About Joe the Plumber

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed
McCain used the visage of Joe the Plumber as the American Dream. It is the ideal that nothing is out of reach for us. All of us can do better in our lives, perhaps buying our boss's business, or getting an additional degree. By using Joe the Plumber, John McCain was trying to tell us that Obama wants to tax the American Dream: If we do well, make more money, then we are going to be punished.

But, it also proves that McCain and his campaign staff did not understand the American Dream. He missed the part of the American Dream that says that as we become more prosperous, we have additional responsibilities, one of which is to pay more taxes as we get into the higher tax brackets in our proggressive tax system. We have a greater responsibility to take care of this great nation so that persons who have not achieved the American Dream are lifted up (so to speak).

McCain never understood this. He saw this as wealth redistribution when in actuality it is merely leveling the playing field to a small (very small) degree. For example, a part of our taxes goes toward education. Our education system makes it possible for everyone to have the chance at the American Dream. This is not a "give away." This simply makes our society better. You can't have public schools without taxes. This is not a socialistic idea.

Joe the Plumber was an empty symbol for the American Dream. In reality, Joe fell well short of the symbol that McCain tried to create - not licensed as a plumber, owes taxes, etc.

American dream != progressive taxes. Just because we have a progressive system does not mean it's part of the American dream as you seem to be suggesting. And no, not everyone agrees with your liberal BS about prosperity = more responsibility via taxation by the gov't. While people do have a moral responsibility to care / show mercy on others - who are you to use the gov't to force your level of morality(love this one since the libs always try to claim the Conservatives force morality on people) on everyone via taxation. It may be YOUR american dream(and the dream of other libs) to tax everyone more and more but it's not the dream of everyone.
Also, using education is retarded - most places it's paid for by local property taxes - not a progressive tax on labor.

silly libs always crack me up...

Don't be an idiot, a progressive tax isn't the goal of liberals...it's just the best way for the government to fulfill it's role. The fact that people like you always argue about taxes just demonstrates that you don't really get it. Conservatives always seem to be interested in taxes for their own sake, while liberals are more interested in what you can DO with tax money. That's why I'm a liberal, I don't think whining about taxes is a very good political ideology.

Don't get me wrong, I don't like taxes any more than you do. And as someone who makes a decent amount of money, and hopes to make more in the future, I like the idea of something other than a progressive tax. But the problem is that "I don't like taxes" is only step one, and conservatives have bizarrely taken that idea and run with it, leaving people like me wondering if they realize they forgot several other steps. Modern conservatives are the counterpart to a group that doesn't exist, people who want high taxes for the sake of making the rich poorer. Liberals want the government to do certain things, and you people are too busy fighting non-existent communists to provide a reasonable alternative.

Edit: To put it another way, your taxes are too high? So are mine...so what do we do about it? The fact that such a question is usually met with blank stares and slack jaws from the right is why I'm a pretty big liberal. I'm a liberal not because I'm a big fan of taxes, but because I'm a big fan of political ideologies that don't fit on a bumper sticker.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

American dream != progressive taxes. Just because we have a progressive system does not mean it's part of the American dream as you seem to be suggesting. And no, not everyone agrees with your liberal BS about prosperity = more responsibility via taxation by the gov't. While people do have a moral responsibility to care / show mercy on others - who are you to use the gov't to force your level of morality(love this one since the libs always try to claim the Conservatives force morality on people) on everyone via taxation. It may be YOUR american dream(and the dream of other libs) to tax everyone more and more but it's not the dream of everyone.
Also, using education is retarded - most places it's paid for by local property taxes - not a progressive tax on labor.

silly libs always crack me up...

How cute, a Phony "go shopping, entitlement" conservative who blames his and the country's shortcomings on "the libs". Quit whining about your taxes. You think you can live in this great country and be entitled to pay nothing. I have been taxed 35% on my wages under the Bush administration. I am well off though. I'm part of "the rich" you "go shopping" conservatives like to "rally behind". It took a lot of hard work to grow my business and I am now reaping the rewards of being fortunate to live in this great country. If Obama goes through with what he planed, I will be taxed 39.6% on my income. Guess what: after paying my taxes I am still very well off.

My taxes buy you and me civilization and if some of that money goes to an unfortunate American which allows him or her to better themselves, so be it. You don't like our tax system, get the fuck out. Insted of feeling entitled to live here and not give back, why don't you better yourself. This country is full of upportunity to make money. Quit bitching about your "boogyman of ills" and get out and live your life. You "victimolgy conservatives" blameing a phantom boogyman ("the libs") for the country problems "always crack me up"

Who's whining about taxes? Seems to me you people are whining about them. I merely replied to the stupid notion that American dream = progressive taxation. The idea that I or other Conservatives want to "pay nothing" is absurd and nothing more than a lame strawman.

Ah yes, the same old lame "get out" line you libs used to try to claim us Conservatives were saying. Except, I didn't say that and you people are. Yeah, great americans you are...:roll:

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Pandaren

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
American dream != progressive taxes. Just because we have a progressive system does not mean it's part of the American dream as you seem to be suggesting. And no, not everyone agrees with your liberal BS about prosperity = more responsibility via taxation by the gov't. While people do have a moral responsibility to care / show mercy on others - who are you to use the gov't to force your level of morality(love this one since the libs always try to claim the Conservatives force morality on people) on everyone via taxation. It may be YOUR american dream(and the dream of other libs) to tax everyone more and more but it's not the dream of everyone.
Also, using education is retarded - most places it's paid for by local property taxes - not a progressive tax on labor.

silly libs always crack me up...

It's pretty simple if you ask me.

Poor people will beat your sorry ass and take your stuff if there is no societal framework that gives them a chance to legally better themselves.

