HOME | DD
OmicronPhi β A.C.A.B?
Published: 2015-07-07 22:43:10 +0000 UTC; Views: 1906; Favourites: 22; Downloads: 4
Redirect to original
Description
Hillary Clinton is still a capitalistΒ imperialist scumbag politician. Are you American? If so, I've a suggestion for you for next year: DON'T VOTE!Related content
Comments: 95
I wouldn't jump to say all Clinton's are but Bill and Hillary certainly are.
π: 1 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 0
Why not vote for Bernie Sanders rather than not voting? Sure, he is a social democrat, but he wants to implement "robin hood taxes", to fund education for all, and provide a single payer healthcare system for all.
Progress is still progress. Doing a at least some good, rather than no good, is better, right?
π: 0 β©: 2
Donald Trumps wants to do the same thing, and he is proposing a flat tax.
π: 0 β©: 1
... How is a flat tax anything close to good? His rate will not only give the nation tons upon tons of trillions in debt, but it will also force the poor to pay more, while the rich pay less....... and how is that the same?Β
Option one: "Having the poor pay less, and have the rich pay more"
Option two: "Having everyone pay the same, at a higher rate for the poor than before, and a lower rate for the rich than before"Β
.... How is that "the same thing"?
π: 0 β©: 1
Do you even understand what a flat tax is?Β "His rate will not only give the nation tons upon tons of trillions in debt, but it will also force the poor to pay more, while the rich pay less" If there is a tax for the low, middle, andΒ high class communities of the Untied States, then everyone will be paying equally. There will be no limits, and in all, this would simplify the Untied States economy.
" Option one: "Having the poor pay less, and have the rich pay more"Β
Option two: "Having everyone pay the same, at a higher rate for the poor than before, and a lower rate for the rich than before" "
Neither of the things that you listed above have anything to do with a flat tax because they are not equal as a flat tax is.
π: 0 β©: 1
Economists calculated how much a flat tax would do to the US economy... Lets just say that it wasn't pretty. Trillions in debt. If everyone had to pay, lets say 15% in tax, then the rich are going to pay less, than before, and the poor are going to pay much more than before. Its simple mathematics.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Yes, that is simple mathematics, but who's going to say that the tax is going to be at 15%, and who's to say that we're going to go any more big hiccups into debt after the trade agreement will be dropped with China?
π: 0 β©: 1
You do know that trade deal is utterly terrible and will only move jobs away from the states right?
π: 0 β©: 1
What do you mean? ... I was saying to drop the trade deal that was created by Nixon. That deal is the reason why many American companies have moved to China and other close Asian nations in the first place.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
What does that have to do with the flat tax? And I thought you meant the recent deal, but whatever... I guess we should stay on the topic at hand.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
The Chinese trade deal that we're currently participating in has nothing to do with Trumps flat tax plan, but it was brought up so I was speaking on topic.
π: 0 β©: 1
Ok then. My point is that you cannot fund the government on a flat tax, unless its insanely high for utterly everyone. Simple math.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
I wouldn't be so sure about that, but perhaps you're right. Then again, that's where trade comes in.
π: 0 β©: 1
What would that help? If you "kept it low", and you kept running the economy as a "free market" you know there will be crashes all the time. Then what are you gonna do? Whenever a crash happens, it often spreads. And even if it doesn't, it will still happen eventually. It happened in the twenties, it happened in the 80's and it happened in the 2000nds... Economic crashes in the US, all under a "free market".... You really think that without any other forms of income when the debt piles up, and the trade dies because of crash... What then? Your idea of the ideal, is not very thought through.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Your idea of the idea sounds like Communism.
π: 0 β©: 1
Do you even know what Communism is?
π: 0 β©: 1
A social, and economic ideology of politics.
π: 0 β©: 1
You do know that Communism is a money less one at that, right? How can an economic system sound like communism, when we specifically talk about distribution and taxation of money?
π: 0 β©: 1
Communism is made up of taxes as well. Β -_-
π: 0 β©: 1
How can a money less system require taxation?Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Communism is not moneyless, where are you getting that from?
π: 0 β©: 1
.... The communist Manifesto? Have you heard of it? A money less, classless system. How do you not know this?
π: 0 β©: 1
I'm not a Communist, I only have limited knowledge on the political topic.
π: 0 β©: 1
So how can it be relying on taxation when its supposed to be money less?Β
π: 0 β©: 1
I wish you'd say moneyless instead of "money less", it just sounds dumb. Do you not recall the Moskow's many tax plans for the USSR, or how about Beijing's?
π: 0 β©: 1
Well sorry. It just tells me that its grammatically wrong every time I try.Β
Of course I do. What about them? You do know that just because someone claims something, doesn't mean its true right?Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Well if you know about those tax plans, then how can you say that Communism is a moneyless system?
π: 0 β©: 1
Because those governments were never communist. They were state capitalist.Β
The state runs everything, is the boss, and employs and so on.... that is just state capitalism. Not communism. "The state doing stuff" is not communism...
π: 0 β©: 1
The USSR was promoting Communism from the very instant that it was established until it collapsed in 1991, China is still promoting Communism to this day, how can you claim that they were both "State Capitalist"? If you believe that that is how things work, then the United States and every other country is Communist because each and every nation runs under a central state government.
π: 0 β©: 1
... So you think that "a stateless, money less system", means a market economy, with a totalitarian ruling class?.... What are you on? Its the opposite of what Communism is! Literally.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
You're contradicting yourself ...
π: 0 β©: 1
No, you are. You are the one calling China and the Soviet Union Communist. Im not. They had states, both had and have money, and they had and have a ruling class and dictators, who were often wealthy. Its the complete opposite of Communism... Literally.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
I said nothing about a Stateless or moneyless system, you did. Secondly, if the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China were not Communist, then why did they have one party systems made up of Communist Parties? ... answer that.
π: 0 β©: 1
Communism is a stateless and moneyless system, by definition, and you claim that Soviet Russia, and The PRC are communist.Β
Also, the idea of a one party system, who has absolute rule, is more fascist than communist.Β
If I started to point at the color green, and told you that it was yellow, it didn't matter how many people I had behind me, agreeing with me, I would still be wrong. The same goes for this. Communism, is a stateless, and moneyless, communally democratic system, while China and Soviet Russia had either dictatorships, or one party rule, over the masses, as they had markets, and money, while there were rich and poor, ruler and the ruled... that is literally the opposite of what communism is. How can you not see that? When the freaking inventor of communism, contradicts what they do, don't you think that what they do, might not be communism?
π: 0 β©: 2
I don't think that it matters where the idea of a one party system originated from, the fact of the matter is that both the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China had a one party system of Communism.Β
By you denying this, denying a definition, it makes me want to quit debating you for your ignorance of the topic.
π: 0 β©: 1
Ok, grey is now black. Why? Because I totally have like a billion people behind me that says the same, and see? I got a Wiki page and everything, so I must be legit, no matter how what the definitions of black and grey actually are... you know, logic right?
π: 0 β©: 0
comΒ·muΒ·nism
ΛkΓ€myΙΛnizΙm/
noun
a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.
π: 0 β©: 1
Not paid, provided, according to their needs... Read his manifesto, instead of quoting from google or Wikipedia... Seriously dude.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
If you cannot take a definition, then your an ignorant fool. Goodbye.
π: 0 β©: 1
I gave you the definition several times! How am I the fool when you failed several times by your own argument?
π: 0 β©: 1
I gave you historical fact the whole time, I even gave you a definition, now goodbye.
π: 0 β©: 1
The same did I, and I even gave you the description form the inventor of the freaking thing... but you don't seem to really care I guess.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
I'm sick of the topic.
π: 0 β©: 1
Then why bring it up?
π: 0 β©: 1
Because you were acting like a damn Communist.
π: 0 β©: 1
How is one acting like a communist? I'm a socialist. I don't think revolution is necessary... Thats just for one.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
You're speaking so small about such a large topic.
π: 0 β©: 1
What do you mean?
π: 0 β©: 1
| Next =>