Anabolics
Search More Than 6,000,000 Posts
Results 1 to 26 of 26
  1. #1
    Kärnfysikern's Avatar
    Kärnfysikern is offline Retired: AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Scotty, beam me up
    Posts
    14,223

    scary that there are people this stupid

    http://jahtruth.net/democra.htm

    Democracy is supposed to be the rule of the majority. Government of the majority of the people, for the majority of the people, by the majority of the people.

    Let us now compare the smooth deceptive definition, to stark reality.

    In the western world approximately 95% of the wealth is possessed by approximately 5% of the people. That means, using these same figures, that 95% of the people, the overwhelming majority, possess only 5% of the wealth.

    The politicians would have us all believe that this is the will of the majority. That is the politician's idea of what they call democracy.

    When did the 95% of people, the overwhelming majority, ever vote for the right for themselves to be poor and vote for the tiny 5% minority to possess their own (the poor people's) share of the nation's wealth, that the poor majority's ancestors have fought and died to protect?

  2. #2
    Logan13's Avatar
    Logan13 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,864

    exactly

    Quote Originally Posted by johan
    Johan,
    I was just at that "just the truth" website 25 minutes ago and I almost started the exact same thread. Right, 95% of a democratic society is poor, he has confused capitalism with democracy. I wish that the author would man up and give us a better way.

  3. #3
    thegodfather's Avatar
    thegodfather is offline Dulce bellum inexpertis
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Middle East
    Posts
    4,035
    Some believe that if you took all that wealth, and dispersed it evenly across the people, all the wealth would be back in the hands of the 5% within 10 years. Democracy does not mean that everyone has to have an equal share of wealth, just an equal share of freedoms. If everyone voted to have an equal share of wealth, that would be communism, and democracy would no longer be functioning. Not to mention, there are no TRUE democracys. In the United States, all 300million people do not vote on every single issue, which is how a true democracy functions. Instead, we use elected officials, elected by the people, to represent the majority's vote. There is no practical way for every single person to vote on every issue, however if there was, I feel as though it'd be a much more effective system.

  4. #4
    Logan13's Avatar
    Logan13 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,864

    yes

    Quote Originally Posted by thegodfather
    Some believe that if you took all that wealth, and dispersed it evenly across the people, all the wealth would be back in the hands of the 5% within 10 years. Democracy does not mean that everyone has to have an equal share of wealth, just an equal share of freedoms. If everyone voted to have an equal share of wealth, that would be communism, and democracy would no longer be functioning. Not to mention, there are no TRUE democracys. In the United States, all 300million people do not vote on every single issue, which is how a true democracy functions. Instead, we use elected officials, elected by the people, to represent the majority's vote. There is no practical way for every single person to vote on every issue, however if there was, I feel as though it'd be a much more effective system.
    Well put.....and the USA is a Republic.

  5. #5
    Kärnfysikern's Avatar
    Kärnfysikern is offline Retired: AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Scotty, beam me up
    Posts
    14,223
    Quote Originally Posted by Logan13
    Johan,
    I was just at that "just the truth" website 25 minutes ago and I almost started the exact same thread. Right, 95% of a democratic society is poor, he has confused capitalism with democracy. I wish that the author would man up and give us a better way.

    Great minds think alike

  6. #6
    Kärnfysikern's Avatar
    Kärnfysikern is offline Retired: AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Scotty, beam me up
    Posts
    14,223
    Quote Originally Posted by thegodfather
    Some believe that if you took all that wealth, and dispersed it evenly across the people, all the wealth would be back in the hands of the 5% within 10 years.
    No doubt about it. 90% of the people probably doesnt have the will or the intelligence to husstle togheter a fortune and out of the remaining 10% the most ruthless gets the edge.

