Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
If you can't be bothered to read a systematic response to your drive-by posts, then you are somebody that really doesn't care what anybody but you yourself thinks. And even your latest post bears out the now quite apparent fact that you have a perspective that you wish to just "put out there" regardless of other perspectives that could challenge it.
You keep suggesting that I believe things I don't believe, yet you can't be bothered to actually think things through. This is probably why you just can't be bothered to be systematic.
Look, I didn't read all of your supposed "statistics," and I'm not going to.
Yup, see above.
If the point of your post is that the rich aren't getting richer then you're flat full of it.
Uhh... well, again, see above. You'd rather speculate (inaccurately) than to bother to actually know what you're talking about.
Continuing with my example, the rich should bear more of the burden (as they did historically).
Uhh... see above. You can't be bothered to read "all my 'statistics,'" so you prefer to (inaccurately) believe (just because you feel like it) that the rich historically bore more of a burden than they now do. In fact, they now pay 38 TIMES as much in real dollars than they did in the 80s, which is a VAST disparity in increase compared to the other 90% of taxpayers.
But, you know, not to trouble you with any data that doesn't fit your "obviously correct" perspective.
And yes, there are lots of ways to do that.
Oh, wait, I though that the preferred way was to just increase their percentage-of-income-taxed to make it less "obscene" than it now is.
The example was about moving our society back toward a level playing field.
Your "example" showed NO such thing, and you have done exactly ZERO to sustain your bald and inaccurate claims. You have also done exactly ZERO to define what a "level playing field" would look like.
But not for hand-outs (in a way a minimum wage is a hand-out).
Sure you are!
You don't think that taxing the "rich" more to force THEM to pay for education, presumably to reduce the cost of education for the "poor" is not another form of handout?
Look, what you liberals NEVER seem to get is that you think in terms of wealth-redistribution in SO MANY different ways that you are now completely inured to the whole concept of coercion and theft. You think that if "I can afford it" (by some definition of "afford" you have cooked up), then I "shouldn't miss" what you steal from me and hand over to somebody else. And you are "handing" money around so fast and freely that you no longer even recognize what theft IS and what handouts you ARE providing.
You like all sorts of handouts, but you draw a line at a minimum wage? Why? What lofty principle tells you that a minimum wage is a "handout," but Obamacare is not?
Wow! Just wow!
There are many ways to use a larger contribution from the rich.
See above! What in the world entitles you or anybody else to arbitrarily decide how much of a "larger" "contribution" (that one IS in scare-quotes!) the "rich" SHOULD be making?
THIS is THE problem with the liberal mindset: It imagines all "wealth" as a sort of big, societal "pool," that SOCIETY gets to decide how it will be "distributed."
But that base perspective utterly dismantles the whole basis of PRIVATE property. Whether you coercively EXTRACT a dime from me or a thousand dollars, you have still stolen. And the power to tax IS the power to destroy.
This country was NOT founded on the idea that taxation was for the purposed of redistribution! When I "contribute" to the federal government, the original design is that I'm buying something (like national defense) that I cannot do for myself as an individual by ANY means, in principle. But what the feds NOW do with tax money is redistribute mass amounts of it around to INDIVIDUALS that can, in principle, do for THEMSELVES what the feds are handing them. Thus, now, I'm not buying something from the feds that I cannot in principle do for myself. I'm "buying" OTHER people being HANDED my money to do things FOR THEM that they CAN, in principle, do for themselves.
The example I used above was helping people improve themselves through education (my family was dead broke when I graduated high school and I made it through both university and law school using grants and a reasonable, eventually repayable, number of loans - and as a direct result I've paid as much in taxes during some single years as all that education cost in the first place).
Well, goody for you and your dad! You guys are the classic exemplars of it all working out just hunky-dorry, which is why you cannot for the life of you SEE what happened as a "handout," which you claim to decry!
By contrast, I didn't get handouts for MY education, and, unlike you, I AM in debt, as well as having worked my way through. Since you are doing so well, how about you just HAND me some "grants" to help out with my student loan debt? You CLEARLY have not "contributed" enough yet, because people like me are not on an "level playing field" with you or your dad!
And, actually, what you should be seeing is that part of why I AM in student loan debt is that I was paying higher taxes (apparently to help your dad have a free ride) while I worked my way through school than I really should have been!
Look, the second somebody in power decides that ANY sort of individual redistribution is going to happen, the whole IDEA of a "level playing field" is instantly GONE, never to return. You CANNOT "level" any "playing field" by TAKING what belongs to one person and HANDING it to another. There is NO comparison between that and my paying taxes to support, say, national defense or other such things that the federal government ACTUALLY was put in place to do for ALL of us collectively.
Or pay down our national debt, or work on our national infrastructure (roads, bridges, or, God forbid, better energy sources).
Oh, yeah, RIGHT!
A liberal that wants to pay down national debt? With WHAT money? You guys moan about a non-case that doesn't even matter in this SCOTUS non-decision about religion, but you LOVE what SCOTUS did with Obamacare? Give me a gigantic break.
