House Democrats look at taxing the rich for health care - Polidicks

[QUOTE=HK-100;15946844]Okay there Jim Taggart.[/QUOTE] That's a new one.

[QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;15943646]but that's simply not feasible. In order to make enough money, using a flat tax, to provide nationwide health care, the flat tax rate would have be higher than most poor families could handle[/QUOTE] And taxing the rich even more than they are now sure won't put them in a tougher position, hmmm? Listen, to pay for just [I]one third[/I] of all the uninsured people in America, it's gonna cost one trillion dollars. That's $1,000,000,000,000. Seriously, you expect the rich to just up and carry this burden without any kind of problems? It's not that simple. People don't like losing wealth. When a businessman begins to lose revenue, he cuts expenses. Ya think that none of these guys are gonna cut the pay of their employees? "Well, hurf durf, CEO's can afford pay cuts, man!" you might say. What about the average worker? The accountant? The janitor? The lower-level management? You think they won't get pay cuts? And worse, what about when mass amounts of people begin to lose their jobs?

Now you are just bashing phrases. All I want to express is that morals and laws corelate in many ways. Laws are the written down basis to protect the individual and his rights. They are made by society. Morals, if used in the original meaning, fulfill the same purpose. They are society made conventions about what is wrong and what is right. Of course there can be missinterpretation of morals, purposely or not, but the same applies to laws. Thus I have the oppinion that a law that corelates with morals is not wrong. In this case, a law that kind of shifts money from the upper class to the lower class. Seeing how 1000 dollar can mean a lot more to a low income family than to a high income family, I think this is a move. Of course it would be wrong to take absolutes. That's why we have taxes in %. Now what's the argueing point here? Obviously, higher % for higher income people. Yes, that looks injustice at first glance, why would a richer family have to pay a bigger fraction of their income than lower income families? My answer: There is no endless wealth. The wealthier you are, the less a single dollar means to your personal life.

[QUOTE=Alex_DeLarge;15946864]And I don't give a shit about some douchebag named "Chippay" on Facepunch trying to prove me wrong.[/QUOTE] i don't need to prove you wrong because you are wrong your argument is a shitty conservative talking point and you have no actual experience with the system you're belittling. stop embarrassing yourself champ

[QUOTE=Chippay;15946739] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman[/url][/QUOTE] But it's true though, he's pro-life and signed pro-life legislature. No libertarian could consider that.

[QUOTE=Conscript;15946734]lol ayn randist[/QUOTE] What's really lulzworthy are the mediocore Marxists who strawman her all the time.

[QUOTE=Killuah;15946884]Now you are just bashing phrases. All I want to express is that morals and laws corelate in many ways. Laws are the written down basis to protect the individual and his rights. They are made by society. Morals, if used in the original meaning, fullfil the same purpose. They are society made conventions about what is wrong and what is right. Of course there can be missinterpretation of morals, purposely or not, but the same applies to laws. Thus I have the oppinion that a law that corelates with morals is not wrong. In this case, a law that kind of shifts money from the upper class to the lower class. Seeing how 1000 dollar can mean a lot more to a low income family than to a high income family, I think this is a move. Of course it would be wrong to take absolutes. That's why we have taxes in %. Now what's the argueing point here? Obviously, higher % for higher income people. Yes, that looks injustice at first glance, wha would a richer family have to pay a bigger fraction of their income than lower income families? My answer: There is no endless wealth. The wealthier you are, the less a single dollar means to your personal life.[/QUOTE] You say, as you insult a member of that lower class whose protection you claim to champion. FYI you know nothing about how the legal system works.

[QUOTE=Chippay;15946899]i don't need to prove you wrong because you are wrong your argument is a shitty conservative talking point and you have no actual experience with the system you're belittling. stop embarrassing yourself champ[/QUOTE] this is getting serious

[QUOTE=thisispain;15946901]But it's true though, he's pro-life and signed pro-life legislature. No libertarian could consider that.[/QUOTE] And he ignores the separation of church and state therein. [editline]05:22PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Chippay;15946899]i don't need to prove you wrong because you are wrong your argument is a shitty conservative talking point and you have no actual experience with the system you're belittling. stop embarrassing yourself champ[/QUOTE] I DON'T NEED TO PROVE YOU WRONG BECAUSE IM RIGHT RABBLE RABBLE rabble I'm glad for your sake that you aren't the one in the courts arguing this case.

[QUOTE=Conscript;15946882]That's a new one.[/QUOTE] I'm glad you like it old friend.

[img]http://www.patriotdepot.com/images/products/detail/OBAMA.1.jpg[/img] I'l leave that here.

yeah universal healthcare is just too expensive, i guess you guys are right [img]http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/4481/carriers.gif[/img] [img]http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/636/090209usbudget1.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=HK-100;15946903]What's really lulzworthy is the mediocore Marxists who strawman her all the time.[/QUOTE] I bet. Tell me all about the mystic, Ayn rand. I'd really like to know. Although you might want to do it in a PM lest we piss off everyone for going off topic.

See, that's a bullshit argument too. Nobody said the military budget isn't overinflated.

[QUOTE=Chippay;15946899] stop embarrassing yourself champ[/QUOTE] I suggest you take your own advice... I may not have experience with the Canadian Universal Healthcare program but I have written papers regarding the subject and I am pretty well versed in regards to what we're speaking about.

[QUOTE=Conscript;15946954]I bet. Tell me all about the mystic, Ayn rand. I'd really like to know. Although you might want to do it in a PM lest we piss off everyone for going off topic.[/QUOTE] You're the one who brought up Ayn Rand.

[QUOTE=evilweazel;15946946][img]http://www.patriotdepot.com/images/products/detail/OBAMA.1.jpg[/img] I'l leave that here.[/QUOTE] no get out that site just sounds retarded and you are retarded for trying something like that in an argument :dogout:

[QUOTE=Lankist;15946914] I DON'T NEED TO PROVE YOU WRONG BECAUSE IM RIGHT RABBLE RABBLE rabble I'm glad for your sake that you aren't the one in the courts arguing this case.[/QUOTE] sounds like someone has his panties in a twist his claim that he has "stories and websites" is not a legitimate argument, especially considering the fact i have actually dealt with the healthcare system [I]repeatedly[/I] i know you're trying to get back at me for calling you a terrible person (you are) but there's much better ways to do it i mean you could criticize my enraging lack of capitals like everyone else on facepunch, it's scandalous

[QUOTE=Chippay;15946947]yeah universal healthcare is just too expensive, i guess you guys are right [img]http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/4481/carriers.gif[/img] [img]http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/636/090209usbudget1.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Notice how we haven't ever had a war on our land since the mid 1800s? Yeah I think you should take that into account when you spout shit off like that.

[QUOTE=Lankist;15946975]You're the one who brought up Ayn Rand.[/QUOTE] that was me bro sorry

[QUOTE=Alex_DeLarge;15946974]I suggest you take your own advice... I may not have experience with the Canadian Universal Healthcare program but I have written papers regarding the subject and I am pretty well versed in regards to what we're speaking about.[/QUOTE] oh boy, more unnamed sources designed to give justification to your opinion despite the fact [B]i actually deal with the healthcare system and live in the country[/B]

[QUOTE=Alex_DeLarge;15947004]Notice how we haven't ever had a war on our land since the mid 1800s? Yeah I think you should take that into account when you spout shit off like that.[/QUOTE] that doesn't change the fact that the military is bloated bro

[QUOTE=Alex_DeLarge;15947004]Notice how we haven't ever had a war on our land since the mid 1800s? Yeah I think you should take that into account when you spout shit off like that.[/QUOTE] hahaha, you actually think that is justified, don't you? are you trolling me?

I didn't want to insult you Lankist. You really come off kind of angry in this thread.

[QUOTE=Chippay;15947012]oh boy, more unnamed sources designed to give justification to your opinion despite the fact [B]i actually deal with the healthcare system and live in the country[/B][/QUOTE] yeah, and just as a small anecdote in case someone mentions britain, the NHS isn't too bad either

[QUOTE=thisispain;15947042]yeah, and just as a small anecdote in case someone mentions britain, the NHS isn't too bad either[/QUOTE] b...b...but fox news told me about how bad socialism is!!!

[QUOTE=Killuah;15947025]I didn't want to insult you Lankist. You really come off kind of angry in this thread.[/QUOTE] he's your stereotypical angry black man

[QUOTE=Conscript;15941619]Maybe if we were talking about taking their money, yeah. haha typical. dont tax the rich cuz that's soshulizm!![/QUOTE] Says "Conscript". Get real loser.

[QUOTE=Chippay;15946997]sounds like someone has his panties in a twist his claim that he has "stories and websites" is not a legitimate argument, especially considering the fact i have actually dealt with the healthcare system [I]repeatedly[/I] i know you're trying to get back at me for calling you a terrible person (you are) but there's much better ways to do it i mean you could criticize my enraging lack of capitals like everyone else on facepunch, it's scandalous[/QUOTE] The moment you descent into outright telling an opponent who is still willingly engaged in discussion that you will not engage him on a logical basis is the moment you admit defeat. I'm not saying he's right. I'm saying by telling him that he is wrong and admitting you have no intention to further elaborate why, you are wrong.

[QUOTE=Lankist;15946975]You're the one who brought up Ayn Rand.[/QUOTE] That doesn't mean I'm about to get into a debate about some lolbertarian god in a health care thread. It's not like I didn't expect someone to call me out on it, with the sheer amount of libertarians on FP.