Both Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, and probably some others I don’t remember, have said that they wouldn’t mind paying more in taxes. Nobody’s stopping them, but I agree that they aren’t likely to send Uncle Sam more than is required. As I said elsewhere, I agree the wealthy should pay more. I just don’t think the wealth tax is a wise, or probably legal, way to go.
Someone saying "they mind paying more taxes" is a lot different than actually wanting to pay more by being taxed by the IRS and therefore being required to pay more taxes Gates, Buffet, and others saying such things sounds admirable but I think it's sort of a "left handed offer" and not at all sincere...anyway I think it's somewhat of a moot point.
let me digest this and get you a detailed response. . I appreciate the feedback and want to debate ideologies in hopes ww can both come away better people with better logic. Also. Ready for another shirt? Im def ready for more cookies!!! Lol ill have more time tonight to put real thought into your response.
Though this may be true, this is not me. Many people equate poverty to poor choices. I don't. Yes, there are some who live in poverty due to poor choices, but it is not just the poverty stricken who I refer to when I say poor choices. Some are also victim of circumstance and parental suppression. I'm all for birth control, and though I don't agree with abortion other than certain circumstances, I will defend the right of the woman to make the choice herself. It's her body and future as much as the unborn. These are some of the poor choices i mean, though by far not all. Okay, now lets pinpoint. Drug addiction is a huge component to crimes of theft and robbery. I think we need to attack drug addiction through education and isolation. Across the board, rich or poor. It's negative impact on society is huge. BUT, we need a MAJOR reclassification and dissection of drugs in general. They have mostly been classified as various forms of narcotics for decades even though science and study has revealed many more facets than just saying, marijuana is marijuana, for example. I 100% agree. It's the method in which we hand out help that i'm in disagreement with. Their is a big black market on welfare stamps, for example. We can change the ways in which we investigate families to determine their true needs, vs just handing out credits for the families to spend how they see fit, which often isn't fit at all. Let's study the family and determine their needs for adequate survival of their basic nutrition and well being. Let's then provide those credits directly to the services, like the electrical companies, and lets have the basic healthy foods needs for their family delivered to them. What planet am I on? The one that didn't have a prescription drug plan up until what... 100 years ago? But we survived and thrived. Am I saying we are fine without prescription drugs? No way. But if you think that's the end all, im sorry, MANY MANY MANY people lived and walk this earth without ANY meds at all. My teeth are shit because I didn't have dental care for a long time. Ive had to live in my car for over a month. Sorry. These are first world problems for the easy going American lifestyle Try giving these complaints to the tribes of Africa... Tell this to Lewis & Clark.... I'm not saying life should be super difficult. I'm saying I believe the point of life is to find your passion, goal, dream and work as hard as you can to go after it. Because of all of our outside influences and entertainment options, we are no longer as creative and just sit back and expect things to come to us. Sure, and essential to any community. But in the animal kingdom, all animals work hard and have a purpose. You don't see two of them laying around all day eating yesterdays kill(cake and ice cream, while the other two go hunt every day(work their ass off). I agree 100% and believe that the only way to improve things is to make sure we break the cycle for the children and that means making sure, even if the parent wants to spend the aid wisely, we bypass their choice and make sure the child is taken care of in another way, like I hinted earlier. I don't disagree with that. I suppose it would take adding up the costs of providing true healthy aid to those in true need vs the spending cuts and how deep they would need to go into the military funding. Very open for debate in my book though. As far as the corporations, I agree as well they should be paying more. But expect those taxes to be past onto both their employees and consumers. This is a dangerous line. Go after the corporations they own sure, but after the bottom line, you are treading ground on undermining the fundamentals of capitalism. If someone invents or creates something that changes the world, they have the full right to reap the profits and do with it to which they please. The key isn't taking away the money from the uber wealthy. That will just make them greedier and more defiant. We have to educate them on the fact that if they don't help the world with their massive accounts, it will hurt us all and them in the long run. Who wants to be the rich guy living in a world of post civil war chaos? We cant, however force this gift from the wealthy, it must truly be a gift. I'm not sure who wouldn't. I don't want anyone to live in poverty, especially children. But the reality is, some people are able to exercise better judgement than others, resulting in more profit. Profit of money, profit of life, health, you name it. Social Security Reform Welfare Reform Health Care Reform Government form and filing reform These are things that have been in need for decades now. They all used to be part of the platform of which candidates would use in campaigning. Yes they cost money, but at least then we knew that if needed to fix it before it even costs more. Now, aside from Health Care, they are hardly mentioned, but the SSA funds will run out at its pace. Welfare has virtually zero tracking for the spending of the aid they hand out. Getting a grip on these administrations, and cross referencing them, so the paperwork and information can be utilized much more efficiently. These are the things I want to see a candidate campaign on and try to tackle.
