Santorum Drops Out - Page 6 - PlanetSide Universe
PSU Social Facebook Twitter Twitter YouTube Steam TwitchTV
PlanetSide Universe
PSU: It's Advanced Mobile Station, not Armored Man Squisher
Home Forum Chat Wiki Social AGN PS2 Stats
Notices
Go Back   PlanetSide Universe > General Forums > Political Debate Forum

 
Click here to go to the first VIP post in this thread.  
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 2012-04-13, 03:13 PM   [Ignore Me] #76
Vash02
Major
 
Vash02's Avatar
 
Re: Santorum Drops Out


Originally Posted by Malorn View Post
National sales tax for the few things that the federal government needs to do.

State sales tax for the things the state needs to do.

It isn't that hard of a concept, even for you.
Oh I thought he meant to unify the sales taxes under one national tax. But that would make too much sense.

Though really, adding yet another tax onto sales is just another way of stomping on the poor.
Vash02 is offline  
Click here to go to the next VIP post in this thread.   Old 2012-04-13, 03:28 PM   [Ignore Me] #77
Malorn
Contributor
PlanetSide 2
Game Designer
 
Re: Santorum Drops Out


Meh.
__________________

Last edited by Malorn; 2012-09-11 at 04:34 AM.
Malorn is offline  
Old 2012-04-13, 03:33 PM   [Ignore Me] #78
Shanesan
Sergeant
 
Shanesan's Avatar
 
Re: Santorum Drops Out


Federal government can tax imports and exports for their daily lives. We don't need a Federal Sales Tax for consumers.

If we can strip the Federal Government back to its roots, whom have control of a military and general lawmaking, we wouldn't need a large federal government. You can tell that's the case because they put a clause in that the Congress MUST meet a minimum number of times a year.

Most things should be taken care of by state governments anyway. The Federal Government was never made for grand-reaching "decision" making like they do today.
__________________
Planetside since 2004.
Shanesan is offline  
Old 2012-04-13, 03:35 PM   [Ignore Me] #79
Figment
Lieutenant General
 
Re: Santorum Drops Out


And here we have it ladies and gentlemen, as usual, Malorn is a paranoid anti-government conspiracy theorist.


And your idea of spending sucks. You honestly think that Warren Buffett (example) would spend 2 million, where he pays 15%, around 7 million in income tax, now? He gets so much money in, he gives away almost everything through Bill Gates' funds because he doesn't know what to do with it!

That's not what every person would do! Would you give 90% or more of your money away to complete strangers? No! You would not.


Go do the maths, income tax ensures that people provide for the benefit of the community, where purchasing tax favours the greedy by far! If you wanted to get the same 5 million extra out of national tax random rich guy through taxes, you'd have to raise the taxes a lot for the common people compared to now, just because random rich guy would NOT pay that much tax, at all, so someone else would have to. The flat rate would mean the rich guy would pay far, far less proportionally. Because any extra consumption goods make a HUGE dent in a random person's pocket, but not in a rich guy's pocket. You make the false assumption that these people spend a lot of money on consumption goods and that this is somehow comparable to others and scales with income. It does not. Rich people do not spend 5000 times as much money on food and clothing or even television sets.

Malorn, your tax maths utterly suck. And you STILL haven't commented on that NY times article.

Last edited by Figment; 2012-04-13 at 03:39 PM.
Figment is offline  
Click here to go to the next VIP post in this thread.   Old 2012-04-13, 03:39 PM   [Ignore Me] #80
Malorn
Contributor
PlanetSide 2
Game Designer
 
Re: Santorum Drops Out


Meh.
__________________

Last edited by Malorn; 2012-09-11 at 04:34 AM.
Malorn is offline  
Old 2012-04-13, 03:41 PM   [Ignore Me] #81
Shanesan
Sergeant
 
Shanesan's Avatar
 
Re: Santorum Drops Out


Originally Posted by Figment View Post
And here we have it ladies and gentlemen, as usual, Malorn is a paranoid anti-government conspiracy theorist.


And your idea of spending sucks. You honestly think that Warren Buffett (example) would spend 2 million, where he pays 15%, around 7 million in income tax, now? He gets so much money in, he gives away almost everything through Bill Gates' funds because he doesn't know what to do with it!

That's not what every person would do! Would you give 90% or more of your money away to complete strangers? No! You would not.


