Any liberals capable of defending income tax laws?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-05-2014, 12:34 PM
RE: Any liberals capable of defending income tax laws?
This is getting nowhere, so this is my last post. Just two things to say in closing.

1. Many guys keep saying that we need all this regulation because we can't go back to the unregulated robber baron days where all the wealth was concentrated at the top and there was no middle class. YET, when I point to the undisputed proof that the regulation is making things WORSE not BETTER, all I get is 'fuck you'. FACT: Inequality is worse now than during the unregulated "robber baron" era, and it's even worse now than it was in the 18th century--even if you count the slaves. source of chart below. And as these same people keep concentrating and centralizing all the power, giving a small group of people ultimate authority to pick winners and losers and redistribute wealth, it's just getting worse and worse. It's worse now under Obama than it was under Reagan, which was even worse than the 19th century. And there's no disputing it took a turn for the worse in 1971 with the change in monetary policy. And classic liberals predicted 200 years earlier that it would happen just like it did. So stop saying us classic liberals don't care about inequality and the poor. WRONG! We care enough to swallow our pride, open our eyes, and realize that we are causing the problem and need to thinking through the consequences of our actions with an open mind.

2. The other big difference is classic liberals dig deep to analyze the underlying logic. Why, for example, does [a] have a right to tell [b] what he can and cannot do in the privacy of his own home (say grow pot)? Saying that what [b] does affects [a] is no answer. Unquestionably when [a] busts into [b]'s home, hauls him off at gunpoint, locks him in a cell, prevents him from finishing college or starting a family, [a] has affected [b] far more. So why does [a] have the right? There's only 2 reasons: 1) Because [a] is has a gun. [a] is a larger of people who make the laws which tell the police who they should haul off at gunpoint. 2) Because [b] voluntarily agreed to do what [a] required of him.

Classic liberals saw that throughout history we had #1: might makes right. Whoever controls the legislature, be it a democratic majority or a king, makes the rules. But they realized this was a barbaric neanderthal system that holds society back. So they proposed we switch to a system of [b], where the jurisdiction of these laws/rules/regulations is limited so that [b] can choose which jurisdiction offers him the services he wants with a set of rules he can live under, and execute a social contract with that jurisdiction where he gets certain benefits in exchange for certain obligations. Simple, logical. And it completely transformed the world. With this new system we went from a primitive, backwards systems with aristocrats and peasants who worked in poverty until they were dead by the age of 40, to the modern world we have today. So when today's liberals keep going back to #1 arguing that one group of people they call "society" (which is really just the group of people who have the power) have the right to tell other groups what to do because it's in the best interest of "society" (ie the group that has the power), this IS a return to the old club-wielding neanderthal system. When you say [a] has the right to tell [b] what to do because it's in [a]'s best interest, that IS the definition of slavery, rule by the sword, might makes right.

Classic liberals merely suggest we honor the system of social contracts, liberty and free choice. We will let today's liberal pass whatever laws they want, no matter how barbaric we see them, just so long as you they draw the jurisdictional lines in the one place where these laws cover every single place that the people can legally live and work, making escape impossible, denying free will and liberty. Today's liberals will hijack terms these intellectuals coined, such as calling themselves 'liberal', even though liberal comes from the latin 'liber', like liberty, meaning free to choose. The people who call themselves 'liberal' are the exact opposite. And they use "social contract" in the exact opposite of it's meaning. Any contract must be entered into voluntarily. They pass laws forcing people to do things against their will and make the jurisdiction at the national level specifically to make it impossible for those who disagree to escape the laws and exercise free will. Then when you ask for the moral justification, they say "social contract". No, it's "might makes right". It's "my side has a gun and if you don't obey our rules we'll use it".

This total unwillingness to self-analyze and use logic and reason creates the societal mess we have today. I gave one example of a super-rich UK man, who no doubht lives a wildly extravagant and luxurious life. If the UK relied on a property tax, then he would have to pay his fair share. Everybody would have to pay their fair share because property tax is unavoidable--you can't move your London mansion to a Swiss vault. Instead, they focus on taxing activity, specifically labor--which is a barbaric, draconian system that is impossible to pin down since activity is fungible and can be moved out of reach easily, and it results in so many unintended consequences. For example, this particular person slept in his private jet which took off every night so that he could live in London every day, but spent all his midnight's over international waters and was therefore not a legal resident. According to these bizarre laws today's "liberals" cling to, this man has now paid his debt to society. He doesn't pay one penny in tax, and instead just burns a bunch of jet fuel and contributes to global warming, and that's ok. Or in the US, for many living near the poverty level, the more they work the LESS money they have to live on because of increasing income taxes and phasing out tax credits, their effective marginal tax rate is > 100%. And for all Americans earning between $10k and $40k/year the effective tax rate on each new dollar earned is 82%, so someone earning $20/hour only gets $3.20/hour if he works more. In this thread I asked liberals to answer some questions to justify this system that traps people in poverty and results in such inequality. All I get is 'fuck you' responses (except for ear muffs). I'm done wasting my time. The real reason today's liberals cling so desperately to a tax policy that is so unfair and has so many horrific consequences is because it goes along with the "might make right" way of thinking. The only way their ruling majority can tax private activity is if they have absolute power. This is why, thanks to Snowden, we know the NSA feeds the IRS people's phone calls and emails so the IRS can hunt down people who are engaging in activities that aren't being reported. From a logical standpoint, it would make so much more sense to fund government with a tax that was inescapable, thus requiring no draconian enforcement because the tax is closely coupled to the public service being offered. The government could actually collect MORE taxes and even make the tax rates MORE progressive this way. But, they would lose the power to control other people's activity. And one man being able to control is an irresistible temptation for today's liberals, and they'll accept any consequences to maintain it.

