They Don’t Pay Their Fair Share

[hog88]

“To make money”-Henry Rearden

Mine is so I wouldn't have to work for idiots. I failed.

 

[Vol8188]

They would owe the government money. The government would garnish wages and sell assets.

I suppose a system of tax tribute could be arranged where those who lamented the unfairness could pay the taxes on behalf of those who couldn't pay. I am certain there are enough Ds in the country to cover the tax liability.

That I could be on board with. I’m a huge proponent of things such as gofund me. I could see a system like that being used.

When dividing the budget by each person would you first subtract the disabled?

 

[Vol8188]

Mine is so I wouldn't have to work for idiots. I failed.

Thanks for giving me a chance to quote Atlas Shrugged. But in all honesty you’d have to allow business deductions otherwise you’re taxing them on sales rather than earnings, but treating their sales as earnings

 

[Vol423]

But that's how math and compound interest work. It can't/won't stop unless money is forcibly removed from accounts

Hey! Someone gets it! That shouldn't be too big a surprise. A lot of conservatives understand basic math.

 

[McDad]

That I could be on board with. I’m a huge proponent of things such as gofund me. I could see a system like that being used.

When dividing the budget by each person would you first subtract the disabled?

Yes, of course. Those unable to work and care for themselves would either be first in line for the tax charity system or be excluded from the burden.

 

[NEO]

You are missing the fact that they are only living better if your sole metric is how much stuff they have.
That's a horrible metric in isolation.

Are you ok with creating a database of all welfare recipients that local employers have access to and can offer these recipients a job and they must accept this job or another job to stay on welfare to help offset the welfare cost?

 

[McDad]

I've brought up the idea that no one pays taxes directly to the federal government, all responsibility for social services (medicare/medicaid/social security ext) is transferred to the states and the states pay tax to the federal government for the services it is constitutionally mandated to provide.

I have a problem with your overall ideas.

I disagree income earners who cannot vote should be required to pay income tax.

 

[McDad]

I think the "equally benefitting everyone" concept would generate a little dissention

Dissension is unavoidable.

 

[luthervol]

Are you ok with creating a database of all welfare recipients that local employers have access to and can offer these recipients a job and they must accept this job or another job to stay on welfare to help offset the welfare cost?

yep

 

[luthervol]

Dissension is unavoidable.

It is. But the level of dissension and the passion if fuels is variable.

 

[McDad]

The ideal system for taxation connects the payer and the politician. As long as we have a system where one segment experiences no (or little) consequences for the spending they support, we lack the necessary motivation to earnestly keep politicians budget conscious.

 

[utvolpj]

Hey! Someone gets it! That shouldn't be too big a surprise. A lot of conservatives understand basic math.

I'm not really a conservative and neither are most who claim to be. I was once really good at math though

 

[LouderVol]

lol....The massive wealth/income inequalities invariably and understandably lead to wealth envy. The two are inseparable, especially when the system is perceived as unfair.

Again, it's the perception that matters to you, not the actual fact of the matter.

Someone being rich as crap does not negatively impact someone else to the point of creating an addressable inequality.

Someone being rich as crap and others being envious of it does negatively impact the envious individual. But that is not something that can be addressed by the government, because it's a self created issue. The person is envious, the problem is them, and not the object of envy. Your solution is to punish the object of envy because a third party negatively impacts their own third party life. That makes no sense.

The rich paying their "fair share" would not fix the actual problem.

 

[LouderVol]

I think the "equally benefitting everyone" concept would generate a little dissention

You give me and McDad 100 bucks for our posts on here. We benefit equally.

Fat cat McDad takes that 100 bucks and invests it.
I blow mine at the McDonalds.

5 years later McDad has 105 dollars, yeah yeah I know, and I have none.

You say we did not benefit equally and we should tax mcdad, I say I should have made better life choices.

 

[Orangeburst]

.

 

[AshG]

I have no problem with the rich being rich. The rich have always existed and will always exist.

If a discussion of why the rich should pay what someone else has decided is their fair share is to have merit, then the groundwork needs to be laid that clearly explains how the practices of the rich actively keep poor people poor or prevent the dutiful fulfillment of the Constitution by our government.

 

[McDad]

You give me and McDad 100 bucks for our posts on here. We benefit equally.

This is the best idea in the history of VN

/thread.

 

[Vol8188]

I have no problem with the rich being rich. The rich have always existed and will always exist.

If a discussion of why the rich should pay what someone else has decided is their fair share is to have merit, then the groundwork needs to be laid that clearly explains how the practices of the rich actively keep poor people poor or prevent the dutiful fulfillment of the Constitution by our government.

I’ll give you credit, this is not the stance I thought you’d take.

Do you think I’ve been disingenuous or whatever you accused me of in this thread?

 

[VOLS INC.]

You give me and McDad 100 bucks for our posts on here. We benefit equally.

Fat cat McDad takes that 100 bucks and invests it.
I blow mine at the McDonalds.

5 years later McDad has 105 dollars, yeah yeah I know, and I have none.

You say we did not benefit equally and we should tax mcdad, I say I should have made better life choices.

Of course you forgot to mention the most likely scenario.

You only blew your $$ at McDonald’s because of the systemic racism/sexism/homophobia/ transphobia/etc.(essentially whatever turns you into the victim). You didn’t know any better so you aren’t required to take any blame.
McDad invested his $$ because white supremacy still very much exist. Slavery in America was at the root of the inequity that ultimately played itself out. Even if McDad isn’t white, he can still benefit from and be a white supremacist.

Finally, we must never forget that Trump is at least partially to blame in any and all situations that something occurred.

 

[GordonC]

You give me and McDad 100 bucks for our posts on here. We benefit equally.

Fat cat McDad takes that 100 bucks and invests it.
I blow mine at the McDonalds.

5 years later McDad has 105 dollars, yeah yeah I know, and I have none.

You say we did not benefit equally and we should tax mcdad, I say I should have made better life choices.

$100 doesn't go as far at McDonald's as it used to

 

[McDad]

I have no problem with the rich being rich. The rich have always existed and will always exist.

If a discussion of why the rich should pay what someone else has decided is their fair share is to have merit, then the groundwork needs to be laid that clearly explains how the practices of the rich actively keep poor people poor or prevent the dutiful fulfillment of the Constitution by our government.

I have yet to be shown why it is in the best interests of high income earners to actively keep poor people poor. Most of us earn income, or high income, because a market exists of people with access to disposable income.

 

[luthervol]

You give me and McDad 100 bucks for our posts on here. We benefit equally.

Fat cat McDad takes that 100 bucks and invests it.
I blow mine at the McDonalds.

5 years later McDad has 105 dollars, yeah yeah I know, and I have none.

You say we did not benefit equally and we should tax mcdad, I say I should have made better life choices.

A little overly simplistic but the point is made, and there is some legitimacy to it.
Another overly simplistic scenario.....18 year old Thurston Howell IV gets his tax bill delivered to his frat house at Harvard and 18 year old Elmer gets his out of the mail slot in the dilapidated mobile home he shares with his crack head mom and 3 younger siblings he is trying to provide for by working at Taco Bell and with a second job as a bag boy at the Piggly Wiggly. The concept that they benefitted equally will probably be humorous to one and infuriatingly asinine to the other.

 

[AshG]

I have yet to be shown why it is in the best interests of high income earners to actively keep poor people poor. Most of us earn income, or high income, because a market exists of people with access to disposable income.

Yep. That's what I'm saying.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

Some people just let feelz run their lives. It’s why they can’t ever be logical in these discussions

lmao

 

[Vol8188]

lmao

I’ll gladly discuss this from any logical perspective you wish with you.