They Don’t Pay Their Fair Share

[VOLS INC.]

700!

 

[Vol8188]

700!

500 of those are Luther dodging questions at an elite, Bill Clinton, “what is the meaning of is” level

 

[85SugarVol]

There will always be those who accumulate wealth and power for a variety of reasons. There will always be those who do not accumulate wealth and power for a variety of reasons. Reaching a point where the extremes happily and successfully coexists is the ultimate goal.
I've always been a big believer in societal evolution (even though the last 5 years have seriously tested that belief).

Yes. I should have been clearer.

The idea that we have zeroed out wealth and re-set in a cycle, with multiple iterations. Maybe I misread your post.

 

[sjt18]

Sit down. Bend over and grab your shoestrings. Now pull up hard enough you lift yourself off the chair. Sustain that.

My comment was on the actual efficacy of the saying (or lack thereof), not the sentiment.

OK. You could have made that clear.

 

[sjt18]

There will always be those who accumulate wealth and power for a variety of reasons. There will always be those who do not accumulate wealth and power for a variety of reasons. Reaching a point where the extremes happily and successfully coexists is the ultimate goal.
I've always been a big believer in societal evolution (even though the last 5 years have seriously tested that belief).

Societal evolution?

There are transcendent truths that our founders called "Natural Law". Most of them saw Christianity as the perfect expression of those truths. History does not record societal evolution. It records revolutions... cycles like that observed by Sir Alexander Tytler. Technologies change... people and their patterns do not. Those cycles alternately affirm and pursue "truth" then reject and rebel against it.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Idiocracy was a mockery of hypercapitalism and a warning against making academia/public education an enemy of the state.

You probably also think that people can "pull themselves up by their bootstraps".

Hmmm... I faintly remember seeing bits and pieces of this movie when it first hit cable years ago, but I may have to go to Blockbuster to watch this film in its entirety. I wonder if I will reach the same conclusion that you did.

 

[sjt18]

The only thing I’d disagree with you about is your definition of slavery. Slavery is merely about freedom of association.

For example draftees are military slaves because they’re forced labor, even though their income is untaxed while at war

The choice to pay them in that situation is pretty arbitrary.

The reason I give that definition is that it is the most basic and all encompassing. Many try to make an issue over slavery in the Bible but in NT times there were 4 basic types of slaves in Greco-Roman culture. The most basic kind were those consigned to hard labor usually as a penalty for crime. Another level would equate to what we know as the house and personal staff of wealthy people. Others were artisans and tradesmen. The highest form included doctors, teachers, architects, etc. The commonality between them was that their capacity to produce any product legally belonged to someone else.

Ancient Israel's slavery was more a system of indenture. A slave who wished to stay with his master had a ceremonial ear piercing that identified him as a permanent member of the household. One of Abraham's slaves (bond servants) would have been his heir had God not granted him children in his old age.

In the 1600's, American slavery was modeled after Europe which drew heavily on the Bible. Until 1650, all slaves except criminals were indentured in the colonies. After serving their time, they were freed and were usually paid some amount to get them started. Around 1650, a slave owner in Maryland who had 4 indentured white slaves and one black slave challenged the release of his black slave. For some reason, the judge ruled that because the black man was not a British subject his master was not required to release him. The slave owner himself had arrived in America as an indentured slave and managed to acquire a plantation following his freedom. His name was Anthony Johnson.... a black man. That is how John Casor became the first permanent slave in what would become the U.S. without being a criminal.

Obviously things declined from that point. White indentured servitude waned and black slavery expanded. But the original form was much more benign and had little to do with color.

The basic premise was still that one person had legal right to another's labor.

 

[sjt18]

Hmmm... I faintly remember seeing bits and pieces of this movie when it first hit cable years ago, but I may have to go to Blockbuster to watch this film in its entirety. I wonder if I will reach the same conclusion that you did.

Only if you are prone to making stuff up. The world "dumbed" down because snooty educated people didn't have kids and welfare mommas and Bubba daddies did.

 

[sjt18]

You can challenge assessments here in MI. Sure it takes $ but it can be done. I actuslly prefer our property taxes over any other as I can see exactly what they go to unlike my fed or state.

You can challenge them most places. That pretty much proves that they're arbitrary. Government should never be able to tax arbitrarily.

