upper middle class and wealthy, as we will just continue to find the loop holes, not hire people and raise prices.
Originally posted by doobydoll
See underlined in my post. I HAVE an income, but I don't work, and I am not claiming government assistance.
Originally posted by doobydoll
Keep lying to yourself and others.
Originally posted by doobydoll
Neither do I.
And I think ALL working people should be better off for having a job, unlike you.
Originally posted by doobydoll
In the eyes of the gov and corporations, subsidising the underpaid working poor is your only worth as an overpaid taxpayer. Don't like it? Tough titties pal, you gotta lump it.
Originally posted by doobydoll
That's right, more taxes for you.
[/quoet]
See above
Originally posted by doobydoll
They can't get anything from the working poor which is why they've moved on to those on the next rung up - you!
Not really, as again, my taxes will go down, and being an LLC, I will be able to write off more this year and the following years.
That new Honda Pilot I have been looking at, guess what.. My company will buy it, and write it off. Thus, removing a decent chunk of taxable income.
Originally posted by doobydoll
Corporations love people like you - if it weren't for dopey people like you, they'd be forced to pay decent wages.
Oh, you are correct. I should quit my job, close up my business and go on the Govt handout, and force others to make up the difference.
And I fail to see where I am the reason why Walmart doesn't pay above the going market rate for a Greeter or Cashier. Nice try though.
You have an income, but don't work??? Hmmm. Oh, so your spouse works, and you stay home. Okay then
Now you are just living in a dramatic reactionary fantasy world. I believe everyone should work, to get what they want in this world. You want everyone else to pay for those that don't have a better job.
My taxes should be cut from around 30%ish to the high teens.
And I fail to see where I am the reason why Walmart doesn't pay above the going market rate for a Greeter or Cashier. Nice try though.
Originally posted by Tazkven
Jeez, this thread is still going on, was hoping it would by gone on Monday ...
macman, no offense brother but the only angle I see you fighting for here is a selfish one.
Before you call me a progressive, I actually have my views more aligned with Libertarians, minus the whole Free Trade thing, free trade is destructive to this country as a whole and only benefits the few, instead of the many.
Originally posted by Tazkven
Before you label me jealous and envious, you should know I am a member of the 6 figure club, I work a full time job and also have a business license I use for a side business, as well.
Originally posted by Tazkven
One thing I have noticed is your not paying attention to my or other people's posts, your passion is blinding you. In one particular post you quote a guy then totally say something opposite of what he said, I don't know if your purposely twisting words or if you are honestly missing it.
Originally posted by Tazkven
I would like to give you the benefit of the doubt ...
Originally posted by Tazkven
I can't speak for everyone in this thread but you have assumed I want people who do nothing to get a free ride.
Originally posted by Tazkven
You couldn't be more wrong.
Originally posted by Tazkven
On the contrary, I want money from my check to stop being taken to support people who are applying themselves that have a job.
Originally posted by Tazkven
I REPEAT ...
I want money from my check to stop being taken to support people who are applying themselves that have a job.
Originally posted by Tazkven
I do not buy the bull that someone who works 30 to 40 hours a week is "just a school kid" who is "living at home". School kids work 15 to 20 hours a week for spending money. People working full time hours are trying to support families.
Originally posted by Tazkven
These people MUST be paid enough by the company they are working for to keep them off of Government assistance and out of MY check.
Originally posted by Tazkven
There will always be a hierarchy to things in life. Someone will always be there to bag your food, ring up your groceries, sweep the floors and stock the shelves. Not everyone can have a college education. Not everyone can own a home. There will always be people above AND below you. ALways.
Originally posted by Tazkven
Your argument, really makes no sense and is certainly not based in reality. What you want to do, is have people work slave labor wages, with no assistance and be at the total mercy of those above them. It will never happen. It's a dream. macman's dream.
Originally posted by Tazkven
What you propose, and the other people in this thread speaking of "economics" are saying is that unskilled workers, working full time jobs, Should be paid less than what it takes to survive.
Originally posted by Tazkven
Well, you just made triple the amount of people that have full time jobs OUR burden as taxpayers and raised our taxes as workers AND as business owners because the Companies these people work for refuse to pay these people a living wage.
Originally posted by Tazkven
Then you ask, What is a living wage? That would be a wage an average family would need to survive without being assisted. Sorry, I don't have a number for you but it is obvious the number we are using now isn't working. I know because the money is still coming out of my check to support these people, what you refer to as stealing
Originally posted by Tazkven
I am done going round and round in this thread with people, you either get it or you do not. One word of advice though, be careful what you are wishing for, I guarantee in the end,
Originally posted by doobydoll
Yes I have an income. No I don't work. No I don't have a spouse, or a any partner.
