Fair tax ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Man said:
Who said 25 percent covered the current expenditures.

Now either back it or shit the fuck up
Click to expand...


This was your claim, not mine:

This tax will cover all combined govt spending.

I say 25 percent is fair
Click to expand...



So, my question is.....

How do you intend to fund invasions into foreign countries like your proposed chickenhawk argument to invade Pakistan?

http://forums.techguy.org/controvers...-pakistan.html

If a 25% tax covers the current expenditures of the Federal Government, increased military spending will increase the need for additional revenue.
So.....where do you propose it comes from?



(Johnfromokc.......you might be interested in reading that link, especially the part where akaBrett suggests Israel takes command of our troops ;) )
 
Stone said:
I wonder what the forum members think of you for posting that after knowing my mother as passed on?
Probably not much.
I think you are a scumbag.
Click to expand...

Think of me as you wish..you have been posting lies for weeks....its been getting rather old...you fuck every thread you go to.

Who are you trying to impress?
You ruined another forum...now you want to ruin this one?
Your stupid cocking sucking shit that went on for months over there is what cause all of the rules changes that you hated....then you would bitch about it then they would make more.
STOP ACTING LIKE A MORON ..YOU ARE IN YOUR UPPER 60S ACT LIKE IT
Now you want to come here with wide open rules...abuse em ...fuck the forum up to the point that rules will need to be written in the future.....AS NO ONE LIKES YOU FUCKING UP EVERY THREAD YOU ENTER !!!!

You get pissed because I said I make her proud...that means stop being a perpetual fucking liar.
Stop posing as a god fearing christian in one thread...then being a turd in others.
You really should just go blow a fucking joint....and go work on that basement.
Be real be honest...be the christian you claim to be.
Or whatever the hell it is that fits the occasion.
And do stop trolling me with your fucking bullshit bro.
I aint your bitch.
 
The Man said:
Think of me as you wish..you have been posting lies for weeks....its been getting rather old...you fuck every thread you go to.

Who are you trying to impress?
You ruined another forum...now you want to ruin this one?
Your stupid cocking sucking shit that went on for months over there is what cause all of the rules changes that you hated....then you would bitch about it then they would make more.
STOP ACTING LIKE A MORON ..YOU ARE IN YOUR UPPER 60S ACT LIKE IT
Now you want to come here with wide open rules...abuse em ...fuck the forum up to the point that rules will need to be written in the future.....AS NO ONE LIKES YOU FUCKING UP EVERY THREAD YOU ENTER !!!!

You get pissed because I said I make her proud...that means stop being a perpetual fucking liar.
Stop posing as a god fearing christian in one thread...then being a turd in others.
You really should just go blow a fucking joint....and go work on that basement.
Be real be honest...be the christian you claim to be.
Or whatever the hell it is that fits the occasion.
And do stop trolling me with your fucking bullshit bro.
I aint your bitch.
Click to expand...



I aint your bitch
Click to expand...
.:D


You did post this claim:
This tax will cover all combined govt spending.

I say 25 percent is fair
Click to expand...


And I'm asking:


How do you intend to fund invasions into foreign countries like your proposed chickenhawk argument to invade Pakistan?

http://forums.techguy.org/controvers...-pakistan.html

If a 25% tax covers the current expenditures of the Federal Government, increased military spending will increase the need for additional revenue.
So.....where do you propose it comes from?



(Johnfromokc.......you might be interested in reading that link, especially the part where akaBrett suggests Israel takes command of our troops ;) )


It's a fair question about your tax plan.

Why are you denying you posted the claim?
Why aren't you responding with a reply to the question?

You do seem very upset.
 
I have never stated a 25 percent covers current expenditures.
I stated I think a 25 percent tax would be fair{this will cover all govt spending}...the rest we get to keep.
They have to budget accordingly...pretty simple.

Pay attention to the word all....again the word all....again...the word all....again the word all...again the word all.
 
The Man said:
I have never stated a 25 percent covers current expenditures.
I stated I think a 25 percent tax would be fair{this will cover all govt spending}...the rest we get to keep.
They have to budget accordingly...pretty simple.