 

[sjt18]

The criminal has served their time. Why are we still punishing them? Perhaps they continue to commit crimes bc they are never able to fully rejoin society. I have full sympathy for the victim. The prep served the time sentenced. The price for violating the victims rights should be the sentence they serve. Part of the reason recidivism rates are so high, IMO, is bc we refuse to fully restore these people after they are released.

Literally, that's not true of anyone I've known who spent time in prison. I'm thinking of two different people pretty close to me personally who spent time in jail, got out, kept their noses clean, and did well. One made really good money in the ATL area by starting and eventually managing a sheetrock business. Another is a minority and has made himself an EXCELLENT employee.

I've known others who simply didn't change. They were drawn to trouble and were willing to risk prison for "easy money". Recidivism occurs because of the values and value assessments made by the convict.

Years ago I served with a great guy in the Army Reserve. He had been a "shake and bake" NCO in Vietnam. He happened to be black and the supervisor of guards at Craggy State Prison in Asheville. This was early 90's. He had two daughters he was worried about at the time. His idea about recidivism was that we should build big enough prisons to lock repeat offenders up and keep them. He was particular concerned about young black men. He told me that these people do not think the same as we did. Prison was part of their life cycle...not punishment. He said that they did their time, got out, made babies, did more crime, and went back to jail. (His idea not mine). He said that most of them used their time in prison to compare notes so they would be more difficult to catch next time.

It wasn't their circumstances but their morals, ethics, and values.

 

[AshG]

Hmmm... I faintly remember seeing bits and pieces of this movie when it first hit cable years ago, but I may have to go to Blockbuster to watch this film in its entirety. I wonder if I will reach the same conclusion that you did.

We all see things through the lens of our experience and beliefs, so I don't doubt it one bit that you may find different meaning. And that's ok, because that's the way these things are supposed to work.

 

[rekinhavoc]

Let's tax the senate and the house .
No exemptions . Tax their Cadillac Healthcare. Tax their ridiculous pensions.
No deductions. Tax the gifts they receive.

Maybe they will understand taxes better if they actually can't exempt themselves from the conversation.

They are the only group I am sure don't pay their fair share.

 

[luthervol]

Societal evolution?

There are transcendent truths that our founders called "Natural Law". Most of them saw Christianity as the perfect expression of those truths. History does not record societal evolution. It records revolutions... cycles like that observed by Sir Alexander Tytler. Technologies change... people and their patterns do not. Those cycles alternately affirm and pursue "truth" then reject and rebel against it.

Yep - societal evolution.
The history of man is nothing but a tale of societal evolution....as is religion nothing more than that same reflection.
Sometimes revolution is used to speed the evolution.

 

[LouderVol]

At 5% it would be $429,000 At 7% it is 805,000 At 9% it would be $1.5 million. That was precisely my point as well. Throw your money away on cigs, beer and lottery tickets and thou wildst be broke.

$190/month.

It's amazing how saving/investing even a little can add up to a lot.

And in this for instance it would also drastically reduce their likely health care costs, making life and retirement cheaper.

Now do the same thing for SS payments, and you will see why I rail against it. Instead of getting compounding interest I am losing money.

I would love to see SS flip over to some hybrid system. If you pay in your money gets divided into two pots. One pot is your own personal 401k/investment portfolio. You keep everything in it, including growth. The second pot goes into the typical SS slush fund. Only those who dont contribute get to pull SS at the end of life, this would include spouses.

The breakdown of how much you contribute to each pot is determined based on a rolling five year clock projection of what your 401k will be at retirement. Whatever your break even point is, to get retirement money back equal to contribution if only on SS.

If you only make a little you will only contribute a little to the SS general pot. If you make a bunch of money a bigger chunk goes to SS.

This is a win for everyone, because the contributors actually get their money back, they dont under SS, and they actually control their own 401k, subject to normal laws. SS still gets payments, while drastically decreasing demand. And everybody sees increased retirement from better markets. If markets are good you dont have to contribute as much of your pot to the 401k so more money ends up in SS.

And this would be separate from any other retirement opportunities.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

Decisions have consequences.

Once debt to society is paid, rights should be restored (either provisional, conditional, or in full).

