NationStates Jolt Archive

Ok, this is for US citizens, I don't know about the taxes in other country, and I'm not going to bother looking them up. Just thought yall should know that.

Taxes in the United States are not only too high, the tax system which was created by the IRS and Gov Co. is so damn complicated, it's no wonder why people considered the tax structure a web in which taxpayers can get tangled in if they're not careful. It seems like everything has a tax, except for pissing, pooping and sex, unless you pay a prositute. The tax system that we have now, is basically a socialist system, a system of redisribution of wealth. So, what do we do about this system? We take it down. Here is my tax plan, a plan that will hopefully satisified everyone.

1. Get rid of the current tax system and tax codes. We need to streamline the process and make it more efficient. One way to do this is a flat tax on Income. Another way to do this is by implimenting the fair tax. I'm in favor of the fair tax but realistically I think the flat tax has a better chance of being implimented in the USA.

2. The Flat Tax should be set at 15%, that is half of what we pay right now. Now for those of you who think that this is just for the wealthy, if you actually DO the math you'll find out that the wealthy still pay the highest percentage in taxes. The 15% means that 15% comes out of your paycheck, no matter what you make.

3. Everyone who earns a paycheck get taxed.

4. Social Security and Medicare Medicaid would be privatized. Let's face it, the government sucks when it comes to running thing, if you don't believe me, look at Amtrak, the worse passenger train system in the USA. For Social Security, everyone who has an SS card will get an account. The account will be managed by the person, and that person will choose how much he wants to put towards his retirement. If he doesn't want to think about the future and blow his money, then hey that's his choice, and he should suffer the consequences. We need to start getting people off Gov. Co. tits. As for medicare or Medicaid, those will be handled by your employeers, private companies, or whatever. It basic economics really, if a company does provide it's employee with health care, then he'll lose employees because of that, employeers who do provide health care will have a better chance of getting employees. For private health care companies, the same rule applies. If we just leave the economy and the market alone, then the best health care companies will thrive, while the bad ones will go out of business.

5. A National sales tax, that cannot be changed unless approved in a national elections by the population. This will also apply to Hotel taxes, car rental taxes etc. etc. basically any taxes on good and services will have a national standard, and how high it is will be decided by the people, not Gov. Co.

6. Cut down on the size of Gov. Co., both in the physical sense and the power of Gov. Co.

7. At the end of the year, whatever you spend on essisentals (which will be determined by the IRS), you will be refunded for. essientals such as food, water, shelter, etc. essisentals do not include plasma TV, boats, etc.

and that's all I can think of right now. :)

As long as I continue paying nothing in taxes, your plan has my full support. :)

Just don't mess with my $52 per diem payment.

3. Everyone who earns a paycheck get taxed.


Starts scheming to get paid in cash.

It seems like everything has a tax, except for pissing, pooping and sex, unless you pay a prositute.
acutally money recieved during illegal activities is actually taxable.

oh, and as a tax professional, the tax code is complicated for some, but I get it LOL

oh, and yeah and I support the fair tax.

EDIT: and setting the flat tax at 15% only hurts the poorest people who are now not paying any tax (other than SS and medicare) and the middle class whom most pay less than 15% (when you are talking about effective tax rates which is all that really matters)

As long as I continue paying nothing in taxes, your plan has my full support. :)

Just don't mess with my $52 per diem payment.

Yea. that brings up number 8. Everyone who is or was on Welfare, or any other type of assistant program. Whenver they do go back to work, and trust me they will, they will get a bill requiring to pay back what they took from the taxpayers.

2. The Flat Tax should be set at 15%, that is half of what we pay right now.

no it isn't

it actually represents a tax hike for everyone at the median household income and below

Yea. that brings up number 8. Everyone who is or was on Welfare, or any other type of assistant program. Whenver they do go back to work, and trust me they will, they will get a bill requiring to pay back what they took from the taxpayers.

I've never been on welfare.. :p

The Government pays me $52 for every day I spend driving interstate freight.. I usually spend about $3 per day on average, so the rest is gravy, and adds up to more than what I pay in taxes...

The tax system that we have now, is basically a socialist system

don't use words that you don't understand

Ok, then where should we put the flat tax rate at?

Ok, then where should we put the flat tax rate at?

we shouldn't. if we are going to tax wages (which i don't really approve of in most cases) we ought do it progressively

Yea. that brings up number 8. Everyone who is or was on Welfare, or any other type of assistant program. Whenver they do go back to work, and trust me they will, they will get a bill requiring to pay back what they took from the taxpayers.

Right, because working at McDonalds or Walmart will allow you to be able to repay the state within your lifetime.

You're a genius, Willy. I've always entertained the idea of a flat tax, and SS and Medicaid are WAY too bloated these days. I do, however, take exception at your comment about Amtrak. As someone who has traveled by Amtrak at least 8 times, I can attest that the service is excellent, the trains luxurious and clean (and I was NOT in the business section!!) and the overall experience is well worth the $75 dollars I spent each time.

You're a genius, Willy. I've always entertained the idea of a flat tax, and SS and Medicaid are WAY too bloated these days. I do, however, take exception at your comment about Amtrak. As someone who has traveled by Amtrak at least 8 times, I can attest that the service is excellent, the trains luxurious and clean (and I was NOT in the business section!!) and the overall experience is well worth the $75 dollars I spent each time.
you only think he is a genius because neither of you have even a basic understanding of the current tax code.

3. Everyone who earns a paycheck get taxed.

4. Social Security and Medicare Medicaid would be privatized.

you have never been poor have you?

you only think he is a genius because neither of you have even a basic understanding of the current tax code.
I understand enough to know that a flat tax is the only fair option.

I understand enough to know that a flat tax is the only fair option.

In other words, very little?

we shouldn't. if we are going to tax wages (which i don't really approve of in most cases) we ought do it progressively

Yes, because progressive taxes is working really well right now. :rolleyes: .

No, progressive taxes have been tried and failed. It's time for a new system.

All progressive taxes is, is another redistribution of wealth scam cooked up by Gov. Co.

Right, because working at McDonalds or Walmart will allow you to be able to repay the state within your lifetime.

Yea, and let's just forget about the taxpayers who's money you are taking out of their wallet while on Welfare or any other assistance program. The fact is that it's only fair for the people who used those programs to repay what they took out, it's fair to the taxpayers and that is who we should think about first because without them we wouldn't even have the government.

Ok, this is for US citizens, I don't know about the taxes in other country, and I'm not going to bother looking them up. Just thought yall should know that.

Taxes in the United States are not only too high, the tax system which was created by the IRS and Gov Co. is so damn complicated, it's no wonder why people considered the tax structure a web in which taxpayers can get tangled in if they're not careful. It seems like everything has a tax, except for pissing, pooping and sex, unless you pay a prositute. The tax system that we have now, is basically a socialist system, a system of redisribution of wealth. So, what do we do about this system? We take it down. Here is my tax plan, a plan that will hopefully satisified everyone.

1. Get rid of the current tax system and tax codes. We need to streamline the process and make it more efficient. One way to do this is a flat tax on Income. Another way to do this is by implimenting the fair tax. I'm in favor of the fair tax but realistically I think the flat tax has a better chance of being implimented in the USA.

2. The Flat Tax should be set at 15%, that is half of what we pay right now. Now for those of you who think that this is just for the wealthy, if you actually DO the math you'll find out that the wealthy still pay the highest percentage in taxes. The 15% means that 15% comes out of your paycheck, no matter what you make.

3. Everyone who earns a paycheck get taxed.

I can't agree more, though it would be easier on the people if you don't get taxed if you are attending a school, college, or university.

4. Social Security and Medicare Medicaid would be privatized. Let's face it, the government sucks when it comes to running thing, if you don't believe me, look at Amtrak, the worse passenger train system in the USA. For Social Security, everyone who has an SS card will get an account. The account will be managed by the person, and that person will choose how much he wants to put towards his retirement. If he doesn't want to think about the future and blow his money, then hey that's his choice, and he should suffer the consequences. We need to start getting people off Gov. Co. tits. As for medicare or Medicaid, those will be handled by your employeers, private companies, or whatever. It basic economics really, if a company does provide it's employee with health care, then he'll lose employees because of that, employeers who do provide health care will have a better chance of getting employees. For private health care companies, the same rule applies. If we just leave the economy and the market alone, then the best health care companies will thrive, while the bad ones will go out of business.

True, but I do believe that the government should pay for essential healthcare, like treatments and surgery. Of course, thinking of plastic surgery, if the person is getting plastic surgery because they don't feel good about themselves, they should pay for it. However, if the person is, say, having their face reconstructed or body parts reattached (yes, reattaching body parts is plastic surgery), the government should pay for it.

5. A National sales tax, that cannot be changed unless approved in a national elections by the population. This will also apply to Hotel taxes, car rental taxes etc. etc. basically any taxes on good and services will have a national standard, and how high it is will be decided by the people, not Gov. Co.

6. Cut down on the size of Gov. Co., both in the physical sense and the power of Gov. Co.

7. At the end of the year, whatever you spend on essisentals (which will be determined by the IRS), you will be refunded for. essientals such as food, water, shelter, etc. essisentals do not include plasma TV, boats, etc.

and that's all I can think of right now. :)

you have never been poor have you?

Ahh yes, the poor excuse. Yes, let us pity the poor because they'll never do any better because their "opressed". Instead of telling them that they should and can do better, let us take pity upon them. :rolleyes: . This country is still a country of opprounity, but you'll only get those opporunity if you go after them. and yes I've been poor, but my family decided that being poor sucked, so everyone in my family worked hard to climb our way up, and now we're middle to upper middle class citizens.

I understand enough to know that a flat tax is the only fair option.
a flat tax is neither fair or effective. The fair tax, is structured to be more fair and effective than the current tax code, but even it is different than a flat tax.

Ahh yes, the poor excuse. Yes, let us pity the poor because they'll never do any better because their "opressed". Instead of telling them that they should and can do better, let us take pity upon them. :rolleyes: . This country is still a country of opprounity, but you'll only get those opporunity if you go after them. and yes I've been poor, but my family decided that being poor sucked, so everyone in my family worked hard to climb our way up, and now we're middle to upper middle class citizens.
even as an upper middle class citizen it's doubtful to me that you pay 15% of your income in federal taxes. You don't understand where your money comes from or where it goes, because if you did you would see that your "tax plan" is hurtful to people at all ends of the income spectrum.

even as an upper middle class citizen it's doubtful to me that you pay 15% of your income in federal taxes. You don't understand where your money comes from or where it goes, because if you did you would see that your "tax plan" is hurtful to people at all ends of the income spectrum.

and that brings up point 10. The government should send us a recepit once a year, detailing where our money is going, and how much is going to a certain program, agencies etc. Look, I would love to have the fair tax instated in this country, but I'm thinking realistically. Realistically the Fair Tax won't get implimented in this country because too many people are uninformed about it, and politicans will use that to their advantage to spread lies about the "horror" of the Fair Tax plan. So the next best thing would be the Flat Tax.

Unacceptable. The tax system should be improved, but not towards more neoliberalism that disregards people's rights and human liberty and dignity in favor of a warped sense of fairness where the right to get and be rich trumps all.

Unacceptable. The tax system should be improved, but not towards more neoliberalism that disregards people's rights and human liberty and dignity in favor of a warped sense of fairness where the right to get and be rich trumps all.

What's wrong with being rich?

and that brings up point 10. The government should send us a recepit once a year, detailing where our money is going, and how much is going to a certain program, agencies etc. Look, I would love to have the fair tax instated in this country, but I'm thinking realistically. Realistically the Fair Tax won't get implimented in this country because too many people are uninformed about it, and politicans will use that to their advantage to spread lies about the "horror" of the Fair Tax plan. So the next best thing would be the Flat Tax.
no, the next best thing to the fair tax is the current system slightly tweaked.

and it's not hard to figure out where your taxes go, it's public record how much taxes are taken in, and how much goes to each program. When I am saying that you don't know where your money goes, I am talking about your actual money, your personal money.

no, the next best thing to the fair tax is the current system slightly tweaked.

and how would you slightly tweak it?

Problem 1. A flat tax is only a flat tax until Congress decides to monkey with it. We've been up and down on the number of brackets and the tax rates for brackets so often that it's hard to remember what the current plan is. The Fair Tax and abolition of the IRS is the only way to clean up taxation, such that our elected representatives can't use the tax code to buy their re-elections.

Problem 2. A national sales tax is also a tax. It compounds your flat tax. Get rid of the flat tax.

What's wrong with being rich?

Nothing. But the right to get and be rich is not, as the neoliberal model would suggest, the greatest right. I have no qualms about limiting the right to property through taxation of those who can afford it, where it serves to reinforce more fundamental rights on a broader scale.

Nothing. But the right to get and be rich is not, as the neoliberal model would suggest, the greatest right. I have no qualms about limiting the right to property through taxation of those who can afford it, where it serves to reinforce more fundamental rights on a broader scale.

So you're in favor of taxing my property just because I can buy them, and what is this fundamental rights you speak of? Also, are you a socialist or communist? j/w.

and how would you slightly tweak it?
the rules for claiming head of household for one need to be changed, the rules for claiming Earned Income Credit need to be changed, especially the bit about being able to claim non-dependents and getting a larger credit, I would change certain areas on the schedule C for sole proprietorships, and re-vamp the rules about deductions on the schedule K.

the rules for claiming head of household for one need to be changed, the rules for claiming Earned Income Credit need to be changed, especially the bit about being able to claim non-dependents and getting a larger credit, I would change certain areas on the schedule C for sole proprietorships, and re-vamp the rules about deductions on the schedule K.
This isn't going to solve the fundamental problem with our income tax. That problem is that Congress can still do whatever it wants to do, in order to 'encourage' a particular behavior, or buy votes. Nibbling around the edges may solve problems for one or two categories of tax payers, but nothing short of abolishing the IRS is going to _fix_ our tax code.

THere is only one reason why I like this plan going into effect: It will screw everything up so much that a socialist revolution will be much more likely. Other than that, it is a horrible plan that destroys almost a century of progress in social areas.

So you're in favor of taxing my property just because I can buy them, and what is this fundamental rights you speak of? Also, are you a socialist or communist? j/w.

I could be Communist, but because I'd happily settle for a market-based society checked by regulation with a more even than not distribution of wealth and strong social safety net, I'm more properly called a democratic socialist or welfarist.

I'm in favor of taxing your property because it is the right thing to do, not because I enjoy it, or because I'm punishing you for being wealthy. The fundamental right I speak of is Life, and the rights which follow from that, which can for simplicity's sake be called Liberty.

THere is only one reason why I like this plan going into effect: It will screw everything up so much that a socialist revolution will be much more likely. Other than that, it is a horrible plan that destroys almost a century of progress in social areas.

Yea, but we'll have more money in our pockets, and say whatever you want to say about social progress, money always talk. Why do you think the Democrats keep on losing? They keep on talking about taking away our tax breaks! The truth is, people do things based on their wallets.

I could be Communist, but because I'd happily settle for a market-based society checked by regulation with a more even than not distribution of wealth and strong social safety net, I'm more properly called a democratic socialist or welfarist.

Yea, I'm going to call you communist.


I'm in favor of taxing your property because it is the right thing to do, not because I enjoy it, or because I'm punishing you for being wealthy.

Wow, you just went 180 in that sentance right there. First you say that taxing my property is the "right" thing to do, and you're not trying to punish me for my wealth! Hello, that what that tax is doing! It's punshing me for being able to buy stuff. You know, not every rich person got there because their daddy, or connections. Some of them actually worked their way to the top, should we punish them by taxing them to death? Also, what makes you think it's the right thing to do, to tax's a man's private property? I say if it doesn't belong to the government, then it shouldn't be taxed. My properties are private properities, not properities of the government, so thereforth the government should keep their hands off of it.

The fundamental right I speak of is Life, and the rights which follow from that, which can for simplicity's sake be called Liberty.

and how would you define Liberty?

No, progressive taxes have been tried and failed.

define 'failed'

define 'failed'

Anything that basically ends up as being a system of redistribution of wealth is failed.

Wow, you just went 180 in that sentance right there. First you say that taxing my property is the "right" thing to do, and you're not trying to punish me for my wealth! Hello, that what that tax is doing!

taxes /= punishment

Anything that basically ends up as being a system of redistribution of wealth is failed.

so capitalism has 'failed' then?

Yea, but we'll have more money in our pockets, and say whatever you want to say about social progress, money always talk. Why do you think the Democrats keep on losing? They keep on talking about taking away our tax breaks! The truth is, people do things based on their wallets.

No, you are wrong. People above the median level of income will have much more money in their pockets. People who make already obscene amounts of after tax income will have more money in their pocket. Everyone else, will have less money in their pocket, especially if they are chronically ill, old and already poor. Your national sales tax would make the cost of living for normal people much higher, while the wealthy will get away without paying much sales tax because much of what wealthy people buy don't fall under the heading of "commodities." Finally, you completely ignore capital gains income with your plan, which will allow the wealthy to get even more wealthy without facing any taxation.

In summary, under your plan, the rich get much richer, and the middle class and poor get poorer. Ordinary people get ground in the gears of capitalism and Capitalists get gigantic profits-- until they face a realization crisis when demand for goods falls because no one has any money left to buy them. At that point, socialist revolution (hopefully) takes over and we all end up much happier. *continues wishful thinking*

As for why the democrats can't get elected, they can't get elected because people have started to realize that they don't represent the people, now or in the past.

so capitalism has 'failed' then?

Nah not really, because capitalism encourages people to do for themselves, to not rely on Gov. Co. and for people to actually work.

Nah not really, because capitalism encourages people to do for themselves, to not rely on Gov. Co. and for people to actually work.

By your logic, it has failed, because capitalism is based on an upwards redistribution of income and wealth from laborers to capitalists. Capitalism only encourages people to prey on those that are less fortunate then them.

This isn't going to solve the fundamental problem with our income tax. That problem is that Congress can still do whatever it wants to do, in order to 'encourage' a particular behavior, or buy votes. Nibbling around the edges may solve problems for one or two categories of tax payers, but nothing short of abolishing the IRS is going to _fix_ our tax code.
can you explain to me what exactly you think the problem with the current tax code is?

Yea, I'm going to call you communist.

... this doesn't bode well for the future of our discussion.

Wow, you just went 180 in that sentance right there. First you say that taxing my property is the "right" thing to do, and you're not trying to punish me for my wealth! Hello, that what that tax is doing! It's punshing me for being able to buy stuff. You know, not every rich person got there because their daddy, or connections. Some of them actually worked their way to the top, should we punish them by taxing them to death? Also, what makes you think it's the right thing to do, to tax's a man's private property? I say if it doesn't belong to the government, then it shouldn't be taxed. My properties are private properities, not properities of the government, so thereforth the government should keep their hands off of it.

Taxes are not punishment. Taxes are the tool by which the civil society fulfills it's duty to uphold the rights of the people. Your taxes pay for the army, the police, the fire department, and in most countries, the organs of republican government and welfare programs. You pay taxes because, being a part of society you hold a duty to that society, and that society holds a duty to you. Again, it's not a punishment for being wealthy.

Oh, and I don't care whether you won the lottery, inherited daddy's cash or pulled yourself up by your bootstraps, the fact that taxes are a duty doesn't change.

and how would you define Liberty?

There have been volumes written upon this subject. I could err quite verbose, but I'll keep it brief. Liberty consists of two elements - freedom and agency. Freedom means not having unneccesary restrictions upon one's actions, and agency means having the actual ability to exercise one's Liberty. The man who is restricted by circumstance is no more free than one restricted by law.

Nah not really, because capitalism encourages people to do for themselves, to not rely on Gov. Co. and for people to actually work.

which has what, exactly to do with its systemic redistribution of wealth? that is your criteria for 'failure' mentioned just a few post ago, right?

A simplified tax system would do wonders for every individual (excepting tax accountants), businesses (excepting tax preparation services) as well as the economy as a whole. The current convoluted tax system has an enormous cost due to the time taken to prepare taxes and the near limitless opportunities for exploiting loopholes with the use of ‘creative accounting’.

A flat tax would be far better providing you eliminate all exemptions – no write-offs or subsidies – with taxation starting around the poverty line. All income above the poverty line is taxes at a uniform percentage rate.

This drastically reduces the compliance cost of paying your taxes. Additionally, it is a fair system in that everyone is taxed equally – someone said earlier that taxes are not punishment, and they are not, but taxing someone more than anyone else is punishment of that particular group. That the ‘punished’ group is wealthy does not make it any less immoral – though jealousy will of course mitigate that feeling.

The tax is actually progressive as wealthy people are taxed more than those less well off – and if you are below the poverty line you do not get taxed at all. Despite the progressive nature, it is fair in that it is the same rate excepting the minimum amount of money needed to survive.

Even if the flat rate is well below the current average rate you will still end up boosting your revenue because there are no more loopholes for people to subvert the system. Additionally – those who do not try to subvert the system to retain more of their wealth are most likely fairly altruistic and will spend a good portion of their money on charity work – which is far more efficient than having the government doing it.

And yes – despite what some militant socialist anti-capitalists say – most people are fairly altruistic when given the opportunity. Being wealthy does not mean being a selfish bastard – though if you need to think that people are wealthy because they have to ‘exploit’ people to become rich, thus your unwillingness to do so is the only reason why they are wealthy and you are not so your comparative poverty is purely from being a good person, then go ahead and think that if it makes you feel better.

Sales taxes disproportionately harm the underclass. You cannot simply exclude ‘necessities’ as then you both further complicate the tax system and open up all sorts of discussions as to what constitutes a necessity.

Your tax form is simplified to (Income – Poverty line) x Tax rate.
Everyone can figure that one out in a matter of seconds.

While this sorts out personal income tax, business taxes would still be more complicated – but there isnt a simple way of handling that. After all, just taxing the ‘profits’ is still raises the issue of just what is considered ‘profit’.

I also propose that we should eliminate all payroll taxes because it causes an added disincentive to hire people – having to go through a lot of paperwork to hire someone is a pain. Had I the freedom of just taking down their tax ID number (to report to the IRS – I would rather not have to but alas it is probably a necessity) then paying them whatever for whenever, most companies would be more likely to hire people as the cost of employing someone drops.

Social security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc are all hugely inefficient systems which would be better off if the government was not involved. SS should go back to being an optional program – it would be just like any other retirement plan. I mentioned a tax identification number before rather than SSN because it was never supposed to be used for identification purposes.

If the government still wants to provide a social safety net, they can do so through the general tax fund rather than special taxes which increase the compliance cost for businesses. Leave charity to charities – the government shouldn’t be in that business.

And if the poor are going to starve to death, they should bloody well get on with it and reduce the surplus population. ;) (I hope someone gets that).

Nice Charles Dickens quote. The problem with a flat tax system is that wealth will continue to pool into the hands of fewer and fewer people, and this poses increase in inequality mitigates any attempt at social justice.

Nice Charles Dickens quote. The problem with a flat tax system is that wealth will continue to pool into the hands of fewer and fewer people, and this poses increase in inequality mitigates any attempt at social justice.

I disagree. I happen to think it would facilitate movement up the economic ladder, especially for those who are currently impoverished.

If you eliminate taxation on the poorest individuals, as well as reduce the cost of hiring new people with the elimination of payroll taxes, you provide an opportunity for people to come out of poverty. No taxes – so you keep everything you earn – provides a good incentive to make more money. Above the poverty rate you keep the excess money minus the tax rate but the first (I think it is around $16k right now) remains untaxed.

Since the cost of hiring a worker is reduced, more jobs will be created. Thus unemployment falls and employers can pay workers more money and still come out ahead. It is a very sad comment on our system where it makes a lot more sense to risk fines by hiring illegal immigrants at $16/hr than hire an American at $10/hr.

I happen to think the best way to improve society is not to pull down those who are higher, but to provide a way up for those on the bottom. That some people are wealthier than others is by no means an evil thing. We should not punish people simply because they have more money than you do.


BTW: thanks for recognizing the quote. I was afraid people might take it seriously and just resort to ignorant flaming.

I agree about helping people move up. There is no reason why people below the poverty line could couldn't be left untaxed with a progressive (i.e., wealthy pay higher percentage) income tax system.

The wealthy should pay a higher percentage tax because they benefit disproportionately from the services that the State offers. The building of roads, maintainence of infrastructure, research and development grants etc., benefit the wealthiest in society disproportionately more than they benefit the poorest.

Therefore, it would be logical to have the wealthy pay more for the operation of the State, whose existence primarily serves the wealthy. Taxing the highest income earners at a 50% rate will not "drag the wealthy down." After taxes, the wealthiest in society could live opulent, even decadent life styles with a 90% upper income tax.

2. The Flat Tax should be set at 15%, that is half of what we pay right now. Now for those of you who think that this is just for the wealthy, if you actually DO the math you'll find out that the wealthy still pay the highest percentage in taxes. The 15% means that 15% comes out of your paycheck, no matter what you make.

You would not cut revenue by half. You would cut it by at least 75%.

I have also explained why a flat income tax is NOT a fair tax many times, maybe I will dig up an old explanation.

3. Everyone who earns a paycheck get taxed.

They get taxed already. You get it back if you don't earn enough. Can you come up with any good reason to tax those who already don't get enough out of society to support themselves? Seems rather pointless.

4. Social Security and Medicare Medicaid would be privatized. Let's face it, the government sucks when it comes to running thing, if you don't believe me, look at Amtrak, the worse passenger train system in the USA. For Social Security, everyone who has an SS card will get an account. The account will be managed by the person, and that person will choose how much he wants to put towards his retirement. If he doesn't want to think about the future and blow his money, then hey that's his choice, and he should suffer the consequences. We need to start getting people off Gov. Co. tits. As for medicare or Medicaid, those will be handled by your employeers, private companies, or whatever. It basic economics really, if a company does provide it's employee with health care, then he'll lose employees because of that, employeers who do provide health care will have a better chance of getting employees. For private health care companies, the same rule applies. If we just leave the economy and the market alone, then the best health care companies will thrive, while the bad ones will go out of business.

I do agree that health insurance benefits can be handled by employers in most situations, as it is now. However, not extending health insurance benefits to everyone is a sure way to perpetuate poverty and drop current middle class individuals into poverty.

With social security, it will never get privatized because no one will support legislation that leaves the disabled and elderly to fend for themselves financially, even if they were irresponsible when able to work. Privatizing social security will only tax those responsible individuals more.

Healthcare industries must be completely deregulated to be privatized. If you continue to allow the patents, FDA approvals, and public funding for the healthcare industry, you will have a systematic screw over of those needing healthcare. Protected providers + necessary service = Trouble.

can you explain to me what exactly you think the problem with the current tax code is?
Yes. First, it taxes our income. That creates an entirely unnecessary bureacracy to figure out what our income really is and how well we 'voluntarily' report it. Second, the tax rates, exemptions, credits, etc, are set by a bunch of hacks that are only interested in getting re-elected. We've lost control of their spending and their taxing. Whether you want an end to the death tax or a repeal of the Bush tax cuts, it all depends on persuading your hack that his job depends on it.

I guess I only have two gripes right now. Sometimes I have more, but I can't remember what they are.

Taxes in the United States are not only too high, the tax system which was created by the IRS and Gov Co. is so damn complicated, it's no wonder why people considered the tax structure a web in which taxpayers can get tangled in if they're not careful. It seems like everything has a tax, except for pissing, pooping and sex, unless you pay a prositute. The tax system that we have now, is basically a socialist system, a system of redisribution of wealth. So, what do we do about this system? We take it down. Here is my tax plan, a plan that will hopefully satisified everyone. Everyone except the socialists. Actually, the US system isn't particularly socialist.

2. The Flat Tax should be set at 15%, that is half of what we pay right now. Now for those of you who think that this is just for the wealthy, if you actually DO the math you'll find out that the wealthy still pay the highest percentage in taxes. The 15% means that 15% comes out of your paycheck, no matter what you make. Good idea. Except now, those who are already struggling to make ends meat without being taxed are paying taxes and recieving fewer services.

3. Everyone who earns a paycheck get taxed.
see above
4. Social Security and Medicare Medicaid would be privatized. Let's face it, the government sucks when it comes to running thing, if you don't believe me, look at Amtrak, the worse passenger train system in the USA.Trains are not healthcare nor are they retirement plans. The government does run some things well, and some things poorly. The issue of Amtrak has more to do with the fact that rail lines haven't been of major importance to our nations transportation since the interstate system and planes came around.
For Social Security, everyone who has an SS card will get an account. The account will be managed by the person, and that person will choose how much he wants to put towards his retirement. If he doesn't want to think about the future and blow his money, then hey that's his choice, and he should suffer the consequences. That isn't privitizing social security. That is getting rid of it.
We need to start getting people off Gov. Co. tits.Helping those in need aren't suckling off the governments tit, as much as many conservatives would have us believe. You have clearly never been poor.
As for medicare or Medicaid, those will be handled by your employeers, private companies, or whatever. It basic economics really, if a company does provide it's employee with health care, then he'll lose employees because of that, employeers who do provide health care will have a better chance of getting employees. For private health care companies, the same rule applies. If we just leave the economy and the market alone, then the best health care companies will thrive, while the bad ones will go out of business. You don't particularly understand the medical business and their relationship to medical insurance companies, do you? I'd like to see how our nation turns out when even more MBAs are making medical decisions instead of doctors. As it stands, medicaid needs to be reformed, and doctors need to be fairly compensated...they currently only make $17 per visit...but there are already private health care companies for those who can afford it. A better idea would be to mandate health insurance, as Massachusets has done, and create good options for those who can't afford the inane prices of companies like Aetna or The Hartford.

7. At the end of the year, whatever you spend on essisentals (which will be determined by the IRS), you will be refunded for. essientals such as food, water, shelter, etc. essisentals do not include plasma TV, boats, etc.
What food is essential? I can buy bread, cheese, and wine and live decently okay for quite a while...or I can go out and spend $100 every night going out to dinner. Either way, eating is essential. At what point do we decide it is too much?
And why should I bother sending my money to the government to have them send it back after I pay for something? I'd rather have the money in my account, gaining interest. Why not just nationalize water supply? Make it free to all citizens? We're going to get the money back anyway. Oh wait, if the government gives it to you, you're sucking off its tit. Sorry, I forgot.

Yes. First, it taxes our income. That creates an entirely unnecessary bureacracy to figure out what our income really is and how well we 'voluntarily' report it. Second, the tax rates, exemptions, credits, etc, are set by a bunch of hacks that are only interested in getting re-elected. We've lost control of their spending and their taxing. Whether you want an end to the death tax or a repeal of the Bush tax cuts, it all depends on persuading your hack that his job depends on it.

I guess I only have two gripes right now. Sometimes I have more, but I can't remember what they are.
oh, you and I have talked before, we are on the same "tax" page IIRC, but I was asking Wilgrove, his "solutions" don't seem to solve any of the problems that I have with the tax code.

Yea. that brings up number 8. Everyone who is or was on Welfare, or any other type of assistant program. Whenver they do go back to work, and trust me they will, they will get a bill requiring to pay back what they took from the taxpayers.
... Ha ha ha ha hahaha...

Why would you get a Job then if you know that the first thing you'll have to do is spend whatever money you start making back for when you couldn't pay.

Welfare shouldn't be considered a Loan.

... Ha ha ha ha hahaha...

Why would you get a Job then if you know that the first thing you'll have to do is spend whatever money you start making back for when you couldn't pay.

Welfare shouldn't be considered a Loan.

Amen. I bet he'd be the first to cry for welfare if he were ever poor and needed it.

oh, you and I have talked before, we are on the same "tax" page IIRC, but I was asking Wilgrove, his "solutions" don't seem to solve any of the problems that I have with the tax code.
I think so, too, but it never hurts to ask someone to justify their position. And we both agree that Willy doesn't solve any of the problems in the current tax code.

Yea, I'm going to call you communist.
Ignorant.

A welfarist would say you have to give your money to ofter people so they could buy food and pay rent. The communist would say you have no money.


Wow, you just went 180 in that sentance right there. First you say that taxing my property is the "right" thing to do, and you're not trying to punish me for my wealth! Hello, that what that tax is doing! It's punshing me for being able to buy stuff. You know, not every rich person got there because their daddy, or connections. Some of them actually worked their way to the top, should we punish them by taxing them to death? Also, what makes you think it's the right thing to do, to tax's a man's private property? I say if it doesn't belong to the government, then it shouldn't be taxed. My properties are private properities, not properities of the government, so thereforth the government should keep their hands off of it.
Taxed to death? Show me one person who has died due to his taxrate.:D
And the goal of taxing is not to punish. People are taxed so that the government and invest in things that the individual could not afford to create themselves. For example building a bridge.

Without the government, some of the money that makes it into your pocket might not be there. The intrastructure that you use to get to work may not be there, so you'd either have to move closer to work (which would probably cost you more), or you would have to get a more local job (which would probably pay less [if it doesn't, why would you travel further for the same pay?]). Plus that infrastructure is used by the company your work for, lowering the initaial cost (don't have to pay for it them selves) and day-to-day (don't have to pay for tolls etc), meaning they can afford to pay you more.



and how would you define Liberty?
Pretty well.

Nah not really, because capitalism encourages people to do for themselves, to not rely on Gov. Co. and for people to actually work.
Yes, but it rellies on two people making a mutually benificial transaction. In the transaction the wealth is redistibuted (if only between two people), therefore it fails.

Make REALLY RICH people pay about 75% income tax and have poor people pay about 5-15% tax. Cut military spending, hold insurance policies for eternity (no dropping policies, insurance. The peoples need that agreement to be upheld.), and do as The Democratic Republic of Minaris did. Then wait until robo-workers are made, and then governmentalize it so no one really has to work, so everyone gets semi-equal $$$. Then let the people be free, as they should be. That oughta work...

... Ha ha ha ha hahaha...

Why would you get a Job then if you know that the first thing you'll have to do is spend whatever money you start making back for when you couldn't pay.

Welfare shouldn't be considered a Loan.
That's what I thought.

Ok, you could get $150 bucks a week (read: Family Guy) from Gov. Co. or get a job make $200 but pay 15% tax +5% welfare tax, for a total of $160 bucks a week. Keep in mind, that $200 dollars is Canadian Minimum wage which is much higher than US min wage.

and that brings up point 10. The government should send us a recepit once a year, detailing where our money is going, and how much is going to a certain program, agencies etc. Look, I would love to have the fair tax instated in this country, but I'm thinking realistically. Realistically the Fair Tax won't get implimented in this country because too many people are uninformed about it, and politicans will use that to their advantage to spread lies about the "horror" of the Fair Tax plan. So the next best thing would be the Flat Tax.
Great. So I can get a receipt that says "your tax money went to printing and sending out 260 million tax receipts."

wonderful.


Realistically, it is time for people to stop with the whole "Me. I'm the only one that matters. The world should revolve around me, and me alone" mentality, and start thinking about society as a whole. Help each other rather than kick eachother when we are down. Most wouldn't do that in the literal sense, so I have trouble understanding why we're so willing to do it in the figurative sense.

Make REALLY RICH people pay about 75% income tax and have poor people pay about 5-15% tax. Cut military spending, hold insurance policies for eternity (no dropping policies, insurance. The peoples need that agreement to be upheld.), and do as The Democratic Republic of Minaris did. Then wait until robo-workers are made, and then governmentalize it so no one really has to work, so everyone gets semi-equal $$$. Then let the people be free, as they should be. That oughta work...

And then the Robo-workers become self-aware and we are back to square one.

And then the Robo-workers become self-aware and we are back to square one.

That is an avoidable mistake. Don't give them self-awareness and they won't use it. Obvious.

Also keep the 3 Laws in check to avoid misinterpretation (see: I, Robot).

That is an avoidable mistake. Don't give them self-awareness and they won't use it. Obvious.

Also keep the 3 Laws in check to avoid misinterpretation (see: I, Robot).

But, in the drive to create-ever better robo-workers, they will inevitably become intelligent, and have minds of their own. And the 3 Laws cannot work in concept with intelligent machines, because by defintion they have the capcaity to think for themselves and can interpret the 3 Laws in imaginative ways (see I, Robot, the movie).

Amen. I bet he'd be the first to cry for welfare if he were ever poor and needed it.

I actually could get disability payments due to my handicap, however, I decided that getting a job would be better, and so far it's been proven right. So... no. If I ever was poor, yea, I would work anywhere I could, or get two jobs and work on weekends, going to welfare would be the nuclear option for me.

... Ha ha ha ha hahaha...

Why would you get a Job then if you know that the first thing you'll have to do is spend whatever money you start making back for when you couldn't pay.

Welfare shouldn't be considered a Loan.

yea, but it is, it's taking money from the taxpayers and giving it to those who need it during rough times, however when the rough times are over, then Welfare ends and the person should give back what he's taken out.

I actually could get disability payments due to my handicap, however, I decided that getting a job would be better, and so far it's been proven right. So... no. If I ever was poor, yea, I would work anywhere I could, or get two jobs and work on weekends, going to welfare would be the nuclear option for me.
If you can work I have a hard time believing you would qualify for disability. I have a few family members on SS-disability, and they had to go through hell and court to get their checks.

If you can work I have a hard time believing you would qualify for disability. I have a few family members on SS-disability, and they had to go through hell and court to get their checks.

Eh I probably wouldn't, ah well, I guess I'll just have to settle going to work, getting a paycheck and paying my own way. Ahhh darn....

Eh I probably wouldn't, ah well, I guess I'll just have to settle going to work, getting a paycheck and paying my own way. Ahhh darn....
don't confuse me for someone who is pro-welfare state.

I don't think you know enough about the way things work in this country to be offering up "tax solutions", especially since you have yet to clearly define for me the major problems you have with the tax code and explain to me how your half assed thinking is going to "fix" anything.

yea, but it is, it's taking money from the taxpayers and giving it to those who need it during rough times, however when the rough times are over, then Welfare ends and the person should give back what he's taken out.
I've been catching up with this and this one point seems rather severe. If we are going to have a taxpayer-funded welfare system, I don't think repayment is really in the cards. The tax burden that welfare poses on each earner is the price of providing such a system, no further payback should be required.

If we were to repay the taxpayers for each service that they provide, isn't just like levying a usage fee on each of the services? I don't think repaying a welfare 'loan' is quite the same as buying a stamp to mail a letter.

don't confuse me for someone who is pro-welfare state.

I don't think you know enough about the way things work in this country to be offering up "tax solutions", especially since you have yet to clearly define for me the major problems you have with the tax code and explain to me how your half assed thinking is going to "fix" anything.
Seconded. She does this shit for a living, in the private sector.

don't confuse me for someone who is pro-welfare state.

I don't think you know enough about the way things work in this country to be offering up "tax solutions", especially since you have yet to clearly define for me the major problems you have with the tax code and explain to me how your half assed thinking is going to "fix" anything.

The problems I have with the tax code is this.

1. Too many damn taxes! Everywhere I turn I get taxed, the only time I don't get taxed is when I'm using the toilet. Go get gas, gas tax, go buy food, sales taxes, use a Taxi, service taxes. Hell there's even taxes for prositute now.

2. The tax system that we have now is dissaporinate. Instead of having everyone contribute equally (by how much they make), we have a progressive tax system, which bascially means that the more you make, the more we're going to tax you, why, because you make more. What logic does that make?

3. Taxes are not always being spent right. All the politicans in Gov. Co. have their own little pet project that they use the tax money for. Gov. Co. also like to expand it's budget because they need to "spend" more, and what happens, taxes goes up! Gov. Co. has NO fisical responsibility!

4. Alot of people are using the service that our taxes are paying for, and yet, they don't pay any taxes themselves. The biggest offenders is the Illegal immigrants. They pay no taxes, and yet, they use our medicare, our Welfare system, and Social Security. That is why Medicaid/Medicare and SS should be privitized. If they want to use the services and good that our tax dollars pay for, then they should pay taxes as well.

The problems I have with the tax code is this.

1. Too many damn taxes! Everywhere I turn I get taxed, the only time I don't get taxed is when I'm using the toilet. Go get gas, gas tax, go buy food, sales taxes, use a Taxi, service taxes. Hell there's even taxes for prositute now.
there is a difference between local, state, and federal taxes, doing away with the IRS or having a flat tax for federal income taxes are not solutions to this problem.

2. The tax system that we have now is dissaporinate. Instead of having everyone contribute equally (by how much they make), we have a progressive tax system, which bascially means that the more you make, the more we're going to tax you, why, because you make more. What logic does that make?
there are some problems with tax credits, I agree, but the only people who are legally not paying any tax are below or barely above the poverty line. Taxing people who are that poor does nothing but force them onto welfare. I do taxes for many hardworking families who are barely making it, in fact some of them would already be better off financially if they quit working and lived on welfare, I don't see how taking more of their money is going to help any of your "problems"

3. Taxes are not always being spent right. All the politicans in Gov. Co. have their own little pet project that they use the tax money for. Gov. Co. also like to expand it's budget because they need to "spend" more, and what happens, taxes goes up! Gov. Co. has NO fisical responsibility!
that problem would better be solved by calling your reps and making a LOT of noise, not by "getting more money" from the poor and less from the rich.

4. Alot of people are using the service that our taxes are paying for, and yet, they don't pay any taxes themselves. The biggest offenders is the Illegal immigrants. They pay no taxes, and yet, they use our medicare, our Welfare system, and Social Security. That is why Medicaid/Medicare and SS should be privitized. If they want to use the services and good that our tax dollars pay for, then they should pay taxes as well.
illegal aliens and tax reform have little to do with the other, taxing legal citizens who are poor to help pay for illegals services doesn't make much sense to me.

Ok, we have a poverty line where people below the line don't get their income taxed, that I am willing to change, but everything else stays.

Ok, we have a poverty line where people below the line don't get their income taxed, that I am willing to change, but everything else stays.
That's a step in the right direction (a small one), what about people who live above the poverty line but their expenses are so much that after them they are below the poverty line? (eg. medical expenses)

Consumption taxes tend to hurt the poor and middle class much more than the upper class.

I think that the flat tax should be augmented to factor in basic welfare and maintain the exemptions for the bottom rung of society.

First, instead of setting the beginning point for taxation at 0 dollars of income, set it at something like 10,000 dollars. Then tax each dollar from there instead of from zero. That creates a basic amount that anyone can earn without being taxed for it, just like the current system.

Second, take the rate charged and multiply it by the beginning point and that's how much welfare people get. For example, if the rate is 30% and the beginning point is 10,000 dollars, the welfare amount would be 3000 dollars. Of course, either of these number could be altered to provide more or less welfare. The reason why I use the two numbers to come to the third is that this way, a person who hides his income in a way that makes it appear like he has no personal income loses out on 10,000 dollars free of tax that instead has to be paid wherever he is keeping the money otherwise. It's mathematically unbreakable.

Third, match the corporate rate to the personal rate. That way it does not matter where the money is stored: it gets taxed the same amount anywhere.

Fourth, end all special deductions and instead offer a lower rate to everyone. This means no more loopholes for the super rich to find and exploit to actually pay less taxes than those of us who cannot afford accountants and tax lawyers.

That's a step in the right direction (a small one), what about people who live above the poverty line but their expenses are so much that after them they are below the poverty line? (eg. medical expenses)

Now how in the world is Gov. Co. susspose to know that? The point of this tax reform is to limit the role of Gov. Co. in our daily lives, not increase it by telling them how much we spend etc.

The fair tax sounds great to me. Can you imagine the grey market that would result from a national sales tax? You could make a lot of money selling things privately and simply ignoring the tax.

Now how in the world is Gov. Co. susspose to know that? The point of this tax reform is to limit the role of Gov. Co. in our daily lives, not increase it by telling them how much we spend etc.
But those people would clearly be better off if they did. Why shouldn't they be able to use that oppritunity?

Now how in the world is Gov. Co. susspose to know that? The point of this tax reform is to limit the role of Gov. Co. in our daily lives, not increase it by telling them how much we spend etc.
I am all for small government, but I would rather lobby my congress people to do a better job of being responsible with the money they do get than have to choose between keeping myself and my children healthy and paying taxes.

I spend close to 24K a year in health related expenses, that puts us barely above the poverty line.

I am all for small government, but I would rather lobby my congress people to do a better job of being responsible with the money they do get than have to choose between keeping myself and my children healthy and paying taxes.

I spend close to 24K a year in health related expenses, that puts us barely above the poverty line.

Ok, then how about this, There will be a Federal Health Care, that only offers the basic health care. Shots, medicines, stuff like that. Surgery will not be included in the package. Also, this will ONLY be open for legalize, naturalized citizens of the USA. Sorry illegals, you're out in the cold.

Ok, then how about this, There will be a Federal Health Care, that only offers the basic health care. Shots, medicines, stuff like that. Surgery will not be included in the package. Also, this will ONLY be open for legalize, naturalized citizens of the USA. Sorry illegals, you're out in the cold.
that puts the government more in my life and takes more of my tax money... sorry no.

Besides my kick ass insurance won't cover most of what we need, why would a government plan that only covers "basics" cover any of it.

that puts the government more in my life and takes more of my tax money... sorry no.

Besides my kick ass insurance won't cover most of what we need, why would a government plan that only covers "basics" cover any of it.

Ok, then what do you suggest?

Ok, then how about this, There will be a Federal Health Care, that only offers the basic health care. Shots, medicines, stuff like that. Surgery will not be included in the package. Also, this will ONLY be open for legalize, naturalized citizens of the USA. Sorry illegals, you're out in the cold.
I don't think any of your governments services knowingly serve illegal aliens. They have to either immigrate legally, or get fake identification.

I don't think any of your governments services knowingly serve illegal aliens. They have to either immigrate legally, or get fake identification.

Yay, you win a slice of cheese cake!

Ok, then what do you suggest?
fair tax. (http://www.fairtax.org/)

it's simple, it's fair, it keeps the government out of my business, it lets me control how much tax I pay.

other than that? I bother the heck out of my reps and congress people (been doing that for years, got a few things fixed at the state level)


In my ideal situation, the government would only be in charge of things that the citizens can't do on their own (national defense, roads, ect.) and everything else would be off limits to them. I don't see that happening any time soon though. :(

Man, I figured the fact it was the very first post on this page would get at someone to notice it...

Man, I figured the fact it was the very first post on this page would get at someone to notice it...
they will still ignore it, nobody really wants to hear it.

;)

they will still ignore it, nobody really wants to hear it.

;)
Touché, good sir.

I don't think any of your governments services knowingly serve illegal aliens. They have to either immigrate legally, or get fake identification.
But if that were only true. California has allowed illegal aliens to attend public and post--secondary schools free or at in-state rates (read govenment subsidized). A number of states issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens. I'm certain that's not the end of the list, just as much as I can think of, right now.

But if that were only true. California has allowed illegal aliens to attend public and post--secondary schools free or at in-state rates (read govenment subsidized). A number of states issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens. I'm certain that's not the end of the list, just as much as I can think of, right now.

You also win a slice of cheese cake!

But if that were only true. California has allowed illegal aliens to attend public and post--secondary schools free or at in-state rates (read govenment subsidized). A number of states issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens. I'm certain that's not the end of the list, just as much as I can think of, right now.
Like I said, your government. I don't know for sure as I am one country north.

You also win a slice of cheese cake!
We're being pretty free and easy with that cheesecake aren't we, pardner? Does mine get strawberries?

My idea deserves an entire wedding cake... **rereads post**.

Oh, right. Forgot about the labor prisons...

Am I getting older that fast? I used to could of remembered everything...

lol. I'm not that old at all. Just watched too much Blue Collar TV.:D

But if that were only true. California has allowed illegal aliens to attend public and post--secondary schools free or at in-state rates (read govenment subsidized). A number of states issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens. I'm certain that's not the end of the list, just as much as I can think of, right now.
In Oklahoma there is a push for such a law. In my sophomore year of highschool (remember kids this was 10 years ago almost, yes, I am that young/old) 35% of our "class" (meaning our graduating class) were illegals (or as the school called them "undocumented") it's worse now, the graduating class of my highschool is over half illegals.....:rolleyes: so, there are 2 types of editorials in the Daily Oklahoman lately

1 just because they are illegally here doesn't mean they are criminals, quit being a bigot
and
2 the schools need more money, most of the kids can't read, and the ones who can are in overcrowded classes with no books

:headbang:

[/slightly off topic]

...so, there are 2 types of editorials in the Daily Oklahoman lately

1 just because they are illegally here doesn't mean they are criminals, quit being a bigot
and
2 the schools need more money, most of the kids can't read, and the ones who can are in overcrowded classes with no books

:headbang:

[/slightly off topic]
This is way off topic, but doesn't the first type of editorial make you want to scream? How can someone break a law to enter the country, stay in the country violating the law the whole time, and _not_ be a criminal?

If someone walks into my house without being invited, sits down on the sofa, and starts reading a book, you can darn well expect him to be escorted out by some of Georgia's finest. No difference between my B&E artist and any illegal alien.

My idea deserves an entire wedding cake... **rereads post**.

Oh, right. Forgot about the labor prisons...

Am I getting older that fast? I used to could of remembered everything...

lol. I'm not that old at all. Just watched too much Blue Collar TV.:D
There's your sign!

This is way off topic, but doesn't the first type of editorial make you want to scream? How can someone break a law to enter the country, stay in the country violating the law the whole time, and _not_ be a criminal?

If someone walks into my house without being invited, sits down on the sofa, and starts reading a book, you can darn well expect him to be escorted out by some of Georgia's finest. No difference between my B&E artist and any illegal alien.
I am tired of being annoyed, now I just laugh..........."just because he is illegal doesn't mean he is a criminal" like illegal isn't a word that means that you broke the law, and like criminal doesn't mean the same damn thing.

it's like saying "just because my shirt is crimson doesn't mean it's red"

:rolleyes:

the thing is, the two editorials? both from the same organization. That's what really gets me.

I am probably "biased" about the whole thing though, since I spent a few years living within 40 miles of the border, I have seen way too much illegal immigration and what it does to the communities to be "unbiased" in my opinion about it.

There's your sign!

Git-R-done!


Sorry. Had to do it. All of it.

This is way off topic, but doesn't the first type of editorial make you want to scream? How can someone break a law to enter the country, stay in the country violating the law the whole time, and _not_ be a criminal?

the same way that pot smokers aren't criminals, or skateboarders, or black people drinking from the whites only drinking fountain.

the same way that pot smokers aren't criminals, or skateboarders, or black people drinking from the whites only drinking fountain.
:rolleyes:

:rolleyes:

you see, some people think that the state's mere declarations of illegality aren't enough to make someone a criminal. because states have the well-known habit of declaring all sorts of things illegal when it suits their purposes. shit, you've probably done three illegal things today already if we really went digging through the various levels of the law. criminal.

you see, some people think that the state's mere declarations of illegality aren't enough to make someone a criminal. because states have the well-known habit of declaring all sorts of things illegal when it suits their purposes. shit, you've probably done three illegal things today already if we really went digging through the various levels of the law. criminal.
if I have broken the law today it is because I chose to, you can't claim that someone is not a criminal because they don't think the law is fair.

If you break the law you are a criminal, it's just that simple.

if I have broken the law today it is because I chose to, you can't claim that someone is not a criminal because they don't think the law is fair.

If you break the law you are a criminal, it's just that simple.

I think his point is that EVERY SINGLE ONE of us is a criminal, in that we have, ALL of us, broken a law at some point or another. If we define criminal as "someone who has broken a law", then we're all criminals, and the word loses a great deal of weight.

If you want to decry illegal aliens because they're criminal, and we define criminal as "someone who broke the law", then we can treat you in the very same way, as I'm sure at some point you broke the law.

if I have broken the law today it is because I chose to

nah. have you seen the sheer amount of laws out there?

you can't claim that someone is not a criminal because they don't think the law is fair.

If you break the law you are a criminal, it's just that simple.

then calling someone a criminal is exactly equivalent to calling them a human. criminal.

I think his point is that EVERY SINGLE ONE of us is a criminal, in that we have, ALL of us, broken a law at some point or another. If we define criminal as "someone who has broken a law", then we're all criminals, and the word loses a great deal of weight.

If you want to decry illegal aliens because they're criminal, and we define criminal as "someone who broke the law", then we can treat you in the very same way, as I'm sure at some point you broke the law.
sure I did, and I served my time. But the rationlization that "everyone has broken the law once, so it really doesn't matter if someone is doing it now" really doesn't fit well in the "real world"

should we quit jailing murderers because kids continue to steal bubble gum? should we grant amnesty to illegal aliens who are illegally earning money and defrauding the federal government because back in highschool Smunkee got into a fight?