Taxes are insurance against loss. The wealthy are paying higher taxes because they have more "stuff" that needs to be insured. I count myself among those who are fairly well off, and I recognize that I have a lot at stake that needs to be protected against enemies, foreign and domestic.

I agree, however I see it differently by way of math. You make more- you pay more even if the "rate" is the same. Libs seem to ignore that reality and suggest a person who earns more should pay more per dollar than someone else as if it makes things more "fair". :roll:

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed
McCain used the visage of Joe the Plumber as the American Dream. It is the ideal that nothing is out of reach for us. All of us can do better in our lives, perhaps buying our boss's business, or getting an additional degree. By using Joe the Plumber, John McCain was trying to tell us that Obama wants to tax the American Dream: If we do well, make more money, then we are going to be punished.

But, it also proves that McCain and his campaign staff did not understand the American Dream. He missed the part of the American Dream that says that as we become more prosperous, we have additional responsibilities, one of which is to pay more taxes as we get into the higher tax brackets in our proggressive tax system. We have a greater responsibility to take care of this great nation so that persons who have not achieved the American Dream are lifted up (so to speak).

McCain never understood this. He saw this as wealth redistribution when in actuality it is merely leveling the playing field to a small (very small) degree. For example, a part of our taxes goes toward education. Our education system makes it possible for everyone to have the chance at the American Dream. This is not a "give away." This simply makes our society better. You can't have public schools without taxes. This is not a socialistic idea.

Joe the Plumber was an empty symbol for the American Dream. In reality, Joe fell well short of the symbol that McCain tried to create - not licensed as a plumber, owes taxes, etc.

American dream != progressive taxes. Just because we have a progressive system does not mean it's part of the American dream as you seem to be suggesting. And no, not everyone agrees with your liberal BS about prosperity = more responsibility via taxation by the gov't. While people do have a moral responsibility to care / show mercy on others - who are you to use the gov't to force your level of morality(love this one since the libs always try to claim the Conservatives force morality on people) on everyone via taxation. It may be YOUR american dream(and the dream of other libs) to tax everyone more and more but it's not the dream of everyone.
Also, using education is retarded - most places it's paid for by local property taxes - not a progressive tax on labor.

silly libs always crack me up...

Don't be an idiot, a progressive tax isn't the goal of liberals...it's just the best way for the government to fulfill it's role. The fact that people like you always argue about taxes just demonstrates that you don't really get it. Conservatives always seem to be interested in taxes for their own sake, while liberals are more interested in what you can DO with tax money. That's why I'm a liberal, I don't think whining about taxes is a very good political ideology.

Don't get me wrong, I don't like taxes any more than you do. And as someone who makes a decent amount of money, and hopes to make more in the future, I like the idea of something other than a progressive tax. But the problem is that "I don't like taxes" is only step one, and conservatives have bizarrely taken that idea and run with it, leaving people like me wondering if they realize they forgot several other steps. Modern conservatives are the counterpart to a group that doesn't exist, people who want high taxes for the sake of making the rich poorer. Liberals want the government to do certain things, and you people are too busy fighting non-existent communists to provide a reasonable alternative.

Edit: To put it another way, your taxes are too high? So are mine...so what do we do about it? The fact that such a question is usually met with blank stares and slack jaws from the right is why I'm a pretty big liberal. I'm a liberal not because I'm a big fan of taxes, but because I'm a big fan of political ideologies that don't fit on a bumper sticker.

No, progressive taxation isn't the "best way" - you've just bought into the bullshit.
lol, taxes aren't about me. You show your ignorance by suggesting it's selfishness that drives my tax positions. The reality of the situation is that I think people can use their earnings better than the gov't can use them and you by admission are more interested in what the gov't can do with tax money.


The answer to your edit is for the gov't to get out of things it's not specifically charged with doing. I've stated that repeatedly so obviously you must have been looking in the mirror if all you saw was a blank stare from an "idiot"...

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed
McCain used the visage of Joe the Plumber as the American Dream. It is the ideal that nothing is out of reach for us. All of us can do better in our lives, perhaps buying our boss's business, or getting an additional degree. By using Joe the Plumber, John McCain was trying to tell us that Obama wants to tax the American Dream: If we do well, make more money, then we are going to be punished.

But, it also proves that McCain and his campaign staff did not understand the American Dream. He missed the part of the American Dream that says that as we become more prosperous, we have additional responsibilities, one of which is to pay more taxes as we get into the higher tax brackets in our proggressive tax system. We have a greater responsibility to take care of this great nation so that persons who have not achieved the American Dream are lifted up (so to speak).

McCain never understood this. He saw this as wealth redistribution when in actuality it is merely leveling the playing field to a small (very small) degree. For example, a part of our taxes goes toward education. Our education system makes it possible for everyone to have the chance at the American Dream. This is not a "give away." This simply makes our society better. You can't have public schools without taxes. This is not a socialistic idea.

Joe the Plumber was an empty symbol for the American Dream. In reality, Joe fell well short of the symbol that McCain tried to create - not licensed as a plumber, owes taxes, etc.

American dream != progressive taxes. Just because we have a progressive system does not mean it's part of the American dream as you seem to be suggesting. And no, not everyone agrees with your liberal BS about prosperity = more responsibility via taxation by the gov't. While people do have a moral responsibility to care / show mercy on others - who are you to use the gov't to force your level of morality(love this one since the libs always try to claim the Conservatives force morality on people) on everyone via taxation. It may be YOUR american dream(and the dream of other libs) to tax everyone more and more but it's not the dream of everyone.
Also, using education is retarded - most places it's paid for by local property taxes - not a progressive tax on labor.

silly libs always crack me up...

Don't be an idiot, a progressive tax isn't the goal of liberals...it's just the best way for the government to fulfill it's role. The fact that people like you always argue about taxes just demonstrates that you don't really get it. Conservatives always seem to be interested in taxes for their own sake, while liberals are more interested in what you can DO with tax money. That's why I'm a liberal, I don't think whining about taxes is a very good political ideology.