  7. #7
    scriptfactory's Avatar
    scriptfactory is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,490
    Quote Originally Posted by thegodfather
    Some believe that if you took all that wealth, and dispersed it evenly across the people, all the wealth would be back in the hands of the 5% within 10 years. Democracy does not mean that everyone has to have an equal share of wealth, just an equal share of freedoms. If everyone voted to have an equal share of wealth, that would be communism, and democracy would no longer be functioning. Not to mention, there are no TRUE democracys. In the United States, all 300million people do not vote on every single issue, which is how a true democracy functions. Instead, we use elected officials, elected by the people, to represent the majority's vote. There is no practical way for every single person to vote on every issue, however if there was, I feel as though it'd be a much more effective system.
    Well said.

    I do think the wealth would be spread out among 10% instead of 5%. Many people are simply not given a chance to MAKE money as they don't have much to begin with.

    Also, I think that the top 5% should have to pay a larger percentage of taxes, not less. Can anyone explain to me why rich people get tax cuts?

  8. #8
    alphaman's Avatar
    alphaman is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    The Ron Paul War Room
    Posts
    2,727
    Quote Originally Posted by scriptfactory
    Well said.

    I do think the wealth would be spread out among 10% instead of 5%. Many people are simply not given a chance to MAKE money as they don't have much to begin with.

    Also, I think that the top 5% should have to pay a larger percentage of taxes, not less. Can anyone explain to me why rich people get tax cuts?

    The tax brackets go up as your income goes up. Wealthy people are just smart enough (and have the resources) to use the tax code to their advantage, and end up paying less. They now have the AMT (alternative minimum tax) in the US to try and make the wealthy pay more.

  9. #9
    BeerBaron's Avatar
    BeerBaron is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,458
    Quote Originally Posted by alphaman
    Wealthy people are just smart enough (and have the resources) to use the tax code to their advantage, and end up paying less.
    You forgot to mention they sponsor politicians who make the tax laws in their favor.

  10. #10
    damiongage's Avatar
    damiongage is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Pergatory
    Posts
    3,454
    Quote Originally Posted by scriptfactory
    Well said.

    I do think the wealth would be spread out among 10% instead of 5%. Many people are simply not given a chance to MAKE money as they don't have much to begin with.

    Also, I think that the top 5% should have to pay a larger percentage of taxes, not less. Can anyone explain to me why rich people get tax cuts?
    Why should they pay more? Just because they took the time to make something of themselves and make a better living....they should be punished for this???

  11. #11
    scriptfactory's Avatar
    scriptfactory is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,490
    Quote Originally Posted by alphaman
    The tax brackets go up as your income goes up. Wealthy people are just smart enough (and have the resources) to use the tax code to their advantage, and end up paying less. They now have the AMT (alternative minimum tax) in the US to try and make the wealthy pay more.
    Hmm. I didn't know about the AMT. I have to check that out.

  12. #12
    scriptfactory's Avatar
    scriptfactory is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,490
    Quote Originally Posted by damiongage
    Why should they pay more? Just because they took the time to make something of themselves and make a better living....they should be punished for this???
    Exactly. The extremely rich can AFFORD to support the government more than the average (poor) person. Why shouldn't they pay more? Just because they are rich doesn't mean they should be given tax breaks... I'm not saying bankrupt them, but yeah, they should be "punished" by supporting the government that allowed them to get so damn rich in the first place. They won't even miss it. At the very least everyone should pay the same tax rate with tax breaks being given to those living below the poverty level.

  13. #13
    Kärnfysikern's Avatar
    Kärnfysikern is offline Retired: AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Scotty, beam me up
    Posts
    14,223
    Quote Originally Posted by scriptfactory
    Also, I think that the top 5% should have to pay a larger percentage of taxes, not less. Can anyone explain to me why rich people get tax cuts?
    In sweden if you earn more then a certain sum you pay around 50% in taxes instead of 33% as regular people. I dont agree with this at all. Docs, professors ect they dont make good money here because of that extra tax.

  14. #14
    scriptfactory's Avatar
    scriptfactory is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,490
    Quote Originally Posted by johan
    In sweden if you earn more then a certain sum you pay around 50% in taxes instead of 33% as regular people. I dont agree with this at all. Docs, professors ect they dont make good money here because of that extra tax.
    Taxes are already high in Europe. That's why I say that a nice compromise would be to have everyone pay the same tax with tax cuts for those below the poverty line.

