|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Jan 22, 2009 17:50:19 GMT -6
To those amongst you who are in favor of increasing tax rates for the "rich" (evidently, that yard marker is moving south to $100,000) so that those who don't pay a dime in taxes can get a refund, I am curious about the following as it pertains to the relationship between you and your kids:
Do you teach them that by working harder, they can earn the ability to make a better living and provide a nicer home and environment for their families? If your answer is no, you can stop here. If your answer is yes, why? I mean....how do you reconcile teaching them to work hard and be successful with your support of the Federal Government penalizing them via higher tax rates once they have done the hard work and gained that success?
|
|
|
|
Post by Saggitariutt Jefferspin (ith) on Jan 22, 2009 18:22:57 GMT -6
I can't wait for kids. I will teach them to worship Satan and have special bonding time doing tons of drugs.
|
|
|
|
Post by twinegarden on Jan 22, 2009 18:33:27 GMT -6
Me too, when I have kids, I'm going to teach them to be really flexible so they can join the circus. Even if they have to operate the rides at least it is a foot in the door toward joining the Big Top.
|
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Jan 22, 2009 18:42:26 GMT -6
Me too, when I have kids, I'm going to teach them to be really flexible so they can join the circus. Even if they have to operate the rides at least it is a foot in the door toward joining the Big Top. It will take years on the carney circuit before they will be allowed to operate circus rides, that's the majors, buddy. You better teach 'em some perseverance. |
|
|
|
Post by roxxstar on Jan 22, 2009 18:55:07 GMT -6
I'm going to teach my kids to become a complete douche.
|
|
|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Jan 22, 2009 19:15:27 GMT -6
I'm going to teach my kids to become a complete douche. Send them to live with IaFan and you will have accomplished your goal |
|
|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Jan 22, 2009 19:21:49 GMT -6
To those amongst you who are in favor of increasing tax rates for the "rich" (evidently, that yard marker is moving south to $100,000) so that those who don't pay a dime in taxes can get a refund, I am curious about the following as it pertains to the relationship between you and your kids: Do you teach them that by working harder, they can earn the ability to make a better living and provide a nicer home and environment for their families? If your answer is no, you can stop here. If your answer is yes, why? I mean....how do you reconcile teaching them to work hard and be successful with your support of the Federal Government penalizing them via higher tax rates once they have done the hard work and gained that success? I played Big Government last Halloween. When we returned from Trick or Treating, I had my two kids empty their candy on the table. I divided as I saw fit, giving myself a huge portion(I love candy!). Of course, they weren't very happy and were pissed that they had just spent almost 2 hours "working hard"(actual quote). My daughter actually wanted to go back out and get more candy until I told her that I would have to take my cut and distribute the new haul as I saw fit. She declined. |
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Jan 22, 2009 19:28:46 GMT -6
To those amongst you who are in favor of increasing tax rates for the "rich" (evidently, that yard marker is moving south to $100,000) so that those who don't pay a dime in taxes can get a refund, I am curious about the following as it pertains to the relationship between you and your kids: Do you teach them that by working harder, they can earn the ability to make a better living and provide a nicer home and environment for their families? If your answer is no, you can stop here. If your answer is yes, why? I mean....how do you reconcile teaching them to work hard and be successful with your support of the Federal Government penalizing them via higher tax rates once they have done the hard work and gained that success? I played Big Government last Halloween. When we returned from Trick or Treating, I had my two kids empty their candy on the table. I divided as I saw fit, giving myself a huge portion(I love candy!). Of course, they weren't very happy and were pissed that they had just spent almost 2 hours "working hard"(actual quote). My daughter actually wanted to go back out and get more candy until I told her that I would have to take my cut and distribute the new haul as I saw fit. She declined. You have a lot to learn about confiscation, grasshopper. You can't let the mark know how much of the goods you will confiscate until the mark is 3/4 of the way through collecting them, then change the rules to increase your bounty. |
|
|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Jan 22, 2009 19:44:43 GMT -6
Thanks. There's always next Halloween. But I think the kids have wised up a bit. They'll most likely hide any eccessive profits(like our new Treasury Secretary) before presenting them to me for redistribution. Unless I monitor their every movement of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Jan 22, 2009 19:49:09 GMT -6
Thanks. There's always next Halloween. But I think the kids have wised up a bit. They'll most likely hide any eccessive profits(like our new Treasury Secretary) before presenting them to me for redistribution. Unless I monitor their every movement of course. Well, you know, if you can't get the sanction of the victim, you can always threaten more force and bigger government. GPS tracking, a scale, a snitch, you gotta think outside the box here. And if it costs you $25 to confiscate $20 worth of candy, well at least you'll have sent a message for the following year and "voluntary" compliance will increase. |
|
|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Jan 22, 2009 21:04:08 GMT -6
News from The President's economic advisor Robert Reich: White males need not apply.
I am concerned, as I’m sure many of you are, that these jobs not simply go to high-skilled people who are already professionals or to white male construction workers. … I have nothing against white male construction workers. I’m just saying that there are a lot of other people who have needs as well. … Criteria can be set so that the money does go to others, the long term unemployed minorities, women, people who are not necessarily construction workers or high-skilled professionals.
Edit: Here's the video of Reich's comments in context while talking with tax cheat and head of the Ways and Means Committee, Charlie Rangle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Jan 22, 2009 21:27:58 GMT -6
News from The President's economic advisor Robert Reich: White males need not apply. I am concerned, as I’m sure many of you are, that these jobs not simply go to high-skilled people who are already professionals or to white male construction workers. … I have nothing against white male construction workers. I’m just saying that there are a lot of other people who have needs as well. … Criteria can be set so that the money does go to others, the long term unemployed minorities, women, people who are not necessarily construction workers or high-skilled professionals.Yet one more reason for people not to strive for excellence. No longer a need to when the job will be hand delivered in addition to the tax refund after paying no taxes. |
|
|
|
Post by twinegarden on Jan 22, 2009 21:51:42 GMT -6
News from The President's economic advisor Robert Reich: White males need not apply. I am concerned, as I’m sure many of you are, that these jobs not simply go to high-skilled people who are already professionals or to white male construction workers. … I have nothing against white male construction workers. I’m just saying that there are a lot of other people who have needs as well. … Criteria can be set so that the money does go to others, the long term unemployed minorities, women, people who are not necessarily construction workers or high-skilled professionals.Wow, that is some real bullshit. "Long term unemployed minorities, people who are not necessarily consrtuction workers or high-skilled professionals." Maybe they are long term unemployed because they are lazy as hell, same with being unskilled. If this kind of policy makes the light of day Obama will surely not make a second term. |
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Jan 22, 2009 22:21:12 GMT -6
News from The President's economic advisor Robert Reich: White males need not apply. I am concerned, as I’m sure many of you are, that these jobs not simply go to high-skilled people who are already professionals or to white male construction workers. … I have nothing against white male construction workers. I’m just saying that there are a lot of other people who have needs as well. … Criteria can be set so that the money does go to others, the long term unemployed minorities, women, people who are not necessarily construction workers or high-skilled professionals.Jesus guys, you act like there is an express prohibition on this in the Constitution. GMAFB. |
|
|
|
Post by socal on Jan 23, 2009 7:56:10 GMT -6
Do you teach them that by working harder, they can earn the ability to make a better living and provide a nicer home and environment for their families? If your answer is no, you can stop here. If your answer is yes, why? I mean....how do you reconcile teaching them to work hard and be successful with your support of the Federal Government penalizing them via higher tax rates once they have done the hard work and gained that success? Geez... you sound like you're going to cry.  |
|
|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Jan 23, 2009 8:19:40 GMT -6
Do you teach them that by working harder, they can earn the ability to make a better living and provide a nicer home and environment for their families? If your answer is no, you can stop here. If your answer is yes, why? I mean....how do you reconcile teaching them to work hard and be successful with your support of the Federal Government penalizing them via higher tax rates once they have done the hard work and gained that success? Geez... you sound like you're going to cry. The fact that you take a very direct question and answer it with a non-answer says you either can't answer it (because the two can't be reconciled) or are too ashamed to answer it (because you don't teach your kids to work hard to be successful). I'm guessing none of your "take from those who work for it" brethren will be willing to answer the question either. You guys are all too busy taking offense to the "liberal" title (though you chose to go down that road) and hiding from the liberal behaviors like legalized theft. |
|
|
|
Post by The Flying Spaghetti Monster on Jan 23, 2009 8:32:21 GMT -6
More likely it is because there is going to be no changing your closed mind unless Rush approves it, no matter how logical the arguments.
So what's the point?