Don't get me wrong, I don't like taxes any more than you do. And as someone who makes a decent amount of money, and hopes to make more in the future, I like the idea of something other than a progressive tax. But the problem is that "I don't like taxes" is only step one, and conservatives have bizarrely taken that idea and run with it, leaving people like me wondering if they realize they forgot several other steps. Modern conservatives are the counterpart to a group that doesn't exist, people who want high taxes for the sake of making the rich poorer. Liberals want the government to do certain things, and you people are too busy fighting non-existent communists to provide a reasonable alternative.

Edit: To put it another way, your taxes are too high? So are mine...so what do we do about it? The fact that such a question is usually met with blank stares and slack jaws from the right is why I'm a pretty big liberal. I'm a liberal not because I'm a big fan of taxes, but because I'm a big fan of political ideologies that don't fit on a bumper sticker.

No, progressive taxation isn't the "best way" - you've just bought into the bullshit.
lol, taxes aren't about me. You show your ignorance by suggesting it's selfishness that drives my tax positions. The reality of the situation is that I think people can use their earnings better than the gov't can use them and you by admission are more interested in what the gov't can do with tax money.


The answer to your edit is for the gov't to get out of things it's not specifically charged with doing. I've stated that repeatedly so obviously you must have been looking in the mirror if all you saw was a blank stare from an "idiot"...

Fair enough, but you're arguing a different point now. The size of government is a different argument than HOW taxes are gathered, no matter how big or small government is, it has to be funded somehow. A small government could also be funded by progressive taxation, it would just be lower across the board. "Small government" isn't an answer to the question of what tax policy should look like. It's an answer to the question of what total taxation levels should be, no how those tax burdens are distributed.

I wasn't talking specifically about you, although I do think it's dumb that you claim progressive taxation is the end goal of liberalism, my experience has been that conservatives seem extremely concerned with their own personal tax levels. And obviously that's the driving force for the right, since that always features prominently in Republican campaigns. "The liberals are going to raise your taxes" is a stupid argument, first of all because it's usually not true, and secondly because it treats taxes as the be all and end all policy debate topic.

Now we can definitely debate the size of government as well, but since your complaint was about taxes, THAT is what I responded to. And I see nothing in your response that says anything about why progressive taxation is bad.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

I agree, however I see it differently by way of math. You make more- you pay more even if the "rate" is the same. Libs seem to ignore that reality and suggest a person who earns more should pay more per dollar than someone else as if it makes things more "fair". :roll:

In our progressive income tax, you still pay the same rate as everyone else on the money earned below the threshold amount for the next tax bracket. You only pay more on the amount you earned above that threshold. The same applies if and as you're fortunate enough to earn your way into higher brackets.

When full time low wage workers are in poverty while the wealthy are living in luxury, it's not unreasonable to tax the incremental income above those thresholds at progressively higher rates to underwrite the legitimate functions of the government and economic system that provided them the opportunity to earn that added income.

That's not a "liberal" concept. It's just practical. Too many of the working poor don't have "extra" money, let alone "enough." It's like Willie Sutton's answer when they asked him why he robbed banks. He said it was because "that's where the money is."

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed
McCain used the visage of Joe the Plumber as the American Dream. It is the ideal that nothing is out of reach for us. All of us can do better in our lives, perhaps buying our boss's business, or getting an additional degree. By using Joe the Plumber, John McCain was trying to tell us that Obama wants to tax the American Dream: If we do well, make more money, then we are going to be punished.

But, it also proves that McCain and his campaign staff did not understand the American Dream. He missed the part of the American Dream that says that as we become more prosperous, we have additional responsibilities, one of which is to pay more taxes as we get into the higher tax brackets in our proggressive tax system. We have a greater responsibility to take care of this great nation so that persons who have not achieved the American Dream are lifted up (so to speak).

McCain never understood this. He saw this as wealth redistribution when in actuality it is merely leveling the playing field to a small (very small) degree. For example, a part of our taxes goes toward education. Our education system makes it possible for everyone to have the chance at the American Dream. This is not a "give away." This simply makes our society better. You can't have public schools without taxes. This is not a socialistic idea.

Joe the Plumber was an empty symbol for the American Dream. In reality, Joe fell well short of the symbol that McCain tried to create - not licensed as a plumber, owes taxes, etc.

American dream != progressive taxes. Just because we have a progressive system does not mean it's part of the American dream as you seem to be suggesting. And no, not everyone agrees with your liberal BS about prosperity = more responsibility via taxation by the gov't. While people do have a moral responsibility to care / show mercy on others - who are you to use the gov't to force your level of morality(love this one since the libs always try to claim the Conservatives force morality on people) on everyone via taxation. It may be YOUR american dream(and the dream of other libs) to tax everyone more and more but it's not the dream of everyone.
Also, using education is retarded - most places it's paid for by local property taxes - not a progressive tax on labor.

silly libs always crack me up...

Don't be an idiot, a progressive tax isn't the goal of liberals...it's just the best way for the government to fulfill it's role. The fact that people like you always argue about taxes just demonstrates that you don't really get it. Conservatives always seem to be interested in taxes for their own sake, while liberals are more interested in what you can DO with tax money. That's why I'm a liberal, I don't think whining about taxes is a very good political ideology.

Don't get me wrong, I don't like taxes any more than you do. And as someone who makes a decent amount of money, and hopes to make more in the future, I like the idea of something other than a progressive tax. But the problem is that "I don't like taxes" is only step one, and conservatives have bizarrely taken that idea and run with it, leaving people like me wondering if they realize they forgot several other steps. Modern conservatives are the counterpart to a group that doesn't exist, people who want high taxes for the sake of making the rich poorer. Liberals want the government to do certain things, and you people are too busy fighting non-existent communists to provide a reasonable alternative.