I will watch again and some more. I have another interview link saved that I wanted to watch but ran out of time.
You asked me to sell you on a better plan and I tried to do so, so this is my last contribution. Agree, drug laws are archaic and badly in need of reform. True, a poor person in the US is better off than a poor person in, say, Somalia. So what? How destitute does a poor person have to be to satisfy you that they are not living soft? It's like you tell a rape victim you were only raped by one man, some women are raped by ten men, so shut up and stop crying, bitch. Yes, animals "work" in the sense they need to feed themselves, and, in some cases, their offspring. But animals don't work on plantations or in factories, they don't toil while others sip daiquiris on the veranda. Once they are fed, they stop "work" until they need to eat again. There are no animal slavemasters, kings, feudal lords, billionaires. The nearest thing in animal world are the drones in social insects, males who do no work but exist solely to fertilize the queen. Insects have no choice. We do. The ones who live soft off other people's work aren't poor people. You claim you are not equating poverty and bad choices, but you want to scrutinize how poor people spend their money. Why not assess how well the rich spent what they got in their trillion dollar tax cut, especially since Trump has promised an even bigger tax cut for the rich? Why not prohibit them from using their tax cut, that we all pay for, on safari hunting where very rich Westerners pay desperately poor countries to slaughter endangered animals? Why not demand their new yachts be energy efficient? We have always had wealth inequality in this country but it has exploded in the last 40 years or so, starting with Reagan era tax cut that heavily favored the wealthy, and increasing exponentially ever since. The idea that the very wealthy should pay their fair share suddenly became an outrage and to this day we are supposed to be appalled that rich should pay more taxes. This country had greater growth and more equitable growth when the rich did pay higher taxes; countries in Western Europe have pulled ahead of the US in many social indicators in large part because they have less inequality. I am reminded of the end of Lord of the Rings (book, not movie) when Sam is holding the ring and realizing how powerful it is and how much power it could give him. Then his "good sound Hobbit sense" comes to his aid. "For him, a garden to work with his own two hands, not a garden grown to the size of a realm that others work at his command." Maybe we all need some good sound Hobbit sense. Because no one needs $25 billion, $50 billion, $100 billion. No one. Do you honestly think Bill Gates and Paul Allen would not have created Microsoft if they thought their personal fortunes would stop at, say, $5 billion? So, your choice, @Orion Bailey. If you want to vote for a rude, crude, vicious, vulgar, stupid, ignorant, incompetent, utterly corrupt narcissist who cares for nothing but his ego and his wealth, who promises another tax cut for the rich but is taking school lunches from close to a million American children, who puts children in cages and sexually assaults women, who calls anything that does not praise him fake news, who kowtows to Kim Jong Un and Vladimir Putin, well, you still have that choice. We still have elections. Do you trust Trump to keep them free and fair? One more point. Donald Trump is now the most powerful president in the history of the United States of America. He has absolutely no moral compass; he has said, and believes, that he can do anything he wants. He has said, falsely, that Article 2 of the Constitution, which he has not read, gives the president the right to do anything. And now the Senate majority is going along with it. They are saying he can break laws, lie, harm allies, endanger national security, corrupt elections, and it's just fine as long as they get right wing judges, tax cuts for the rich, and most of all stay in power. The Attorney General, who although appointed by the president is supposed to work for we the people, concurs; not only does he claim the president has absolute immunity to do anything, he also intends to use the Department of Justice, the full weight of the federal government, to go after Trump's opponents. Is this the man you want to give this power to? Your choice. I'm out.
Good points. But you still seem to think that I equate all poor the same and I said I didn't at all? I still stand by my opinion that some of the poor are poor because of their choices in life. If someone makes enough money to spend it foolishly, but doesn't abuse government aid, then it is their freedom of choice to spend it as they like and if/when they blow it all they have no one to blame but themselves. Regarding legal tax cuts, I cant blame a rich person for utilizing something that has been voted in. That is something, I take up with my elected officials. Now I am with you. I think we need a tax overhaul; that includes another 1% tax increase on anyone making 1 million a year or more, a 3% increase on anyone making 10 million or more and a 5% increase on anyone making 100 mill a year or more. That's actually a substantial amount of revenue that could then pay to repair and upgrade many of our infrastructures like roads and bridges, power plants, damns, etc. Combine that with getting rid of the corporate loopholes for any companies showing a net profit quadruple the loophole or more. So, after paying all bills and wages, if they make 4 or more times the write off they were eligible for previously, they are no longer. This will ensure we can still give help to start up companies, but allow larger, more profitable companies to pay their share. Here is another one. Why don't we tax companies that ship by the shipment based on a percentage of estimated wear and tear on the highways? So those who bring in more semis into their facilities, pay more in logistical taxation. I bet we aren't so far off on our thoughts when it comes to tax write offs for the corporate world and the rich. You are not far off here (Not saying you are anywhere else, lol): Sorry for the size, couldn't get it smaller. Anyhow you can see, you are not far off. A 10% decrease in the bottom 90% since 89'. What I find interesting is that the top 10 percent have not joined up and morphing into one class. And it looks more like two classes. The top 10% rich and the bottom 90% poor. This is indeed alarming. HOWEVER, what I see in this graph is even though the bottom 90% is continually declining, it isn't as sharp, during the republican years. For example. Look at the start of 1989 and into 1993. It is on the slight incline. That is the end of Regan, beginning of Bush Sr. Then it dives more from 1993-2001, during Clinton's admin. Now Look at 2002-2004. There was actually a slight incline. That was when Bush JR was president. You can then follow the increase of the top 1% and it roughly has the same pattern, though does take a good dive during the Clinton admin during his second term. Other than that, the increase line up fairly closely to that of the Dems years in office. So, though I do agree with you that the separation is increasing and alarming, I do not agree this is by the republicans doing alone. It is clear by the graph above, that the dems have at least some of it to answer for if not the majority of it. I'm not sure what you mean by stopping. No I don't think they would, but i'm also not sure of the relevance? Fact is, whether someone needs money or not, if they legally earned it, its theirs to do with as they wish. I'm by no means, rich, but I hold no grudges against the rich for being rich. This isn't about Trump. It isn't about Polozi, or Romney and it isn't about Yang or Warren. This is about idealogies. Or that is my intent. I want to keep current politicians running or in office out of it unless it has to do with their political ideologies. rude, crude, vulgar, stupid, etc, are opinion words based on biased viewpoints that could be used for many politicians on both sides of the isle. Clinton had his dick sucked in the white house for cryin out loud. I don't linger on it, but its a double standard to me when I hear about his crude behavior from people who supported Clinton( I supported Clinton btw.) If we are ever going to break out of this standoff we have before all out civil war and anarchy comes, we need to start calling apples apples and oranges oranges. Stop dismissing one act while condemning another act, when they are the same thing! This craziness that Trump is the evil end all is ridiculous and I remember hearing the same thing about Bush Jr. Guess what? We got through it!!!!!! If people would put as much energy into pushing a legit ideological agenda aimed at improving our future instead of getting people to hate trump.. HE WOULD LOSE THE ELECTION! But I don't want to vote for a party or group of people who show sooo much anger and hostility towards someone, no matter WHAT he has done. It's a sign of biased opinions that feed into illogical actions, more often than not. Would you listen to someone who sounds like they have just been sexually violated, or robbed, or kidnapped? That is what some people sound like when they describe their dislike of Trump, and I don't find it stable. Just look at the Iowa Caucus. For as much as I don't care for Trumps antics.. They are just antics and Dems fall for it every time. I'm tired of the bitching. I'm tired of the end all statements about being evil if you vote for him, i'm tired of the blanket hatred without the ability to debate thoughts. First sentence. Would getting fellatio in the white house be considered having a moral compass? This excuse to hate Trump is soooooo old considering..... Question. Do you think there is a chance he says some of these things because he is amused by the reactions he gets? or if he actually believes everything he says? Ill give you a hint. I say stuff.... well used to say stuff all the time around here that I didn't believe, just to get a rise out of someone who I thought would take it literally and get their feathers ruffled. Didn't really pan out all that well for me and it probably wont for him either, but I don't believe he believes everything he says. I think he is just tossing the lure in the water and waiting for a nibble. But again, it shouldn't be about him He isn't republicanism. He is the current sitting president and can only be so for a max of 5 more years. Even if he is reelected, I do not believe it to be the end of the world, like some would have it seem. That is the beauty of our system. No one gets to sit in power for too long. we all have choices. I'm choosing to try to better understand why you are a democrat and you have provided some good answers. I have enjoyed our conversation so far, so I hope you choose to continue. This real.y isn't about me. It isn't about you either. It's about trying to better understand others whom we have differences of opinions on, rather than choosing a hostile path that further separates us all and continues us on the path of frustration, anger and violence. I originally wanted to try to have this discussion with @Stevenson and @calvin natt, but they chose to not participate do to personal reasons. You have legit opened up to me with your thoughts and ideas on things and I appreciate that. Its only in doing so cna we come close together as humans even when we agree to disagree on certain things. And, I will get you a shirt for sure I promise. When I get the next one it will be in your size and Ill send it off. Thanks for the debate Crandt, I hope we can continue.
I am devoting my time to campaigning for a candidate with a better plan, Elizabeth Warren, and the garden I work with my own two hands. And Lucia of course. All more important than repeating myself here.
sorry if it feels like repeating. I was hoping we can get into deeper details about some things to better understand where your stance lays, specifically. I will get you a shirt soon.
