Hey Fox News. The Democrat Leadership does not want to end capitalism in the U.S

fallenturtle · October 7, 2020, 7:57pm

You bitch and moan about an unwillingness to discuss and have a mature dialog and then ignore the majority of my response. Well done, sir.

johnwk2 · October 7, 2020, 8:02pm

Yet another deflection and obfuscation.

fallenturtle · October 7, 2020, 8:03pm

lol, I broke your dialog tree

johnwk2 · October 7, 2020, 8:07pm

Oh, to the contrary my friend. I gave a solution! You ignore the solution and continue with deflections and obfuscations.

fallenturtle · October 7, 2020, 8:08pm

I’m sorry if I forgot about it. Do you recall where it was?

johnwk2 · October 7, 2020, 8:48pm

I posted the solution [on how to end taxing a working person’s property] many, many times. The most recent being:

LINK

fallenturtle · October 8, 2020, 4:57am

Any idea how much money that would bring in a year? Do you think the rich might be able to find a way around it?

Yes, Bernie Sanders! There is income inequality. So, freaken what?

Well, to answer your question, there was a time in our country when everyone, even the unemployed, were expected and required to contribute an equal share in meeting the expenses of government. A wonderful example of this principle is exhibited in the public laws of Maryland’s Dorchester County, under which all able bodied residents of the county above twenty and under fifty years of age were “compelled to labor two days at least in every year in repairing the roads of said county, with the privilege, however, of furnishing a substitute or paying to the road supervisors seventy-five cents for each day such person may be summoned to labor, the money thus paid to be expended in repairing the roads.”

And the law went on to indicate that “anyone neglecting or refusing to perform such labor, or to provide a substitute, or to pay seventy-five cents per day for each and every day he may be summoned to work, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon trial and conviction before a Justice of the Peace, shall be fined seventy-five cents for each day`s delinquency and costs, and shall stand committed until the fine and costs are paid.”___ SEE SHORT vs. STATE OF MARYLAND, decided February 27th, 1895, upholding the law and not violating (a) the 13th or 14th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, or (b) the 40th section of Art. 3 of the Constitution of Maryland.

Are you suggesting we have forced labor that only the rich can get out of?

Yes, Bernie Sanders! There is income inequality. So, freaken what?

What I advocate is an end to a federal tax calculated from a working person’s earned wage. In its place a federal tax imposed on specifically selected articles of luxury would be far more fairer and is in harmony with our founders thinking.

Selecting specifically chosen articles of consumption, and placing a specific amount of tax on each article determined to be a luxury, not only protects a wage earner from an onerous tax, but allows each citizen to contribute their share of taxes in the manner they spend their money.

This is eluded to in Federalist No 21:

”The amount to be contributed by each citizen will in a degree be at his own option, and can be regulated by an attention to his resources. The rich may be extravagant, the poor can be frugal; and private oppression may always be avoided by a judicious selection of objects proper for such impositions. “

It should also be noted that the use of this type of tax allows the market place to determine the limit of tax placed upon each article.

”It is a signal advantage of taxes on articles of consumption that they contain in their own nature a security against excess. They prescribe their own limit; which cannot be exceeded without defeating the end proposed, that is, an extension of the revenue. When applied to this object, the saying is as just as it is witty, that, "in political arithmetic, two and two do not always make four .’’ If duties are too high, they lessen the consumption; the collection is eluded; and the product to the treasury is not so great as when they are confined within proper and moderate bounds. This forms a complete barrier against any material oppression of the citizens by taxes of this class, and is itself a natural limitation of the power of imposing them.” ___ Fed. No. 21

Hamilton’s reasoning was proven correct when Congress decided to place an outrageous 10 percent “luxury” tax on a number of articles considered to be luxury under the “Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990”

SEC. 11221. TAXES ON LUXURY ITEMS.

“`SEC. 4001. PASSENGER VEHICLES.

`(a) IMPOSITION OF TAX- There is hereby imposed on the 1st retail sale of any passenger vehicle a tax equal to 10 percent of the price for which so sold to the extent such price exceeds $30,000.

`SEC. 4002. BOATS.

`(a) IMPOSITION OF TAX- There is hereby imposed on the 1st retail sale of any boat a tax equal to 10 percent of the price for which so sold to the extent such price exceeds $100,000.

`SEC. 4003. AIRCRAFT.