Edit: To put it another way, your taxes are too high? So are mine...so what do we do about it? The fact that such a question is usually met with blank stares and slack jaws from the right is why I'm a pretty big liberal. I'm a liberal not because I'm a big fan of taxes, but because I'm a big fan of political ideologies that don't fit on a bumper sticker.

No, progressive taxation isn't the "best way" - you've just bought into the bullshit.
lol, taxes aren't about me. You show your ignorance by suggesting it's selfishness that drives my tax positions. The reality of the situation is that I think people can use their earnings better than the gov't can use them and you by admission are more interested in what the gov't can do with tax money.


The answer to your edit is for the gov't to get out of things it's not specifically charged with doing. I've stated that repeatedly so obviously you must have been looking in the mirror if all you saw was a blank stare from an "idiot"...

Fair enough, but you're arguing a different point now. The size of government is a different argument than HOW taxes are gathered, no matter how big or small government is, it has to be funded somehow. A small government could also be funded by progressive taxation, it would just be lower across the board. "Small government" isn't an answer to the question of what tax policy should look like. It's an answer to the question of what total taxation levels should be, no how those tax burdens are distributed.

I wasn't talking specifically about you, although I do think it's dumb that you claim progressive taxation is the end goal of liberalism, my experience has been that conservatives seem extremely concerned with their own personal tax levels. And obviously that's the driving force for the right, since that always features prominently in Republican campaigns. "The liberals are going to raise your taxes" is a stupid argument, first of all because it's usually not true, and secondly because it treats taxes as the be all and end all policy debate topic.

Now we can definitely debate the size of government as well, but since your complaint was about taxes, THAT is what I responded to. And I see nothing in your response that says anything about why progressive taxation is bad.

Yes, but my reply to you was based on your post which claimed it was the "best way". Also, no where did I say that progressive taxation was "the end goal of liberalism". Try reading what I said. It was about people like the poster and libs like him - not about "end game".

Again, my "complaint was" NOT "about taxes. My post was a response to the moronic assertion that American dream = progressive taxation. I don't have to list why it's "bad" because i didn't make that claim in my post, I stated it was not the "best way". YOU made the claim, not me.


As a side note - there is a direct link to what you call "how taxes are gathered" (progressive on labor) and how much a gov't "should" do. Very rarely are the two separate in reality. I fall on the side of the individual making the choice over the gov't making the choice which goes directly to the answer you sought in your edit earlier.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

I agree, however I see it differently by way of math. You make more- you pay more even if the "rate" is the same. Libs seem to ignore that reality and suggest a person who earns more should pay more per dollar than someone else as if it makes things more "fair". :roll:

In our progressive income tax, you still pay the same rate as everyone else on the money earned below the threshold amount for the next tax bracket. You only pay more on the amount you earned above that threshold. The same applies if and as you're fortunate enough to earn your way into higher brackets.

When full time low wage workers are in poverty while the wealthy are living in luxury, it's not unreasonable to tax the incremental income above those thresholds at progressively higher rates to underwrite the legitimate functions of the government and economic system that provided them the opportunity to earn that added income.

That's not a "liberal" concept. It's just practical. Too many of the working poor don't have "extra" money, let alone "enough." It's like Willie Sutton's answer when they asked him why he robbed banks. He said it was because "that's where the money is."

No, it's definitely a liberal concept atleast as far as what American political liberalism means today.
Yes, I know each dollar in each level is taxed the same rate but at a higher level a dollar is taxed at a higher rate. That does not come close to being "fair" like you libs try to claim. Why is dollar $levellimit +1 worth being taxed at a higher rate? Some people try to claim it's because they have more to protect or because of the opportunity. I've addressed the "protection" issue - in so far as a dollar is a dollar no matter the quantity. But if you really want to go there, isn't a dollar worth more to people who have less since you constantly point out more of it's used for necessities?
The next part is this idea that they somehow need to pay more for higher levels due to pay for the opportunity provided. To that point I say bullshit. Everyone has the same opportunity to earn that added income. IMO, you libs seem to want people to underwrite intrusive "moral" gov't programs so you use wealth as your piggy bank to fund your social engineering attempts. So how is the war on poverty going? still failing?

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Yes, I know each dollar in each level is taxed the same rate but at a higher level a dollar is taxed at a higher rate. That does not come close to being "fair" like you libs try to claim.

I've always taken your user name to indicate that you were somehow involved with engineering, but your ridiculous fiscal views show a total lack of understanding of reality. I'll say it again. You can't get added tax revenue from those who have no money.

Why is dollar $levellimit +1 worth being taxed at a higher rate?

ONLY those dollars above the threshold index are taxed at the higher rate. ONLY those dollars above the the next highest threshold index are taxed at the next higher rate. Your top few percent of gigazillionaire execs and Wall Street parasites income is derived from the sweat of the poor... if their jobs haven't already been outsourced.

Why do you think Congress got so pissed when the big three auto execs flew into D.C. on their private jets to beg for money? One of those jets could feed a lot of families for a long time.
Quit thinking like Marie Antoinette. When told that the peasants of Paris had no food, she is reputed to have said, "Let them eat cake." She lost her head.

It's not a good idea for the wealthy few to flaunt their wealth in front of a large mass of poor people. They may not be armed, but if enough of them get pissed enough at the same time, they can bring down those few with the money... and they'd be right to do so.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Yes, I know each dollar in each level is taxed the same rate but at a higher level a dollar is taxed at a higher rate. That does not come close to being "fair" like you libs try to claim.

I've always taken your user name to indicate that you were somehow involved with engineering, but your ridiculous fiscal views show a total lack of understanding of reality. I'll say it again. You can't get added tax revenue from those who have no money.