|
|
|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Jan 23, 2009 9:30:59 GMT -6
More likely it is because there is going to be no changing your closed mind unless Rush approves it, no matter how logical the arguments. So what's the point? I'm all ears. What am I missing on the question that I posed? |
|
|
|
Post by roxxstar on Jan 23, 2009 9:36:35 GMT -6
To those amongst you who are in favor of increasing tax rates for the "rich" (evidently, that yard marker is moving south to $100,000) so that those who don't pay a dime in taxes can get a refund, I am curious about the following as it pertains to the relationship between you and your kids: Do you teach them that by working harder, they can earn the ability to make a better living and provide a nicer home and environment for their families? If your answer is no, you can stop here. If your answer is yes, why? I mean....how do you reconcile teaching them to work hard and be successful with your support of the Federal Government penalizing them via higher tax rates once they have done the hard work and gained that success? Ok, I'll answer your question. "Do you teach them that by working harder, they can earn the ability to make a better living and provide a nicer home and environment for their families?" Answer - Yes, absolutely. "If your answer is yes, why? I mean....how do you reconcile teaching them to work hard and be successful with your support of the Federal Government penalizing them via higher tax rates once they have done the hard work and gained that success?[/" Answer - Because I plan on teaching them that the world does not revolve around themselves and their wallets. I'll teach them that having a society like ours takes a government to make things run as smooth as possible. That government needs taxes to make that happen. And that people who have more money should have to pay more taxes. I'll tell them that if they are lucky enough to work themselves into a position of the higher tax bracket, to be thankful for that and not bitch about the fact that some clerk at Walmart has to pay less then them. |
|
|
|
Post by The Flying Spaghetti Monster on Jan 23, 2009 10:07:42 GMT -6
More likely it is because there is going to be no changing your closed mind unless Rush approves it, no matter how logical the arguments. So what's the point? I'm all ears. What am I missing on the question that I posed? You may be all ears, but over the past year you have proved that sure as shit, your mind is utterly and forever closed. |
|
|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Jan 23, 2009 10:18:22 GMT -6
To those amongst you who are in favor of increasing tax rates for the "rich" (evidently, that yard marker is moving south to $100,000) so that those who don't pay a dime in taxes can get a refund, I am curious about the following as it pertains to the relationship between you and your kids: Do you teach them that by working harder, they can earn the ability to make a better living and provide a nicer home and environment for their families? If your answer is no, you can stop here. If your answer is yes, why? I mean....how do you reconcile teaching them to work hard and be successful with your support of the Federal Government penalizing them via higher tax rates once they have done the hard work and gained that success? Ok, I'll answer your question. "Do you teach them that by working harder, they can earn the ability to make a better living and provide a nicer home and environment for their families?" Answer - Yes, absolutely. "If your answer is yes, why? I mean....how do you reconcile teaching them to work hard and be successful with your support of the Federal Government penalizing them via higher tax rates once they have done the hard work and gained that success?[/" Answer - Because I plan on teaching them that the world does not revolve around themselves and their wallets. I'll teach them that having a society like ours takes a government to make things run as smooth as possible. That government needs taxes to make that happen. And that people who have more money should have to pay more taxes. I'll tell them that if they are lucky enough to work themselves into a position of the higher tax bracket, to be thankful for that and not bitch about the fact that some clerk at Walmart has to pay less then them. I appreciate that you answered the question as you truly believe. I actually think your heart is probably in the right place as it pertains to helping others in need. I just don't believe that it works in a practical sense. At least we can agree to disagree though. |
|
|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Jan 23, 2009 10:21:58 GMT -6
I'm all ears. What am I missing on the question that I posed? You may be all ears, but over the past year you have proved that sure as shit, your mind is utterly and forever closed. Again, you didn't answer the question. Would be nice if you could spend a little more energy focusing and a little less energy on the irrelevant insults. |
|
|
|
Post by roxxstar on Jan 23, 2009 12:03:13 GMT -6
Ok, I'll answer your question. "Do you teach them that by working harder, they can earn the ability to make a better living and provide a nicer home and environment for their families?" Answer - Yes, absolutely. "If your answer is yes, why? I mean....how do you reconcile teaching them to work hard and be successful with your support of the Federal Government penalizing them via higher tax rates once they have done the hard work and gained that success?[/" Answer - Because I plan on teaching them that the world does not revolve around themselves and their wallets. I'll teach them that having a society like ours takes a government to make things run as smooth as possible. That government needs taxes to make that happen. And that people who have more money should have to pay more taxes. I'll tell them that if they are lucky enough to work themselves into a position of the higher tax bracket, to be thankful for that and not bitch about the fact that some clerk at Walmart has to pay less then them. I appreciate that you answered the question as you truly believe. I actually think your heart is probably in the right place as it pertains to helping others in need. I just don't believe that it works in a practical sense. At least we can agree to disagree though. Fair enough. |
|
|
|
Post by socal on Jan 23, 2009 12:11:34 GMT -6
You may be all ears, but over the past year you have proved that sure as shit, your mind is utterly and forever closed. Again, you didn't answer the question. Would be nice if you could spend a little more energy focusing and a little less energy on the irrelevant insults. What you're failing to understand... is that we know you're simply a broken record that will tout the daily Rush/Fox diatribes that attempt to (a) demonize someone or (b) elicit sympathy for oppressed rich white people. We also learned long ago that no matter what we say, it will be unacceptable to you. And finally, we (or at least I) could give a shit what the latest rationale you've come up with to make your point... The new occupant in the Oval Office & the huge majorities in congress prove more people prefer the liberal path vs. the so-called "conservative" path. |
|
|
|
Post by NotMyKid on Jan 23, 2009 13:41:08 GMT -6
And finally, we (or at least I) could give a shit what the latest rationale you've come up with to make your point... The new occupant in the Oval Office & the huge majorities in congress prove more people prefer the liberal path vs. the so-called "conservative" path. Come on Socal even you know that this statement isn't true, It's pretty obvious that some people voted for Obama and other Dems had at least a little something to do with their hatred of GWB. The last time I checked the Dems taking control over both houses happened in the last two elections. Don't get me wrong I am not saying that all people voted for Obama and the Dems simply because of GWB but to say that the last to elections prove that people in this country prefer a liberal path over a conservative one simply isn't 100% accurate and has a lot to do with how shitty a job Bush did in office. |
|