  15. #15
    Kärnfysikern's Avatar
    Kärnfysikern is offline Retired: AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Scotty, beam me up
    Posts
    14,223
    Quote Originally Posted by scriptfactory
    Taxes are already high in Europe. That's why I say that a nice compromise would be to have everyone pay the same tax with tax cuts for those below the poverty line.

    that I can agree with. A flat tax somewhere below what is comon in europe right now. If swedish taxes doesnt go down Il leave this country for sure when I have my phd.

  16. #16
    Logan13's Avatar
    Logan13 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,864

    math lesson

    Quote Originally Posted by scriptfactory
    Well said.

    I do think the wealth would be spread out among 10% instead of 5%. Many people are simply not given a chance to MAKE money as they don't have much to begin with.

    Also, I think that the top 5% should have to pay a larger percentage of taxes, not less. Can anyone explain to me why rich people get tax cuts?
    Define rich........I am not rich and I got a tax cut, as well as every other middle-upper middle class person that I know. Can you explain to me how you can give a tax cut to people that don't pay taxes in the first place. To give a tax cut to those who pay no or little taxes equates to welfare. The top 50% of Wage Earners pay 96.03% of Income Taxes....do the math.

  17. #17
    Logan13's Avatar
    Logan13 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,864

    ok

    Quote Originally Posted by scriptfactory
    Taxes are already high in Europe. That's why I say that a nice compromise would be to have everyone pay the same tax with tax cuts for those below the poverty line.
    Come on, your statement makes NO sense. Yes, lets give them a tax break even though they pay no taxes in the first place, i.e. Welfare. Income re-distribution does not work. Please do a little of your own research.

  18. #18
    scriptfactory's Avatar
    scriptfactory is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,490
    Quote Originally Posted by Logan13
    Define rich........I am not rich and I got a tax cut, as well as every other middle-upper middle class person that I know. Can you explain to me how you can give a tax cut to people that don't pay taxes in the first place. To give a tax cut to those who pay no or little taxes equates to welfare. The top 50% of Wage Earners pay 96.03% of Income Taxes....do the math.
    Come on, your statement makes NO sense. Yes, lets give them a tax break even though they pay no taxes in the first place, i.e. Welfare. Income re-distribution does not work. Please do a little of your own research.
    I'm not equating poverty line people with welfare people. Admittedly it's be like 5 years since I lived in the States so maybe I am wrong but I didn't think that people around the poverty line got tax cuts. Here in Germany they don't...

    I'm talking about REALLY rich people, like millionaires and billionaires. Upper middle class people are definitely not rich. I'm not talking about unemployed welfare people, because that's impossible. Like here in Germany, the average person pays 16% in taxes from their wages and 16% in sales tax even though they are hovering at right around the poverty line.

    I also know that when I was in the States I would have to pay mad taxes even though I was making very little money (at least when I was in the US Army.) My income tax refund made it a little better but I always figured I should have to pay a lower percentage of taxes since I made so little money.

    Edit: If I am wrong please educate me! I would like to know why you thought I was talking about welfare people? I didn't think welfare = poverty line.

  19. #19
    Logan13's Avatar
    Logan13 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,864

    income

    Quote Originally Posted by scriptfactory
    I'm not equating poverty line people with welfare people. Admittedly it's be like 5 years since I lived in the States so maybe I am wrong but I didn't think that people around the poverty line got tax cuts. Here in Germany they don't...

    I'm talking about REALLY rich people, like millionaires and billionaires. Upper middle class people are definitely not rich. I'm not talking about unemployed welfare people, because that's impossible. Like here in Germany, the average person pays 16% in taxes from their wages and 16% in sales tax even though they are hovering at right around the poverty line.

    I also know that when I was in the States I would have to pay mad taxes even though I was making very little money (at least when I was in the US Army.) My income tax refund made it a little better but I always figured I should have to pay a lower percentage of taxes since I made so little money.