Why is dollar $levellimit +1 worth being taxed at a higher rate?

ONLY those dollars above the threshold index are taxed at the higher rate. ONLY those dollars above the the next highest threshold index are taxed at the next higher rate. Your top few percent of gigazillionaire execs and Wall Street parasites income is derived from the sweat of the poor... if their jobs haven't already been outsourced.

Why do you think Congress got so pissed when the big three auto execs flew into D.C. on their private jets to beg for money? One of those jets could feed a lot of families for a long time.
Quit thinking like Marie Antoinette. When told that the peasants of Paris had no food, she is reputed to have said, "Let them eat cake." She lost her head.

It's not a good idea for the wealthy few to flaunt their wealth in front of a large mass of poor people. They may not be armed, but if enough of them get pissed enough at the same time, they can bring down those few with the money... and they'd be right to do so.

Who's talking about "added tax revenue"? You see, as an Engineer I have to challenge assumptions and get to make things work more efficiently, work in harmony, or provide customizations not available on previous versions of equipment. Just because you are working on the ASSumption that there is a need for "added tax revenue" does not mean the need is real. It's like a customer telling me he needs me to add more lines to increase his production when I can make his existing line meet his end goal with some customization and tweaks.

Yes, that's what $levellimit+1 is. That "+1" is taxed more than the $levellimit dollar. That is absurd since a dollar is a dollar. What you libs seem to think is that that extra dollar is worth more so the gov't should get more of that dollar. It's fundamentally wrong - especially when put in perspective of your other ideological claims - like those who have more need their $ less. Why is it only worth more to the gov't and not the earner?

 

[ZeGermans]

even if he actually was the person he said he was, someone making 250k a year isn't an average person.

 

[BoomerD]

Joe the Scab Plumber and tax evader has deserved every bit of ridicule that has been heaped upon him.

He put himself up in front of the media under false assumptions, with no actual understanding of how the law would apply to him, lying about buying the business, and full of bullshit about how much money the company made.
He set himself up to fall on his face.

I haven't had this many laughs at something in the political arena in several years.



All the righties who are whining about some government employee "outing" the guy...did you whine this much about government waste when Clinton was being dragged through the mud over getting a blow-job from a fat Jewish girl? (Last estimate I heard was $7 million spent in the investigation and subsequent impeachement proceedings...and then he wasn't even convicted by the Senate)

I think the right has a long way to go to improve themselves before they can cry about "libruls wasting gubment money."

In the mean time, I get great enjoyment out of the Palin/Joe the Plumber ticket being listed as "Dumb and Plumber!"

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
Joe the Scab Plumber and tax evader has deserved every bit of ridicule that has been heaped upon him.

He put himself up in front of the media under false assumptions, with no actual understanding of how the law would apply to him, lying about buying the business, and full of bullshit about how much money the company made.
He set himself up to fall on his face.

I haven't had this many laughs at something in the political arena in several years.



All the righties who are whining about some government employee "outing" the guy...did you whine this much about government waste when Clinton was being dragged through the mud over getting a blow-job from a fat Jewish girl? (Last estimate I heard was $7 million spent in the investigation and subsequent impeachement proceedings...and then he wasn't even convicted by the Senate)

I think the right has a long way to go to improve themselves before they can cry about "libruls wasting gubment money."

In the mean time, I get great enjoyment out of the Palin/Joe the Plumber ticket being listed as "Dumb and Plumber!"

Hold on there slick.... The issue about the state worker is that they abused their position to dig dirt on someone they saw as a political liability for their candidate. NO ONE should be OK with what on regarding the state people.

 

[Red Dawn]

Joe the Plumber wouldn't be such a joke if he hadn't of tried to take financial advantage of the whole situation. One he got an agent he became a shit stain.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Joe the Plumber wouldn't be such a joke if he hadn't of tried to take financial advantage of the whole situation. One he got an agent he became a shit stain.

Because he should just sit around and let your hero Obama take care of everything in his life for him? We are just 2 short months away from free healthcare, free education, and guaranteed jobs. Admit it, you do get a little tingle in your leg when you hear Barack's name don't you?

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed
McCain used the visage of Joe the Plumber as the American Dream. It is the ideal that nothing is out of reach for us. All of us can do better in our lives, perhaps buying our boss's business, or getting an additional degree. By using Joe the Plumber, John McCain was trying to tell us that Obama wants to tax the American Dream: If we do well, make more money, then we are going to be punished.

But, it also proves that McCain and his campaign staff did not understand the American Dream. He missed the part of the American Dream that says that as we become more prosperous, we have additional responsibilities, one of which is to pay more taxes as we get into the higher tax brackets in our proggressive tax system. We have a greater responsibility to take care of this great nation so that persons who have not achieved the American Dream are lifted up (so to speak).

McCain never understood this. He saw this as wealth redistribution when in actuality it is merely leveling the playing field to a small (very small) degree. For example, a part of our taxes goes toward education. Our education system makes it possible for everyone to have the chance at the American Dream. This is not a "give away." This simply makes our society better. You can't have public schools without taxes. This is not a socialistic idea.

Joe the Plumber was an empty symbol for the American Dream. In reality, Joe fell well short of the symbol that McCain tried to create - not licensed as a plumber, owes taxes, etc.

American dream != progressive taxes. Just because we have a progressive system does not mean it's part of the American dream as you seem to be suggesting. And no, not everyone agrees with your liberal BS about prosperity = more responsibility via taxation by the gov't. While people do have a moral responsibility to care / show mercy on others - who are you to use the gov't to force your level of morality(love this one since the libs always try to claim the Conservatives force morality on people) on everyone via taxation. It may be YOUR american dream(and the dream of other libs) to tax everyone more and more but it's not the dream of everyone.
Also, using education is retarded - most places it's paid for by local property taxes - not a progressive tax on labor.

silly libs always crack me up...

