SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#148 Jan 3, 2013
Darn, hit the wrong key.

So Chip, same scenario only the person making $60,000 pays 18% in taxes. Who has the most money left over to exist in the economy? And who still is richer than the other? Which is the entire point now isn't it.
Chip

Hartland, WI

#150 Jan 3, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
Darn, hit the wrong key.
So Chip, same scenario only the person making $60,000 pays 18% in taxes. Who has the most money left over to exist in the economy? And who still is richer than the other? Which is the entire point now isn't it.
Does it matter? You think it would be better to reward everyone the same no matter what they do, its called socialism and it has failed in every economy in history, an absolute FACT that only a complete ignorant pile of trash would ignore.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#151 Jan 3, 2013
Chip wrote:
<quoted text>
Does it matter? You think it would be better to reward everyone the same no matter what they do, its called socialism and it has failed in every economy in history, an absolute FACT that only a complete ignorant pile of trash would ignore.
I agree a complete ignorant pile of trash would ignore that the majority of the industrialized countries on the planet right at this time in history are democratic socialist countries.

Not that I am advocating that. Just saying an ignorant pile of trash would ignore it.
Bob

Big Rapids, MI

#152 Jan 4, 2013
Batch 37 Pain Is Good wrote:
If you pay no income tax then you should not be allowed to vote..... It takes people who know what it takes to support a limited govt......
Before you trash that part of the constitution, you might want to consider changing the 2nd amendment first.......

Then you could go to work on the 1st amendment so they couldn't complain about it.......

Why is it always the lunatics from the far right fringe that want to change the rules only if it benefits them? Almost sounds like Batch is a facist!
HPQ

Detroit, MI

#153 Jan 4, 2013
Ron wrote:
<quoted text>
What a stupid argument from the the guy that collects a government check. Give me, give me, give me!!
So Mike...how is the child predator biz going?
Chip

Madison, WI

#155 Jan 4, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree a complete ignorant pile of trash would ignore that the majority of the industrialized countries on the planet right at this time in history are democratic socialist countries.
Not that I am advocating that. Just saying an ignorant pile of trash would ignore it.
So you would prefer to be just like Cuba instead of being better, seems to explaing a lot of your arguments.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#156 Jan 4, 2013
Chip wrote:
<quoted text>
So you would prefer to be just like Cuba instead of being better, seems to explaing a lot of your arguments.
What, never heard of England? Sweden? Norway? France? Canada? Just to mention a few.

Cuba is a communist country professor.
Chip

Madison, WI

#157 Jan 4, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
What, never heard of England? Sweden? Norway? France? Canada? Just to mention a few.
Cuba is a communist country professor.
Well I guess that's the diffence between you and me, I view the U.S. as better than these countries and should continue to be better. Clearly you don't!
Chip

Madison, WI

#158 Jan 4, 2013
difference
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#160 Jan 4, 2013
Chip wrote:
<quoted text>
Well I guess that's the diffence between you and me, I view the U.S. as better than these countries and should continue to be better. Clearly you don't!
That I don't is your accusation. Not my assertion.

Still I believe, from historical evidence, a society where only the wealthy prosper, fails.

All those countries I mentioned, other than Cuba of course, have been around for a couple of thousand years while ours hasn't yet reached 300.

They still have private business. Though you would believe there are rules/laws for those businesses to follow is a bad thing.

So tell me why you don't believe in the Preamble of the Constitution.
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

What words do you have a problem with? Union? Look up the definition. Justice? Look the word up. Insure? Look the word up. Tranquility? Look the word up. Promote the General Welfare? Look the words up. Blessings of Liberty? Look the words up. Also notice Blessings of Liberty follow the words Union, Justice, Tranquility and Welfare.

