Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Both. What's your point?
That's The Ticket!..
- Thread starter schuylaar
- Start date
londonfog
Well-Known Member
public schools are part of our social system. The system in which you hate so much, helped you and yours.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Public schools are part of a forced indoctrination system. That was and remains the primary intention of them. I could slay you on that point if you are up for a good ass kicking, but I'll spare you for now Kaiser Wilhelm.
When a person has a real threat of home seizure if they do not pay for something, it is a reasonable thing to question that kind of "social system". Shouldn't children be taught that bullying and threats are inappropriate methods of getting along with others?
Also, you imply because a person is forced to pay for something , that somehow they approve of it. That is a false conclusion.
I carry a piece of plastic that grants me the ahem "privilege" of operating a motor vehicle, it doesn't mean I approve of it, it means I have submitted in that instance, weighing the alternative harm to me if I do not.
A person in jail for a victim less crime can eat the food provided, but still know they are wrongfully incarcerated....their eating the food doesn't mean they approve of the situation does it?
The system has taken something from me and anybody else that values peaceful living. It undeniably and routinely takes away a persons natural right of self determination. Care to argue that?
londonfog
Well-Known Member
after I kick this guys ass on Madden...
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Of course, please take your time....
Way back when I was involved in sports, I had an interesting conversation regarding Al Davis, the former owner of Coach Madden's Oakland Raiders.
Otis Sistrunk and Ted Hendricks were my homeboys.
yes.
you have many options.
private schools - religious
private schools - academic
magnet school - academic
k-12 online - parent initiated academic
home school - parent initiated academic provided EA approved for diploma.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
The option to not be extorted from doesn't exist though does it?
No, it does not.
If you raise your own food, should you be forced to pay the largest grocery store down the street, even if you do not buy anything from them?
if you're talking about taxes in general..you are correct, infrastructure costs money.
if you raise your own food, why would you pay the largest grocery store down the road other than it's corporate entity which puts monies in the pockets of elected officials for favoritism in legislation, even if you don't buy from them? = righties
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
My point was all services, real ones and so called government "services" should be paid for by those that use them. Making people pay for things they do not use, and holding their home ransom as well, is not the business model of any real service provider.
It is however part of the business model of thugs, the mafia and violent gangs....oh and government, but I repeat myself.
londonfog
Well-Known Member
Rob Roy you use our ( and yours) system everyday.
it can never work that way, RR.
we all have to chip in..but you know?..if we re-vamp the tax code?..we can get rightie to pay his fair share which would significantly reduce your liability. see how that works?
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Even if "1%er righty" paid 1% taxes for only one year of their working life they'd still pay a larger dollar amount than 100,000,000 ordinary Americans would pay for their entire lives.it can never work that way, RR.
we all have to chip in..but you know?..if we re-vamp the tax code?..we can get rightie to pay his fair share which would significantly reduce your liability. see how that works?
"Lefty fair share" is not the same as "fair share".
Flat rate taxes for all!
I'll compromise tho and allow for a progressive consumption tax, it'd make large and pointlessly expensive toys rich people buy a little more expensive but it'd be barely noticed.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
you benefit from public education every day of your life you freeloading mooch.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
let's see...
advocate for a flat tax which breeds massive income inequality, then boast about how the massive income inequality leads to certain outcomes, like the top 1% having so much more than the bottom 50% that their minimal share of taxes on it is still overwhelming.
gee, that isn't circular beyond all retardation.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
i like how pissy and defensive you started getting as soon as i stopped giving you a pass on all your racism and anti-semitism.
you really had a fucking meltdown.
but you can't do a flat 35% for someone who makes $30k.
let's just say to live life somewhat comfy in america you'd need to earn at least $50-60k single person..
to reduce someone's income by the same percentage you would higher incomes would still leave the lesser incomed struggling.
35% from $30k?
35% from $5M?..you could still live on that, easy..not so much for the guy who makes $30k.
you need a sliding scale flat.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
how about we just get rid of the whole retarded idea of flat taxes and stick with the progressive sliding scale?
that would be fine, we still need to revamp the tax code because the 1% should not get as many deductions plan and simple.
offshore is bullshit and nothing but tax evasion with the already lucrative loop holes they get.
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
I think a good way of making a consumption tax progressive is food items under X are tax free (tax the shit out of caviar, leave hamburger alone), clothing items under X are tax free (again, tax the shit out of designer handbags and 1000 dollar Italian shoes, leave my hanes underwear out of this), utilities under X are tax free (a good incentive to not waste and keep your bills under X, tax the shit out of those people with 20K worth of lights and waterfalls).
Certain necessities like food, clothing and shelter to a certain dollar amount being tax free would actually be a huge boost to the working poor, not a detriment like some will argue.