Go do the maths, income tax ensures that people provide for the benefit of the community, where purchasing tax favours the greedy by far! If you wanted to get the same 5 million extra out of this guy through taxes, you'd have to raise the taxes a lot for the common people compared to now, just because this guy would NOT pay for it, at all, so someone else would have to.

Malorn, your tax maths utterly suck. And you STILL haven't commented on that NY times article.
You really shouldn't take the richest person in America and make a target out of him. He is not representative of anyone else. If Warren Buffet gives so much money to the Bill Gates Foundation, why would you want to take that and put it to the Federal Government...?

I donate a fair deal of money to my local community because I respect seeing my money used for good, visibly. If you tax me (a middle-class American) more, I will be able to donate less.
__________________
Planetside since 2004.
Shanesan is offline  
Old 2012-04-13, 03:43 PM   [Ignore Me] #82
Figment
Lieutenant General
 
Re: Santorum Drops Out


Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
You really shouldn't take the richest person in America and make a target out of him. He is not representative of anyone else. If Warren Buffet gives so much money to the Bill Gates Foundation, why would you want to take that and put it to the Federal Government...?

I donate a fair deal of money to my local community because I respect seeing my money used for good, visibly. If you tax me (a middle-class American) more, I will be able to donate less.
Read his own argument, I posted a link on page 3.

He wants to pay more taxes so that more people benefit.
Figment is offline  
Click here to go to the next VIP post in this thread.   Old 2012-04-13, 03:50 PM   [Ignore Me] #83
Malorn
Contributor
PlanetSide 2
Game Designer
 
Re: Santorum Drops Out


Meh.
__________________

Last edited by Malorn; 2012-09-11 at 04:33 AM.
Malorn is offline  
Old 2012-04-13, 03:55 PM   [Ignore Me] #84
Shanesan
Sergeant
 
Shanesan's Avatar
 
Re: Santorum Drops Out


Originally Posted by Figment View Post
Read his own argument, I posted a link on page 3.

He wants to pay more taxes so that more people benefit.
He can "donate" as much money that he wants to the Federal Government. Nobody is stopping him.
__________________
Planetside since 2004.
Shanesan is offline  
Click here to go to the next VIP post in this thread.   Old 2012-04-13, 03:57 PM   [Ignore Me] #85
Malorn
Contributor
PlanetSide 2
Game Designer
 
Re: Santorum Drops Out


Meh.
__________________

Last edited by Malorn; 2012-09-11 at 04:33 AM.
Malorn is offline  
Old 2012-04-13, 04:23 PM   [Ignore Me] #86
Sirisian
Colonel
 
Sirisian's Avatar
 
Re: Santorum Drops Out


I'm kind of surprised no one questioned Shanesan's claims. Some of them are legit problems, but again like I mentioned they are not black and white issues. I already said conservatives are horrible when it comes to this. Most of the issues you brought up have huge gray areas and complexities that Republicans don't want to admit to. Using some of them to attack Obama is a cheap shot. Especially when some problems didn't even start with Obama. He's just expected to clean up the mess in his first 3 years.
Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
Obama backed off on closing Guantanamo.
He continued indefinitely detaining alleged terrorists, WITHOUT TRIAL.
Obama protected the Bush administration from prosecution for torture.
Obama fought for, and won, the right to deny habeas corpus to detainees.
He blocked UN human rights investigations at Guantanamo.
He dropped charges against the CIA for destroying videotapes documenting torture of detainees.
He continued rendition of alleged terrorists to countries where they could be tortured.
He also passed an executive order to mandate periodic review. Currently there are 171 detainees there of which 88 are cleared for release. Basically it's a very complicated matter that both conservatives and liberals attack each other with. It does seem like the camp is winding down, but at the same time I hate to play devil's advocate that some of the people held there are people who would go back into fighting the US if sent home. (A very small percentage though since the numbers are questionable about how many have already done that). I'm against torture so this is a problem I've always had with Obama. However, you have to see things relative. The majority of Republican support torture as do the candidates when they were asked if they did during the Republican debates. (Romney wasn't there).

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
Obama backed off of his promise to keep lobbyists out of his administration.
Heh you have articles like this which beg to differ. It's important to remember how many lobbyists there are for the legislature. Small changes like the recent STOCK act, which stops insider trading, is a good first step. Personally I think the only way to fully fix the problem is to mandate that senators and congressmen can't take in outside income for life if they choose to take the job.

