Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

How can anyone with AS be a conservative?

Page 18 of 29 [ 458 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 ... 29  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

16 Aug 2011, 4:02 pm

If Buffet gets away with paying only 1 percent tax then that is obscene.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

16 Aug 2011, 4:07 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:

I do not know what blood libel is...so an explination might be educational.


An accusation hurled against Jews, accusing them of killing Gentile children to get blood to mix with Matzos for Passover. A calumny. If there is one thing a religion Jew won't do it is eating food mixed with blood. And no religious Jew would kill a child, be he Gentile or not.

ruveyn


Damn that is a heavy accusation, I hope I have not done any of that. 8O


Next time Inuyasha makes dumb accusations, simply reply with "but at least I don't eat babies like you conservatives".



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

16 Aug 2011, 4:11 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:

I do not know what blood libel is...so an explination might be educational.


An accusation hurled against Jews, accusing them of killing Gentile children to get blood to mix with Matzos for Passover. A calumny. If there is one thing a religion Jew won't do it is eating food mixed with blood. And no religious Jew would kill a child, be he Gentile or not.

ruveyn


Damn that is a heavy accusation, I hope I have not done any of that. 8O


I don't recall you personally engaging in blood libel, though there are a few people here that have.

androbot2084 wrote:
If Buffet gets away with paying only 1 percent tax then that is obscene.


As I pointed out, he'll be sitting pretty with legal loopholes, while his less politically connected competitors get their taxes hiked. If Buffett really felt he wasn't paying enough to the government, how about he write the government a check.



androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

16 Aug 2011, 4:14 pm

Conservatives think Buffet should pay zero taxes because he gives people jobs.



Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

16 Aug 2011, 4:14 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
As I pointed out, he'll be sitting pretty with legal loopholes, while his less politically connected competitors get their taxes hiked.


That's how it always works. Hypocrisy from those in the system, whilst those outside it struggle on an unfair playing field.



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

16 Aug 2011, 4:19 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
And Buffett's credibility is in question, so why should I care what he is advocating for when it won't affect him, but will hurt his competitors.

No, this is incorrect. It's just factually wrong. What Buffet is advocating is specifically intended to affect him and people like him. He is advocating increasing the capital gains tax rates- most of his income is taxed as capital gains, and that is why he currently pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.

Note Inuyasha using the common Fox/Republican tactic of claiming that someone should not be trusted because their credibility has been questioned- when he is the one questioning that credibility! Just like Fox's stories that "some say [insert right-wing talking point here]" in order to act as an opinion outlet while pretending to do news.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,246
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

16 Aug 2011, 4:29 pm

Orwell wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
And Buffett's credibility is in question, so why should I care what he is advocating for when it won't affect him, but will hurt his competitors.

No, this is incorrect. It's just factually wrong. What Buffet is advocating is specifically intended to affect him and people like him. He is advocating increasing the capital gains tax rates- most of his income is taxed as capital gains, and that is why he currently pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.

Note Inuyasha using the common Fox/Republican tactic of claiming that someone should not be trusted because their credibility has been questioned- when he is the one questioning that credibility! Just like Fox's stories that "some say [insert right-wing talking point here]" in order to act as an opinion outlet while pretending to do news.


Or, we can just take Marshal's advice, and tell Inuyasha:
"At least I don't eat babies like you conservatives!"

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

16 Aug 2011, 7:02 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
And Buffett's credibility is in question, so why should I care what he is advocating for when it won't affect him, but will hurt his competitors.

No, this is incorrect. It's just factually wrong. What Buffet is advocating is specifically intended to affect him and people like him. He is advocating increasing the capital gains tax rates- most of his income is taxed as capital gains, and that is why he currently pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.

Note Inuyasha using the common Fox/Republican tactic of claiming that someone should not be trusted because their credibility has been questioned- when he is the one questioning that credibility! Just like Fox's stories that "some say [insert right-wing talking point here]" in order to act as an opinion outlet while pretending to do news.


Or, we can just take Marshal's advice, and tell Inuyasha:
"At least I don't eat babies like you conservatives!"

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


If you all want to destroy whatever shred of credibility you have, that's your business.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,246
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

16 Aug 2011, 7:13 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
And Buffett's credibility is in question, so why should I care what he is advocating for when it won't affect him, but will hurt his competitors.

No, this is incorrect. It's just factually wrong. What Buffet is advocating is specifically intended to affect him and people like him. He is advocating increasing the capital gains tax rates- most of his income is taxed as capital gains, and that is why he currently pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.

Note Inuyasha using the common Fox/Republican tactic of claiming that someone should not be trusted because their credibility has been questioned- when he is the one questioning that credibility! Just like Fox's stories that "some say [insert right-wing talking point here]" in order to act as an opinion outlet while pretending to do news.


Or, we can just take Marshal's advice, and tell Inuyasha:
"At least I don't eat babies like you conservatives!"

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


If you all want to destroy whatever shred of credibility you have, that's your business.


(Sigh) Sometimes I forget I'm dealing with other Aspies here. Next time in order to show you that I'm joking, I'll be sure to put a :lol: at the end of the sentence.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

16 Aug 2011, 7:15 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
And Buffett's credibility is in question, so why should I care what he is advocating for when it won't affect him, but will hurt his competitors.

No, this is incorrect. It's just factually wrong. What Buffet is advocating is specifically intended to affect him and people like him. He is advocating increasing the capital gains tax rates- most of his income is taxed as capital gains, and that is why he currently pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.

Note Inuyasha using the common Fox/Republican tactic of claiming that someone should not be trusted because their credibility has been questioned- when he is the one questioning that credibility! Just like Fox's stories that "some say [insert right-wing talking point here]" in order to act as an opinion outlet while pretending to do news.


Or, we can just take Marshal's advice, and tell Inuyasha:
"At least I don't eat babies like you conservatives!"

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


If you all want to destroy whatever shred of credibility you have, that's your business.


(Sigh) Sometimes I forget I'm dealing with other Aspies here. Next time in order to show you that I'm joking, I'll be sure to put a :lol: at the end of the sentence.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I was guessing you were joking, but I'm also guessing Orwell was serious and it really isn't a laughing matter.



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

16 Aug 2011, 7:27 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
And Buffett's credibility is in question, so why should I care what he is advocating for when it won't affect him, but will hurt his competitors.

No, this is incorrect. It's just factually wrong. What Buffet is advocating is specifically intended to affect him and people like him. He is advocating increasing the capital gains tax rates- most of his income is taxed as capital gains, and that is why he currently pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.

Note Inuyasha using the common Fox/Republican tactic of claiming that someone should not be trusted because their credibility has been questioned- when he is the one questioning that credibility! Just like Fox's stories that "some say [insert right-wing talking point here]" in order to act as an opinion outlet while pretending to do news.


Or, we can just take Marshal's advice, and tell Inuyasha:
"At least I don't eat babies like you conservatives!"

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


If you all want to destroy whatever shred of credibility you have, that's your business.


(Sigh) Sometimes I forget I'm dealing with other Aspies here. Next time in order to show you that I'm joking, I'll be sure to put a :lol: at the end of the sentence.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I was guessing you were joking, but I'm also guessing Orwell was serious and it really isn't a laughing matter.

What did I say that you're so upset about? I never said anything about eating babies.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

16 Aug 2011, 7:30 pm

Orwell wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
And Buffett's credibility is in question, so why should I care what he is advocating for when it won't affect him, but will hurt his competitors.

No, this is incorrect. It's just factually wrong. What Buffet is advocating is specifically intended to affect him and people like him. He is advocating increasing the capital gains tax rates- most of his income is taxed as capital gains, and that is why he currently pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.

Note Inuyasha using the common Fox/Republican tactic of claiming that someone should not be trusted because their credibility has been questioned- when he is the one questioning that credibility! Just like Fox's stories that "some say [insert right-wing talking point here]" in order to act as an opinion outlet while pretending to do news.


Or, we can just take Marshal's advice, and tell Inuyasha:
"At least I don't eat babies like you conservatives!"

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


If you all want to destroy whatever shred of credibility you have, that's your business.


(Sigh) Sometimes I forget I'm dealing with other Aspies here. Next time in order to show you that I'm joking, I'll be sure to put a :lol: at the end of the sentence.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I was guessing you were joking, but I'm also guessing Orwell was serious and it really isn't a laughing matter.

What did I say that you're so upset about? I never said anything about eating babies.


Well the implying I can't think for myself for starters.

Oh did you here about the Project Gunrunner supervisors have been promoted. Yeah the people that allowed guns into the hands of Mexican Drug Cartels have been promoted.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

16 Aug 2011, 7:34 pm

Orwell wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
And Buffett's credibility is in question, so why should I care what he is advocating for when it won't affect him, but will hurt his competitors.

No, this is incorrect. It's just factually wrong. What Buffet is advocating is specifically intended to affect him and people like him. He is advocating increasing the capital gains tax rates- most of his income is taxed as capital gains, and that is why he currently pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.

Note Inuyasha using the common Fox/Republican tactic of claiming that someone should not be trusted because their credibility has been questioned- when he is the one questioning that credibility! Just like Fox's stories that "some say [insert right-wing talking point here]" in order to act as an opinion outlet while pretending to do news.


Or, we can just take Marshal's advice, and tell Inuyasha:
"At least I don't eat babies like you conservatives!"

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


If you all want to destroy whatever shred of credibility you have, that's your business.


(Sigh) Sometimes I forget I'm dealing with other Aspies here. Next time in order to show you that I'm joking, I'll be sure to put a :lol: at the end of the sentence.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I was guessing you were joking, but I'm also guessing Orwell was serious and it really isn't a laughing matter.

What did I say that you're so upset about? I never said anything about eating babies.


Tastes like chicken.....



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

16 Aug 2011, 7:37 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Well the implying I can't think for myself for starters.

I have not implied that, I have stated it outright on several occasions. And it is a fact.

Quote:
Oh did you here about the Project Gunrunner supervisors have been promoted. Yeah the people that allowed guns into the hands of Mexican Drug Cartels have been promoted.

Again with the random tangent. No, I hadn't heard about that. Is that supposed to have any relevance to anything? What do Mexican drug cartels and illegal gun sales have to do with tax policy?


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,246
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

16 Aug 2011, 7:38 pm

:lol:

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

16 Aug 2011, 7:50 pm

visagrunt wrote:
However, it is consistent with the tax law principle that, "it never hurts you to earn an extra dollar."

If I have money to invest, I will invest it with a view to earning a return on that investment. While tax will reduce the return that I enjoy, it will not eliminate it, and I am not going to stop investing simply because I have to pay tax on the return, because I am still better off with the after-tax return than I am with sticking my money in a mattress.

The proper economic argument is not that taxation discourages investment--it does no such thing. The proper argument is that tax reduces the amount of capital that investors have available to invest. So the balance must be struck between the amount of taxation that is necessary to fund a functioning government against the amount of capital that needs to be left in the market.

Visagrunt, the economic framework relies on trade-offs. If something reduces the good I get, I may do less of it, relative to the other things I can do with that money. OR it can alter the kinds of investments I make, as capital gains are usually realized by high-growth stocks, and not realized by stocks currently paying dividends as a capital gain is the gain from the increase of a stock price. So... I may say "Hmm... I should take the dividend, and not bother with capital gains from Apple", which is a distortion of the investment decision AGAINST a high growth stock, which is a problem if we want to promote growth.

So.... your point seems to fail to understand the basic mechanism of supply and demand, so... the economics of it is questionable. In any case, "reducing the amount of capital to invest" is discouraging investment for all practical purposes. The supply has diminished relative to what it could be.



Last edited by Awesomelyglorious on 16 Aug 2011, 7:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.