Biden gonna tax us to death

#376
#376
Y9 Vol said:
At least it is your choosing and not government theft.
Click to expand...
The default assumption, and the wrong assumption, as we have witnessed in this thread is if you are against your taxes going up you don't care about others who need help. Simply isn't true. Routinely those who identify as conservative are very charitable in their giving. Conversely, a routine embarrassment for D politicians is how little they give and when they do give it is usually to some sort of politically based "foundation".
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill, AM64, midnight orange and 3 others
#377
#377
McDad said:
The default assumption, and the wrong assumption, as we have witnessed in this thread is if you are against your taxes going up you don't care about others who need help. Simply isn't true. Routinely those who identify as conservative are very charitable in their giving. Conversely, a routine embarrassment for D politicians is how little they give and when they do give it is usually to some sort of politically based "foundation".
Click to expand...
Leftists want big nanny state government and believe that that government is more capable of distributing your money than you are. It's all about control. Just like masks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, Rickyvol77, McDad and 2 others
#378
#378
McDad said:
The default assumption, and the wrong assumption, as we have witnessed in this thread is if you are against your taxes going up you don't care about others who need help. Simply isn't true. Routinely those who identify as conservative are very charitable in their giving. Conversely, a routine embarrassment for D politicians is how little they give and when they do give it is usually to some sort of politically based "foundation".
Click to expand...
That's not a default assumption. There was a poster on here yesterday saying he didn't care about anyone's quality of life other than his and his family's. Many anti-government anti-tax people are very generous and charitable - many aren't. Many dems are very generous and charitable - many aren't.
The difference is in how we view the government's role in providing a safety net.
 
#379
#379
luthervol said:
That's not a default assumption. There was a poster on here yesterday saying he didn't care about anyone's quality of life other than his and his family's. Many anti-government anti-tax people are very generous and charitable - many aren't. Many dems are very generous and charitable - many aren't.
The difference is in how we view the government's role in providing a safety net.
Click to expand...
The difference is in what you define as a safety net. You define it as lifelong support for anyone that wants it. I define it as a helping hand until you get off your ass and get a job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dovervolz, AM64 and Y9 Vol
#380
#380
SpaceCoastVol said:
The difference is in what you define as a safety net. You define it as lifelong support for anyone that wants it. I define it as a helping hand until you get off your ass and get a job.
Click to expand...
You obviously have no clue as to how I define a safety net.
 
#381
#381
luthervol said:
That's not a default assumption. There was a poster on here yesterday saying he didn't care about anyone's quality of life other than his and his family's. Many anti-government anti-tax people are very generous and charitable - many aren't. Many dems are very generous and charitable - many aren't.
The difference is in how we view the government's role in providing a safety net.
Click to expand...
...and there was a poster on here this morning casting stones of not caring because someone didn't want their taxes raised. The point is conservative areas of the country routinely give more. As a general rule they care about others but simply follow a different path to help out. Doesn't mean that liberals don't do it too, it just means they don't do it at the same level.

CWV is a poster who puts his "money where his mouth is". I know it for a fact because I gave, one time ftr, to a charitable endeavor of his. I also know he does a christmas thing every year.

I believe the federal government collects enough right now to provide the safety net necessary. The discussion about taxes isn't really about funding efforts. The discussion is about how to stick it to greedy Sobs and how to enforce "fair share". In effect, we are emotionalizing something which should only be based in arithmetic.
 
#382
#382
McDad said:
...and there was a poster on here this morning casting stones of not caring because someone didn't want their taxes raised. The point is conservative areas of the country routinely give more. As a general rule they care about others but simply follow a different path to help out. Doesn't mean that liberals don't do it too, it just means they don't do it at the same level.

CWV is a poster who puts his "money where his mouth is". I know it for a fact because I gave, one time ftr, to a charitable endeavor of his. I also know he does a christmas thing every year.

I believe the federal government collects enough right now to provide the safety net necessary. The discussion about taxes isn't really about funding efforts. The discussion is about how to stick it to greedy Sobs and how to enforce "fair share". In effect, we are emotionalizing something which should only be based in arithmetic.
Click to expand...
I can't find anything to support your statement that conservative areas routinely give more.
The one study I found was based on IRS data comparing heavily republican areas with heavily democratic areas.
There was no breakdown on where the money went (like a person's place of worship / private school) and it did not factor in the higher taxes willingly paid in heavily democratic areas to provide services.

Republicans Give More to Charity Than Democrats, but There’s a Bigger Story Here
 
#384
#384
luthervol said:
I can't find anything to support your statement that conservative areas routinely give more.
The one study I found was based on IRS data comparing heavily republican areas with heavily democratic areas.
There was no breakdown on where the money went (like a person's place of worship / private school) and it did not factor in the higher taxes willingly paid in heavily democratic areas to provide services.

