Make the best choices for your Medicare needs with AARP’s Medicare Made Easy. Try it today!

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
502
Views

Re: FAR RIGHT OR LIBERAL - NO MIDDLE GROUND

502 Views
Message 11 of 153

@rk9152 wrote:

@MaVolta wrote:


Oh, "means tested," now we are getting somewhere. 

 

And does that apply to corporate welfare also?

 

As a centrist, I would support a 15% corporate tax rate IF the tax avoidance loopholes were all closed, and corporate subsidies were eliminated. There may be good reason for some subsidies to some businesses, including larger corporations, but they should be specific and short term, and not just favorable to industry giants. (That's generally speaking, and not to get into the weeds of any particular program.)


I really don't know the right number. The idea is to get as many bucks as possibly while insuring that  the business prospers.

 

Supposedly the loopholes are designed for a specific purpose - the old saw, "You tax what you want to discourage, not what you want to encourage". Yes, I know - corruption screws that up. So it is the corruption, not the system that is at fault.

 

My main problem with corporate taxes is that, in reality, they get passed along to the consumer. And some consider that to be regressive.


The only way to get corruption out of the system is to change it. So let's just close up the loopholes everywhere, shall we? Yes, how libertarian of me.

 

As for corporations paying taxes . . . well since the SC of the land has ruled that corporations are people, for the benefit of making political contributions, then I would argue that they should pay taxes the same as people do. 

 

If we consider all of the money spent to buy influence in Washington, either by election funding or by furnishing "perks" to certain MoC, that if it were redirected to the Treasury, we could easily pay down the federal deficit, and probably have money to spare. 

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
502
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
508
Views

Re: FAR RIGHT OR LIBERAL - NO MIDDLE GROUND

508 Views
Message 12 of 153

@MaVolta wrote:


Oh, "means tested," now we are getting somewhere. 

 

And does that apply to corporate welfare also?

 

As a centrist, I would support a 15% corporate tax rate IF the tax avoidance loopholes were all closed, and corporate subsidies were eliminated. There may be good reason for some subsidies to some businesses, including larger corporations, but they should be specific and short term, and not just favorable to industry giants. (That's generally speaking, and not to get into the weeds of any particular program.)


I really don't know the right number. The idea is to get as many bucks as possibly while insuring that  the business prospers.

 

Supposedly the loopholes are designed for a specific purpose - the old saw, "You tax what you want to discourage, not what you want to encourage". Yes, I know - corruption screws that up. So it is the corruption, not the system that is at fault.

 

My main problem with corporate taxes is that, in reality, they get passed along to the consumer. And some consider that to be regressive.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
508
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
497
Views

Re: FAR RIGHT OR LIBERAL - NO MIDDLE GROUND

497 Views
Message 13 of 153

@Olderscout66 wrote:

Of course we had postal service, roads, ports, stable currency, military forces, trade laws, tort and criminal laws and police and courts to enforce them without marx. But we had NONE of that WITHOUT TAXES, taxes that were almost entirely paid by the upper class.

 

Now because some of Marx ideas from the 1880's don't work, the RW thinks anything that Marx said that DOES work must somehow be abandoned? or else we'll all have to abide by EVERYTHING Marx wrote about???

Where did you get that idea?? It was the Marxist of the Frankfurt School that tried to redefine it and define a path to it. Certainly not something the RW is interested in bringing about.

 

But, that last part is interesting - it seems like you are advocating for "Marxism Lite". Care to start a topic on that??

 

Here's what we DON'T have because of the generosity of Capitalists: Public schools, police and fire departments, our Military, our courts, our currency, our banking system, our public roads and bridges and tunnels, the water in our homes, safe food to eat, safe medicines to take, a Government we elect, and the hope of a better future for our kids.

We have none of that due to the "generosity" of anyone. We have all of that due to the government doing it's job - paid for by taxes to do that and that alone.

 

Not one of those is a "money maker", so the ONLY way we get them is from Government and the only way we have government is by collecting TAXES.

Yes, taxes for the purpose of doing the job of government - providing services to the nation as a whole - not those "means tested".

 

Marx thought Government was the solution to the evils of Capitalism, and he's right - just not when it comes to how that Government is chosen. It was Jefferson, not Marx who said "a Government's greatness is judged by the way it treats the least of its citizens." Republicans think "Greatness" is achieved by persecuting the poor, the different and the foriegn, and redistributing all the wealth of the middle class to the very top of the 1%. If that's NOT what Republicans believe, then why is it what they've been doing for the last +30 years?

