Schoolyard Taunting
- Thread starter snafu
- Start date
ImWithStupid
New member
How much state income tax do you pay, Hugo?
timesjoke
Active Members
But the point I made earlier of how these same Alaskans are still paying more tax money into the Government than they receive back in the form of a check still applies:
You admit it there, every product purchased at a store has embedded taxes into it, all taxes are passed on to the consumer so when these "poor" people spend their money, they are actually paying the taxes of companies.......companies do not pay taxes, they pass the cost of the tax to their goods/services sold.
Then there is property taxes and other government fees to cover just about every other aspect of life, no hugo, these people are not getting 'free money', they are getting a refund for "PART" of the money paid into the Government back.
Your problem is people you have no respect for are getting a tax refund, you want a 'better' class of person to get 'free money'.
I pointed out before, the writer you said was a good conservative wants the funds redirected into his pocket in a larger amount than he already gets, did this man do anything to actually earn funds made off of the oil?
Did he extract the oil from the ground?
Did he ship the oil to storage plants?
Did he own the land?
Did he do a single thing in his life to assist the oil collection/transport/sale process?
So how has he "earned" the money, much less a greater percentage of the sale than anyone else in the State of Alaska?
ImWithStupid
New member
Nice try. According the Tax Foundation, Texas hovers around 43rd in the nation for state and local tax burden. Only 7 states are lower that Texas.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sl_burden_ustotal&allstates-20080807.xls
You are benefiting from the tax on the oil and gas production in Texas, by lower personal taxes, no different than getting a check back, you pay less up front.
timesjoke
Active Members
Oops, busted again.
As much as hugo likes to claim I am the reason he does not debate in a reasonable way, it was not me who had to attack the other person's dead mother because I could not handle the hard questions being asked......
Hugo has avoided direct questions from IWS and snaf as well. I am just the most vocal to point it out each time hugo dodges an honest question or point.
hugo
New member
Ronald Reagan
http://redstateeclectic.typepad.com/redstate_commentary/2009/10/the-reaganhayek-legacy.html
The Great Bimbo, Sarah Palin, on Hayek:
hugo
New member
We don't spend much here in Texas. That is the reason for the low taxes. Lower spending requires less revenue. Limited government requires less resources. Do I have to tell conservatives this?
Why is it that in the last 40 years liberals have been supporting a windfall profits tax on oil and conservatives have been against it?
Do you favor increased federal taxes?
Do you favor governments raising taxes when they are already in then black and then mailing welfare checks with the new funds?
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfhZsol8Cck]YouTube- HILLARY CLINTON ON ENERGY & HOW TO HELP GAS PRICES[/ame] Guess what, y'all in the same boat with Hillary, Barack and Jimmy.
ImWithStupid
New member
What have I ever said that would even make that a valid question to ask me?
You're the one living large on the back of the blood, sweat and work of those in the oil industry. Don't pass your, spread the wealth, socialist guilt off on me.
You talk a big game, buy you're no different from the people of Alaska. It makes no difference if you benefit up front, with low or no income tax or a refund later.
To answer your question. No. I'm against it, but I also don't say one thing and live another, like some people.
hugo
New member
The "living large" amounts to less than $30 per Texan. The socialist alcohol taxes take a lot more from me. Also, if it was up to me that socialist oil production tax would not exist and I would not vote for anyone that expanded it. We had this conversation before.
Alaska was the most socialist state in the union when Sarah became governor, she decided that was not enough government. I guess she resided a bit too close to the ole Soviet Union and was infected by the commie virus.
Look at this:
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/287.html
Notice which state spends the most per capita (Alaska) and which spends the least (Texas). That is why we got no state income tax. Not the oil production tax which amounts to less than 8 cents a day per Texan. Living large on that 8 cents a day.
Notice that Alaska spends more per capita than California and Massachusetts combined. Sarah thought that spending was not enough.
timesjoke
Active Members
And yet hugo supports Big Government grabbing up the resources itself, and using it for individual political gain......
Hugo has always been two faced, he says he supports a conservative value system but at the same time he also says he wants the "free money" to go into his pocket. That is exactly what the writer of the piece he posted and called a great conservative said, so that must be his real possition.
Now hugo is just dancing around the point, either the resources belong to someone or they do not. Should the oil companies get the oil out of the State for free?
What is the real difference between politicians sharing the sale of oil with all members of the State or the same politicians using the sale of oil to reward 'select' members or companies in the State?
Seriously, what is the real difference?
Equal shares certainly makes it harder for the funds to be used for individual corruption in Government, and I like that idea. As much as hugo loves to "say" he is against Government, he sure does support the all powerful and corrupt Government methods of excluding the people and doing whatever they want for personal political gain a lot.
Hugo has always been two faced, he says he supports a conservative value system but at the same time he also says he wants the "free money" to go into his pocket. That is exactly what the writer of the piece he posted and called a great conservative said, so that must be his real possition.
Now hugo is just dancing around the point, either the resources belong to someone or they do not. Should the oil companies get the oil out of the State for free?
What is the real difference between politicians sharing the sale of oil with all members of the State or the same politicians using the sale of oil to reward 'select' members or companies in the State?
Seriously, what is the real difference?
Equal shares certainly makes it harder for the funds to be used for individual corruption in Government, and I like that idea. As much as hugo loves to "say" he is against Government, he sure does support the all powerful and corrupt Government methods of excluding the people and doing whatever they want for personal political gain a lot.
hugo
New member
Benjamin felt a nose nuzzling at his shoulder. He looked round. It was Clover. Her old eyes looked dimmer than ever. Without saying anything, she tugged gently at his mane and led him round to the end of the big barn, where the Seven Commandments were written. For a minute or two they stood gazing at the tatted wall with its white lettering.
?My sight is failing,? she said finally. ?Even when I was young I could not have read what was written there. But it appears to me that that wall looks different. Are the Seven Commandments the same as they used to be, Benjamin??
For once Benjamin consented to break his rule, and he read out to her what was written on the wall. There was nothing there now except a single Commandment. It ran:
ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL
BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS
After that it did not seem strange when next day the pigs who were supervising the work of the farm all carried whips in their trotters.
?My sight is failing,? she said finally. ?Even when I was young I could not have read what was written there. But it appears to me that that wall looks different. Are the Seven Commandments the same as they used to be, Benjamin??
For once Benjamin consented to break his rule, and he read out to her what was written on the wall. There was nothing there now except a single Commandment. It ran:
ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL
BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS
After that it did not seem strange when next day the pigs who were supervising the work of the farm all carried whips in their trotters.
ImWithStupid
New member
Now you're referring to TJ and his claim that only "income" taxpayers and non-government workers should be allowed to vote.
TJ has long been for a ruling class/caste system of government.
He doesn't care about any other tax you pay to support government.
timesjoke
Active Members
Nice try there Joe, you and hugo worked it out pretty well together but that is not actually what I said.
I said only those who can prove they pay taxes should be allowed to vote because people who do not pay taxes always vote for socialist agendas and severely left leaning canidates.
It was a joke actually because I know something like that could never happen, it would never be politically correct. Ever 'wish' you could win the lottery? Ever talk with friends about how you would spend the money "if" you won? This is the same thing.
hugo on the other hand wants something that can and does happen all the time, to give individual politicians the power to "buy votes". Who cares what segment of votes they are buying? The result is the same, either the people getting the money "earned" the funds or they did not.
So did hugo 'earn' the money that offsets his personal tax burdon in the State of Texas? Or is he instead getting 'free money' paid in on his behalf to lower his burdon?
Is that welfare.........?
ImWithStupid
New member
What the **** are you babbling about? Worked what out, together?
So, comrade Stalin, the only reason you now say it is a joke, is because you don't think it can happen.
So, if you could wave a magic wand, you would create a ruling class of citizens, based on income and profession.
Sounds like the progressive movement to me. A ruling class to tell others how to live their lives and make the rules to enforce their decisions.
timesjoke
Active Members
Play stupid if you insist, lol.
Yep, playing stupid, answering you is also stupid, so why not.......
No, I would be the king of the world, why have a bunch of people between me and the actions when the people with that kind of power would just be corrupted anyway, lol.
No dumbass........
The point was that in a "perfect" world, those who pay for things get to make the decisions, while those who are leaching have the option of getting off their azz and being one of the deciders or to stay leaching and not get a 'vote'.
Consider it like your home, if your paying the bills, you make the rules of the house, if you let an out of work buddy move in with you, will you let him set or change the rules of your home while your paying for him to live for free on your food, electricity, etc.....?
I don't think so.
If you say otherwise we all know your telling a lie.
Anyway, as I said, it was just one of those comments that are just tossed out there for ******** around, kind of like you saying I was banned on a dozen forums but when I asked you to back that comment up, you ran away from it.
We all have our own ways of talking ****, one way I like to play around is to say I want things that can never be, I thought my example of the lottery was enough for even you to understand that point but I guess not.
ImWithStupid
New member
Where's this **** coming from? If you look back, Hugo and I aren't exactly on the same page on this thread, but the fact thay you think you should be some fukking ruling party, concerns me more than anything Hugo says.
His quote from Animal Farm was perfect for you and your mentality. You think everyone should be equal, just some people more equal than others.
My point is that if that's your perfect world or what's in your heart, you need to study the words of your founding fathers, because you don't ******' get it and people like you are more dangerous than those who want to change the country like Obama, because at least they understand the ideology they are trying to instill.
Dumbass, huh. Mr. Highandmighty, high road name calling. Nice. Now listen up.
Maybe you ought to take a fukking, Times...HUSH, look at what your saying.
Nice to see you're the one dredging up the past. That was even on a different forum that doesn't even exist anymore. Keep it up and see what happens. And just to alleviate any kind of mistake of what I'm talking about. Yes, that is a threat.
I'm done with the . I was about to get all Medieval on everyone right before the truce happened spontaneously.
In your delusional mind, Hugo and I spent 70 posts on this thread, setting you up to get you agreeing with me on nearly every post I made, challenging Hugo, just to switch up on you and "work it out very well together". Now you just sound like a paranoid schizophrenic. There was no collaboration by me and Hugo.
Not playing stupid. Just playing, SANE.
timesjoke
Active Members
"the enemey of my enemey is my friend"
You never let a chance to take a shot at me pass for any reason.
Even if you did not understand my point earlier, you should now after I detailed it out more, but your still acting like you do not so that proves your only interested in "gotcha" comments with me.
No I do not, as said above, now that there is no excuse for you to missunderstand, continuing to push this false comment is intentional and proves your not being sincere.
As I said, it is fantacy, dreaming, not serious or something I would ever expect or really want. I explained it with the lottery example, if you are intentionally blocking yourself from understanding that then I cannot help you.
But, the founding fathers were creating a system of people who took care of themselves, things like welfare have drastically changed the dynamic they were creating, are you honestly trying to say you can't see how the voying system has been corrupted by welfare?
Hide what you can't answer to, I expected that. I was not trying to screw with you, just point out that you have always had a personal thing with me.
I never said you spent 70 posts setting up anything. where did you get that?
When an opportunity presents itself to take a shot at me, you will, that was my only point. Trying to insert extra stuff into what I say is not reasonable.
Now the "times hush".
I will now gladly shut up upon request, part of your responsibility with that agreement is to now tell me in pm's how I upset you to this point and help me understand how better to reply to your comments to not make you mad.
But, attacking me and putting me down at the same time your using the "times hush" is not really the spirit of the agreement I am offering. I was trying to make it so me and another person could discuss how to get along, not how you can shut me up and continue bashing me forever without me commenting.
But even though your not using it in good faith, I will still respect my word and no longer comment in this thread, you have the thread sir.