Are we created equal?

Everybody is not equal, but everybody should be treated equally.

 

43% of Americans don't make enough to pay federal income tax, sure they would not mind making enough to pay the tax though

I have no issue with people only paying tax for money earned over the poverty limit, I and would extend that to all Americans equally rich or poor alike

.

 

But this isn't true in the slightest. Your definition of egalitarianism may be true, but you have confused it with what liberals are trying to do............which is that we noticed that there are some people in our society and in our history that have been looked down upon. Some people made it difficult for others to obtain an education. Look at Brown vs. Board of education.

Was that lawsuit to provide blacks with the same academic status/outcome as whites...................or was it to give blacks the same opportunity as whites?
Is SNAP a way to provide everyone with the same economic status..............or to give everyone the same opportunity to obtain food if needed?

If either of these, or any other government program, were to try to ensure the same "outcome", then it does a (*)(*)(*)(*) poor job at doing so, because all it really does is to provide everyone with the same economic/academic opportunity..................one that wasn't there beforehand; which is what makes it more equal.

 

Actually, the bottom quintile not only pays ZERO federal income taxes, they get 9% back.... That's a recent phenomena.

The interesting part is we apparently only expect some people to pay taxes while others get a free ride...... So WHO is responsible for your earnings again?

 

Couldn't refute again?

- - - Updated - - -

Do you even know the similarities?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_(Marxism)

 

So no foreign policy and no more Obama investments in "green energy"?

First get China and Russia to do the same and get rid of all other threats out there and let us know when you have done so.

Pentagon: China's military advances to overtake U.S. in 5 years
http://fellowshipoftheminds.com/201...military-advances-to-overtake-u-s-in-5-years/

We are a free people free to invest wherever I as a free citizen choose to, who are you to tell me otherwise?

 

Where is it dictated that government spending is dictated by GDP or should be a fix portion of it? Your numbers do NOT tell how much an administration spent because where you see decreases such as the early years of the Clinton administration were actually increases in GDP not decreases in spending. The goal should be to constantly lower the percentage number as we grow the economy faster than we grow the government.

 

So did Bush but the was no excuse according to you so why is it for Obama?

 

ROFL yeah after you get your first million you don't need to spend money any more! Where do you get this nonsense. And investing is spending, when I invest a dollar in a company what do you think happens to that dollar? It gets spent.

ROFL above average people never have to replenish things? This is just too rich.

And conversely the more you have the more you will spend until you get rich and then you don't spend anymore?

Wrong, the people investing their capital either as an individual business owner or together in a group, a corporation create jobs through the businesses they create.

 

That fairness thing. Those statements you make about the top 1% earning too much income and having too much of the wealth and government should tax it away and redistribute it.

Or are am mistaken, you don't believe government should tax the top 1% more because they earn too much and you do believe government has no business trying to equal incomes and wealth through the tax system?

- - - Updated - - -

Oh still here and still showing how fallacious your conclusions remain. I take my threads as they come in my control panel and work my way down.

 

The Tax and Spend clause is not about "welfare" as in food stamps and section 8 housing, ie providing the subsistence of the individual citizen. It is about the welfare, the good and sound condition, of the government and it's holdings and it's assets and it's debts. The welfare of the UNITED STATES, the union of the states, not the PEOPLE, the citizens.

 

Yes the fallacious nonsense the schools must be teaching these days about the Tax and Spend clause which authorizes the Congress to pass taxes in order to pay for the expenses and well being of THE GOVERNMENT so that it can carry out it's authorized duties. Not the welfare of the CITIZENS, the PEOPLE as they are referred to in the Constitution.

 

How did you reach your conclusion?

You may need to become more familiar with private laws in the US.

 

Couldn't prove the claim again?

 

Ahh. That "fairness thing" you don't subscribe to.

My arguments about the growing inequality and the 1% taking more and more of the nation's income and wealth is not me saying *I* (or most progressives) am entitled to their earnings.

I absolutely believe the top 1% should be taxed at higher rates. I absolutely believe the government has no business trying to equal incomes and wealth through the tax system.

What "fallacious conclusion" is that?

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks for sharing your opinions. I disagree the goal should be to constantly lower the percentage, but I understand why a 1% apologist would want that.

 

You're surely not trying to say that the economy Bush inherited was anything like the economy Obama recovered?

 

What makes up a state, smart guy?

 

I don't even think they're teaching anything about the constitution anymore. Too busy teaching how to put a condom on a cucumber.

 

I'd venture that basic survival necessities and services should be provided by the state just as a matter of necessity (ex. survival as a nation) anything beyond the bare basics should be consisdered a luxury, not a right.

 

so you favor dismantling the infrastructure of America from National Parks to National Highways, and with drawing all US troops from foreign soil into a survival role of America?

 

I believe we merely need more, equal, application of a federal doctrine and State laws regarding employment at will.

 

I'll answer that for him:

No. *looks the other way*

 

The first thing one can be sure of is death and taxes. One is being killed in tax paradises. When there are no social programs, that help create the mid-class (the motor of all progress), there's bureaucracy (in practice) and a little elite over lots of poor ones - practically in countries like that there's a lot to steal.
Everyone in a civilised country pays taxes, so when one goes to the streets, one is not killed by some hungry desperate. One lives amongst people with perspectives, so there's a progress. To achieve that, the government has to be about reducing drama and include "human factor". Every real help is a little help, just becose no-one needs more.

 

But if a weeks worth of food cost $10.00, and there was one rich guy in the store with $100.00, and nine poor people with no money, and the rich guy handed each of the poor people $10.00, then not only do nine people now get to eat, but the store owner makes ten times as much, because now he can sell ten man-weeks worth of food, instead of just one.

 

Hmm... well... if you give everyone without a job a shack and just barely enough to eat, all you end up with is a bunch of gaunt people living in a hovel, unable to do much.

The way some jurisdictions deal with it is, if you go on welfare, you have to pay for it by doing some work for the state - which is prettymuch how the Hoover Dam got built - but the notion of becoming a forced welfare-labourer sticks in the craw of most Americans... that's too much like "communism"...

What some jurisdictions do is, if you go on welfare, then you have to look for a job and prove it, but that presumes there are opportunities.

What's biting so many stuck on welfare is that the opportunities are just not there! Not like they used to be. Not like before America let a few 1%ers get most of the money without having to invest it back creating jobs in the places they made the money from... not like before America opened its economic valves to globalization and started deflating like a balloon.

Nine out of ten welfare-poverty cases are not happy sucking on a social-teat... most are frustrated by the lack of opportunity. They went to crummy schools that didn't teach anything, and even if they got good grades there's no jobs.