I'm just regurgitating what I learn in gov class, my teacher is a very intelligent person and I trust what he says and based on the facts he's shown us I agree with him.

I still believe the rich should be taxed if it means benefiting to the lower income people.

[QUOTE=hismajestythepope;16814127]you guys are missing the point, go to a low income area. people will complain like omg i cant afford dis i cant afford dat. but theyll be wearing timbaland boots and a bepe hoody, texting away on their sidekick while their homies smoking a blunt playing their new xbox 360.

MAAAN THA STRUGGLE YO.[/QUOTE]

this is called drug culture

go to a trailor park. go to center city.

wait you dont live in an industrial area you live in ****ing florida josh.

[QUOTE=pate;16814086]The rich already get taxes higher!

And in big cities, $250,000 doesn't make a person rich.



Again, there are other taxes.

He's going to heavily tax corporations. Guess what: Corporations don't pay taxes. They raise prices so we get to pay their taxes for them.



Capitalism = selfish

You work for what you have. If you don't work for anything, the government SHOULD NOT be handing you a fat check every month that came from a "rich" person's paycheck.


Rich people earned their money. Why should the government take it away?


And yes, I'm fine with the unemployment system as it is. I'm not talking about that.[/QUOTE]
Cutting taxes for the poor and raising taxes on the rich =/= taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor. The govenrnment doesn't send out checks to the poor with the rich people's money. They just take less of the poor's money and to compensate take more of the rich's.

As a (soon to be) wealthy person, I have no problem having less money in my pocket in order to allow others the ability to eat 3 meals a day and sleep under a roof without working 80 hours a week.

poor people dont live in florida

[QUOTE=Angmar;16814140]I'm just regurgitating what I learn in gov class, my teacher is a very intelligent person and I trust what he says and based on the facts he's shown us I agree with him.

I still believe the rich should be taxed if it means benefiting to the lower income people.[/QUOTE]
well wouldnt you know it, a high school teacher is liberal.

Not to mention that income taxes don't go towards redistribution, it goes to paying off debt. Not to mention that the government has no right to mandate the burden of one individual onto another individual.

I've always thought a flat tax would be a much more liberal concept, seeing as it creates everyone as an equal essentially, because they are...but when i met more hardcore liberals who understood tax law better i was disappointed to find that they are just as obsessed with money as republicans. They just go about it a different way.

123 Vince.

[QUOTE=Permanent Solution;16814153]Cutting taxes for the poor and raising taxes on the rich =/= taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor. The govenrnment doesn't send out checks to the poor with the rich people's money. They just take less of the poor's money and to compensate take more of the rich's.

As a (soon to be) wealthy person, I have no problem having less money in my pocket in order to allow others the ability to eat 3 meals a day and sleep under a roof without working 80 hours a week.[/QUOTE]
how are you rich if you're going to have less money

and how are you going to be rich anyway? Out of curiosity.

It's not like the government is going to take all of your money, you'll still be wealthy, just not as wealthy as you were before, boohoo.

[QUOTE=hismajestythepope;16814151]go to a trailor park. go to center city.

wait you dont live in an industrial area you live in ****ing florida josh.[/QUOTE]

i used to live in a ****** *** ghetto and have been involved in quite a few in general

[QUOTE=McP3000;16814161]how are you rich if you're going to have less money

and how are you going to be rich anyway? Out of curiosity.[/QUOTE]

Well if I make 100k and I pay 50% taxes, then I still take home as much as someone making 50k who pays no taxes. And neither of those scenarios are even close to reality.

Well consider that I'm 22 and have already gotten job offers that would land me as an individual in the top quartile of household incomes in the US and...

its not like lower class folk need more nike dunks either steve

[QUOTE=Angmar;16814165]It's not like the government is going to take all of your money, you'll still be wealthy, just not as wealthy as you were before, boohoo.[/QUOTE]
i dont see how the amount of money has anything to do with the inherently immoral concept. You're thinking in very surface level terms.

why are we talking about tax in the rock and metal thread on its 2000 page milestone

because there's always taxes and death

[QUOTE=Permanent Solution;16814173]Well if I make 100k and I pay 50% taxes, then I still take home as much as someone making 50k who pays no taxes. And neither of those scenarios are even close to reality.[/quote]
I know its not a reality because that would be a horribly immoral thing for the government to do.

[quote]Well consider that I'm 22 and have already gotten job offers that would land me as an individual in the top quartile of household incomes in the US and...[/QUOTE]
That isn't rich. Rich is considered the top tax bracket which is in the 300k's i think. unless you wanna get sticky and talk about subjective definitions of being rich, but lets not.
But then again you're also in the top %1 of people under the age of 30 so congrats man. :P

Whats the job?

[QUOTE=hismajestythepope;16814175]its not like lower class folk need more nike dunks either steve[/QUOTE]

god dammit

[QUOTE=McP3000;16814177]i dont see how the amount of money has anything to do with the inherently immoral concept. You're thinking in very surface level terms.[/QUOTE]

I'm impressed by your impressive vocabulary!

wow steve, and you laugh at silverfang for replying **** like that

[QUOTE=Angmar;16814186]I'm impressed by your impressive vocabulary![/QUOTE]
erm what

the highly evocative use of eloquent passages makes this conversation a pleasure to process auditorily.

[QUOTE=Altmer;16814191]the highly evocative use of eloquent passages makes this conversation a pleasure to process auditorily.[/QUOTE]
hey you know how to use a thesaurus too

I know what those words mean, but I really don't get what his point is tbh!

np joanna newsom

what dont you understand steve

[QUOTE=McP3000;16814192]hey you know how to use a thesaurus too[/QUOTE]

problem is that was off the top of my head

steve why are we the only smart people on mx?

its so lonely :( :( :(

Posting on mx lowers your IQ

What the hell is thinking on surface terms suppose to [B]f[/B]ucking mean.

you have a shallow mind

you must broaden your horizons and deepen your bottoms

****