    Edit: If I am wrong please educate me! I would like to know why you thought I was talking about welfare people? I didn't think welfare = poverty line.
    Well, I think that we could learn from each other in this forum. Tax rates in the US are base on net income, the more net income one has, the higher tax bracket the person is in. I am in the 22% tax bracket, I believe that the highest bracket is now around 28%. The lower brackets are roughly 15% after standard deductions. So, the higher your net income, the higher the tax bracket you are in...i.e. the more money you make, the higher percent of that income is going to go to taxes.
    Now the people with money have the cash to pay those who know the tax loopholes to do their taxes to save money....but these "loopholes" are available to everyone. I use them for all of my 1099 income in regards to expenditures.
    Welfare individuals may not be at the poverty level of those in third world countries, but it they are still at the poverty line by American standards....i.e. they can not support their families because they are making little or no money. Welfare programs are in place and have increased in spending under Bush. I do not want anyone living in the streets or children going hungry. But if they have no income, and they pay no income tax, how can we give them a tax break? We are talking about 2 different issues in regards to welfare and tax breaks.
    The less money that people must pay in taxes, the more money they have to purchase goods and services, and/or expand their business which creates jobs for those in the lower and middle income brackets which in turn gives these people more money to spend........the net effect is a strong and growing economy.
    The tax cuts that Bush has handed out since he has been in office went to anyone that had taxable income. Everyone of these people received the same rebate check, those that made millions and those that made a couple thousand. When we do the math, a $400 tax rebate check to a person who made $1 million dollars of taxable income equates to a 0.04% tax break. This same rebate check sent to a person who made $5000 in taxable income equates to a 8% tax break. Obviously, the rich did not gain as much as those on the Left would like you to think they did........The top 50% of Wage Earners pay 96.03% of Income Taxes....do the math. I do not like getting wrapped up in emotion as it is a waste of energy. When we look at issues with facts it is a lot easier to understand and relate.
    You still awake after that???????
    -Logan13

  20. #20
    scriptfactory's Avatar
    scriptfactory is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,490
    Quote Originally Posted by Logan13
    Well, I think that we could learn from each other in this forum. Tax rates in the US are base on net income, the more net income one has, the higher tax bracket the person is in. I am in the 22% tax bracket, I believe that the highest bracket is now around 28%. The lower brackets are roughly 15% after standard deductions. So, the higher your net income, the higher the tax bracket you are in...i.e. the more money you make, the higher percent of that income is going to go to taxes.
    Now the people with money have the cash to pay those who know the tax loopholes to do their taxes to save money....but these "loopholes" are available to everyone. I use them for all of my 1099 income in regards to expenditures.
    Welfare individuals may not be at the poverty level of those in third world countries, but it they are still at the poverty line by American standards....i.e. they can not support their families because they are making little or no money. Welfare programs are in place and have increased in spending under Bush. I do not want anyone living in the streets or children going hungry. But if they have no income, and they pay no income tax, how can we give them a tax break? We are talking about 2 different issues in regards to welfare and tax breaks.
    The less money that people must pay in taxes, the more money they have to purchase goods and services, and/or expand their business which creates jobs for those in the lower and middle income brackets which in turn gives these people more money to spend........the net effect is a strong and growing economy.
    The tax cuts that Bush has handed out since he has been in office went to anyone that had taxable income. Everyone of these people received the same rebate check, those that made millions and those that made a couple thousand. When we do the math, a $400 tax rebate check to a person who made $1 million dollars of taxable income equates to a 0.04% tax break. This same rebate check sent to a person who made $5000 in taxable income equates to a 8% tax break. Obviously, the rich did not gain as much as those on the Left would like you to think they did........The top 50% of Wage Earners pay 96.03% of Income Taxes....do the math. I do not like getting wrapped up in emotion as it is a waste of energy. When we look at issues with facts it is a lot easier to understand and relate.
    You still awake after that???????
    -Logan13
    Makes sense. Then should we get rid of the loopholes?

  21. #21
    alphaman's Avatar
    alphaman is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    The Ron Paul War Room
    Posts
    2,727
    Quote Originally Posted by scriptfactory
    Makes sense. Then should we get rid of the loopholes?
    Heck NO!!

