An Analysis of Hate

[dnf777]

I find it VERY offensive when MY flag is flown upside down or walked on, assistance programs are used and abused by 'illegals' while our deficit soars.

I hope you weren't afloat when you were offended by the national ensign being flown upside down. That is an international maritime distress signal. Not sure how the French and Italians signal distress.

[YardleyLabs]

I actually think the idea of a VAT is a great idea the problem is I have a hard time believing that either set of parties would be willing to get rid of income taxes in favor of a VAT. It would just be an add on to what we currently pay.

I don't really think that a VAT offers a viable or desirable alternative to the income tax. I would be more interested in seeing it replace corporation taxes. That would eliminate any potential double taxation of corporate profits and thereby eliminate all justification for treating capital gains and dividend income differently from income earned through labor.

Tax all income, regardless of source, using a single set of rates. It doesn't matter if your income comes from salary, welfare checks, social security, unemployment, capital gains, inheritance, or any other source, it is still income and should be taxed. I also believe there should only be one set of rates, rather than different taxes for Medicare, social security, unemployment and income. Since the one thing we never want to discourage is employment, all payroll taxes should be eliminated. Finally, all deductions other than legitimate expenses to produce income should be eliminated. Just as all income is income, all consumption is consumption. Why should the government prefer one over the other?

Now, some argue for a proportional tax (the flat tax) and others for a progressive tax. Personally, I favor a mildly progressive tax. However, what we have now, when all taxes paid are taken into consideration, is a mildly regressive tax structure (Conservatives only like to focus on the Federal income tax and ignore all those other taxes). That is, people with lower incomes are paying a slightly higher percentage of their incomes in taxes than those with higher incomes. The gap is even greater with you compare the percentages paid by middle income earners with those in the highest income categories.

[depittydawg]

I don't really think that a VAT offers a viable or desirable alternative to the income tax. I would be more interested in seeing it replace corporation taxes. That would eliminate any potential double taxation of corporate profits and thereby eliminate all justification for treating capital gains and dividend income differently from income earned through labor.

Tax all income, regardless of source, using a single set of rates. It doesn't matter if your income comes from salary, welfare checks, social security, unemployment, capital gains, inheritance, or any other source, it is still income and should be taxed. I also believe there should only be one set of rates, rather than different taxes for Medicare, social security, unemployment and income. Since the one thing we never want to discourage is employment, all payroll taxes should be eliminated. Finally, all deductions other than legitimate expenses to produce income should be eliminated. Just as all income is income, all consumption is consumption. Why should the government prefer one over the other?

Now, some argue for a proportional tax (the flat tax) and others for a progressive tax. Personally, I favor a mildly progressive tax. However, what we have now, when all taxes paid are taken into consideration, is a mildly regressive tax structure (Conservatives only like to focus on the Federal income tax and ignore all those other taxes). That is, people with lower incomes are paying a slightly higher percentage of their incomes in taxes than those with higher incomes. The gap is even greater with you compare the percentages paid by middle income earners with those in the highest income categories.

Right on the money... (pun intended)

[Hew]

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul young
i love this country and i'll be damned if i'll be lectured by anyone about how being concerned for my fellow citizens well-being and caring enough to help provide some basic necessities to them is un-american. or that taxation for the purpose of maintaining the form of government that makes all this possible is "stealing". especially a non-citizen.-Paul

Ummm...that was kind of my point. If she was lecturing on the joys of liberal progressivism you and Buzz wouldn't say boo about her citizenship.

BTW, in the past you have thrown yourself on the ground shrieking in anguish because you perceived that some lefties here had their patriotism questioned, and in the above post you define was is and is not "un-american" (sic) for the rest of us. You don't see some inconsistency there?

Hmmmm. Paul? Was hoping you'd defend your proclaimation of what is/is not American. Just crickets chirpin'.

[Hew]

I hope you weren't afloat when you were offended by the national ensign being flown upside down. That is an international maritime distress signal.

That should have been prefaced with, "Well ya know, Sammy...."

[paul young]

i really didn't think i had anything to "defend"..........

i know what you think of my beliefs and that doesn't bother me in the least. you're a fellow citizen and that is your right.

the post that i made was not in reference to anyone except luvmylabs. don't make make it more than it is.-Paul

[Hew]

i really didn't think i had anything to "defend"..........

You have, on more than one occasion on this board, gotten the vapors because you thought someone's patriotism had been questioned. Yet you feel qualified to opine on what is and isn't "un-American." Most people wouldn't draw much of a distinction between qiestioning someone's patriotism or telling someone their thoughts are un-American. Whether you want to defend that inconsistency or not is certainly your perogative. I guess you've chosen to go with "not."

Personally, I think it is ok in certain circumstances to brand a thought/speech/writing as "un-American" or a person as unpatriotic. That's the consistent, non-hypocritical position.

[dnf777]

That should have been prefaced with, "Well ya know, Sammy...."

Ya got me on that one, Coach!

Flag etiquette is one of my passions. Most people think is disrespectful to fly the flag upside down. Not necessarily. What is disrespectful, and we see it all the time, is athletes or rally-goers wrapping themselves in the flag as if it were a pancho or shawl. There's only one time in a select group of people's lives that you should be draped in a flag, and its not a desirable position to be in for those of us still in the vertical position.

later

[david gibson]

Ya got me on that one, Coach!

Flag etiquette is one of my passions. Most people think is disrespectful to fly the flag upside down. Not necessarily. What is disrespectful, and we see it all the time, is athletes or rally-goers wrapping themselves in the flag as if it were a pancho or shawl. There's only one time in a select group of people's lives that you should be draped in a flag, and its not a desirable position to be in for those of us still in the vertical position.

later

so other than when in distress when is it ok to fly the flag upside down?

ok, if i am in distress, and all i have is a flag, i would definitely fly it upside down or even burn it if i needed smoke to get attention.

other than that, when is it cool?

[dnf777]

Its not okay, unless its used as a distress symbol. And its not okay to burn it unless it has been properly dismantled and ceremoniously burned after decomissioning. The BoyScout pack in your area will collect damaged and soiled or disrepaired flags for proper disposal, as will the VFW or any active or reserve military post.