Crux Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 Set the bar for Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZimZam Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 He sums it up pretty well. "The 1980 field in comparison to 2012 reminds me of the recent LSU vs. Florida game...the score was LSU 41- Florida 11." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted October 15, 2011 Author Share Posted October 15, 2011 He's not a moron, that's all I'm saying. What is it about the $9.99 plan that would convince you of this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted October 15, 2011 Author Share Posted October 15, 2011 The most qualified candidate we had in recent memory was Bush 41, and all the press did was lambaste him as being a "wimp". And he was no idealogue, he did raise taxes, did he not? "Read my lips", then bam, y'all got hijacked! Who could be at the bottom of this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlpineK Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 Walk away form the board and I missed 2 whole pages of in depth research Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassgowkiss Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Yes, the plan 999 should be called plan 666 as it is straight out of hell. My last year emergency appendectomy would have been taxed at 9% under this mental abortion. I mean wtf? Taxing food, pharmaceuticals and medical services!? This guy is seriously fucked in the head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassgowkiss Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 I called Herman Cain a moron. Prove me wrong! He has an M.S. in Computer Science from Purdue. He also worked in ballistics in the US Navy, and ran a corporation. And you? did you learn all these facts while sucking his cock? good boy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Most every other first world nation has a VAT or GST. Why not America? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted October 17, 2011 Author Share Posted October 17, 2011 Because we don't have the kind of first world programs, like universal health care, that might help to offset the increased burden taxes like that would impose on those least able to bear it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassgowkiss Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Most every other first world nation has a VAT or GST. Why not America? Basic food items, as well as medical services and prescription drugs are not taxed through GST as far as I remember. Under this stupid plan, last year I would have had to pay additional $1800 for my surgery! Fucking great idea! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Most every other first world nation has a VAT or GST. Why not America? Basic food items, as well as medical services and prescription drugs are not taxed through GST as far as I remember. You remember wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassgowkiss Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 when i had to get stitches in Jasper I did not pay GST on my bill. You also don't pay GST on items like bred, cheese or milk, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 You also don't pay GST on items like bred, cheese or milk, right? Wrong http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/bsnss/tpcs/gst-tps/gnrl/txbl/xmptgds-eng.html You don't pay GST on medical services only because the government is paying for these so ultimately it would be taxing itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 The most qualified candidate we had in recent memory was Bush 41, Ron Paul baby!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZimZam Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 What is GST and what does that go towards? Is a VAT only for lux items or for all purchases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 GST = goods and services tax (Canadian). VAT = value added tax (European). Otherwise same thing. Economists consider them "fairer" than income taxes since they tax consumption rather than income. Given two rich dudes, one whom spends a lot on mansions and yachts and bling, and the other who doesn't, the dude who spends a lot pays more tax. Also the rich tend to spend more than the poor and so pay more tax. JayB and j_b can probably argue about that summary for at least another 10 pages now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Aren't sales taxes (i.e. taxes on consumption) regressive? If you calculate basic living costs, the rich guy will pay fewer taxes (as a percentage of his income) than the poor guy (who's sales taxes will represent a larger slice of his income) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whirlwind Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 My Favorite is when asked to site his sources, and or tell us how his plan does what he says its supose to do, he says: "I'm not at liberty to do so at this time" like it some bigg fucking secret. 