Originally posted by doobydoll
But many ARE working, and they still can't get a basic living let alone anything more. No I don't want everyone else to pay for those who are underpaid, I just expect their bosses to pay them, not you.
Originally posted by doobydoll
Not for long. It is governments job to find more ways of taxing you, one way or another, to pay it's various obligations. And you can't ever escape it.
Originally posted by doobydoll
You're not the reason why, Walmart is.
Originally posted by doobydoll
If Walmart needs a greeter or a cashier then it should pay them a proper wage. If it did, they'd be off benefits and you wouldn't have to look for ways to dodge your taxes.
Originally posted by macman
If we all paid a flat 15% for sake of argument, EVERYONE paid this on income, then there would be no write off of Walmart, thus creating a level playing field for everyone, rich or poor. We would all pay the same percentage.
Now, you need to come to terms with the idea that the current structure of taxing people is grossly misaligned with how the Country was founded.
Companies, should not have greater tax write offs over people, and vice versa.
The idea of taxation was for business, not on income.
My pay, should not be pilfered to give to others because they can't get a job that pays what mine does.
So, either from investments, retirement and/or some form of social security. May I ask which?
It is not my problem, nor is it the burden of the tax payer.
Just because Walmart doesn't pay a certain amount, doesn't in turn mean the Govt is good to steal from me.
They do pay them the proper wage. As dictated by the market. The market being comparative positions at other businesses.
Originally posted by Tazkven
Best thing I have seen you write, I knew we could find something we agreed on!
Originally posted by Tazkven
About your other question ...
I am not Libertarian, Democrat or Republican. I hold no allegiance to any party.
Other than their FREE TRADE views, I agree most with Libertarians. They of course took many points from both major parties and incorporated into theirs. But that is another thread.
Originally posted by Tazkven
Lastly, the reality of the situation is that our tax money will always be used to feed and house the less fortunate around the world and here at home. Good luck lobbying against that.
Originally posted by Tazkven
In my mind, a good first step towards reducing it would be making sure that those that have jobs don't need our support in the first place, wouldn't you agree?
Originally posted by doobydoll
No social security, no benefits.
Occupational pension.
Originally posted by doobydoll
I agree. It should be the burden of the employer.
Originally posted by doobydoll
They profit from the work their employees do for them, the gov doesn't profit from it and the taxpayer most certainly doesn't.
Originally posted by doobydoll
People need to afford to live and it's gov's fault for allowing companies to pay less than their workers need to live on.
Originally posted by doobydoll
Gov has to do whatever corporations have paid them to do, and because poor people vote too and it needs their votes, it has to sub their bad pay with taxpayer money.
Originally posted by doobydoll
If working people can't live on their pay and you also snatch away assistance, people will just TAKE what they need. No-one wants that, especially gov.
Originally posted by doobydoll
Obviously they don't pay a proper wage or their employees wouldn't be claiming benefits.
Originally posted by macman
reply to post by Garkiniss
That is business, free will and free market applications being applied.
But, that falls on deaf ears, as your Progressive statements show that you want More and Bigger Govt controlling more aspects of life.
And no, the success of a company is shown by profits, not what they provide for workers.
That is a simple as it gets.
Originally posted by Domo1
I'm fine with raising the minimum wage to a (reasonable) living wage, but to single out one company like they have here is ridiculous. I have big problems with Wal Mart, but what they've done is single out one company and forced them to adhere to laws that don't apply to others, which is ludicrous.
Seattle Mayor just got caught making an ass out of himself for something similar with Whole Foods, claiming they payed workers too low. Turns out they actually pay higher. It was pretty obvious he was trying to garner support from the unions.
Originally posted by Garkiniss
I don't want the Government to have to intervene with business, but I do want a little corporate responsibilty.
Originally posted by Garkiniss
If a business cuts every corner in the book, negates the environment, forces taxes to go, adds to the deficit, and after allllllll that STILL can't afford to pay a living wage, it's a failure.
Originally posted by Garkiniss
Sorry, but the freemarket fails when it drags down a country in the process.
Originally posted by macman
You either believe in people and business being free, or you don't.
Sounds like the moronic statement of "common sense gun control".
You either believe in rights, or you don't.
Forcing a business to act in a way, that you and people in Govt see as more responsible is more akin to stating giant shrimp.
Again, you are fine with people and business doing what they want, so long as they do what they want, under your wants and needs.
Sounds about right, when dealing with the Progressive mindset.
No, that is the free market. Good or bad, this country was designed to allow for both.
Originally posted by macman
No, that is the free market. Good or bad, this country was designed to allow for both.