Billing them for their time spent while paying them less than legal wages shouldn't be legal.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

So you do what exactly? Sounds like you're a Blue Cross/Blue Shield type provider that doesn't actually create value, you're just a middle man.

You work hard to be a prick.

 

[LouderVol]

So you are saying that it is OK for the victim to suffer perhaps for life... but the criminal should be "restored"? Have you ever known a rape victim? Should child sexual predators have a "right" to vote for politicians who lessen the punishment for sexual abuse of minors?

I don't necessarily have a great answer except that you guys seem to be pretty dismissive of the "rights" that can never be restored to some victims

If the criminal needs to be punished for life, punish them for life.

What we have is they are sentenced to a 25 year sentence. But then go on to continue being punished once the 25 are up. That's wrong. If the judge doesnt think 25 is enough make it 50 or life. At the end of whatever sentence the criminal gets, they should be equal to any other citizen.

The system you are pushing just creates more victims as it forces criminals into recidivism once they are out, so they go back to the only thing they know, wronging others.

 

[LouderVol]

Raping a woman who spends a lifetime looking over her shoulder and having nightmares when the rapist gets out in 6 years on good behavior... is just?

Take it up with the judge. Not the person who used to be a criminal.

You want to punish a citizen because the system doesnt punish them enough based on the laws at hand.

If the crime deserves worse punish, up the laws, and let the judges dish it out. But once time/punishment is served they are full citizens again.

 

[LouderVol]

- It seems like those least able to pay would be required to pay the most.
- The person with a million dollar home should pay more for police and fire protection because he has more to be protected.
- Everyone benefits form a well functioning, safe, and educated society. The person in the gated community who sends their kids to private school still benefits from public education, affordable housing, etc...

But do the high end neighborhoods require more policing? Are they where crimes happen?

They may have more to lose, but they are less likely to lose it. And likely have insurance to handle those losses, decreasing even further their "need" for cops. When it comes to violence, I would love to see you suggest the rich need or deserve more protection than the poor.

The problem with any socialized system is that one person can vote to take away from others while enriching themselves.

 

[Vol8188]

- It seems like those least able to pay would be required to pay the most.
- The person with a million dollar home should pay more for police and fire protection because he has more to be protected.
- Everyone benefits form a well functioning, safe, and educated society. The person in the gated community who sends their kids to private school still benefits from public education, affordable housing, etc...

The person with a million dollar home is far less likely to call the police or the fire department.

Your claim that private school parents benefit from public education is only because you fail to realize kids would be educated without you. You’re not as important as you see yourself

 

[luthervol]

The person with a million dollar home is far less likely to call the police or the fire department.

Your claim that private school parents benefit from public education is only because you fail to realize kids would be educated without you. You’re not as important as you see yourself

But when the rich person does call the police or fire department, they desperately want and expect a quick response - same with an ambulance. This can only happen with well staffed police and fire departments. And that obviously takes money. And that obviously can only come from people able to pay.

You're absolutely clueless on the second point.

 

[Vol8188]

But when the rich person does call the police or fire department, they desperately want and expect a quick response - same with an ambulance. This can only happen with well staffed police and fire departments. And that obviously takes money. And that obviously can only come from people able to pay.

You're absolutely clueless on the second point.

The wealthy rarely call an ambulance too and normally the ambulance is not funded by tax payer money. But the best part of local government functions is if you don't like them it is very easy to move relative to federal government functions which so many on your side want to turn everything into.

You believe if public schools stopped tomorrow people would just say "well, I guess my kid won't be learning things"?

 

[luthervol]

You believe if public schools stopped tomorrow people would just say "well, I guess my kid won't be learning things"?

Millions would, yes. And tens of millions more would receive a far worse education.

 

[McDad]

Billing them for their time spent while paying them less than legal wages shouldn't be legal.

I agree. And I think that deserves conversation.

I am working hard to keep myself on track as much as possible (income, income taxes, taxes, etc) in this thread.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Let's tax the senate and the house .
No exemptions . Tax their Cadillac Healthcare. Tax their ridiculous pensions.
No deductions. Tax the gifts they receive.

Maybe they will understand taxes better if they actually can't exempt themselves from the conversation.

They are the only group I am sure don't pay their fair share.

Never gonna happen.