IT BEGINS: Cortez Says ‘ULTRA WEALTHY’ Will Pay for Universal Healthcare, Free Education | Sean Hannity

fallenturtle · 2018-08-01T18:46:55.422Z

I’ve yet to hear of anyone under a progressive tax system that would prefer to be lower income vs rich to avoid the “penalty” of a higher tax rate.

Interested · 2018-08-05T18:36:54.730Z

Besides, Medicare isn’t free! Seniors pay about $140/mo. taken out of Social Security benefits and that covers 80% of Hospital, medical. So they pay about $175 for a second Policy to cover the other 20%. Then They pay about $35 mo. for prescription drug coverage. That’s about $350/mo. And, guess what! THATS PER PERSON! that’s worse than Obamacare for the Average family!

enubus18 · 2018-08-06T01:01:57.535Z

Liberal superstar??? She got 17,000 votes in a low turnout district. If you listen to her, she she should ask for a refund on her college education at Boston college. she knows nothing, she learned nothing and she was propagandized for 4 years, with loony Bernie Commie claptrap!

koushi_shinigami · 2018-08-09T12:26:53.298Z

Sounds to me like she qualifies as a star of the libs.

koushi_shinigami · 2018-08-09T12:30:48.747Z

mobulis:

Because a flat tax isn’t fair.

Wht not?

…

mobulis · 2018-08-09T14:28:02.779Z

koushi_shinigami:

Wht not?

…

Because it doesn’t hurt equally.

koushi_shinigami · 2018-08-09T16:11:21.145Z

mobulis:

Because it doesn’t hurt equally.

And that is the purpose of taxation – to cause pain?

mobulis · 2018-08-09T16:31:59.245Z

koushi_shinigami:

And that is the purpose of taxation – to cause pain?

With a flat tax the richer you are the less it will affect you, and that’s wrong.

koushi_shinigami · 2018-08-09T17:18:24.948Z

mobulis:

With a flat tax the richer you are the less it will affect you, and that’s wrong.

If the country received all the funds it needs to satisfy all its financial obligations, then why would it be wrong to ‘affect richer people less than poorer people’? This makes no sense unless your goal is to punish success due to class envy.

With a flat tax the wealthy will automatically be paying more money in taxes than poor people. Why do you want to financially hurt them?

mobulis · 2018-08-09T17:59:25.934Z

koushi_shinigami:

If the country received all the funds it needs to satisfy all its financial obligations, then why would it be wrong to ‘affect richer people less than poorer people’? This makes no sense unless your goal is to punish success due to class envy.

With a flat tax the wealthy will automatically be paying more money in taxes than poor people. Why do you want to financially hurt them?

If after paying taxes their lifestyle has not changed then their taxes are not too high.

koushi_shinigami · 2018-08-09T18:10:38.299Z

mobulis:

If after paying taxes their lifestyle has not changed then their taxes are not too high.

You are not answering the question.

Why do you want to see their lifestyle change? Would that somehow be beneficial to the country? If so then how?

mobulis · 2018-08-09T19:11:57.860Z

koushi_shinigami:

mobulis:

If after paying taxes their lifestyle has not changed then their taxes are not too high.

You are not answering the question.

Why do you want to see their lifestyle change? Would that somehow be beneficial to the country? If so then how?

Whatever the percentage the tax is, any detrimental effect will be greater the less wealth you have. So the rich can afford to be taxed more without detrimental effects.

koushi_shinigami · 2018-08-09T19:17:34.347Z

Why do you want there to be a detrimental effect on anyone? In this case you want to penalize the wealthy. Why? Are you really that jealous of the success of others? When you go out to dinner and you split the check, do you divide it according to the income of each person there?

Would you be in favor of a tax system in which everyone ended up with the same result. After taxes everyone has $12,000 income for the year. those who earn less would receive money from the government, those who make more would give all above $12,000 in taxes. In your mind would that be a fair system?

mobulis · 2018-08-09T19:32:00.505Z

koushi_shinigami:

Why do you want there to be a detrimental effect on anyone? In this case you want to penalize the wealthy. Why? Are you really that jealous of the success of others? When you go out to dinner and you split the check, do you divide it according to the income of each person there?

Would you be in favor of a tax system in which everyone ended up with the same result. After taxes everyone has $12,000 income for the year. those who earn less would receive money from the government, those who make more would give all above $12,000 in taxes. In your mind would that be a fair system?

No I wouldn’t, but I am in favor of a income cap of one million a year after taxes.

koushi_shinigami · 2018-08-09T19:38:36.834Z

mobulis:

No I wouldn’t

Why not? Everyone would have the same results from their labor. Wouldn’t that be fair? And the rich would suffer more under that system. Isn’t that what you want to happen?

blueapplepaste · 2018-08-09T19:51:01.636Z

Semantics really.

Regardless it was terrible. They never should have capitulated and negotiated with the GOP in good faith with the GOP in the end picking up their toys and going home.

It’s time for single payer. Everyone else does it for half the price and better outcomes.

mobulis · 2018-08-09T19:59:17.995Z

koushi_shinigami:

mobulis:

No I wouldn’t

Why not? Everyone would have the same results from their labor. Wouldn’t that be fair? And the rich would suffer more under that system. Isn’t that what you want to happen?

Because the cap is one million, like most cons you seem be unable to understand the concept of moderation.

koushi_shinigami · 2018-08-09T21:10:23.098Z

mobulis:

Because the cap is one million, like most cons you seem be unable to understand the concept of moderation.

In your imaginary scenario I guess it is. But sometimes clarity can be better seen at the limits. If it is not fair to take everything over $12,000 why is it fair to take everything over $1 million? I dare say the real answer is you live in the first scenario, but not in the second scenario. So it wouldn’t be your ox that’s getting gored.

And like most liberals you worry about things that are really none of your business. What another person makes has no bearing on your life what so ever. But if someone is making more than some arbitrary limit you want to set, you want to confiscate it.

I was asking to find out if you have a good reason for wanting to limit the success of other people whom you don’t even know. As expected, you don’t, and I doubt you’ve given the matter enough serious though to know why you feel the way you do. To you, your position just “feels” right. What it really boils down to is envy and class jealousy.

LouC · 2018-08-09T22:19:17.410Z

blueapplepaste:

Semantics really.

Regardless it was terrible. They never should have capitulated and negotiated with the GOP in good faith with the GOP in the end picking up their toys and going home.

It’s time for single payer. Everyone else does it for half the price and better outcomes.

SOCIALISM

Egads we can’t have that…no…no…no…No matter how much better it might or would be in the long run.

blueapplepaste · 2018-08-10T18:04:25.025Z

LouC:

blueapplepaste:

Semantics really.

Regardless it was terrible. They never should have capitulated and negotiated with the GOP in good faith with the GOP in the end picking up their toys and going home.

It’s time for single payer. Everyone else does it for half the price and better outcomes.

SOCIALISM

Egads we can’t have that…no…no…no…No matter how much better it might or would be in the long run.

The hilarious part if Trump came out tomorrow and said he was proposing single payer the Trumpsters would immediately get on board spouting how it’s gonnasavr is money and Trump is looking out for the little guy.