Cad, dear boy. The first thing that went through my head after reading this is well...

"Is this guy a fucking idiot or something?"

Please, please. Show me where in the hell BMW remotely implied that the "American Dream" is progressive taxes. Education is paid locally? Go see the school in the poorer areas and tell me how they're doing before you starting ranting and raving about how the "libs" want to "tax" everyone to death.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Rainsford
...

Fair enough, but you're arguing a different point now. The size of government is a different argument than HOW taxes are gathered, no matter how big or small government is, it has to be funded somehow. A small government could also be funded by progressive taxation, it would just be lower across the board. "Small government" isn't an answer to the question of what tax policy should look like. It's an answer to the question of what total taxation levels should be, no how those tax burdens are distributed.

I wasn't talking specifically about you, although I do think it's dumb that you claim progressive taxation is the end goal of liberalism, my experience has been that conservatives seem extremely concerned with their own personal tax levels. And obviously that's the driving force for the right, since that always features prominently in Republican campaigns. "The liberals are going to raise your taxes" is a stupid argument, first of all because it's usually not true, and secondly because it treats taxes as the be all and end all policy debate topic.

Now we can definitely debate the size of government as well, but since your complaint was about taxes, THAT is what I responded to. And I see nothing in your response that says anything about why progressive taxation is bad.

Yes, but my reply to you was based on your post which claimed it was the "best way". Also, no where did I say that progressive taxation was "the end goal of liberalism". Try reading what I said. It was about people like the poster and libs like him - not about "end game".

Again, my "complaint was" NOT "about taxes. My post was a response to the moronic assertion that American dream = progressive taxation. I don't have to list why it's "bad" because i didn't make that claim in my post, I stated it was not the "best way". YOU made the claim, not me.


As a side note - there is a direct link to what you call "how taxes are gathered" (progressive on labor) and how much a gov't "should" do. Very rarely are the two separate in reality. I fall on the side of the individual making the choice over the gov't making the choice which goes directly to the answer you sought in your edit earlier.

Nobody said that the American dream is progressive taxation, so I'm not sure what you're arguing about. The American dream can be helped along by policies that INCLUDE progressive taxation, but it's not a goal by itself. Nobody made that claim either, which is why I'm a little confused about your post.

And no matter how much you want to separate taxation and spending, you can't do it. As long as you support a non-zero amount of government spending, the taxes to pay for that have to be gathered somehow. It's not obvious to me why a larger government would more likely have progressive taxation or why a small government could somehow eliminate this obviously disliked taxation method.

I also find it pretty disingenuous that you claim taxes on labor are the main issue being debated. The biggest policy differences between conservatives and liberals seem to be about non-labor taxes, like capital gains and inheritance taxes. Taken as a whole, conservative tax policies tend to place a LARGER tax burden on labor relative to their liberal counterparts, while liberals tend to want to tax non-labor income at a higher rate. If your concern is really about unfairly taxing labor, you're batting for the wrong team.

 

[UberNeuman]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Joe the Plumber wouldn't be such a joke if he hadn't of tried to take financial advantage of the whole situation. One he got an agent he became a shit stain.

Because he should just sit around and let your hero Obama take care of everything in his life for him? We are just 2 short months away from free healthcare, free education, and guaranteed jobs. Admit it, you do get a little tingle in your leg when you hear Barack's name don't you?

Sorry you didn't edit enough... Your horseshit remains....

and if you're still backing "Joe" then you are truly retarded....

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed
McCain used the visage of Joe the Plumber as the American Dream. It is the ideal that nothing is out of reach for us. All of us can do better in our lives, perhaps buying our boss's business, or getting an additional degree. By using Joe the Plumber, John McCain was trying to tell us that Obama wants to tax the American Dream: If we do well, make more money, then we are going to be punished.

But, it also proves that McCain and his campaign staff did not understand the American Dream. He missed the part of the American Dream that says that as we become more prosperous, we have additional responsibilities, one of which is to pay more taxes as we get into the higher tax brackets in our proggressive tax system. We have a greater responsibility to take care of this great nation so that persons who have not achieved the American Dream are lifted up (so to speak).

McCain never understood this. He saw this as wealth redistribution when in actuality it is merely leveling the playing field to a small (very small) degree. For example, a part of our taxes goes toward education. Our education system makes it possible for everyone to have the chance at the American Dream. This is not a "give away." This simply makes our society better. You can't have public schools without taxes. This is not a socialistic idea.

Joe the Plumber was an empty symbol for the American Dream. In reality, Joe fell well short of the symbol that McCain tried to create - not licensed as a plumber, owes taxes, etc.

American dream != progressive taxes. Just because we have a progressive system does not mean it's part of the American dream as you seem to be suggesting. And no, not everyone agrees with your liberal BS about prosperity = more responsibility via taxation by the gov't. While people do have a moral responsibility to care / show mercy on others - who are you to use the gov't to force your level of morality(love this one since the libs always try to claim the Conservatives force morality on people) on everyone via taxation. It may be YOUR american dream(and the dream of other libs) to tax everyone more and more but it's not the dream of everyone.
Also, using education is retarded - most places it's paid for by local property taxes - not a progressive tax on labor.

silly libs always crack me up...

Cad, dear boy. The first thing that went through my head after reading this is well...

"Is this guy a fucking idiot or something?"

Please, please. Show me where in the hell BMW remotely implied that the "American Dream" is progressive taxes. Education is paid locally? Go see the school in the poorer areas and tell me how they're doing before you starting ranting and raving about how the "libs" want to "tax" everyone to death.

Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed
He missed the part of the American Dream that says that as we become more prosperous, we have additional responsibilities, one of which is to pay more taxes as we get into the higher tax brackets in our proggressive tax system.