Enjoy this system you liberals created. I moved away to a libertarian paradise, so I'm out already. Just stop whining about the effects. Thomas Jefferson warned that this monetary and fiscal policy liberals have put in place would mean: "the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered." We told you that it would happen, why and how it would happen, and how to prevent it. But the desire to rule by force and control other people was just too addictive to listen.

[Image: US_Inequality_Through_the_Centuries.PNG]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-05-2014, 12:39 PM
RE: Any liberals capable of defending income tax laws?
Having been publicly humiliated the Omega male slinks back to the rear of the cave with token growls now that the Alphas have put him back in his place. Thus is order restored in the tribe.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Revenant77x's post
21-05-2014, 01:01 PM
RE: Any liberals capable of defending income tax laws?
(21-05-2014 12:34 PM)frankksj Wrote:  This is getting nowhere...

Indeed; though I despair of your ever understanding why.

If all your interactions with other people prove futile, do you suppose the problem lies in common with literally everyone else besides you?

Or might it perhaps be embodied in the one common participant?

I wonder.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like cjlr's post
21-05-2014, 01:24 PM
RE: Any liberals capable of defending income tax laws?
(21-05-2014 12:34 PM)frankksj Wrote:  This is getting nowhere, so this is my last post. Just two things to say in closing.

So a debate is not worth having if people disagree with you?

Isnt that the most essential part of a debate?

[Image: RPYH95t.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes The Germans are coming's post
21-05-2014, 02:34 PM
RE: Any liberals capable of defending income tax laws?
(21-05-2014 12:34 PM)frankksj Wrote:  Enjoy this system you liberals created. I moved away to a libertarian paradise, so I'm out already. Just stop whining about the effects.

The only one whining is you. Dodgy

And since you have moved away, why are you still whining? Consider

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
21-05-2014, 02:36 PM
RE: Any liberals capable of defending income tax laws?
(21-05-2014 01:24 PM)The Germans are coming Wrote:  
(21-05-2014 12:34 PM)frankksj Wrote:  This is getting nowhere, so this is my last post. Just two things to say in closing.

So a debate is not worth having if people disagree with you?

Isnt that the most essential part of a debate?

He's not been here to debate, just proselytize.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
21-05-2014, 04:14 PM
RE: Any liberals capable of defending income tax laws?
(21-05-2014 12:34 PM)frankksj Wrote:  Enjoy this system you liberals created. I moved away to a libertarian paradise, so I'm out already.

I thought you lived in Cali and went to Mexico for medical treatment. Could a mod check his IP so we can settle this discrepancy?

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-05-2014, 04:19 PM
RE: Any liberals capable of defending income tax laws?
(21-05-2014 04:14 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(21-05-2014 12:34 PM)frankksj Wrote:  Enjoy this system you liberals created. I moved away to a libertarian paradise, so I'm out already.

I thought you lived in Cali and went to Mexico for medical treatment. Could a mod check his IP so we can settle this discrepancy?

Yes His isp is in southern california.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Revenant77x's post
21-05-2014, 04:33 PM (This post was last modified: 21-05-2014 05:01 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Any liberals capable of defending income tax laws?
(21-05-2014 04:19 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(21-05-2014 04:14 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  I thought you lived in Cali and went to Mexico for medical treatment. Could a mod check his IP so we can settle this discrepancy?

Yes His isp is in southern california.

Well now I have to question the credibility of the rest of Frankie's claims.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like GirlyMan's post
21-05-2014, 04:33 PM
RE: Any liberals capable of defending income tax laws?
(21-05-2014 04:14 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(21-05-2014 12:34 PM)frankksj Wrote:  Enjoy this system you liberals created. I moved away to a libertarian paradise, so I'm out already.

I thought you lived in Cali and went to Mexico for medical treatment. Could a mod check his IP so we can settle this discrepancy?

He has also said he was in the process of relocating to Hong Kong.

His attachment to truth appears tenuous.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: