Punk rockers/anarchists and Libertarians, what is the difference?

[downnola]

Then, I gusss the system is working out exactly as you wanted.

I don't get what your point is. Do you think I should stop advocating for higher taxes because they'll lobby for less taxes? Why should I stop, they're the ones that suck.

[Machismo]

No, the problem is that you have just seen how much people pay in taxes in my country while enjoying a good life that you are so dumbfounded you don't even dare to talk about paying a fair share anymore.

Why should it only be about fines? If we're talking about equitable outcomes, then let's talk about equitable outcomes.

Hey, if you want to talk about something else, go ahead. I was talking about fines and the different impacts they have on the poor vs. the rich, you know because the system benefits the rich. Something you vehemently denied and rather moved the goalpost to talk about something more to your liking.[/QUOTE]

S, you think that lower-income people (everyone making over $18k) should be paying more?

By your own charts, that should be the case.

[Mayhem]

It does, and they are murderous asshats when they do it.

Wow, throwing someone out of your country is not murder, bud.

Contrary to what many would have you believe, the Bolsheviks were not good guys. Murdering children in the dead of night isn't a heroic act.

Ok cool, no one was talking about murder. When someone says, eat the rich, they aren't talking about cannibalism either.

[Machismo]

I don't get what your point is. Do you think I should stop advocating for higher taxes because they'll lobby for less taxes? Why should I stop, they're the ones that suck.

No, I think nothing will get you to stop advocating for screwing over other people.

That's what selfish people do.

- - - Updated - - -

Wow, throwing someone out of your country is not murder, bud.



Ok cool, no one was talking about murder. When someone says, eat the rich, they aren't talking about cannibalism either.

What if they resist?

Well, the Bolsheviks sure liked to murder some folk.

[Edge-]

Children cannot vote. People who have yet to be born... cannot vote.

That debt impacts them.

Alas, putting your money where your mouth is... doesn't seem to be a thing.

Fucking hell, son. Everything the country does impacts them. Domestic policy all impacts them. Foreign policy all impacts them. That's how time works dude, it's a straight line.

You keep saying this like it's a self-contained argument in itself not worth further discussion, analysis, and consideration. It fuckin ain't yo. It ain't at all.

[Felya]

My solution got me 100% of the water, how much did your solution get you?

You are still missing the point... I will try to make it clearer on more time... what results in more money as revenue from a flat tax on 80$ and 10$? This isn’t about who owns what or anything to do with your imagination in how you can manipulate the question to avoid answering. This is now a simple math question, that requires a simple answer of no more than a number... Want to take another swing at it?

Again, just math... none of this my or their bullshit... what is greater... 10% of 80 or 10% of 10... be genuine for once in this thread...

[downnola]

No, I think nothing will get you to stop advocating for screwing over other people.

That's what selfish people do.

This is projection coming from someone who wants to shift the tax burden from the rich to the poor and middle class during a pandemic.

[Machismo]

Fucking hell, son. Everything the country does impacts them. Domestic policy all impacts them. Foreign policy all impacts them. That's how time works dude, it's a straight line.

You keep saying this like it's a self-contained argument in itself not worth further discussion, analysis, and consideration. It fuckin ain't yo. It ain't at all.

Yes, yes it does. And in this case, you are willingly pushing a monstrous financial burden on them. We both know you don't give a shit, either, yo.

- - - Updated - - -

You are still missing the point... I will try to make it clearer on more time... what results in more money as revenue from a flat tax on 80$ and 10$? This isn’t about who owns what or anything to do with your imagination in how you can manipulate the question to avoid answering. This is now a simple math question, that requires a simple answer of no more than a number... Want to take another swing at it?

Again, just math... none of this my or their bullshit... what is greater... 10% of 80 or 10% of 10... be genuine for once in this thread...

Looks like my answer gets me more water to quench my thirst. Wasn't that the objective?

Or, would you care to revise your shitty analogy?

[Edge-]

Yes, yes it does. And in this case, you are willingly pushing a monstrous financial burden on them. We both know you don't give a shit, either, yo.

What's the alternative, then? Is there any analysis of what simply cutting spending across the board in an attempt to achieve a balanced budget would have say...5 years down the line? 10 years down the line? How about 30 years down the line? That's how these things work, you need to look at the short and long term costs/benefits/impacts.

That's a complex, nuanced discussion worth having. Things like, "think of da debt we leave da keeeeeeeds" lacks any of that and is little more than just empty sloganeering.

[Machismo]

This is projection coming from someone who wants to shift the tax burden from the rich to the poor and middle class during a pandemic.

On the contrary, I have long been calling for simply a reduction in spending. MY goal has been lower taxation all along.

if it were up to me, we'd have a freeze on spending increases for 5 years.

[Felya]

Looks like my answer gets me more water to quench my thirst. Wasn't that the objective?

Or, would you care to revise your shitty analogy?

Oh my god... can people please read what he responded to, with this bullshit... Why are we bothering? This is pointless...

Edit: He pretty much just responded that he will not be genuine, to continue this diatribe... what else do you need to see this, for what it is? 140 pages.......

[downnola]

Yes, yes it does. And in this case, you are willingly pushing a monstrous financial burden on them. We both know you don't give a shit, either, yo.

Ahh yes, such a monstrous burden how will they ever handle a higher tax rate.

[Machismo]

What's the alternative, then? Is there any analysis of what simply cutting spending across the board in an attempt to achieve a balanced budget would have say...5 years down the line? 10 years down the line? How about 30 years down the line? That's how these things work, you need to look at the short and long term costs/benefits/impacts.

That's a complex, nuanced discussion worth having. Things like, "think of da debt we leave da keeeeeeeds" lacks any of that and is little more than just empty sloganeering.

Uhh, balancing a budget sounds like a great idea. Since you have made it clear that you have no desire to do so, then you are opting to push that burden onto others.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh my god... can people please read what he responded to, with this bullshit... Why are we bothering? This is pointless...

Once again, you're just pissed that your analogy was shit. If I have two cups, and I'm thirsty, then I can drink it all.

[Mayhem]

S, you think that lower-income people (everyone making over $18k) should be paying more?

By your own charts, that should be the case.

Sure, if you introduce a minimum wage of 14x $1805 a year go ahead because that's the minimum wage in Austria. You wouldn't want to raise taxes without paying people a living wage, would you?

[Edge-]

Uhh, balancing a budget sounds like a great idea. Since you have made it clear that you have no desire to do so, then you are opting to push that burden onto others.

And we're back with empty sloganeering and precisely 0 engagement with the actual topic I raised, which is ripe for interesting discussion.

This thread is just reinforcing all the stereotypical views of libertarian thinking.

[Machismo]

Ahh yes, such a monstrous burden how will they ever handle a higher tax rate.

How much higher?

it would need to be tripe to balance the budget.

[Felya]

Once again, you're just pissed that your analogy was shit. If I have two cups, and I'm thirsty, then I can drink it all.

For the sake of transparency... I just reported you for trolling... keep going, tiger blood...

[Machismo]

Sure, if you introduce a minimum wage of 14x $1805 a year go ahead because that's the minimum wage in Austria. You wouldn't want to raise taxes without paying people a living wage, would you?

So, at least you admit you also want to raise taxes on the lower and middle-income earners, as well.

I mean, that's what the tax numbers show...

- - - Updated - - -

And we're back with empty sloganeering and precisely 0 engagement with the actual topic I raised, which is ripe for interesting discussion.

This thread is just reinforcing all the stereotypical views of libertarian thinking.

I've engaged for way more than 100 pages.

Not one of you has actually entertained the idea of reducing spending as a reasonable approach to massive government deficits.

[Mayhem]

What if they resist?

Then they are met with force. What's your argument, that you can't remove people from your country if they resist? Seize their assets and let them stay, another option. There're sometimes different solutions to a problem.

Well, the Bolsheviks sure liked to murder some folk.

Yeah, so did rich people back in the days, what's your point?

[Edge-]

Not one of you has actually entertained the idea of reducing spending as a reasonable approach to massive government deficits.

I think literally everyone here is on board with targeted spending cuts mixed in with other strategies including revenue increases, with the understanding that some years will be deficit years and some years won't because that's how life works.

You're just the one here spending hundreds of pages repeating empty slogans and demanding that the world conform to your binary view of reality.