Here moranBMW suggests that the American dream says... First off, the American dream doesn't say anything and second it sure as hell doesn't say you have added responsibilities. The gov't says you do via force - taxes. In this case the moran poster suggests that the American dream's responsibilities contain progressive taxation. It's pure and utter bullshit. The American dream has NOTHING do do with progressive taxation.

Next - do you not know where education funds come from? seriously?


I swear you people are so blinded by your ideology you fail to think rationally.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Rainsford
...

Fair enough, but you're arguing a different point now. The size of government is a different argument than HOW taxes are gathered, no matter how big or small government is, it has to be funded somehow. A small government could also be funded by progressive taxation, it would just be lower across the board. "Small government" isn't an answer to the question of what tax policy should look like. It's an answer to the question of what total taxation levels should be, no how those tax burdens are distributed.

I wasn't talking specifically about you, although I do think it's dumb that you claim progressive taxation is the end goal of liberalism, my experience has been that conservatives seem extremely concerned with their own personal tax levels. And obviously that's the driving force for the right, since that always features prominently in Republican campaigns. "The liberals are going to raise your taxes" is a stupid argument, first of all because it's usually not true, and secondly because it treats taxes as the be all and end all policy debate topic.

Now we can definitely debate the size of government as well, but since your complaint was about taxes, THAT is what I responded to. And I see nothing in your response that says anything about why progressive taxation is bad.

Yes, but my reply to you was based on your post which claimed it was the "best way". Also, no where did I say that progressive taxation was "the end goal of liberalism". Try reading what I said. It was about people like the poster and libs like him - not about "end game".

Again, my "complaint was" NOT "about taxes. My post was a response to the moronic assertion that American dream = progressive taxation. I don't have to list why it's "bad" because i didn't make that claim in my post, I stated it was not the "best way". YOU made the claim, not me.


As a side note - there is a direct link to what you call "how taxes are gathered" (progressive on labor) and how much a gov't "should" do. Very rarely are the two separate in reality. I fall on the side of the individual making the choice over the gov't making the choice which goes directly to the answer you sought in your edit earlier.

Nobody said that the American dream is progressive taxation, so I'm not sure what you're arguing about. The American dream can be helped along by policies that INCLUDE progressive taxation, but it's not a goal by itself. Nobody made that claim either, which is why I'm a little confused about your post.

And no matter how much you want to separate taxation and spending, you can't do it. As long as you support a non-zero amount of government spending, the taxes to pay for that have to be gathered somehow. It's not obvious to me why a larger government would more likely have progressive taxation or why a small government could somehow eliminate this obviously disliked taxation method.

I also find it pretty disingenuous that you claim taxes on labor are the main issue being debated. The biggest policy differences between conservatives and liberals seem to be about non-labor taxes, like capital gains and inheritance taxes. Taken as a whole, conservative tax policies tend to place a LARGER tax burden on labor relative to their liberal counterparts, while liberals tend to want to tax non-labor income at a higher rate. If your concern is really about unfairly taxing labor, you're batting for the wrong team.

Uhh... hello? I didn't separate taxes and spending. You tried to seperate them with your comments on my reply to your earlier edit question.

And while you can claim the American dream can be helped along by progressive taxation - so could a flat tax, or a hundred other things. It's a poor argument when it comes to "the American dream".

You can assume and make all sorts of claims about groups and policies and tendencies but it matters very little. You asked the question - I answered it and it's true. And no I'm not batting for the wrong team, Conservatives don't hold the taxation of labor in high regard, in fact some have been trying to change it. The flat or fair tax were not liberal ideas... sheesh.... But anyway, the topic was progressive taxation correct? What tax is progressive here - that's right -the tax on your labor. It's becoming quite obvious you are just trying to confuse the issue by twisting things and injecting irrelevant BS. I suggest you stop while you are behind...

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Joe the Plumber wouldn't be such a joke if he hadn't of tried to take financial advantage of the whole situation. One he got an agent he became a shit stain.

Because he should just sit around and let your hero Obama take care of everything in his life for him? We are just 2 short months away from free healthcare, free education, and guaranteed jobs. Admit it, you do get a little tingle in your leg when you hear Barack's name don't you?

Sorry you didn't edit enough... Your horseshit remains....

and if you're still backing "Joe" then you are truly retarded....

"Backing Joe"? I wasn't aware that we had any elections coming up.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY



I swear you people are so blinded by your ideology you fail to think rationally.

Yet you are the one with Reagan shilling for some corporation in your sig fearmongering about how medicare=communism o0o0o0o0o.
BTW where is the hammer and sickle? We have had medicare for ages now lolololz

Thanks for the cold-war era comedy gold in your highly partisan sig though, I forgot how foolish Reagan was, and you REALLY want to criticize someone else for being an idealist?
You must be a parody poster. If so my hat is off.

Edit: Spelled rayguns name wrong..err whatever

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: TheRedUnderURBed

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY



I swear you people are so blinded by your ideology you fail to think rationally.

Yet you are the one with Reagan shilling for some corporation in your sig fearmongering about how medicare=communism o0o0o0o0o.
BTW where is the hammer and sickle? We have had medicare for ages now lolololz

Thanks for the cold-war era comedy gold in your highly partisan sig though, I forgot how foolish Reagan was, and you REALLY want to criticize someone else for being an idealist?
You must be a parody poster. If so my hat is off.

Edit: Spelled rayguns name wrong..err whatever

Yeah, Reagan was a small minded idealogue. He's the one who started destroying government institutions from within by appointing anti-government saboteurs, and then said "see, government is inefficient and doesn't work". Pretty clever strategy for fooling a lot of ignorant people and winning elections, for years to come.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Joe the Plumber wouldn't be such a joke if he hadn't of tried to take financial advantage of the whole situation. One he got an agent he became a shit stain.