We're talking TRILLIONS at this point. We're talking every man, woman, and child in this nation NOW in debt to the tune of over $100,000.000. For most people in this nation, that means that THEY are bankrupt; and that's debt they HAVE before even considering their "actual" household debt.
You think that a minimum wage increase is "really a handout?" Oh, wow! The REAL handouts (and the corresponding INSANE indebtedness) slip right past you, and you wave them on and wish them godspeed.
It is to laugh... and cry.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
I just read your latest post about how happy you'd be to volunteer for a tax increase on your bracket.
Since you're so happy to do so, and since most of the increase will go straight to "wealth"-redistribution causes, you really should just write ME a check.
I'm all for this idea of making education more affordable, and the "rich," like you, can make that happen! Yippee!
So, you can reduce my indebtedness right now. You don't have to wait for the feds to forcibly extract it from you. You can volunteer right now, as you said, and do some redistribution immediately. I'm ALL for it! Yes, right now.
From the sounds of it, you should be able to "afford" AT LEAST $50,000, and that would help MY educational cause out a lot. So, put your money where your mouth is.
|
|
clinker
Trad climber
Santa Cruz, California
|
|
Madbolter, its past your bedtime. I can tell by your last post that it is nighty-night time now.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
LOL... you're so right. It's that time.
|
|
mtnyoung
Trad climber
Twain Harte, California
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 9, 2014 - 01:34am PT
|
Madbolter:
1. Who's "pissed off?"
2. See above regarding posts that are way too long.
3. Re-write yours (use the "edit" function) so it is readable.
4. Stop sopping up the right wing kool-aid and start thinking for yourself.
5. If you really think I am a liberal then you're as crazy as you seem.
6. He's right; I'm going to bed (so you've got plenty of time for number 3 above).
|
|
Wade Icey
Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
|
|
you guys are being trolled by the LEB.
|
|
Lollie
Social climber
I'm Lolli.
|
|
I've shared campsite in Upper Pines with Madbolter in the Yosemite Valley. He's a real person. Ask lostinshanghai.
But the First Amendment and 'under god' issues.
As it reads "under god" unspecifically in the pledge, as in under any god whatsoever, then one have freedom to choose a religion. So far clear. Question remains, if one pledge allegiance, do one have the choice to choose not religion?
Those who added it very likely only had one specific god in mind, Jahve, but that's not what it says. But the pledge is not law. First Amendment is.
|
|
Lollie
Social climber
I'm Lolli.
|
|
What is this continous LEB/Lois argument anyway? It's just a cowardly passive aggressive way to label and cast aspersions on someone's arguments for something through a roundabout way, while at the same time avoiding to have to expose any opinions oneself.
Sheesh. Milksops.
...(couldn't, wouldn't, use the more common epiteth milquetoast, as the Milktoast of Supertopo indeed got a spine, in matters like these. Nor have I read the arguments in themselves.)
|
|
couchmaster
climber
pdx
|
|
I dislike reading long posts, but made an exception and have to say that Madbolter certainly has pointed out some seriously considered core beliefs. Great points in there. Thanks for taking the time. I believe most folks, the crows (the PhilOs, Bruce Kays, mechrists and Glantons et al) won't bother reading your stuff or at least past the first 2 sentences if history is any guide, but some of us do. Brace for some personal attacks if they read the first 5 words as they won't have a coherent argument to advance in opposition. Fortunatly they haven't yet arrived like crows at the dump to caw loudly for each others amusement. (see rancher thread as example) Lollie has the same point just above. Thanks.
But your posts are still too long. Poopoo head meanie. (Just warming you up there for the idiots future posts:-)
|
|
couchmaster
climber
pdx
|
|
What are you? Still in 3rd grade? LOL Caw caw
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
brevity is the soul of being read rather than skipped.
|
|
Lollie
Social climber
I'm Lolli.
|
|
Hey Dingus?
I liked the sound of what I wrote: Milktoast of Supertopo.
Made an image to go with it:
|
|
Lollie
Social climber
I'm Lolli.
|
|
Sure! It's your's.
|
|
sempervirens
climber
|
|
Lollie,
Are you guys accepting immigrants?
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
1. Who's "pissed off?"
2. See above regarding posts that are way too long.
3. Re-write yours (use the "edit" function) so it is readable.
4. Stop sopping up the right wing kool-aid and start thinking for yourself.
5. If you really think I am a liberal then you're as crazy as you seem.
6. He's right; I'm going to bed (so you've got plenty of time for number 3 above).
1. Me, when people seem convinced that theft is perfectly acceptable, as long as the fed are the ones doing it.
2. Nope. Brevity is the soul of drive-by shootings. Too many of you sad-saps have the attention span of a gnat. It's a large part of why we get the politicians we do.
3. See (2) above.
4. If you really think I am right wing, then you're as crazy as you seem.
5. If I'm misreading you, I sincerely apologize. You certainly seem to be advocating for (at least parts of) the welfare state.
6. Awww... I never managed number (3). Got a good night's sleep, though.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!