Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Down To The Wire 2012 >>POLITICS<<
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 61 of 143 (676747)
10-25-2012 8:11 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by Phat
10-25-2012 7:34 AM


Re: A House Divided
I sometimes wonder whether America is so culturally diverse that it is impossible to be meaningfully democratic.

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Phat, posted 10-25-2012 7:34 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Phat, posted 10-25-2012 8:18 AM Larni has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 62 of 143 (676750)
10-25-2012 8:18 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by Larni
10-25-2012 8:11 AM


Re: A House Divided
What does it mean to be "meaningfully democratic"? My point is that we currently have division, consensus is tentative and shaky, and unity is needed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Larni, posted 10-25-2012 8:11 AM Larni has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Jon, posted 10-25-2012 9:13 AM Phat has not replied
 Message 64 by jar, posted 10-25-2012 9:32 AM Phat has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 63 of 143 (676767)
10-25-2012 9:13 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by Phat
10-25-2012 8:18 AM


Re: A House Divided
What does it mean to be "meaningfully democratic"?
Where a majority of people actually benefit from having a 'majority rules' system. When there are so many large and diverse groups, it becomes possible to enact policies that actually favor none of them; or worse, it becomes easier to enact policies that only favor the most powerful of them, regardless of their actual representation in the group.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Phat, posted 10-25-2012 8:18 AM Phat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by onifre, posted 10-25-2012 11:49 AM Jon has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(2)
Message 64 of 143 (676774)
10-25-2012 9:32 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by Phat
10-25-2012 8:18 AM


Do we need unity?
Unity is easy to achieve, all that is needed is a Monarch or Dictator. My way or the highway.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Phat, posted 10-25-2012 8:18 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Phat, posted 10-25-2012 2:14 PM jar has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 65 of 143 (676776)
10-25-2012 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by Rahvin
10-24-2012 7:29 PM


("lower taxes" and then "close loopholes" to make the whole thing "budget neutral?" If it doesn't do anything to the budget then why bother enacting it?)
I think its for the medium to smaller companies that don't, or cannot, take advantage of the loopholes. High taxes does stifle newer business development and if you can promote that kind of growth then you can get more jobs n'stuff.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Rahvin, posted 10-24-2012 7:29 PM Rahvin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Jon, posted 10-25-2012 9:47 AM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied
 Message 67 by Theodoric, posted 10-25-2012 10:01 AM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 70 by onifre, posted 10-25-2012 11:55 AM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 80 by Omnivorous, posted 10-25-2012 1:33 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 66 of 143 (676780)
10-25-2012 9:47 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by New Cat's Eye
10-25-2012 9:38 AM


High taxes does stifle newer business development
Who says we need newer business development?

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-25-2012 9:38 AM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


(1)
Message 67 of 143 (676785)
10-25-2012 10:01 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by New Cat's Eye
10-25-2012 9:38 AM


Higher taxes historically do not stifle business
High taxes does stifle newer business development
Conventional wisdom but not based on facts. The highest growth period for business and productivity was during period of highest taxes in the US. You can research this, cuz you will just whine and bitch if I post a link.
You say that can't be true. It is look at the figures.
How can that be?
It is smart tax policy. It is using tax policy to stimulate growth and investment.
If corporations and individuals know they are going to be hit with a huge marginal tax rate they do things to lower the income.
For example, XYZ is going to get hit with a 70% tax rate for profits over 100 million. It is going to show profits of $150 million. So what does a smart company do? It spends 50 million on business expansion. Why give government 70% when they can reinvest it in themselves?
Instead of paying the CEO an extra 10 million a smart tax policy incentivizes the company to give the money to people lower down the totem pole or make capital investments.
You say that wont work. History has shown you wrong already.
Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-25-2012 9:38 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-25-2012 10:07 AM Theodoric has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 68 of 143 (676786)
10-25-2012 10:07 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by Theodoric
10-25-2012 10:01 AM


Re: Higher taxes historically do not stifle business
You say that can't be true.
Quote me saying that.
The highest growth period for business and productivity was during period of highest taxes in the US.
That doesn't mean the taxes caused the growth. And what kinds of businesses were growing? The larger the business the less the tax is going to impact their growth. And those are the ones that more take advantage of the loopholes too.
Smaller businesses have it harder and relieving some of the taxes would help them.
Instead of paying the CEO an extra 10 million
Yeah, I'm not talking about those kinds of companies.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Theodoric, posted 10-25-2012 10:01 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Theodoric, posted 10-25-2012 1:17 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 69 of 143 (676809)
10-25-2012 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by Jon
10-25-2012 9:13 AM


Re: A House Divided
Where a majority of people actually benefit from having a 'majority rules' system. When there are so many large and diverse groups, it becomes possible to enact policies that actually favor none of them; or worse, it becomes easier to enact policies that only favor the most powerful of them, regardless of their actual representation in the group.
Well we've had the civil rights movement, and the anti-discrimination laws. That's seemed to work due to majority rule. If we go back far enough we see many cases where this was the case.
Freedoms have become too diverse now perhaps, and there's still a lot of catching up to do. But it does seem like overall progress has been made and it's been mostly due to majority rule, or rather the eventual lead up to majority rule.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Jon, posted 10-25-2012 9:13 AM Jon has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Rahvin, posted 10-25-2012 12:53 PM onifre has replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


(3)
Message 70 of 143 (676812)
10-25-2012 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by New Cat's Eye
10-25-2012 9:38 AM


High taxes does stifle newer business development and if you can promote that kind of growth then you can get more jobs n'stuff.
Don't buy into that bullshit. Taxes have only gone up since they were introduced into the system and businesses have grown enormously.
Higher taxes has never ever in history stifled new business.
- Oni
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-25-2012 9:38 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-25-2012 12:45 PM onifre has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 71 of 143 (676834)
10-25-2012 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by onifre
10-25-2012 11:55 AM


I'm not saying that businesses cannot succeed with high taxes. I'm saying that a reduction in these taxes could help small to medium sized business grow by reducing their cost to operate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by onifre, posted 10-25-2012 11:55 AM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Rahvin, posted 10-25-2012 12:55 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 75 by onifre, posted 10-25-2012 1:03 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied
 Message 78 by Theodoric, posted 10-25-2012 1:21 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


(1)
Message 72 of 143 (676838)
10-25-2012 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by onifre
10-25-2012 11:49 AM


Re: A House Divided
Well we've had the civil rights movement, and the anti-discrimination laws. That's seemed to work due to majority rule.
Not quite.
Civil rights have had to go through the court system against popular public opinion before becoming endorsed by the majority.
Miscegenation laws were not eliminated due to majority rule - they were ruled unconstitutional by the courts.
Anti-homosexuality laws and anti-sodomy laws were not eliminated due to majority rule - they were ruled unconstitutional by the courts.
School segregation...well, you get the picture.
Sometimes majority rule works - but the "two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner" metaphor is accurate: majority rule leads to the persecution of minorities. That's why the US system isn't a straight democracy, and also why it's not just a representative republic - it's a constitutional representative republic, which means that there is a mechanism by which an oppressed minority can circumvent majority rule to force equal treatment.
overall progress has been made and it's been mostly due to majority rule, or rather the eventual lead up to majority rule.
The key word being eventual. Only after the majority is first forced to give way to the oppressed minority, and then gets to stew for a while and notices that not only did the sky not fall, but those minority folks aren't so bad.
The pattern is that the courts force the majority to bend knee...and the forced equal treatment, over a generation or two, causes a greater social integration whereby the newer generations have grown up thinking that equality is the natural order (which it should have been all along), and become the majority as their bigot elders die off.
Forgive me if this does not cause me to cheer the glories of democracy.

The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.
- Francis Bacon
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus
"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of
variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the
outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by onifre, posted 10-25-2012 11:49 AM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by onifre, posted 10-25-2012 1:28 PM Rahvin has replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 73 of 143 (676840)
10-25-2012 12:55 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by New Cat's Eye
10-25-2012 12:45 PM


I'm not saying that businesses cannot succeed with high taxes. I'm saying that a reduction in these taxes could help small to medium sized business grow by reducing their cost to operate.
That depends entirely on the taxes. A tax increase on profits over $100 million will not affect a new start-up business, for instance. Not even a little.
Not all tax policy changes are equal. It's rather difficult to talk about "higher taxes" as a generalized entity when modern tax policy is clearly separated into income brackets and various targeted subsidies and incentives.

The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.
- Francis Bacon
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. — Albert Camus
"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of
variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the
outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-25-2012 12:45 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-25-2012 1:00 PM Rahvin has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 74 of 143 (676844)
10-25-2012 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by Rahvin
10-25-2012 12:55 PM


Do you see why someone might think that the bugetly neutral lowering of taxes and closing of loopholes could be worthwhile?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Rahvin, posted 10-25-2012 12:55 PM Rahvin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Rahvin, posted 10-25-2012 1:04 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 75 of 143 (676846)
10-25-2012 1:03 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by New Cat's Eye
10-25-2012 12:45 PM


I'm saying that a reduction in these taxes could help small to medium sized business grow by reducing their cost to operate.
Well first, that cost is usually absorbed by the customer.
But more to the point, in all of our history businesses have found a way to work with the tax system in place. Small and medium size businesses have always had the same chance to "grow" and "make it" as always. To say THIS is a time when taxes need to be lowered so that small/medium businesses can grow doesn't make a valid point.
I'd worry more about job growth that increases people's spending potential than taxes. The more money people are making the more they spend. In that sense, the more the unemployment numbers keep dropping the better it really is for ALL businesses.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-25-2012 12:45 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024