Republicans Give More to Charity Than Democrats, but There’s a Bigger Story Here
Click to expand...
May not be available online. It was a feature on a news magazine show (60 min, 2020, etc) comparing anonymous random donations...maybe to salvation army at xmas...in areas deemed liberal and conservative. It stuck with me because someplace in TN was one of the areas compared. It's been a few years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#385
#385
Boston Vol said:
A fair wage? A fair wage is whatever the employer offers to pay. If an employee doesn't like it, talk to your boss and see about getting a raise or go find another job that pays you "fairly."
Click to expand...

Walmart's wages are being subidized by tax dollars, so your argument is missing the point. Many full time walmart employees qualify for welfare so they do not need to find higher wages and walmart does not need to pay them. I still find it odd that so many conservatives defend this practice.
 
#386
#386
ClearwaterVol said:
Walmart's wages are being subidized by tax dollars, so your argument is missing the point. Many full time walmart employees qualify for welfare so they do not need to find higher wages and walmart does not need to pay them. I still find it odd that so many conservatives defend this practice.
Click to expand...
How many of Walmart's 2 million+ employees are on government support?
 
#388
#388
ClearwaterVol said:
Walmart's wages are being subidized by tax dollars, so your argument is missing the point. Many full time walmart employees qualify for welfare so they do not need to find higher wages and walmart does not need to pay them. I still find it odd that so many conservatives defend this practice.
Click to expand...
Because it isn't a subsidy no matter how many times you call it one.
The people working there are choosing the work and the public assistance. If the assistance was removed, Wally would have to pay more over time. If wages go up, assistance may not be removed from that person's life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, hog88 and SpaceCoastVol
#391
#391
SpaceCoastVol said:
Kick them off support as long as they are working. Let the market fix it.
Click to expand...
If we are going to have a safety net, it needs to have incone/assistance buffer zones where people can work and still recieve some help. Otherwise we deincentivize gainig employment and working their way off assistance.
Also, we need to not deride those employers who are offering employment in those buffer zones with claims of predation or subsidy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and SpaceCoastVol
#392
#392
C-south said:
I wonder how many work part time just to get the free kick back? No telling how much welfare they get when they file their taxes.
Click to expand...
This is my thought as well and the reason for my position in my reply to CWV.
It's been my experience there are those who only want marginal employment to not mess up their SS, disability, assistance, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and C-south
#393
#393
McDad said:
Because it isn't a subsidy no matter how many times you call it one.
The people working there are choosing the work and the public assistance. If the assistance was removed, Wally would have to pay more over time. If wages go up, assistance may not be removed from that person's life.
Click to expand...
Many choose to work lower paying jobs so they don’t loose .gov assistance. That’s why there needs to be strict limits on how long a person can receive a “helping hand”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill, AM64, Rickyvol77 and 1 other person
#394
#394
hog88 said:
Many choose to work lower paying jobs so they don’t loose .gov assistance. That’s why there needs to be strict limits on how long a person can receive a “helping hand”.
Click to expand...
ab so lutely

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Tommy Thompson do that in Wisconsin and was fairly successful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#395
#395
hog88 said:
Many choose to work lower paying jobs so they don’t loose .gov assistance. That’s why there needs to be strict limits on how long a person can receive a “helping hand”.
Click to expand...
There is a percentage who actively look to retain assistance.
 
#396
#396
luthervol said:
That's not a default assumption. There was a poster on here yesterday saying he didn't care about anyone's quality of life other than his and his family's. Many anti-government anti-tax people are very generous and charitable - many aren't. Many dems are very generous and charitable - many aren't.
The difference is in how we view the government's role in providing a safety net.
Click to expand...
DO you not think that most reasonable agree about the "safety net" for truly in need people and children, the problem lies in massive government waste of money, welfare fraud/misuse, using this money/resources on non-US citizens, and the cycle of generational dependency which breeds more welfare recipients.

It's not that people "don't care" about those in need that are really suffering, it's seeing the money wasted and misused and seeing "poor" people with I-phones, big screen TVs, SUVs, etc who are using the system to avoid working or contributing to society.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and C-south
#398
#398
McDad said:
There is a percentage who actively look to retain assistance.
Click to expand...

It’s a high percentage. I remember one of my aunts, she was an LPN (I think) but would work the lowest paying jobs so she wouldn’t lose her assistance. She is lazy as ****.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#399
#399
Sandman 423 said:
I have known quite a few in the construction industry that want to work for cash only (Usually at a lower rate) because they have a check coming in for a disability.
Click to expand...
My experience is similar. Not in construction though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#400
#400
McDad said:
There is a percentage who actively look to retain assistance.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. We have a lot of employees (restaurant industry) who don’t want to work more than a certain number of hours a week so they won’t lose government benefits. I mean in some instances it’s as low as 18 hours a week. I despise that mentality, but it’s here to stay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and McDad
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top