999 where the poor and lower middle class that spend 80-100% of there income now pay 18% tax and the weathly that make most of there money off capital gains which for some reason is not considered income, pay next to nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whirlwind Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 The most qualified candidate we had in recent memory was Bush 41, Ron Paul baby!!!!! some of his socail issue stances are just plan scary, but i would vote him in to end the wars, fix/get rid of the fed, and end the drug war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Aren't sales taxes (i.e. taxes on consumption) regressive? If you calculate basic living costs, the rich guy will pay fewer taxes (as a percentage of his income) than the poor guy (who's sales taxes will represent a larger slice of his income) Usually the poor get a refund for their sales tax and the rich don't. Also, it's only regressive if you ignore the differences in price for goods purchased. Someone who buys a $5.00 pair of sweatpants at Walmart and pays a 10% tax pays 50 cents in tax. Someone who buys a $500 pair of designer jeans at a New York boutique pays $50 bucks in tax. Percentage is the same but the second person pays 100 times the amount of tax as the first, by choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted October 17, 2011 Author Share Posted October 17, 2011 50 bucks for someone making 500,000 a year means less than 50 cents to someone making 15,000 that has to feed their kids that night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 The most qualified candidate we had in recent memory was Bush 41, Ron Paul baby!!!!! some of his socail issue stances are just plan scary, but i would vote him in to end the wars, fix/get rid of the fed, and end the drug war. Did you know that the president doesn't have the power to get rid of the fed or unilaterally abolish drug laws? I doubt congress would be on board with either of these ideas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66114.html?fb_ref=.Tpx7tnaHWrU.like&fb_source=home_oneline Ron Paul’s opinions about cutting the budget are well-known, but on Monday, he got specific: the Texas congressman laid out a budget blueprint for deep and far-reaching cuts to federal spending, including the elimination of five cabinet-level departments and the drawdown of American troops fighting overseas. There’s even a symbolic readjustment of the president’s own salary to put it in line with the average American salary. Paul will elaborate on the plan during an afternoon speech in Las Vegas ahead of Tuesday’s debate. He’ll say that his plan for $1 trillion in cuts will create a balanced federal budget by the third year of his presidency. “It’s the only plan offered by a presidential candidate that actually balances the budget and begins to pay down the debt,” top Paul adviser Jesse Benton said in a statement ahead of the speech. “And it’s the only plan being offered that tries to reign in the Federal Reserve and get inflation under control.” Many of the ideas in Paul’s 11-page “Plan to Restore America” are familiar from Paul’s staunch libertarianism, as well as tea party favorites like eliminating the departments of education and energy. But Paul goes further: he’ll propose immediately freezing spending by numerous government agencies at 2006 levels, the last time Republicans had complete control of the federal budget, and drastically reducing spending elsewhere. The EPA would see a 30 percent cut, the Food and Drug Administration would see one of 40 percent and foreign aid would be zeroed out immediately. He’d also take an ax to Pentagon funding for wars. Medicaid, the children’s health insurance program, food stamps, family support programs and the children’s nutrition program would all be block-granted to the states and removed from the mandatory spending column of the federal budget. Some functions of eliminated departments, such as Pell Grants, would be continued elsewhere in the federal bureaucracy. And in a noticeable nod to seniors during an election year when Social Security’s become an issue within the Republican primary, the campaign says that plan “honors our promise to our seniors and veterans, while allowing young workers to opt out.” The federal workforce would be reduced by 10 percent, and the president’s pay would be cut to $39,336 — a level that the Paul document notes is “approximately equal to the median personal income of the American worker.” Paul would also make far-reaching changes to federal tax policy, reducing the top corporate income tax rate to 15 percent, eliminating capital gains and dividends taxes, and allowing for repatriation of overseas capital without tax penalties. All Bush-era tax cuts would be extended. And like the rest of his GOP rivals, Paul would repeal President Barack Obama’s health care reform law, along with the Dodd-Frank financial regulatory reform law enacted last year. Paul, a longtime Federal Reserve critic, would also push a full audit of the central bank, as well as legislation to “strengthen the dollar and stabilize inflation.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted October 17, 2011 Author Share Posted October 17, 2011 And what about this sounds good? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassgowkiss Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 And what about this sounds good? Massive oil spill due to closing Energy Department, maybe toss a nuclear meltdown here and there, or reversing to the age of illiteracy due to dissolving Department of education? mmmmm..... good! Ron Paul is a lunatic. This guy is just plain mental. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.