war tax

ok, let’s refrain from personal attacks only when they are on you. ok… let’s do that. you are ridiculous man.

i dont consider myself fully “jewish” but i do take offense when someone implies that i am anti-semitic, despite some jewish heritage. it seems you dont think that implication to be a personal attack, just put yourself in my shoes and you would be outraged as well.

if i were to practice all the religions of my immediate ancestor i guess i woule be worshiping a god with multiple personality disorder.

my life is just starting out and i can’t rule out a nobel peace prize just yet. heck, just because you’ve got your “life circumstances” that prevent you from doing certain things, doesnt mean everyone else has similar constraints.

how are those pokemon episodes going?

“when someone implies that i am anti-semitic, despite some jewish heritage. it seems you dont think that implication to be a personal attack, just put yourself in my shoes and you would be outraged as well…”

I said OFF-TOPIC personal attacks. And everyone thinks your argument about impunity from being called antisemitic because you have Jewish blood was more childish than Pokemon cards. No one gave it any credence, just like no one cared when Farrakhan proclaimed his supposed Jewish heritage.

Now as for my charge, if you would like to actually understand it, just to take ONE thing you said, your comments on Deut. 20: Every respected, ecumenical religious scholar (I’m including Christians here, and also the Pope, who certainly believes that Christianity is more of a pacifistic religious philosophy than Judaism) would tell you that this chapter does not characterize the Jewish theological attitude toward war (which I know has been expounded upon in Jewish literature). The fact that you went off on a rant about this piece of text to suggest that the Likud party and American Jews (over 50% of whom did NOT support the war in Iraq) are hellbent on war-for-the-sake-of-war or even world domination was too fantastic and scurrilous not to be considered antisemitic. Any one of those scholars would tell you, you are either (1) woefully mistaken or (2) desire to hold such an exteremely false attitude for prejudicial reasons.
I’m sorry, Danh, but I had to call a spade a spade.

And if I implied it before, I’m SAYING it now so you know exactly where I stand: “you said some things which I consider antisemitic.” Are these things absolute for you or just part of a surge of antipathy? I don’t know, but I wouldn’t make it my business to pry into such a deep matters. Maybe it’s not a big deal that you show a touch of the ol’ antisemtism. I mean you can still live a full life. There are no rules about being an antisemite that would prevent a person from showing various degrees of kindness to his neighbors, to children and small animals.

Whatever. You don’t have to agree with me, and I guess if I were you, my mind would try to fix it so that anything suggestive of bigotry was out of the question. Just know I wasn’t being rhetorically expedient. I had to call it as I saw it.

And why are we talking about this now? Because you brought it up on the thread called “war tax.”


I think this sticker must be on MQ’s computer. Although he’s a CAnadian, he comes off as a bit of a space cadet sometimes.

i called you a pussy for not being in iraq despite your immense hatred for saddam, something you alluded to in your post. tangent? maybe, off-topic? nope.

they make pokemon cards?! damn, i didn’t realize you were actually into that shit.

how the fuck do i prove that i’m not anti-semitic other than by knowing myself that I’M NOT ANTI-SEMITIC?! i think i would know whether i hated jews or not. just because you suspect that i’m anti-semitic, that doesn’t mean it’s true.

if i were to say “i suspect you hate blacks because you mentioned the word spades; therefore for the time being you are anti-black. prove to me otherwise.” you would say that’s ridiculous as well. same shit as what you’re saying to me.

as for your war tax, i don’t think it will fly in congress. every entity that would be affected by such a tax would lobby against it.

I just want rich people to pay their FAIR SHARE of tax. They DON’T pay their fair share, with the current tax break for the wealthy.

Anderson said “Let’s say corporations pay taxes in the United States at 40% of their taxable income.”

LOL! You’re supposed to be “schooling” the “communists”, and you try to do it by making up facts and figures. You must have learned that from Bill O’Lielly (the “independant” who is a registered Republican).

This is the only time in US history (that I know of) where there has been a TAX CUT DURING A TIME OF WAR. A war that is supposed to last a long time, according to Bush.

It is typical selfishness on the part of the right-wing. You want a war but you don’t want to pay for it.

That’s okay, your kids and your grand-kids will pay for it.

If you Republican guys are so “fiscally responsible” why has the rate of spending doubled under this right wing Congress and White House?

Thank god for Bush, for getting rid of the balanced budget and growing the government to unprecedented size. These crooks have attached a vaccuum cleaner to the taxpayers’ wallets. But the bill will arrive later, after Bush has left office.

Let someone else clean up the mess! Is that one of the Republican’s tenets?


Poor Donald Trump!

He needs poor and middle class taxpayers to lift some of the weight off his shoulders!

Lumpy, are you really hell bent on defending the extreme left wingers at all costs, instead of leaving the fringe in the gutter? Please, don’t try and change the subject in an attempt to defend this pinko, when what you’re now asking for (increased taxes for the wealthy, or at least not cutting taxes at war time) and what he is asking for (forced subsidizing of industry by banks and increased corporate taxes to 4 times their taxable income) are two entirely different things. The enemy of your enemy is not always your friend. In this case, Monsior Marx would have the entire country in an unemployment line.

Step back and make sure you want to take Comrade Quebec’s side on this, before you change his words to match your own beliefs. Look at what he is asking for and what you are asking for, and they are two separate things, are you sure you really stand behind the Politburo Parrot here? Keep in mind your rant about the wealthy individuals has nothing to do with anything I said about the Japanese Kieritsu’s or the tax rate of corporations.

It so happens that I think there is merit in what you are saying (the tax cut during the war), unfortunately politics and our economic health are also major driving forces behind the timing. You can bet that Bush has learned from his father and wasn?t going to go into the elections only to hear, “it’s the economy stupid,” up into November. I think you know as well as I do that if W were to say we are hell bent on foreign policy but ignore the domestic economy, the administration would hear hell about it from both parties.

And in that respect, you have to admit that growth figures for 3rd quarter, up 8%, ain’t too shabby. While we both may be concerned about the growing government, I think we are both happy for the economic good news. Now as far as tomorrow’s economy, I agree, spending needs to be controlled. A deficit in and of itself isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but I too believe in fiscal responsibility.

Lastly, before you start “loling” at my hypothetical tax rate, be sure you know why you are laughing. I picked 40% because it is a reasonable rate, regardless of what rate you pick, 35%, 40% or 50% (or more), Chairmen Mao, I mean, Chairmen Quebec’s suggested tax rate of 10 times their current taxes would put any firm out of business. Or do you support that idea too? I had figured you smarter than that.

Don’t let your disdain for the rich interfere with what is and what isn’t reasonable for the good of the country. Forcing industry out of business a la Monsior Mao won’t help anybody.

If you want to discuss taxes and the economy, I am happy to, but don’t try and turn my criticism for our lunatic communist into a platform for your views personal views on the wealthy.

danh, I think reasonable people would say that wishfully proclaiming falsehoods about the Jewish religion to saddle Israelis or American Jews with wrongdoing is antisemitic.

On the other hand, most reasonable people would not believe that “calling a spade a spade” is a racist phrase, since the phrase concerns cards and has nothing to do with race. (And this is not a question of punning with that phrase to be offensive, which would be racist). It’s clearly not the “same shit, man” unless you’re stupid beyond belief.

As I said, your judgment seems to get wobbly, both when you get hostile and when your foot gets in your mouth.

Damn it, we need three threads. We need the thread to decide the whole jewish thing. We need a thread to point out the communists, and we need a thread to discuss what is and what isn’t, a “fair” tax rate. Oh I guess a 4th thread for the original question asked by the post.

Additionally, I forgot to mention, Lumpy, if you want me to give accurate income tax figures for companies, that isn’t a problem, just name the company. Unfortunately I have spent the past several weeks with a spreadsheet that lists revenue and expenses for every publically traded company in the US. Believe me, accurately citing exact figures isn’t a problem (although I wish it was, we’re talking an excel sheet with over 5000 rows, it’s enough to make me cry).

What’s wrong with being a communist again?

anderson keep holdin’ down this thread brother

brian

ok so if i were, say, part french; and i didnt agree with the current french administrions policy; and pointed out some french-americans were screwing over americans with policy that seemed more french-oriented than american; and pointed to some french manifesto that talked about how they are the chosen ones; then i would automatically hate all french people?

what if i subsituted french with chinese?

to me it seems like you conveniently used the anti-semitic label to invalidate all my arguments on the other thread and now for the sake of consistency you try to logically derive an explanation for it.

you know what… go on believing i’m antisemitic… just don’t go around spewing it like it is a fact, then i will call you on it again.

Personally, I think the entire tax system needs to be junked in favor of a flat tax! The flat tax would have no loop holes.

Since when is it fair to make someone who makes more money pay a higher percentage? They already pay a higher real dollar number since they make more. Just because we have had this deplorable system for many years does not make it appropriate!

If we had a flat 20% tax rate across the board then the person who makes $50,000 per year would pay $10,000 per year in federal tax. A person making $200,000 dollars per year would pay $40,00 in federal taxes. What’s wrong with this? As you can see the rich person is paying four times more money in taxes than the middle class person. This certainly seems fair to me, why have a higher percentage on top of this?

The current system is highly punitive to the ambitious who desire to work over time, or start and grow a business. When you take away the incentive less people will be attempting to make more money. This actually causes your tax base not to grow!

If you owned a business and had a sales force of ten people how would you best reward them? Would you have a policy where the more sales they produced the less comission that they make? That is in essence what our current tax system does. It punishes you for making more money!

Our economy would be far stronger if we instituted a flat tax system where each individual regardless of his or her income paid the same flat rate percentage.

What President Bush is trying to do by giving tax cuts to everyone, including the middle class, is two fold: increase the tax base. More people with more money in their hands means that there will be more people starting businesses and commerce increases, simple.

The second purpose for the tax cut is to simply increase spending which also helps the economy in a multitude of ways. If you purchase more toys for your children at Wal-Mart or Toys R Us then these company’s will in turn need to employee more people and purchase more goods from the manufacturer.

The interesting part is that there is really no debate on whether the economy has come back. It has in fact comeback! And you must give Bush his due, so far. whether it stays strong or not is yet to be seen, and a debatable point.

To answer your question regarding a war tax on the rich. Naturally, it is a bad idea as that punishes one for accomplishing something good for himself, his family, the economy and thus America.

If the economy keeps growing as it did in the last quarter we will not need a war tax of any kind, on any group!

Danh, it doesn’t get simpler than how you invoked Deut 22 was flat-out incorrect (hysterically delusioned to apply it as you did), shows prejudice, and constitutes antisemitism. You maybe were just feeling like a jerk that day, but that’s what you said and that’s why I’m done talking to your dumb ass.

dumb? far from it you fucking hater.

Taxes suck. However, I am willing to donate to a fund to buy a plane ticket to get danh and Brian Smith together in the same room.

go capatalism!, i mean communism!.

Liberals seem to think that the U.S. government owns our possessions. They also think they have a right to take from the hard-working and give it to the lazy to make things ‘fair’. Well, this isn’t what America was built on. This may be fine for Canada, that economic superpower to the north, but it’s not for us. Our country is about personal responsibility and opportunity.

So, if a war tax is needed, it needs to be spread out among everyone or, better yet, the government needs to reduce spending somewhere else to finance the occupation of Iraq.

Also, Brian, it’s good to see that you’re willing to have an open discussion on an issue. However, you did refer to Danh as anti-Semitic on several occasions, and there really is no reason for name-calling just because someone disagrees with you. Why don’t you apologize for that, so we can all move on?

We will all be better off when we vote the Tax & Spend Republicans out of office.

Under Clinton the government spending shrunk by 0.7 percent. Under President Bush the government spending has grown 21 percent. Congress is also to blame. The president has not vetoed a single bill yet. I believe this is an all-time first.

Of course, with the tax cuts running up huge deficits, he is leaving a mess that some other president will have to straighten out. In my opinion these big spending bills and tax cuts are nothing more than bribes. Bush is trying to buy his way into getting re-elected by giving voters a tax cut, even though we are at war.

Your kids and grandkids will be the ones who pay for these tax cuts, the Iraq war, the medicare bill, etc etc.

There is an energy bill that got shelved, that may make a comeback later. Watch for it. Even a few Republicans voted against the bill, because even they were shocked, at how big the tax breaks were, for the big energy companies. It was just a big gveaway to the oil and energy companies.

Why do we even have a congress? They should just let Bush’s coroporate cronies write the legislation, and quit pretending that any of this is in the public interest. Two reps from Exxon, two from BP (British Petroleum), two from Merck, two from Glaxo, and so on and so forth. Just be honest and admit that we are being governed by big business, under Bush and his toadies in Congress. They bought the last election, and with a 200 million dollar campaign war chest, they are going to try to buy the next one for Bush again, too.

I guess that’s what friends are for.

You guys who think this tax cut is “Bush is just giving me back MY money” really don’t get it. It’s IMPOSSIBLE to have a real tax cut, when the government is raising spending to new highs.

All Bush is doing is running up a huge bill on your kids’ and grandkids’ VISA cards.