  22. #22
    brewerpi's Avatar
    brewerpi is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    370

    loopholes

    After I pay for my tax advisor's help the money I save is almost not worth it, the only advantage to my income level is not having to pay social security tax. I agree with the earlier line about the 5% getting it all back if it were spread around to the "masses". I have read recently that the old 5% owning 90% isn't an accurate/relevant figure these days. I do know that the top 5% percent of Americans pay well over 50% of the taxes-income taxes that is. The lower tax brackets get hosed on "sin" taxes-alchohol and tobacco etc. not to mention the "idiot" tax-lottery!

  23. #23
    Logan13's Avatar
    Logan13 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,864

    yes

    Quote Originally Posted by scriptfactory
    Makes sense. Then should we get rid of the loopholes?
    I think that we should definately make the tax system easier, especially for those who cannot afford to pay for tax advise. But to be honest, I like the loopholes.

  24. #24
    Logan13's Avatar
    Logan13 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,864

    correct

    Quote Originally Posted by brewerpi
    After I pay for my tax advisor's help the money I save is almost not worth it, the only advantage to my income level is not having to pay social security tax. I agree with the earlier line about the 5% getting it all back if it were spread around to the "masses". I have read recently that the old 5% owning 90% isn't an accurate/relevant figure these days. I do know that the top 5% percent of Americans pay well over 50% of the taxes-income taxes that is. The lower tax brackets get hosed on "sin" taxes-alchohol and tobacco etc. not to mention the "idiot" tax-lottery!
    The gov't would never admit it, but the taxes from these "vice" goods and services is very lucrative. It gives them more money to spend fighting these social problems, and reminding us how only they, the gov't, can take care of us and save us from ourselves.

  25. #25
    thegodfather's Avatar
    thegodfather is offline Dulce bellum inexpertis
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Middle East
    Posts
    4,035
    Income tax is one thing...But who forgot to mention property tax? We pay $12,000 in property tax per year. Thats $1,000 a month onto our mortgage. Heres what really pisses me off with the government. Low income housing in upper-middle class neighborhoods. Someone tell me, what is the point of me paying $500,000 for my house, and $1,000 a month in property tax to live in an upper eschelon neighborhood around other hard working high earning people. Then the government comes in, and builds a development full of HUD(section 8) homes or apartments. These people are exempt from paying property tax's, and their kids goto the schools in my town funded by MY dime. I just dont agree with every township being required to have low income housing. Now you can rant and rave about equal opportunity and all that. However, often times when they build these things, the crime rates in the town goes up, and it becomes an eye sore for the town.

    PS- They also need to kick about half the leaching low lifes off of Welfare who dont genuinely need it...If they checked up on these people like they're supposed to, and made them actually goto the work programs that they're required to, we wouldn't be supporting these lazy sacks of shit with our tax dollars...

  26. #26
    Logan13's Avatar
    Logan13 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,864

    libs

    Quote Originally Posted by thegodfather
    Income tax is one thing...But who forgot to mention property tax? We pay $12,000 in property tax per year. Thats $1,000 a month onto our mortgage. Heres what really pisses me off with the government. Low income housing in upper-middle class neighborhoods. Someone tell me, what is the point of me paying $500,000 for my house, and $1,000 a month in property tax to live in an upper eschelon neighborhood around other hard working high earning people. Then the government comes in, and builds a development full of HUD(section 8) homes or apartments. These people are exempt from paying property tax's, and their kids goto the schools in my town funded by MY dime. I just dont agree with every township being required to have low income housing. Now you can rant and rave about equal opportunity and all that. However, often times when they build these things, the crime rates in the town goes up, and it becomes an eye sore for the town.

    PS- They also need to kick about half the leaching low lifes off of Welfare who dont genuinely need it...If they checked up on these people like they're supposed to, and made them actually goto the work programs that they're required to, we wouldn't be supporting these lazy sacks of shit with our tax dollars...
    If only the terrorists would concentrate on the bleeding heart libs...........I totally agree with you.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •