Hi there! You are currently browsing as a guest. Why not create an account? Then you get less ads, can thank creators, post feedback, keep a list of your favourites, and more!
Banned
#301 Old 27th Oct 2008 at 8:14 AM
Quote: Originally posted by RandomAnomaly
There's a reason that the poorest of the country IS the poorest of the country. There may be a few differences in finances between the down-on-their-luck people and the fat, lazy bums, but wouldn't you rather the money goes to the people who actually earn it than the people who act like they are entitled to it?


Yes there is a reason, in fact many reasons, why the poorest of the country are the poorest. One big reason is the massive loss in jobs we've had over the past 8 years. A lot of the "fat, lazy bums" get welfare checks and various other government money. I definitely feel that the rich needs to be taxed more, or maybe a flat tax needs to be out. Why should the rich keep getting richer while the poor keep getting poorer?
Advertisement
Field Researcher
#302 Old 27th Oct 2008 at 10:34 AM
The 'spread the wealth' plan the Republicans go on about is no such thing. It's a revocation of an unfair tax break for those with a NET income over $250K.

Also, the biggest problem isn't how much the highest earners- the mega corporations and such- are taxed, it's how little of that tax they actually pay.

Quote:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Most U.S. and foreign corporations doing business in the United States avoid paying any federal income taxes, despite trillions of dollars worth of sales... More than half of foreign companies and about 42 percent of U.S. companies paid no U.S. income taxes for two or more years in that period, the report said.

The study showed about 28 percent of large foreign corporations, those with more than $250 million in assets, doing business in the United States paid no federal income taxes in 2005 despite $372 billion in gross receipts, the senators said. About 25 percent of the largest U.S. companies paid no federal income taxes in 2005 despite $1.1 trillion in gross sales that year, they said.


http://www.reuters.com/article/news...249465620080812

It's these kind of loopholes that shift the tax burden to the middle class.
Inventor
#303 Old 27th Oct 2008 at 12:19 PM
off topic Every time I hear a republican talk about Obama wanting to spread the wealth by taking their money and giving it to the no working lazy bums, I can't help but think/asked, can anyone be that ignorant and disingenuous? If that was the case, since they (the top 5% earners/money makers) claim to pay most in taxes, and if it is the custom of this country that their money is given to no working lazy bums, why are there so many poor bums? While the 5% may make more money, it has not done much to increase their lack of knowledge. Why is that?

Or...maybe that fact of the matter is, they share more of their lack of knowledge/ignorance than they do their wealth!:rant:
Theorist
#304 Old 27th Oct 2008 at 1:50 PM
Fair is everyone paying the same percentage of their income in taxes, not having a huge gap. How is having someone from column A paying 18% of their income in taxes and someone from column B having to pay 37% of their income in taxes "fair"? It seems to me that having such a huge disparity in tax rates is most decidedly UNfair. What is fairer than everyone paying the exact same amount of their income in taxes as everyone else? Isn't the notion that everyone should be treated the same regardless of who they are what we should strive to? We should tax everyone at the same rate, period. That is fair. having multiple rates of taxation, encouraging people to hide wealth to stay in a lower tax bracket to avoid paying steeper taxes isn't. The current system encourages cheating. A flat tax vastly simplifies the personal income tax code, and eliminates a lot of loopholes. What is more fair than that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Obama on ABC's This Week, discussing Obamacare
What it's saying is, is that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore
umm...Isn't having other people carry your medical burden exactly what national health care is?
Field Researcher
#305 Old 27th Oct 2008 at 1:56 PM
A flat rate plan could be a viable system if you remove all exceptions, and apply this to coroprate as well as individual taxes...


...which would cause the immediate collapse of the economy as the bulk of big businesses relocate overseas.

Implementation is always the biggest hurdle.
Inventor
#306 Old 27th Oct 2008 at 2:00 PM
Quote: Originally posted by davious
Fair is everyone paying the same percentage of their income in taxes, not having a huge gap. How is having someone from column A paying 18% of their income in taxes and someone from column B having to pay 37% of their income in taxes "fair"? It seems to me that having such a huge disparity in tax rates is most decidedly UNfair. What is fairer than everyone paying the exact same amount of their income in taxes as everyone else?


This is not a new issue, there are a lot that is not right with this country and it don't all have to do with paying UNfair taxes. There are a lot of UNfair to go around but somehow they all seem interconnected, I wonder why that is?:handbag: :fight:
Scholar
#307 Old 27th Oct 2008 at 3:37 PM
Does America taxes people on how much they make only or the value of what they own as well?
Moderator of Extreme Limericks
#308 Old 27th Oct 2008 at 4:23 PM
Ok guys, let's try to get back to the original topic. If someone wants to open up a thread debating taxes and such, that would be fine with me.

There's always money in the banana stand.
Mad Poster
Original Poster
#309 Old 28th Oct 2008 at 2:38 AM
Which is why we need to promote equality and fairness. As much as I can why people would believe that the rich should pay more, then that doesn't really fall under the fairness aspect in terms of treat each person as equal. And because I want us gays to be treated with equality, it would be hypocritical of me to wish for the rich to pay more in taxes.

And thus is why this thread is about inequality in some ways.
#310 Old 1st Nov 2008 at 4:57 AM
I really can't stand Sarah Palin!She is a Ignorant Woman?
Lab Assistant
#311 Old 1st Nov 2008 at 7:01 AM
I have never really understood homosexuality....its confusing to me to see females dressing as men and men dressing as women.....isn't the whole point that you are attracted to someone of the SAME sex.....if you're attracted to a woman that looks like a man wouldn't u also be attracted to....well a man? But it's not really for me to understand because that's not my path in life.....I have SO many issues with Sarah Palin and this is a large one.....Who someone loves and decides to marry isn't any of the world's business.....hetero people marry jerks, creeps, and sleazy women that end in divorce and no one cares....so why should it matter that a man wants to marry another man.....i think its all time for us to get over this because being gay isn't going anywhere....its like being white or black....people are who they are and as soon as we can accept that the better we will all be......if you disagree then don't attend the wedding!!!

It's funny how at the end, you think back to the beginning, and wonder how you got here......
My Blog
Mad Poster
Original Poster
#312 Old 2nd Nov 2008 at 1:03 AM
Quote: Originally posted by MizzGin03
I have never really understood homosexuality....its confusing to me to see females dressing as men and men dressing as women.....isn't the whole point that you are attracted to someone of the SAME sex.....if you're attracted to a woman that looks like a man wouldn't u also be attracted to....well a man?


I can see why you would be confused. The thing with this is, some people who are born a certain sex don't want to be that sex because they feel more comfortable being the opposite sex. That is why for example a man who goes through a sex change to become a woman does it because he is almost like a woman trapped inside a man's body. His brain is incapable of understanding what it's like to be a man. He would have a similar brain to that of a straight woman.

But as what you were confused about in that would it be the same for a gay person to date the same sex that looks like the opposite sex and why wouldn't they just date the opposite sex... well... there are several reasons. One that comes to mind is that a man who looks like a woman can't get pregnant. But unfortunately I'm not very savvy on transgenderism. I'm a gay man and I can be feminine but it's not in a way where I want to be a woman or even dress like one, it's just that I am in more touch with my feminine side.
Lab Assistant
#313 Old 2nd Nov 2008 at 2:34 AM
Quote: Originally posted by frankie
I can see why you would be confused. The thing with this is, some people who are born a certain sex don't want to be that sex because they feel more comfortable being the opposite sex. That is why for example a man who goes through a sex change to become a woman does it because he is almost like a woman trapped inside a man's body. His brain is incapable of understanding what it's like to be a man. He would have a similar brain to that of a straight woman.

But as what you were confused about in that would it be the same for a gay person to date the same sex that looks like the opposite sex and why wouldn't they just date the opposite sex... well... there are several reasons. One that comes to mind is that a man who looks like a woman can't get pregnant. But unfortunately I'm not very savvy on transgenderism. I'm a gay man and I can be feminine but it's not in a way where I want to be a woman or even dress like one, it's just that I am in more touch with my feminine side.



Thank you for trying to explain that! I never can ask anyone whom I know is gay because I don't want to offend anyone but I have always wondered!

It's funny how at the end, you think back to the beginning, and wonder how you got here......
My Blog
#314 Old 2nd Nov 2008 at 4:20 AM
Quote:
I have never really understood homosexuality....its confusing to me to see females dressing as men and men dressing as women.....isn't the whole point that you are attracted to someone of the SAME sex.....if you're attracted to a woman that looks like a man wouldn't u also be attracted to....well a man?


Quote: Originally posted by frankie
I can see why you would be confused. The thing with this is, some people who are born a certain sex don't want to be that sex because they feel more comfortable being the opposite sex. That is why for example a man who goes through a sex change to become a woman does it because he is almost like a woman trapped inside a man's body. His brain is incapable of understanding what it's like to be a man. He would have a similar brain to that of a straight woman.

But as what you were confused about in that would it be the same for a gay person to date the same sex that looks like the opposite sex and why wouldn't they just date the opposite sex... well... there are several reasons. One that comes to mind is that a man who looks like a woman can't get pregnant. But unfortunately I'm not very savvy on transgenderism. I'm a gay man and I can be feminine but it's not in a way where I want to be a woman or even dress like one, it's just that I am in more touch with my feminine side.


Frankie, if it's a biological man who wants to become a woman, then they identify as a woman, and are a she - not a he. (Just to be respectful to the person.. after all, if you saw a transexual woman on the street, who is obviously trying to be female but not quite passing, would you say "hello sir"?)..

Sexual orientation and gender identity are on 2 different spectrums, but I've read that both of them can be affected by hormone levels on the fetus, so it might explain why some gay men act efeminate and some lesbians act butch (then again they just might have a more masculine or feminine gender identity but are comfortable with their body - but this could just be the loud minority that the media shows us a lot)
But the difference is with transgendereds is the hormones will affect the developing baby's brain one way and the body the other, so their body does not match their mind's idea of what sex their body should be.

MizzGini, there are a lot of manly gay men and girly gay women, it's just that the media shows us a lot of stereotypes and makes it seem like there are more than there actually are.
Really I don't think gender preference has that much to do with gender identity, or how masculine or feminine a person acts.. because there are a lot of masculine gay female-to-male transexuals. Actually I think some gay men for example act girly because they are outcasted by their male friends if they're outed, and they're more comfortable to talk about what guys they like around women..

*OK* sorry.. I just feel like 99% of people out there know zilch about transgender people, we need to have this stuff in our sex education or something!

Anyways, this is why I didn't vote for any candidate this general election... On one side you have the militaristic, big government (I dont believe his so called "fiscal conservatism", he's probably pulling the same scheme as Bush jr. did in 2000), socially oppressive candidate, and the other you have the big government, socialist candidate *on top of a democrat majority in congress*... Either way, we are screwed, by this ridiculous two party system! :mad:
Inventor
#315 Old 2nd Nov 2008 at 1:53 PM
I was channel surfing last evening and came across a piece on Indonesia and a part of their society that believe that there are five/six different genders. They believe that those born with male/female sex organs are spiritually special and closer to God/Creator. It seems that religion plays a big part in suppression of self identity/identification as they promote the male/female gender identity only.

I was drawn by their ability to conclude that a Creator must be all of these identity if you are to believe in a Creator.

Religion is the elephant in the room as it demand that one deny his/her self identity/identification and be either black or white and then proceed to punish you if you are black or all is not white. If you were not male you were punished for being female by males. Seems like the joke is on all those that have allowed themselves to be manipulated under the guise of an elephant.
Mad Poster
Original Poster
#316 Old 2nd Nov 2008 at 10:08 PM
Unfortunately there is just way too much ignorance and intolerance... ignorance because we are not all taught many of the things that we learn as adults when we are kids, which I think we should so that we can grow up to be less ignorant and more tolerable.
Lab Assistant
#317 Old 5th Nov 2008 at 8:12 PM
Looks like you won't have to worry anymore- I beleive last nights elections and its results have shown the inevitable truth:
the Republican party and conservatism in general are beggining to collapse. The Christian right no longer has the majority to back them. If this trend continues, the Republicans will be gone in a few years. =]
Theorist
#318 Old 5th Nov 2008 at 8:29 PM
Actually, if you look at the total number of votes, McCain and Obama were a lot closer than McCain is getting credit for. Blame it on the way the electoral votes work, but as it works, you can seemingly win an election by a huge amount of electoral votes, and have the popular vote remain really close. Let's be honest. Sometimes it isn't just that you vote...its where your vote comes from that is most important. Ask Al Gore. If he could have taken a few votes from districts that he dominated Bush in, where 1000 votes wouldn't have changed the outcome, and applied those to Miami-Dade county, he would have been President. Same # of votes, but different locations = different outcome. In fact, if the people that voted for McCain lived in different districts from where they did live, McCain could be the President elect with the exact number of votes he got. Its about where the votes come from, not the absolute number of votes.

You are foolish if you think this signals the demise of the Republican party. This happened in 1992 as well, after the 12 years of Reagan and Bush Sr. But, as we know, while Clinton got re-elected in 1996, the Republicans took over a lot of previously Democratically held seats in Congress. Politics has a cyclical nature. Democrats are in control now, Republicans will regain seats in Congress in the next few elections, etc. Everyone gets sick of the people in charge, regardless of who they are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Obama on ABC's This Week, discussing Obamacare
What it's saying is, is that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore
umm...Isn't having other people carry your medical burden exactly what national health care is?
Mad Poster
Original Poster
#319 Old 5th Nov 2008 at 11:18 PM
Well this thread is getting rather obsolete now that Obama won and this issue is not as big as it seemed. So I guess it can be locked.
Moderator of Extreme Limericks
#320 Old 6th Nov 2008 at 1:08 AM
Since this topic is sort of outdated and Palin wasn't brought into office, I'm going to go ahead and close this thread. If anyone would like to open a new thread pertaining to any of the other various points that were brought up during this debate, that would be absolutely fine with me.

:locked

There's always money in the banana stand.
 
Page 13 of 13
Back to top