• Rick Perry commits political suicide
    410 replies, posted
hey guys remember when this thread was about Rick Perry using religious rhetoric and homophobia in his campaign advert that was a good time
[QUOTE=Jookia;33626862]Why do you somehow have a picture that all the rich are evil people? Gabe Newell and Bill Gates for example actually worked to get where they were and worked to stay there. They didn't exploit people. As for the flat tax, then that's the country's problem. I don't care. I just don't see it being fair for successful people having to work that hard only to end up having over half of their earnings from work taken.[/QUOTE] You aware that taxes aren't about taking from evil people, right? The idea of "rich people are not all evil" is a complete non-issue.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;33626824]Because if you introduce a flat tax that the poor can live on, you're not going to be generating enough revenue. While the rich get to swan around in their pleasure boats bought by the labour of poor people.[/QUOTE] What if that rich person is employing those poor people, is it wrong then for them to enjoy the fruits of the empire they created?
[QUOTE=Jookia;33626899]If he wants to pay more, let him. That doesn't mean that he should have to give up most of his money by force.[/QUOTE] But you recognise his business credentials, and his ability to understand what he's actually saying? Unlike you.
[QUOTE=Jookia;33626899]If he wants to pay more, let him. That doesn't mean that he should have to give up most of his money by force.[/QUOTE] stop saying "most". it's not gonna exceed 50 percent even in the most progressive plans
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;33626922]You aware that taxes aren't about taking from evil people, right? The idea of "rich people are not all evil" is a complete non-issue.[/QUOTE] I was replying to [quote]While the rich get to swan around in their pleasure boats bought by the labour of poor people.[/quote]
[b]“there’s something wrong in this country when gays can serve openly in the military"[/b] I thought it was 2011 but I guess we're living in medieval Europe.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;33626937]But you recognise his business credentials, and his ability to understand what he's actually saying? Unlike you.[/QUOTE] Argument from authority, eh? [editline]9th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=SigmaLambda;33626940]stop saying "most". it's not gonna exceed 50 percent even in the most progressive plans[/QUOTE] 50% is a large amount.
[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;33626930]What if that rich person is employing those poor people, is it wrong then for them to enjoy the fruits of the empire they created?[/QUOTE] Considering how relative and metaphysical money actually is, they're going to be enjoying it regardless how much you tax them.
[QUOTE=Jookia;33626949]50% is a large amount.[/QUOTE] "Most" implies a majority. Taxation won't even be close to 50%.
[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;33626930]What if that rich person is employing those poor people, is it wrong then for them to enjoy the fruits of the empire they created?[/QUOTE] uhh they get to anyway? even when highly taxed they still end up with more money than they would have if they had earned less.
I don't see how anyone could have a clear reason to be against gays, or anyone who isn't blonde-hair and blue-eyed. Jesus christ it boggles the mind.
[QUOTE=Jookia;33626949] 50% is a large amount.[/QUOTE] it's not "most". that's not what the word "most" means. words have definitions. [editline]8th December 2011[/editline] i mean certainly "rich people being able to enjoy their wealth" should be [i]a[/i] priority, but it should be a way, way lower priority than "poor people being able to enjoy lifesaving medical care" and "everyone being able to enjoy quality public education and effective police forces"
Once you get beyond a certain point (i.e. rich enough to make bills go away and have enough to spend on some cool stuff), being rich does not make you happy. [URL]http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S15/15/09S18/index.xml?section=topstories[/URL] [URL]http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/dec/13/happiness-growing-wealth-nations-study[/URL] [editline]8th December 2011[/editline] scientifically proven, bitch.
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;33626972]it's not "most". that's not what the word "most" means. words have definitions.[/QUOTE] 50% is most in my view. You lose half your income. All your arguments are basically 'the rich have enough money, they won't mind if we take 200 million of their 400 million' even though that doesn't stop the problem that the countries should budget better.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;33626953]Considering how relative and metaphysical money actually is, they're going to be enjoying it regardless how much you tax them.[/QUOTE] Then why are you speaking of it as if them having money is bad simply because it was those he is employing that got him there?
so in short the poor should stay poorer and the rich richer, gotcha.
[QUOTE=Jookia;33627000]50% is most in my view. You lose half your income.[/QUOTE] No it's not. 'Most' implies a majority. If it were 51% I'd consider that statement seriously.
[QUOTE=pg.;33627016]so in short the poor should stay poorer and the rich richer, gotcha.[/QUOTE] If I get rich, it's not my problem to make poor people less poor. Pretty much yeah. Sorry for derailing.
[QUOTE=pg.;33627016]so in short the poor should stay poorer and the rich richer, gotcha.[/QUOTE] No way! What about trickle down econ... hahaha
[QUOTE=Turnips5;33627029]No it's not. 'Most' implies a majority. If it were 51% I'd consider that statement seriously.[/QUOTE] I count from 0%.
I read the title as "Rick Perry commits suicide". Getting my hopes up and then crushing them.
[QUOTE=Jookia;33627043]I count from 0%.[/QUOTE] what
[QUOTE=Jookia;33627043]I count from 0%.[/QUOTE] oh my god I'm not joining in this argument again but that's one of the stupidest and most incoherent things I've read in any thread in a long time like this isn't even anything to do with the argument that's just a dumb statement
wait, I remember you. you're that guy who thought electromagnetic induction was useless and irrelevant. HAHAHA e. actually, no
[QUOTE=Turnips5;33627058]wait, I remember you. you're that guy who thought electromagnetic induction was useless and irrelevant. HAHAHA[/QUOTE] Electromagnetic induction what are you on about?
[QUOTE=Turnips5;33627058]wait, I remember you. you're that guy who thought electromagnetic induction was useless and irrelevant. HAHAHA[/QUOTE] Whoa whoa, what? :pwn:
I didn't even realise campaign adverts like these existed. I'd see some and think they were spoofs or a lookalike taking the mickey. In the UK, the worst we get is a Photoshopped image of ol' David Cameron lying through his teeth.
[QUOTE=cyclocius;33627126]I didn't even realise campaign adverts like these existed. I'd see some and think they were spoofs or a lookalike taking the mickey. In the UK, the worst we get is a Photoshopped image of ol' David Cameron lying through his teeth.[/QUOTE] First time I saw this video I was convinced it was a parody.
[QUOTE=cyclocius;33627126]I didn't even realise campaign adverts like these existed. I'd see some and think they were spoofs or a lookalike taking the mickey. In the UK, the worst we get is a Photoshopped image of ol' David Cameron lying through his teeth.[/QUOTE] I think in England everyone has resigned to the understanding that anyone we vote for will be a cunt, so there's no point in doing any fancy tricks to impress us
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.