AdamLanes 1 #51 July 15, 2009 QuoteGiven this, I am astounded that people want to raise taxes on the most heavily taxed, while leaving the untaxed (and in many cases negatively taxed via refundable credits) to continue free riding. Tom, you shouldn't be surprised at this. If most people don't want to pay taxes, all they have to do is vote to only tax the wealthy minority. Its one of the problems with democracy. In a democracy, the majority has the power to vote away the rights of the minority. Democracy is simply tyranny by the majority! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #52 July 15, 2009 Quote Democracy is simply tyranny by the majority! That's why we're a Republic. We democratically elect our political leaders, who are then sworn to uphold the Constitution.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #53 July 15, 2009 Then I guess that it's a good job that we/you don't live in a Democracy. We live in something that most like to think of as Democratic but actually as we don't vote on individual policies but a basket of them.... so pick the party that on balance reflects our overal values (more or less) ..... whilst some people (maybe a lot) vote for personality/celebrity (which is truely sad). (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #54 July 15, 2009 Both the Democratic and Republican parties have failed America badly. They are more interested in their party than they are in America. We really need to move past them. How to do so effectively is something I'm looking for.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AdamLanes 1 #55 July 15, 2009 Quote That's why we're a Republic. We democratically elect our political leaders, who are then sworn to uphold the Constitution. Yea right, the government upholds the Constitution . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #56 July 15, 2009 Quote Yea right, the government upholds the Constitution Agreed. A large point of what FDR did went against the Constitution. SCOTUS at that time tried to stop him, but couldn't. That set the tone that the Democratic party has followed since. Republicans have become just as bad. We really need to move on from these parties. They are more interested in their parties than the country.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #57 July 15, 2009 Interestingly (or inevitably?) we're having the same problem with our, essentially 2 party system over here too. Maybe (easier said than done) it's time for us to become properly Democratic and make decisions on individual policies ourselves and not rely on our elected representatives, who seem to be swayed more by self interest than, well 'US'. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #58 July 15, 2009 QuoteMaybe (easier said than done) it's time for us to become properly Democratic and make decisions on individual policies ourselves... While I don't agree with your underlying idea, it's interesting to note that we're probably reaching the point of technological development where large scale direct democracy might actually be practical. On the broader point, I'm very skeptical. Watching some of the absurdity that democracies get up to, I'm less and less in favor of democracy every year.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #59 July 15, 2009 I'm not wholey sold on the idea myself, in truth ... too many dick-heads out there that are allowed to vote and some policies would counter others or not be in 'the public' interest etc... The old Democracy sort of worked because only a very small number of people were actually allowed to vote ..... um ... sounds like the system we have now (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AdamLanes 1 #60 July 15, 2009 QuoteIf most people don't want to pay taxes, all they have to do is vote to only tax the wealthy minority. Its one of the problems with democracy. In a democracy, the majority has the power to vote away the rights of the minority. Democracy is simply tyranny by the majority! I just want to clarify the point I was trying to make. The problem is being forced to pay taxes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #61 July 15, 2009 Quote On the broader point, I'm very skeptical. Watching some of the absurdity that democracies get up to, I'm less and less in favor of democracy every year. Again, the USA is a Republic. Our elected leaders are sworn to uphold the Constitution, and it's up to SCOTUS to see that they do. That stopped working when FDR took over, and it's been going down hill since.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #62 July 15, 2009 QuoteQuote On the broader point, I'm very skeptical. Watching some of the absurdity that democracies get up to, I'm less and less in favor of democracy every year. Again, the USA is a Republic. Our elected leaders are sworn to uphold the Constitution, and it's up to SCOTUS to see that they do. That stopped working when FDR took over, and it's been going down hill since. On this issue (taxation), the republic may actually be less effective than a democracy, because it's possible to take the cash from the public coffers and pay off a (relatively small) number of representatives, instead of having to pay off a (relatively large) number of direct voters. Broadly, the problem that Adam outlined (the majority can always vote to take away the property of the minority) is still present, whether the system is a republic or a democracy (honestly, I've got my doubts that it's either at present--more like an oligarchy). Regardless, I concur that the framework of the Republic is hardly being respected by the government, or by the people, now or at any time in the past 100 years or so.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #63 July 15, 2009 QuoteI'm not wholey sold on the idea myself, in truth ... too many dick-heads out there that are allowed to vote and some policies would counter others or not be in 'the public' interest etc... Agreed. The representatives in Washington don't even read what they're often voting on. Leaving it up to the general public to read 1000 page bills and vote with any amount of understanding is wishful thinking. OTOH, if the reps in washington aren't reading them then I guess it wouldnt change much. I think Adam's point would be amplified. People would vote on bills based on what's best for them and not what's best for the country thereby fucking everyone else up. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #64 July 15, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote 2008 numbers: 1st quintile (wealthiest 20%): 87.5% of all income tax 2nd quintile: 13.6% of all income tax (101.1% cumulative) 3rd quintile: 4.7% of all income tax (105.8% cumulative) 4th quintile: -2.7% (103.1% cumulative) 5th quintile: -3.2% (99.9% cumulative) probably should recalculate after including sales taxes. The sub-discussion was about income tax, not sales tax. No, the "sub-discussion" was about people who pay no taxes. And yes, if you only want to talk about income taxes, that will show a lot of people paying nothing. But if you add back in the highly relevant FICA and sales taxes, the dead beats don't seem quite so dead beat. Sales tax is highly regressive while FICA taxes are in the context of upper versus the lower income classes. I'm sure it's still fairly progressive overall, so you probably should just go with it, rather than make an obviously misleading argument. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #65 July 15, 2009 I'd love to see the numbers, adjusted for other taxes, preferably breaking down sales taxes, property taxes and "other" taxes (as well as state and federal income taxes). Do you happen to have them, or know where they could be found? QuoteNo, the "sub-discussion" was about people who pay no taxes... I initiated the "sub-discussion" in post #41 of this thread with the post: Quote40% of Americans pay no Federal Income taxes (emphasis added).-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #66 July 15, 2009 Quote I think Adam's point would be amplified. People would vote on bills based on what's best for them and not what's best for the country thereby fucking everyone else up. Agreed, but in BOTH cases the situation would probably be the same ... self serving people (population/politicians) voting for what's best for them. So, what's the answer? One (could be) - politics would not be allowed to be a carreer. People 'could' be selected for short periods of time like Jurry Service. They would need to be isolated from corporate types (bit like the jurry being kept away from witnesses and more accurately, criminals!!). (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhys 0 #67 July 15, 2009 QuoteNot to mention the petty dictators and strongmen who have impoverished them, and now grow rich off the "aid" they are subverting. I'm sure they'd disagree, too. The said aid is not always acyually needed, but gratefully recieved. I learned alot about third world corruption while living in tanzania/east africa for a year. those countries have diamonds, among other precious stones, tourism, other natural recources and a multitude of human recource. Kids are keen to learn, adults are keen to work... the park fees alone that are charged in tanzania are huge, to climb Mt. Kilimanjaro you pay a US$600 fee at the gate just to enter the park, 100' of 1000's of tourists pay hundreds of dollars in park fees, yet the country recieves aid frm the USA and other countries... Do they need it? Fuck no, they have more wealth than many other countries could imagine. Why do they get it? It is easeir for the leaders to recieve aid for being a poor country that it is to run a counrty correctly and make some money of your own, all those dollars go to a very small few at the cost of the livlihoods, health and welfare of the citizens. It is in thier culture to 'not' question anyone with more authority than them,(a little like the USA) so nothing is ever done to the rife corruption that is going on in broard daylight. We were operating a DZ for the year we were there and 90% of our customers were volenteers for aid companies. Admitedly some of the volenteers did a great job but a higher percentage made more problems than they solved."When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #68 July 15, 2009 QuoteSo, what's the answer? One (could be)... The original answer over here was: Limit the powers of government. Unfortunately, that was done away with a little less than 100 years ago.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BDashe 0 #69 July 15, 2009 My internet is being painfully slow, so im not sure if some of what i say has already been posted- so i apologize for any repeats. First, Rhys I agree with you quite a bit with regards to africa. I've spent a pretty good amount of time in 5 or 6 different countries there (tanzania and Rwanda included) and the corruption is pretty surprising. For those that b*tch the CEOs and other execs in this country have unfair pay, grab a backpack and wander around africa for a little while, then come talk to me about a 'have and have not' divide. Namely how the 'haves' pocket their fortunes. anyway, it is especially surprising, as rhys mentioned, that we keep feeding into blatantly malicious systems. And for me, the amount of faith based action over there with the number of groups actually believing their 1.5 weeks preaching/pushing their beliefs on unsuspecting cultures as well as handing out rice actually 'saved' people is ridiculous. without going too far off topic though, looking at the OP and that website- i mean talk about the opposite extreme. While I do not support a lot of our terribly bias and thinly masked 'how does this benefit me' foreign policy; the information provided on that site is just plain wrong with how they paint our motive in almost every action listed. They make it seem like we haphazardly wage war on civilians for fun. I mean what was worse- the french/belgian occupation of rwanda (and the rest of africa for that matter) or our lack of action from their mess? french occupation of vietnam? maybe the chinese trying to invade before them? U.S.? How bout the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia? ultimately these are battles no one wins- either you did it wrong, you did too much, or you didnt do anything, so f*ck you! can't please everyone. Id say all of our attempts at stabilzation had some validity to it, after having been destabilized by another country way before us. Quite a lot of the roots of 2nd/3rd world issues stemmed from a time before the US even existed or had access to these countries. I mean we certainly did a number on the native americans and hawaiians, can't escape that happy history. However (and though very ugly) for the more modern stuff listed they're claiming accidents, outlying circumstance, or collateral damage as the original or primary intent of our actions which just isn't the case. Im not saying our intent always justifies the collateral damage, but at least factor in some of the rest of what was going on. one of my favorites w/r/t vietnam: '...a slew of US presidents decide to invade, rape, murder, and poison the country instead. Several million Vietnamese are killed.' Riiiiiiight, like we just decided things were going too well back home and it was time to host a genocide and lose 60,000 of our own boys. Gimme a break.So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #70 July 16, 2009 QuoteQuote I think Adam's point would be amplified. People would vote on bills based on what's best for them and not what's best for the country thereby fucking everyone else up. Agreed, but in BOTH cases the situation would probably be the same ... self serving people (population/politicians) voting for what's best for them. Politicians can be voted out of office if they don't represent their region properly. You can't vote the dumb or lazy out of the public. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #71 July 16, 2009 Quote Politicians can be voted out of office if they don't represent their region properly. . Only at election time ... it's not so easy between times and then the damage has often been done (and compounded)...... Unless the Smith & Weston act is invoked (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
