quote:

ORIGINAL: TheMajesticWorm
Ohh dear, apologies, another of you crackpot conservatives made that remark. I got confused because you were both so wrong. I didn't think there could be two seperate people so silly! I did enjoy the part where you were shocked that "fair share" was subjective.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheMajesticWorm

Ohh dear, apologies, another of you crackpot conservatives made that remark. I got confused because you were both so wrong. I didn't think there could be two seperate people so silly! I did enjoy the part where you were shocked that "fair share" was subjective.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TricklessMagic

It's England, if that is how they like to roll then let them roll that way. I was on the Florida Bar Referral Panel for low income folks and more often than not they were check collectors. Physically fit but for some mental issues like anxiety and depression. You know what most of us feel on a weekly basis working full-time jobs and worrying about bills. If folks have legitimate health problems I don't have a problem with them receiving help but their productivity should have to be maximized first before just handing them a check. I know a cancer survivor who is fighting her third battle with breast cancer and is working to earn the capped $1,000 a week she's allowed to earn while she receives welfare and healthcare. She could work, and wants to work forty hours a week but then she'd lose the healthcare coverage for the cancer treatment and that's the biggest thing. That's where I have a problem. She needs the healthcare so let her work a forty hour work week and simply take ten percent of her paycheck. From a forty hour work week she'd earn more combined than the $1,000 plus the welfare but the system won't let her.

We have crops that need harvesting, buildings that have to be torn down, and rather than pay people to take care of it, we give them handouts because their bodies are fit but their minds are supposedly unhealthy. It don't take much brain power to bend at the back and pick beans. But we will leave these unhealthy people free to sit on their asses and pickup drug habits (the depressed and anxious ones). If you can't physically work or you are younger than 16 (16 year olds should get help if they maintain good grades or a part time job of twenty hours or more) then you should get some help. If you are physically able to work but for some reason are mentally unfit to where you sit and color all day (seriously I've seen it doing Pro Bono for friends of mine who are Targeted Case Managers for Medicaid) but can reason and drive a car, then you need to be picking fruit and harvesting crops for forty hours a week in order to receive aid. If the mentally unfit has a break down then take them to the hospital till they are fit to work again. Don't hand them money to spend on what they want.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheMajesticWorm
Ohh dear, apologies, another of you crackpot conservatives made that remark. I got confused because you were both so wrong. I didn't think there could be two seperate people so silly! I did enjoy the part where you were shocked that "fair share" was subjective.

Apology accepted.

I wasn't shocked at all that "fair share" is a subjective term. I've known it all along. Apparently, it was missed that claiming that everyone should pay their "fair share" is a shitty foundation to build on, as "fair share" can be redefined at any time.

Plus, it speaks to those US Lib's (I generally don't speak of any other country's political structures as I don't live there, so I don't know - but, I'll try to specify more [and, understand that I'll fail quite a bit at it]), who say an awful lot of words, that don't really mean shit. They say stuff knowing that they aren't saying anything concrete, so they can redefine it any time they want. It's blatant in the US.

Welcome to the boards.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
I don't know what a 'fair share' is but I do know what is fair and what is unfair. For example: Is it fair that you could bust your ass 8-10 hours a day and make real good money and pay 35% federal tax.
All of the while I am waking up at noon and hitting the golf course and make millions in something called capital gains and pay 15% ?
Is that fair ? Are there any facts or extrapolation of fact that would explain how that...is fair ?
You could report to your desk 9-5 make good money and pay 35% in federal tax. while I report to my desk 9-5 managing other people's investments and pay only 15%. Is that fair ?
Yes, what is fair is subjective but in comparison, what is unfair soon becomes quite obvious in our patently immoral tax code.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

And, here is where the rubber meets the road. Which is the "fair" rate? 35% or 15%? Or is it simply "unfair" that the two rates aren't the same?

Someone said that the libs are paying their fair share when they take all their legal deductions and pay their obligations according to IRS tax code. When "the rich" to the same thing, though, they aren't paying their fair share. Complete disingenuous.

I control what is in the tax code. I always pay the taxes that the tax code requires me to pay. Anyone who says I don't pay my fair share is disingenuous.roflmfao

quote:

1. I think he was speaking about the legal type of bar.

Omg...how could I have missed that

quote:


2. Don't be an ass.

As you well know I have no choiceit is my curse.

quote:

3. Never mind.

You never come visit any more