And no, in your twisted mind, I don't mean a Welfare State. However promote the general Welfare doesn't mean only those at the top shall experience Justice, Tranquility and Welfare/well being...in all the ways you promote.
MIbowhunter

Traverse City, MI

#161 Jan 4, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
That I don't is your accusation. Not my assertion.
Still I believe, from historical evidence, a society where only the wealthy prosper, fails.
All those countries I mentioned, other than Cuba of course, have been around for a couple of thousand years while ours hasn't yet reached 300.
They still have private business. Though you would believe there are rules/laws for those businesses to follow is a bad thing.
So tell me why you don't believe in the Preamble of the Constitution.
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
What words do you have a problem with? Union? Look up the definition. Justice? Look the word up. Insure? Look the word up. Tranquility? Look the word up. Promote the General Welfare? Look the words up. Blessings of Liberty? Look the words up. Also notice Blessings of Liberty follow the words Union, Justice, Tranquility and Welfare.
And no, in your twisted mind, I don't mean a Welfare State. However promote the general Welfare doesn't mean only those at the top shall experience Justice, Tranquility and Welfare/well being...in all the ways you promote.
Nice post.
Batch 37 Pain Is Good

Highland, MI

#162 Jan 4, 2013
Seems some Dems are getting their first week check and finding out how Obama and the Dems stole from them. Ha!
Chip

Madison, WI

#163 Jan 4, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Sure, the founding fathers thought we should be a land of high taxes and handouts.

Thomas Jefferson:

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

Alexander Hamilton:

If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare… The powers of Congress would subvert the very foundation, the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America.

John Adams:

The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.

James Madison:

As a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights. Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions.

George Washington:

No taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant.

Benjamin Franklin:

I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.

No nation was ever ruined by trade, even seemingly the most disadvantageous.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#164 Jan 4, 2013
Chip wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure, the founding fathers thought we should be a land of high taxes and handouts.
Thomas Jefferson:
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
Alexander Hamilton:
If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare… The powers of Congress would subvert the very foundation, the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America.
John Adams:
The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.
James Madison:
As a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights. Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions.
George Washington:
No taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant.
Benjamin Franklin:
I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.
No nation was ever ruined by trade, even seemingly the most disadvantageous.
I'm going to save myself the drudgery of having to once again get into the context of what the founding fathers believed about taxation. Read this. http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2010/06/16/the...

I will make a few quick comments. George Washington instituted the first tax on the new nation. The Whiskey Tax. Even to call up the military to quell the rebellion over it.

The full context of Washington's "No taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant." is also on the link I've provided.

Thomas Jefferson was a proponent of progressive taxation.

So for you and/or anyone else to be presenting the founding fathers as anti-taxation demeans the intelligence of these visionaries that found this country. How Tea Partyish of you.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#166 Jan 4, 2013
Rob wrote:
<quoted text>
They were trying to pay of the debt from the war. Something unlike your hero.
(Washington)"He supported Alexander Hamilton's programs to pay off all state and national debt, to implement an effective tax system and to create a national bank (despite opposition from Thomas Jefferson). "
"The Whiskey Rebellion, or Whiskey Insurrection, was a tax protest in the United States beginning in 1791, during the presidency of George Washington. Farmers who used their leftover grain and corn in the form of whiskey as a medium of exchange were forced to pay a new tax. The tax was a part of treasury secretary Alexander Hamilton's program to increase central government power, in particular to fund his policy of assuming the war debt of those states which had failed to pay."
Your an idiot! The founding fathers were nothing like you claim they were. As a matter in fact they are the opposite.
We don't have a war debt? Really? Oh ya, sorry, we have two war debts.

Other than that do go back to the discussion covering the 16th Amendment and how that came about.

And if you believe they didn't have any idea it would take money to operate the Federal Government, that took revenue and the only way to obtain that revenue was to levy taxes, you are the idiot. My good grief man were you educated at a charter school.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#167 Jan 4, 2013
With respect to Alexander Hamilton's view on taxes:
"But these are not the only objects to which the jurisdiction of the Union, in respect to revenue, must necessarily be empowered to extend. It must embrace a provision for the support of the national civil list; for the payment of the national debts contracted, or that may be contracted; and, in general, for all those matters which will call for disbursements out of the national treasury. The conclusion is, that there must be interwoven, in the frame of the government, a general power of taxation, in one shape or another."
Also: "What remedy can there be for this situation, but in a change of the system which has produced it in a change of the fallacious and delusive system of quotas and requisitions? What substitute can there be imagined for this ignis fatuus in finance, but that of permitting the national government to raise its own revenues by the ordinary methods of taxation authorized in every well-ordered constitution of civil government? Ingenious men may declaim with plausibility on any subject; but no human ingenuity can point out any other expedient to rescue us from the inconveniences and embarrassments naturally resulting from defective supplies of the public treasury." Federalist No.30
That sounds to you/anyone Hamilton wasn't an advocate or in taxation ONLY to pay the war debt?
Chip