Pay attention to the word all....again the word all....again...the word all....again the word all...again the word all.
Click to expand...


You did claim this:

This tax will cover all combined govt spending.

I say 25 percent is fair
Click to expand...

And my question is:

How do you intend to fund invasions into foreign countries like your proposed chickenhawk argument to invade Pakistan?

http://forums.techguy.org/controvers...-pakistan.html

If a 25% tax covers the current expenditures of the Federal Government, increased military spending will increase the need for additional revenue.
So.....where do you propose it comes from?



(Johnfromokc.......you might be interested in reading that link, especially the part where akaBrett suggests Israel takes command of our troops ;) )


It's a fair question about your tax plan.

Why are you denying you posted the claim?
Why aren't you responding with a reply to the question?
 
The Man said:
Are you still claiming a member voted for you using your account?
I haven't seen a retraction on that yet.
Are you still claiming account abuse by another member.
Click to expand...

The Administration (Springsteen) thinks it was a software glitch that gave a false message.
You can ask him about it if you are interested.




but anyway, back to your claim:

This tax will cover all combined govt spending.

I say 25 percent is fair
Click to expand...

So.....
How do you intend to fund invasions into foreign countries like your proposed chickenhawk argument to invade Pakistan?

http://forums.techguy.org/controvers...-pakistan.html

If a 25% tax covers the current expenditures of the Federal Government, increased military spending will increase the need for additional revenue.
So.....where do you propose it comes from?



(Johnfromokc.......you might be interested in reading that link, especially the part where akaBrett suggests Israel takes command of our troops ;) )


It's a fair question about your tax plan.

Why are you denying you posted the claim?
Why aren't you responding with a reply to the question?
 
Talk about a circle jerk. Jesus guys

TM why not just say that in case of war we sell war bonds or have an additional tax?

Stone what does a fair tax have to do with war? You could use the same argument if there is a Katrina or major earthquake or other disaster. Makes no difference if the govt revenue came from income or a fair tax. The money is not there if other spending is out of control.
 
Alien Allen said:
Talk about a circle jerk. Jesus guys

TM why not just say that in case of war we sell war bonds or have an additional tax?

Stone what does a fair tax have to do with war? You could use the same argument if there is a Katrina or major earthquake or other disaster. Makes no difference if the money came from income or a fair tax. The money is not there.
Click to expand...


TM why not just say that in case of war we sell war bonds or have an additional tax?
Click to expand...
TM is stuck on tax cuts, so an additional tax wouldn't work.
And war bonds are really only a supplement, not a standalone solution.
The only war I'm aware of that had tax cuts occur is the recent one in Iraq and all that did was add to large debt.


Stone what does a fair tax have to do with war?
Click to expand...
A lot......if you fix a rate and war occurs, not only is there generally a drop in consumer spending, there is a need to finance that war from a new source, or raise the tax rate.


You could use the same argument if there is a Katrina or major earthquake or other disaster. Makes no difference if the money came from income or a fair tax. The money is not there.
Click to expand...
Indeed....that was to be my next argument :D
 
Alien Allen said:
Talk about a circle jerk. Jesus guys

TM why not just say that in case of war we sell war bonds or have an additional tax?

Stone what does a fair tax have to do with war? You could use the same argument if there is a Katrina or major earthquake or other disaster. Makes no difference if the govt revenue came from income or a fair tax. The money is not there if other spending is out of control.
Click to expand...
Actually they could raise the tax overnight with a fair tax system....and revenues would be gained instantly{stone knows this}
But my point was to stone is I never made the claim that we operate with a 25 percent tax...I stated I feel 25 percent is fair to cover all govt spending....which would include war.
I specified all to him many times.
No big deal he is just looking for an avenue to a "chickenhawk" attack.
 
Alien Allen said:
Talk about a circle jerk. ..................
Click to expand...


This tax will cover all combined govt spending.

I say 25 percent is fair
Click to expand...


How do you intend to fund invasions into foreign countries like your proposed chickenhawk argument to invade Pakistan?

http://forums.techguy.org/controvers...-pakistan.html

If a 25% tax covers the current expenditures of the Federal Government, increased military spending will increase the need for additional revenue.
So.....where do you propose it comes from?



Indeed.......a flawed claim TM wouldn't concede.
 
The Man said:
Actually they could raise the tax overnight with a fair tax system....and revenues would be gained instantly{stone knows this}
But my point was to stone is I never made the claim that we operate with a 25 percent tax...I stated I feel 25 percent is fair to cover all govt spending....which would include war.
I specified all to him many times.
No big deal he is just looking for an avenue to a "chickenhawk" attack.
Click to expand...

Actually they could raise the tax overnight with a fair tax system
Click to expand...
Then you'd be advocating more taxation while arguing for less in this forum.
It's called hypocrisy ;)



But my point was to stone is I never made the claim that we operate with a 25 percent tax.
Click to expand...
This was your claim:
This tax will cover all combined govt spending.

I say 25 percent is fair
Click to expand...

And my question was:

How do you intend to fund invasions into foreign countries like your proposed chickenhawk argument to invade Pakistan?

http://forums.techguy.org/controvers...-pakistan.html

If a 25% tax covers the current expenditures of the Federal Government, increased military spending will increase the need for additional revenue.
So.....where do you propose it comes from?

AA had the balls to reply to it....you didn't.


No big deal he is just looking for an avenue to a "chickenhawk" attack.
Click to expand...

It was your post and it was relevant because of increased military involvement and spending.

Here it is in it's entirety:

Invade Pakistan? Pk seems to escape the news for what it is.
A nation that is home for many terrorists.
But yet we fund Pk...in effect funding terrorists in a round about way.
Results are nill to none for ridding terrorits..its a joke
Our money doesnt go to stop terrorism...it just isnt working.
I say game over time to kick some dust up.
But whats in the future...why havent we acted.
Are we afraid they may have allies that will help in the battle.
What is stopping us?
Why are we forking over money?

Take OBL living right by a military base....why?...because its safe...If one is going to really hide that would be a poor choice think about it.
But it does appear that money can talk...as he got snitched out.
None the less they didnt retaliate when we went in with a military operation and smoked his butt.
Although they did whine.
Certainly no cheers from the crowd..."they have gotten OBL..now Islam can rebuild its reputation"
I say due to the reaction that was given and the fact they harbor terrorists coupled with we already went in and smoked some terrorists and got away with it...lets go smoke some more.
Afg is already botched its still corrupt as ever.
Fact is many there like the Taliban once you get away from the city...for you have some law in the jungle so to say.
Which may pose a question...Are they all that bad?..depends on how you look at it.
As long as they restricted their rule to rural areas and the areas were defined then perhaps not..its the involvement of going beyond such that affects others that is the problem.
They have went beyond that...the Taliban is no longer is just "law" for land of the lawless..its a well organized group that has become a rather large thorn..
I say lets go in to Pk based on the first of this post
No poll here...Something I learned from Jim...I want your thoughts..not just a yes or no on the matter.
I am interested in why you think we should invade or why you think we should not invade.
.
Links are welcome as it could be a gathering of information..but please do read the articles and explain how it relates to the topic /and how it supports your position.
I say lets go in and whip some butt..screw em..just call it a large militarily operation {code Tah ta Taliban}...as essentially thats what it would be not a war persay..we are not out to fight the Pk army..but to go after terrorists
Click to expand...

I think most would agree that attacking a nation with nuclear capabilities would be incredibly costly.
 
A lot......if you fix a rate and war occurs, not only is there generally a drop in consumer spending, there is a need to finance that war from a new source, or raise the tax rate.
Click to expand...

you missed my point. we have paid for wars, disaster damage, etc. on a charge card all along.

what is the difference

you make it sound like we had not been running up a deficit and debt and that there would be a new loss of revenue in the event of a war.

For the record I would favor a fair tax. with there being exceptions for some things such as food.

I don't buy the argument that rich will make out better. The rich peoples houses I work at spend like there is no tomorrow.

The current tax system is smoke and mirrors. People are nickle and dimed to death. A flat tax would make things more above board.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top