Because he should just sit around and let your hero Obama take care of everything in his life for him? We are just 2 short months away from free healthcare, free education, and guaranteed jobs. Admit it, you do get a little tingle in your leg when you hear Barack's name don't you?

What a childish post. What he should have done is just go back to work and get on with his life instead of trying to cash in on his chance encounter with Obama. On top of that he gleefully let McCain and Palin use him for their propaganda which made him look like a bigger tool.

 

[BMW540I6speed]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed
McCain used the visage of Joe the Plumber as the American Dream. It is the ideal that nothing is out of reach for us. All of us can do better in our lives, perhaps buying our boss's business, or getting an additional degree. By using Joe the Plumber, John McCain was trying to tell us that Obama wants to tax the American Dream: If we do well, make more money, then we are going to be punished.

But, it also proves that McCain and his campaign staff did not understand the American Dream. He missed the part of the American Dream that says that as we become more prosperous, we have additional responsibilities, one of which is to pay more taxes as we get into the higher tax brackets in our proggressive tax system. We have a greater responsibility to take care of this great nation so that persons who have not achieved the American Dream are lifted up (so to speak).

McCain never understood this. He saw this as wealth redistribution when in actuality it is merely leveling the playing field to a small (very small) degree. For example, a part of our taxes goes toward education. Our education system makes it possible for everyone to have the chance at the American Dream. This is not a "give away." This simply makes our society better. You can't have public schools without taxes. This is not a socialistic idea.

Joe the Plumber was an empty symbol for the American Dream. In reality, Joe fell well short of the symbol that McCain tried to create - not licensed as a plumber, owes taxes, etc.

American dream != progressive taxes. Just because we have a progressive system does not mean it's part of the American dream as you seem to be suggesting. And no, not everyone agrees with your liberal BS about prosperity = more responsibility via taxation by the gov't. While people do have a moral responsibility to care / show mercy on others - who are you to use the gov't to force your level of morality(love this one since the libs always try to claim the Conservatives force morality on people) on everyone via taxation. It may be YOUR american dream(and the dream of other libs) to tax everyone more and more but it's not the dream of everyone.
Also, using education is retarded - most places it's paid for by local property taxes - not a progressive tax on labor.

silly libs always crack me up...

Cad, dear boy. The first thing that went through my head after reading this is well...

"Is this guy a fucking idiot or something?"

Please, please. Show me where in the hell BMW remotely implied that the "American Dream" is progressive taxes. Education is paid locally? Go see the school in the poorer areas and tell me how they're doing before you starting ranting and raving about how the "libs" want to "tax" everyone to death.

Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed
He missed the part of the American Dream that says that as we become more prosperous, we have additional responsibilities, one of which is to pay more taxes as we get into the higher tax brackets in our proggressive tax system.

Here moranBMW suggests that the American dream says... First off, the American dream doesn't say anything and second it sure as hell doesn't say you have added responsibilities. The gov't says you do via force - taxes. In this case the moran poster suggests that the American dream's responsibilities contain progressive taxation. It's pure and utter bullshit. The American dream has NOTHING do do with progressive taxation.

Next - do you not know where education funds come from? seriously?


I swear you people are so blinded by your ideology you fail to think rationally.

Oh Jeeezez H Christ! . look at all the childish name calling. Boy did I hit a nerve with mentioning a progressive tax system, laughable!. I responded to the topic of Joe the Plumber and how he was marketed by the McCain campaign with the whole "spreading the wealth around", Joe not wanting to pay his share, Obama ruining the American dream, etc. etc. Read my original post again.

No where did I state that the only way to attain the American dream that it "has" to include a progressive tax system. Thats some tangent you created. I got news for you: whatever the American dream is to you?, I assume becoming wealthy, you will have to do it with the system we have in place. The part of my post you quoted above - "is what it is".

If Joe wants to acheive the American dream, aka become wealthy he WILL have to deal with the progressive tax system, period!. His responsibilities will be to pay his share, duh!. Take whatever skewed worldview out of that quote to satisfy your outrage. To acheive the American dream you will have to do it with the tax system we have in place RIGHT NOW. Get it?. Thousands of Americans have become wealthy under this system. Try it some time, instead of blameing all the countrys problems and your short comings on a tax system and some boogyman ideology ("the libs").

In my experience: In my opinion: In a perfect world: In a perfect tax system:

Any tax system must be fair; our accrual accounting system benifits the rich; it enables potential assets and credits; it creates values that are thus ficticious; it allows the 'roll-over' of profits and losses; moreover, where entities exist, benefits can be provided for individuals and written off as expenses; and generally proliferates the control of vast sums of wealth by individuals.

However, simply taxing the rich - meaning that they cannot secure their holdings or are taxed in an unjust proportion - is not the answer.

First we must recognize that there is no direct Tax on revenues earned in the course of a regular employer/employee relationship. For citizens there is no such direct Tax.

Second: we must stipulate legally the meaning of the word "income" as used within the Constitution's tax laws; which has been defined by the Supreme Court Justices as "profits and gains," a direct Tax subject to apportionment, etc.

Third we must devise graduated tax on profits. In other words, the wealthy should be taxed, but in a manner that would encourage and secure wealth, and its maintenance to a specified level; for the extremes of wealth lead to corruption and the extremes of poverty lead to hoplessness; while both lead to Godlessness and injustice.

All expendatures would be subtracted, whether by entity or individual, because use taxes would be gained therefrom.

A just "income" tax would not apply until profits reached certain levels. Increasing taxes would be paid on each level; but once a level is taxed, no more tax would be due. Thus revenues which can only be obtained from the rich would be available to assist the poor, while becoming reasonably rich would not be prohibited and also be secured.

Flame away!, lets hear some more "cool" name calling, some more feigned boogymen to blame.....Booooo!, "the libs" are coming to get ya!