In what way do you see the Republicans "persecuting" the poor"? And of course the envy brings out the class warfare towards the 1%.

 

The American Revolution was the first ever to depose a Monarch and replace him with a man of the People. Nobody in 1776 ever imagined they would spawn a movement determined to destroy the Government of, for and by The People in favor of an Oligarchy, but nobody in 1976 imagined what was happening to the Republican Party.

And, I am sure no one envisioned anyone trying to establish a government with all the power over the people that our modern day neoMarxists envision. What has to be understood is that while some like to bandy around the word "Oligarchy" thinking in terms of those that have more money than the whiners, the power that results from a Marxist type government leads to exactly that. Look at the USSR - who owned the dachas? Not the everyday person.


 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
497
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
488
Views

Re: FAR RIGHT OR LIBERAL - NO MIDDLE GROUND

488 Views
Message 14 of 153

@MIseker wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@MaVolta wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@MaVolta wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@alotofgrey wrote:

Listening to our far Right is like listening to Communists and Socialists. Sounds good, just don’t work and cannot be made to work. How do I know that.

 

There are over a hundred countries. Pick one where it worked. Heck, pick one from the last 100 years.

 

Limited Government Conservative on the Right.


O.K. I'll pick the USofA.

 

Based on the Constitution and based on the free market partnered with the government to insure it's freedom has worked a long, long time. It has even survived leftist obsessions with "From each according to his means; to each according to his needs". These Marxist dreams are hidden in the word "free". In reality "free" does not exist - it is all wealth redistribution.


Again??? 


Meaning what - "free" does exist??


Meaning Marxism again? Are you obsessed over Marx or what?? 


This insatiable need on the part of some to defend Marxism is interesting.

 

But, no, the issue was simply is there really "free" government stuff? Understandably, there is an unwillingness on the part of the left to address that.

 

ah yes the bogus claim of marxism. you do know there were public roads and schools well before marx? fire departments, a postal service that delivered to you even if you sent nothing? public libraries? county poor houses etc? an army or militia toprotect settlers stealing land? govenment give aways of land and people to survay it and mark it off? Help me here..tell me how our founding fathers used government for the common good with out marx? could it be they thought govt was for the common good? they even had a revolution for the common good without marx, alinsky,and pivien a cloward.  how dare history disagree with you.

 


Once again scads of words defending Marxism while trying to deny the basic point I am trying to get to - there is no such a thing as "free" government stuff.

 

The type of revolution involving Alinsky, Piven and Cloward, etc. was the topic elsewhere which ended due to two things - people refusing to discuss it honestly and a few others constantly posing off topic.

 

If that is what you want to discuss, where were you then?? My only point here is - "free" stuff.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
488
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
495
Views

Re: FAR RIGHT OR LIBERAL - NO MIDDLE GROUND

495 Views
Message 15 of 153

@rk9152 wrote:

@MaVolta wrote:


Fair enough, then I will offer my centrist view. If I consider that everyone is paying taxes into the system somewhere, whether federal or state income tax or sales tax or property tax, etc. then it might stand to reason that nothing is "free." However, if I consider that these are separate buckets where monies are distributed for specific purposes, and everyone has not contributed to all of the buckets, yet draw out a benefit, then maybe that would be considered "free". But I don't see what that has to do with Marxism or Socialism, etc.

 

Not everyone makes enough money to pay income tax. Not everyone has the means to own property and pay taxes. Poverty exists. Just because a portion of tax dollars is used to subsidize their food, shelter, or health care, doesn't make us Socialists or Marxists, or any other "-ist." It simply says that we respect their human dignity, and that we are willing to care for those less fortunate than ourselves. I really don't view it through a political lens.


The distinction I draw is "means tested". When someone advocates for raising the taxes only on the rich so as to fund means tested programs, to me that is along the lines of "From each according to his means; to each according to his needs".

 

The sort of thing we are discussing must be seen through a political lens since it is about government spending policies and the associated taxing policies.


Oh, "means tested," now we are getting somewhere. 

 

And does that apply to corporate welfare also?

 

As a centrist, I would support a 15% corporate tax rate IF the tax avoidance loopholes were all closed, and corporate subsidies were eliminated. There may be good reason for some subsidies to some businesses, including larger corporations, but they should be specific and short term, and not just favorable to industry giants. (That's generally speaking, and not to get into the weeds of any particular program.)

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
495
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
493
Views

Re: FAR RIGHT OR LIBERAL - NO MIDDLE GROUND

493 Views
Message 16 of 153

So true scout !!!

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
493
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
497
Views

Re: FAR RIGHT OR LIBERAL - NO MIDDLE GROUND

497 Views
Message 17 of 153

Of course we had postal service, roads, ports, stable currency, military forces, trade laws, tort and criminal laws and police and courts to enforce them without marx. But we had NONE of that WITHOUT TAXES, taxes that were almost entirely paid by the upper class.

 

Now because some of Marx ideas from the 1880's don't work, the RW thinks anything that Marx said that DOES work must somehow be abandoned? or else we'll all have to abide by EVERYTHING Marx wrote about???

 

Here's what we DON'T have because of the generosity of Capitalists: Public schools, police and fire departments, our Military, our courts, our currency, our banking system, our public roads and bridges and tunnels, the water in our homes, safe food to eat, safe medicines to take, a Government we elect, and the hope of a better future for our kids.

 

Not one of those is a "money maker", so the ONLY way we get them is from Government and the only way we have government is by collecting TAXES.

 

Marx thought Government was the solution to the evils of Capitalism, and he's right - just not when it comes to how that Government is chosen. It was Jefferson, not Marx who said "a Government's greatness is judged by the way it treats the least of its citizens." Republicans think "Greatness" is achieved by persecuting the poor, the different and the foriegn, and redistributing all the wealth of the middle class to the very top of the 1%. If that's NOT what Republicans believe, then why is it what they've been doing for the last +30 years?

 

The American Revolution was the first ever to depose a Monarch and replace him with a man of the People. Nobody in 1776 ever imagined they would spawn a movement determined to destroy the Government of, for and by The People in favor of an Oligarchy, but nobody in 1976 imagined what was happening to the Republican Party.

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
497
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
495
Views

Re: FAR RIGHT OR LIBERAL - NO MIDDLE GROUND

495 Views
Message 18 of 153

@rk9152 wrote:

@MaVolta wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@MaVolta wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@alotofgrey wrote:

Listening to our far Right is like listening to Communists and Socialists. Sounds good, just don’t work and cannot be made to work. How do I know that.

 

There are over a hundred countries. Pick one where it worked. Heck, pick one from the last 100 years.

 

Limited Government Conservative on the Right.


O.K. I'll pick the USofA.

 

Based on the Constitution and based on the free market partnered with the government to insure it's freedom has worked a long, long time. It has even survived leftist obsessions with "From each according to his means; to each according to his needs". These Marxist dreams are hidden in the word "free". In reality "free" does not exist - it is all wealth redistribution.


Again??? 


Meaning what - "free" does exist??


Meaning Marxism again? Are you obsessed over Marx or what?? 


This insatiable need on the part of some to defend Marxism is interesting.

 

But, no, the issue was simply is there really "free" government stuff? Understandably, there is an unwillingness on the part of the left to address that.

 

ah yes the bogus claim of marxism. you do know there were public roads and schools well before marx? fire departments, a postal service that delivered to you even if you sent nothing? public libraries? county poor houses etc? an army or militia toprotect settlers stealing land? govenment give aways of land and people to survay it and mark it off? Help me here..tell me how our founding fathers used government for the common good with out marx? could it be they thought govt was for the common good? they even had a revolution for the common good without marx, alinsky,and pivien a cloward.  how dare history disagree with you.

 

So it begins.
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
495
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
493
Views

Re: FAR RIGHT OR LIBERAL - NO MIDDLE GROUND

493 Views
Message 19 of 153

Yes , IMHO those fortunate to have gotten a Govt job with such great benefits like a pension should always be thankful , because it's not necessarily because they worked harder or smarter than those workers without benefits like a pension, but that they were in the right place at the right time and were the one's fortunate to have been chosen and fortunate enough to " Still " have a pension. I see it as Gratitude !!!

There , but for the grace of GOD , go I.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
493
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
499
Views

Re: FAR RIGHT OR LIBERAL - NO MIDDLE GROUND

499 Views
Message 20 of 153

@mandm84 wrote:

I am fortunate and thankful to be able to put bread on the table.



So are those who have earned their retirements, in spite of what someone on the outside looking in thinks.   Apparently the grass is greener on the other side of the fence for those looking in from the outside.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
499
Views