What's Wrong With Kansas?

[JohnStOnge]

I just saw these questions as a result of the thread being bumped up.

1) How is progressive taxation immoral?

It makes some people pay a bigger share of running the country than others. As I said: A completely fair and moral tax system is one in which you look at what it costs to run the country than make every person in the country pay their equal share. So if there are 320 million people in the United States you look at what it costs to run the United States then divide that number by 320 million then each of the 320 million is charged that amount. Some are kids so it'd be their parents paying for them. That sort of thing.

Having 20% of households pay 69% of all Federal taxes (not just income taxes) while another 20% of households pays only 0.4% of all Federal taxes is neither fair nor moral. Fair and moral would be a situation in which you could select any 20% of the population and find that they contributed 20% of what it cost to fund the government.

2) Are you suggesting we redistribute wealth evenly before applying your fair tax scheme?

No.

[kalm]

7,000 state workers face an unpaid furlough due to revenue shortfalls. This might be part of the plan. Starve the beast!

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/7523496" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Baldy]

7,000 state workers face an unpaid furlough due to revenue shortfalls. This might be part of the plan. Starve the beast!

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/7523496" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ohhhh kayyy...

Your state, Washington State, has been furloughing state employees for the past several years now.

[kalm]

7,000 state workers face an unpaid furlough due to revenue shortfalls. This might be part of the plan. Starve the beast!

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/7523496" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ohhhh kayyy...

Your state, Washington State, has been furloughing state employees for the past several years now.

Many states did at the onset of the recession. We still are?

[Baldy]

Ohhhh kayyy...

Your state, Washington State, has been furloughing state employees for the past several years now.

Many states did at the onset of the recession. We still are?

Don't know, don't care to look, but many states still are.

[BDKJMU]

1.5 mile cookie cutter tracks suck....

[kalm]

Many states did at the onset of the recession. We still are?

Don't know, don't care to look, but many states still are.

So you pulled it out of your ass?

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Good for Brownback cutting the unfair and vindictive taxation of people with money.

Taxes rates should be the same for every man woman and child. Everyone needs some skin in the game and taxing people with money is fu*king immoral. Everyone should pay not just some.

[JohnStOnge]

Taxes rates should be the same for every man woman and child.

As noted earlier I would go farther and not say that everyone should pay the same rate but that everyone should pay the same in absolute terms. You've got some people paying millions in taxes every year while otehr people pay nothing and there's this nonsensical assertion that the ones paying millions aren't paying their "fair share." It's ridiculous.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: We've got a situation in which the majority of the people in this country are parasites.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Agreed

[Baldy]

Don't know, don't care to look, but many states still are.

So you pulled it out of your ass?

No, it's a fact. Washington State has furloughed state employees...much like Kansas.

[kalm]

So you pulled it out of your ass?

No, it's a fact. Washington State has furloughed state employees...much like Kansas.

For the past several years?

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Does it matter?

[kalm]

Does it matter?

Yes.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Not really..................it happens in both those states so its just a deflection tactic.

[kalm]

Not really..................it happens in both those states so its just a deflection tactic.

Stick with woman and Andy hating there kiddo.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Not really..................it happens in both those states so its just a deflection tactic.

Stick with woman and Andy hating there kiddo.

I will if you stick too picking on customers and racing more than halfway towards womanhood.

[houndawg]

I just saw these questions as a result of the thread being bumped up.

1) How is progressive taxation immoral?

It makes some people pay a bigger share of running the country than others. As I said: A completely fair and moral tax system is one in which you look at what it costs to run the country than make every person in the country pay their equal share. So if there are 320 million people in the United States you look at what it costs to run the United States then divide that number by 320 million then each of the 320 million is charged that amount. Some are kids so it'd be their parents paying for them. That sort of thing.

Having 20% of households pay 69% of all Federal taxes (not just income taxes) while another 20% of households pays only 0.4% of all Federal taxes is neither fair nor moral. Fair and moral would be a situation in which you could select any 20% of the population and find that they contributed 20% of what it cost to fund the government.

2) Are you suggesting we redistribute wealth evenly before applying your fair tax scheme?

No.

Exactly John. And the ones paying more are the ones reaping the most reward from our glorious system. You need to get the drama-queen act under control John. You really do.

[Wedgebuster]

Thank God for Kansas, we need a state only for stupid people, and Kansas does that better than anybody else.

[JohnStOnge]

Exactly John. And the ones paying more are the ones reaping the most reward from our glorious system

For the most part they are the ones earning more.

The whole thing with this issue is a fundamental popular misconception. It's the idea that there is this pile of income and/or wealth that is sent down from heaven and should be divided evenly. But that's not correct. Income is dictated for the most part by supply and demand. Wealth is generated.

I've used this example before but it's a good one: Take Bill Gates even though he's a liberal. He's got a lot of wealth. Suppose he'd never been born. Do you think that'd means the "typical" American would have more wealth as though he somehow "took" more than his share from the heavenly supply of wealth?

Of course not. I hope all realize that.

[JohnStOnge]

BTW, nothing wrong with Kansas the band as far as I'm concerned. I'm not a musician. That's stipulated. But as an outside consumer that is the most impressive "popular" band I've ever seen or heard musically as far as seeing musicians and saying, "Holy crap" and "wow." Yes and Emerson Lake and Palmer are up there too. But if I had to pick it'd be Kansas.

The sad thing is that I can't think of ANYTHING in the last 30 years or so.

[houndawg]

Exactly John. And the ones paying more are the ones reaping the most reward from our glorious system

For the most part they are the ones earning more.

The whole thing with this issue is a fundamental popular misconception. It's the idea that there is this pile of income and/or wealth that is sent down from heaven and should be divided evenly. But that's not correct. Income is dictated for the most part by supply and demand. Wealth is generated.

I've used this example before but it's a good one: Take Bill Gates even though he's a liberal. He's got a lot of wealth. Suppose he'd never been born. Do you think that'd means the "typical" American would have more wealth as though he somehow "took" more than his share from the heavenly supply of wealth?

Of course not. I hope all realize that.

Where do you come up with this jabbering nonsense John? Start a different thread if you want to change the subject.

[houndawg]

BTW, nothing wrong with Kansas the band as far as I'm concerned. I'm not a musician. That's stipulated. But as an outside consumer that is the most impressive "popular" band I've ever seen or heard musically as far as seeing musicians and saying, "Holy crap" and "wow." Yes and Emerson Lake and Palmer are up there too. But if I had to pick it'd be Kansas.

The sad thing is that I can't think of ANYTHING in the last 30 years or so.

Back in the day most of Kansas' stuff was based on Bach fugues. Good musicians, very good. But if they were on the same bill Kansas would be the opener and they would be thrilled to have the gig.

[houndawg]

Thank God for Kansas, we need a state only for stupid people, and Kansas does that better than anybody else.

God sends most of his tornados to Oklahoma and Texas because he hates them most. He hates Kansas too but because they are so stupid he doesn't afflict them as much. The wrath of God is tempered with mercy for the stupid.

[kalm]

BTW, nothing wrong with Kansas the band as far as I'm concerned. I'm not a musician. That's stipulated. But as an outside consumer that is the most impressive "popular" band I've ever seen or heard musically as far as seeing musicians and saying, "Holy crap" and "wow." Yes and Emerson Lake and Palmer are up there too. But if I had to pick it'd be Kansas.

The sad thing is that I can't think of ANYTHING in the last 30 years or so.

You need to get out more then. Here's a ranking of musical talent by band using a scoring method based on each band member's rank in their instrument category:

http://www.rankopedia.com/Most-Talented ... 11218/.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Obviously subjective on how to rank a musician's talent but there have been many bands in the last 30 years with truck loads of talent. For example and one which made the list is the Police. Their ranking is based off of Andy Summers but I always thought Copeland was one of the better drummers around.

Then there's more recent acts like the White Stripes, Black Keys, Arctic Monkeys…that are very talented at every position.