Madison, WI

#169 Jan 4, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm going to save myself the drudgery of having to once again get into the context of what the founding fathers believed about taxation. Read this. http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2010/06/16/the...
I will make a few quick comments. George Washington instituted the first tax on the new nation. The Whiskey Tax. Even to call up the military to quell the rebellion over it.
The full context of Washington's "No taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant." is also on the link I've provided.
Thomas Jefferson was a proponent of progressive taxation.
So for you and/or anyone else to be presenting the founding fathers as anti-taxation demeans the intelligence of these visionaries that found this country. How Tea Partyish of you.
Thomas Jefferson:

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

Sure sounds like a proponent of progressive taxation.

I would be more than willing to go back to the days where there was no other taxes than the Whiskey tax.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#170 Jan 4, 2013
Rob wrote:
<quoted text>
Apparently your reading and comprehension skills are of the lowly educated. You must of dropped out of school. I said they were trying to pay off their debt from the war. They being the founding fathers, and war being the revolutionary war.
As far as funding the government, nobody has a problem with funding the government thru taxes. Just as long as it is for the protection of the people like government was set up for. Not to support lazy fat azzes. Or to give pork barrel funding like the hurricane Sandy Pig bill. Or the the other legislation that has $41 of spending for every $1 in cuts.
Charter schools are doing very well all over. Maybe before you stick your foot in your mouth again you should research charter schools in Louisiana after the hurricane. Remember charter schools start most of the time where public schools have already failed.
And you don't believe charter schools are not pork barrel projects...private for profit schools funded by tax payer dollars? Private schools operating free from many of the laws and regulations that govern traditional public schools.

And there are several reports that charter schools on the whole are falling below performance of their public school counter parts.

But discussion of charter schools is off topic.

Yes you said "they were trying to pay off their debt from the war." Though strongly indicating that was the reason and only reason they were in favor of taxation.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#171 Jan 4, 2013
Chip wrote:
<quoted text>
Thomas Jefferson:
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
Sure sounds like a proponent of progressive taxation.
I would be more than willing to go back to the days where there was no other taxes than the Whiskey tax.
You sarcastically said, "Sure sounds like a proponent of progressive taxation."

"Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1785. ME 19:18, Papers 8:682

That settles that.

Please try and keep up as that has been gone over recently here.
SOS in Mesa

Phoenix, AZ

#174 Jan 4, 2013
Rob wrote:
<quoted text>
They were trying to pay of the debt from the war. Something unlike your hero.
(Washington)"He supported Alexander Hamilton's programs to pay off all state and national debt, to implement an effective tax system and to create a national bank (despite opposition from Thomas Jefferson). "
"The Whiskey Rebellion, or Whiskey Insurrection, was a tax protest in the United States beginning in 1791, during the presidency of George Washington. Farmers who used their leftover grain and corn in the form of whiskey as a medium of exchange were forced to pay a new tax. The tax was a part of treasury secretary Alexander Hamilton's program to increase central government power, in particular to fund his policy of assuming the war debt of those states which had failed to pay."
Your an idiot! The founding fathers were nothing like you claim they were. As a matter in fact they are the opposite.
Your an idiot!??? You're an uneducated idiot. Brush up on your spelling.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Grand Rapids Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Secret Service Director Julia Pierson resigns 11 hr DR X 2
College football roundup: Ohio State starts the... (Sep '13) 13 hr Go Blue Forever 1,400
What do you think of U-M's new football coach? (Jan '11) 18 hr Hugh Jass 27
What Doctors Think About Obamacare 20 hr Batch 37 Pain Is ... 2
Obama Admin. Caught Spying On Koch Bros.? 20 hr Batch 37 Pain Is ... 2
Obama attends only 41.2% of his intelligence br... Wed Rob 5
is it time to worry about the new england patri... Wed bobolinq 1
Grand Rapids Dating
Find my Match

Grand Rapids Jobs

Grand Rapids People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Grand Rapids News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Grand Rapids

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]