Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Culture Forum

Culture Forum

  1. Standard member KellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    02 Nov '08 10:53 / 1 edit
    In the states there is much discussion about the notion of greed on
    Wall Street, and bailing out Main Street due to the greed of Wall
    Street. Personally, I think there is nothing but greed here, those that
    want something from either BO, or JM for nothing are doing so out of
    greed as well.

    The notion that anyone has to pay more so others who pay nothing
    can get something is completely wrong. Either the playing field is level
    or it isn’t, if it isn’t one group is being punished and another lavished
    upon without regard for the ones being punished bottom line. This
    then sets us up so that we allow politicians to get away with sticking us
    all with taxes across the board. As soon as one group starts to
    demonized watch out, they will attack them and you too, they just will
    not be as up front about coming after you, but they will.
    Kelly
  2. 02 Nov '08 17:42
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    In the states there is much discussion about the notion of greed on
    Wall Street, and bailing out Main Street due to the greed of Wall
    Street. Personally, I think there is nothing but greed here, those that
    want something from either BO, or JM for nothing are doing so out of
    greed as well.

    The notion that anyone has to pay more so others who pay nothi ...[text shortened]... em and you too, they just will
    not be as up front about coming after you, but they will.
    Kelly
    "The notion that anyone has to pay more so others who pay nothing can get something is completely wrong."

    Do you think Jesus would agree with this statement?
  3. Standard member KellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    02 Nov '08 23:33
    Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
    [b]"The notion that anyone has to pay more so others who pay nothing can get something is completely wrong."

    Do you think Jesus would agree with this statement?[/b]
    I think Jesus would want everyone to be treated the same way, and
    in the US that isn't done. People do not share the pain to reap the
    benefits and that has created in this country a group of people who
    believe they have a right to other people's money, and we have
    leaders who use that greed to promote themselves to stay in power.
    Kelly
  4. Donation kirksey957
    Outkast
    02 Nov '08 23:37
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    I think Jesus would want everyone to be treated the same way, and
    in the US that isn't done. People do not share the pain to reap the
    benefits and that has created in this country a group of people who
    believe they have a right to other people's money, and we have
    leaders who use that greed to promote themselves to stay in power.
    Kelly
    How would you fix this problem?
  5. 02 Nov '08 23:48
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    I think Jesus would want everyone to be treated the same way, and
    in the US that isn't done. People do not share the pain to reap the
    benefits and that has created in this country a group of people who
    believe they have a right to other people's money, and we have
    leaders who use that greed to promote themselves to stay in power.
    Kelly
    Jesus wouldn't want the unfortunate to be given a helping hand?
  6. Standard member ChronicLeaky
    Don't Fear Me
    03 Nov '08 04:23
    Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
    Jesus wouldn't want the unfortunate to be given a helping hand?
    Of course not. That's his job, kind of like how government social programs should be replaced by private charity 🙄.
  7. Standard member KellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    03 Nov '08 06:50 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by kirksey957
    How would you fix this problem?
    Either a flat tax or a consumption tax and get rid of the income tax
    that way if some politician wants to raise taxes, he has to look
    at all the tax payers in the face and say that is what he wants to
    do to everyone. That would stop the free for all in spending too.
    Kelly
  8. Standard member KellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    03 Nov '08 06:51
    Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
    Jesus wouldn't want the unfortunate to be given a helping hand?
    You should halp the unfortunate, that does not stop if you are paying
    taxes or not.
    Kelly
  9. Standard member ChronicLeaky
    Don't Fear Me
    03 Nov '08 07:22 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    Either a flat tax or a consumption tax and get rid of the income tax
    I highly agree with the latter two parts of this sentence. In general, I think the real social function of the government is to convince people to have individual positive trade balances, by doing nothing to discourage production and a lot to encourage consumption. I would advocate extreme taxation of any consumption above a certain standard of living, no income tax, and the abolishment of the limited liability corporation. The inevitable black market and careful, local investment would be real capitalism at work.

    To the extent the the sort of ways of treating one's neighbours espoused by Christianity are sensible, and to the extent that the economy affects how we treat our neighbours, I think something like the above is optimal for minimising the d-bag contingent's ranks.

    EDIT Obviously there would be some serious revenue decreases, but I think certain government social programs are beneficial, so the obvious solution in a place like the US is to eliminate the military except for the Coast Guard and Border Patrol.

    EDIT And eliminate the socialisation of nonproductive interests.

    EDIT Basically I wish the Libertarians were not such members of the d-bag contingent on a few issues, and that they weren't running an effing ex-CIA person for president, and I might have someone to vote for tomorrow.
  10. Standard member ChronicLeaky
    Don't Fear Me
    03 Nov '08 09:40
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    Isn't 🙄 for sarcasm?
  11. Standard member Bosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    03 Nov '08 11:08 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by ChronicLeaky
    Isn't 🙄 for sarcasm?
    I use it to express disbelief; I find 😵 to be more sarcastic.

    Edit: sadistic too.
  12. Standard member ChronicLeaky
    Don't Fear Me
    03 Nov '08 13:35
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    I use it to express disbelief; I find 😵 to be more sarcastic.

    Edit: sadistic too.
    Let's start a band called "Overloaded Emoticon" or "Semantic Smiley and the Double Meanings".
  13. Standard member Bosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    03 Nov '08 13:36 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by ChronicLeaky
    Let's start a band called "Overloaded Emoticon" or "Semantic Smiley and the Double Meanings".
    'Bloated Emoticon' -- although I like plain 'Bloat'.
  14. 03 Nov '08 15:15 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    You should halp the unfortunate, that does not stop if you are paying
    taxes or not.
    Kelly
    Let me try to understand you. It seems your position is that it's "wrong" for the government to help the unfortunate because they can "get something" while "paying nothing." Why are you opposed to this? How is your opposition to paying taxes to help the unfortunate not based in your own greed?

    People who advocate a flat tax do so out of greed or ignorance. It only serves to put more money in the pockets of those who earn the most and take more money from those who earn the least.
  15. Standard member KellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    03 Nov '08 18:50 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
    Let me try to understand you. It seems your position is that it's "wrong" for the government to help the unfortunate because they can "get something" while "paying nothing." Why are you opposed to this? How is your opposition to paying taxes to help the unfortunate not based in your own greed?

    People who advocate a flat tax do so out of greed or ignora ...[text shortened]... the pockets of those who earn the most and take more money from those who earn the least.
    No where did I say it was wrong for the government to help the
    unfortunate at all, I said it was wrong for people to reap the
    benefits and not help foot the bill. It is wrong to treat one person
    differently than another, the playing field is either level or it isn't.
    To have a progressive tax table is to treat people different, and it
    allows politicians to divide and conquer with their tax schemes,
    because they pit one segment of society against another as if
    one segment is owed part of another’s wealth.

    A flat tax hits everyone the same way, you make more you pay
    more, you make less you pay less, with an equal percentage, so
    there is equality and fairness in how everyone is treated.
    Kelly