`(a) IMPOSITION OF TAX- There is hereby imposed on the 1st retail sale of any aircraft a tax equal to 10 percent of the price for which so sold to the extent such price exceeds $250,000.

`SEC. 4006. JEWELRY.

`(a) IMPOSITION OF TAX- There is hereby imposed on the 1st retail sale of any jewelry a tax equal to 10 percent of the price for which so sold to the extent such price exceeds $10,000.

`SEC. 4007. FURS.

`(a) IMPOSITION OF TAX- There is hereby imposed on the 1st retail sale of any furs a tax equal to 10 percent of the price for which so sold to the extent such price exceeds $10,000

The luxury tax, particularly on boats, was found so onerous that sales dropped dramatically and the tax was repealed the following year!

I am convinced our Founders got the tax system right.

If a luxury tax leads to less luxury items being bought, then it seems unlikely such a tax could sustain our currently spending. Are you proposing cutting things too?

johnwk2 · October 8, 2020, 4:00pm

I see you have overlooked Hamilton’s answer to your question. Read his answer and then get back to me.

I thought we were trying to find a way to avoid oppressing the poor with a notoriously evil direct tax which confiscates the property working people have earned by the sweat of their labor.

JWK

You bet Joe Biden will win. Every rat will find their wat to the voting booth to get their piece of “free government cheese”.

fallenturtle · October 8, 2020, 4:33pm

Hamilton knew what you were proposing to cut in 2020?

What are you talking about? That’s why we have a progressive income tax.

Cratic3947 · October 8, 2020, 5:34pm

Obama didn’t run on Obama care. So you can’t believe a word dems say when running.

Suddenly school shootings will start up again and they will all say “this can’t go on” and take away your rights.

DNC = CCP

fallenturtle · October 8, 2020, 6:53pm

What was the healthcare plan that Obama ran on if not Obamacare?

johnwk2 · October 8, 2020, 7:48pm

He ran on a healthcare plan which allowed people to keep their existing healthcare plan and doctor.

.

Do you really have that short of a memory, fallenturtle?

JWK

“From each according to their ability to pay, to each who needs help living a decent life.” ___ fallenturtle

fallenturtle · October 8, 2020, 7:58pm

I guess I missed the memo that declared that the proto-healthcare plan that Obama ran on can’t be referred to as Obamacare because its not exactly the same as what was passed. In fact, he also ran on a public option and making the mandate only apply to children so its kind of ironic that what we call Obamacare is actually less of what Obama wanted than what he campaigned on.

"I contend Fox News personalities are not accurate " -johnwk2

johnwk2 · October 8, 2020, 8:38pm

What I actually stated was:

I contend Fox News personalities are not accurate when they say Democrat Leaders want to end capitalism in the United States and refer to our system as “capitalism”. .

johnwk2 · October 8, 2020, 9:32pm

Now, what does that have to do with your question? “What was the healthcare plan that Obama ran on if not Obamacare?” A question which I answered as follows:

He ran on a healthcare plan which allowed people to keep their existing healthcare plan and doctor.

Do you really have that short of a memory, fallenturtle?

JWK

fallenturtle · October 8, 2020, 9:37pm

And I responded. That’s the post you got upset with the quote on.

Do you really have that short of a memory, johnwk2?

johnwk2 · October 8, 2020, 9:43pm

Unlike you, I remember the healthcare plan that Obama ran on which he repeatedly told the people would allow them to keep their existing health care plans and doctors.

JWK

The socialist controlled Democrat Party Leadership is known for accusing others of what they themselves are guilty of.

fallenturtle · October 8, 2020, 9:45pm

Why are you repeating yourself? Did I claim he didn’t say that?

FTN

The Democratic Party leadership is mostly made up of mixed economy liberals. Using both italics and bold is redundant. Bacon is tasty.

johnwk2 · October 9, 2020, 3:00pm

JWK

The only difference between a thief and a socialist and democrat voters is, socialists and democrat voters use government force to steal their neighbor’s property for their personal economic needs. A thief has the you-know-what-ski to do his/her own stealing.

johnwk2 · October 9, 2020, 4:46pm

Is your memory failing you again? I posted nothing about “Biden/Burisma” in this thread. What I did post in this thread and you just responded to as “pulled … out of thin air” was about Obanacare and how Obama repeatedly told the people would allow them to keep their existing health care plans and doctors.

HERE IS THE POST AND EVIDENCE

JWK