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
Obama authorized the assassination of U.S. citizens abroad.
This is a point I strongly agree with you on. Playing the Devil's advocate though is very easy to see why two of them were killed. The 16 year old killing is more unjustifiable though and is impossible to rationalize. I'm actually kind of surprised Anwar al-Awlaki wasn't arrested. It's was well known where he lived in Yemen.


Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
Obama rescinded on his promise to not prosecute marijuana users in states where it is legal, and pushed for a 5 year prison term for a California-legal medical marijuana dispensary operaton.
Yeah unescusable. The US's stance on these topics is horrible.

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
Obama prosecuted child-soldier Omar Khadr using evidence gained through torture.
I don't have enough information about this to say anything. Sounds pretty bad though since the evidence during the case wasn't very good.

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
Obama granted 27 waivers to oil companies drilling in the weeks following the Deepwater Horizon disaster.
How is this a problem? The Deepwater Horizon disaster is separate from other drilling. It would be like taking the Japanese approach and decommisioning all the Nuclear Reactors because one breaks. Kind of going overboard. (Also Republican would call him out if he stopped drilling. They like drilling or something. Obama gave a few speeches about drilling earlier this month).

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
He extended the PATRIOT Act, with no reforms.
I don't want to justify his actions, but the Legislature also passed it fairly easily on both sides. You have to ask yourself, would a Republican do anything different? (Or just check how most of them voted).

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
He dramatically increased government secrecy, denying more Freedom of Information Act requests in 2009 than Bush did in 2008.
Wasn't there more requests during his presidency? This seems like a relative issue. I ask because I think that was the case, but can't find a chart for the number of requests or where people are getting numbers.

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
He cut a secret deal to kill the public option, while still campaigning on its behalf...
It was a compromise between insurance companies and hospitals I believe. What specifically was bad about this? Not to mention the huge republican opposition to a public option. Obama did the most reasonable thing I believe.

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
He defended Don't Ask Don't Tell from legal challenges and then "celebrated" its repeal.
He reaffirmed his opposition to same-sex marriage though he campaigns as if he supports it.
To be fair most politicians are horrible with this topic. The only politicians I've seen that have strong positions are either very religious or had one of their kids come out creating the extremes. And then there's Hillary who is for all human rights generally. This recent piece from today covers a lot of things. You get the feeling he doesn't want to say anything or do anything to give a reason for attack on the subject. That and he has shown he doesn't want an ammendment either way with his stance on the Defense of Marriage Act. For now it seems like a state issue.

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
He granted waivers to 30 companies, including McDonalds, exempting them from health care reform.
Woah, I never heard of that. Apparently it's around 1000 companies, not 30. It's a "one-year exemption". Their reasoning seems legit though. I don't see the problem. Sounds like the changes need some time.

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
He announced the single largest arms deal in history, of $60bil worth of arms, to Saudi Arabian dictatorship.
That's a lot of exports. Not gonna lie. It's a hard deal to turn down. That and Saudi Arabia is like the strongest middle eastern ally I believe.

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
He gave permits to BP and other oil companies, exempting them from environmental protection laws.
That was a misconception. The exemption that was cited was for a tested project that was funded with the stimulus. The exclusion was not related to oil and was merely to allow the project to be done. (It was an untested project before and it had a risk involved).

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
He appointed Monsanto executive Michael Taylor to the FDA.
He appointed a former Monsanto lobbyist as Chief Agriculture Negotiator.
I think this is why some lobbyists are afraid to register. It's a stigma that really holds some politicians back. Did they do something bad or is it the perceived conflict of interest?

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
He appointed Timothy Geithner as Secretary of the Treasury.
I wouldn't worry about it. whatever conservatives thought he did on purpose seems to have hurt him severely. He already mentioned Obama isn't going to select him again. Probably because of the controversy. If you have more information about the case I'd be willing to read it as the whole thing confused me.

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
He increased the use of combat drones in Pakistan.
It's been going down now after recent incidents. I think a lot of it has to do with the poor border between the countries and Pakistan's apathy toward harboring terrorists. That is they tend not to do anything about it.

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
He passed a massive Wall Street bailout at the expense of the taxpayers.
You should research this more. It actually didn't effect taxpayers at all. I think this misconception came from a Santorum ad. The $250 billion Wall Street bailouts from TARP were paid back in full with interest.

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
He played down the importance of the WikiLeaks documents.
To be fair they were essentially a random set of 250K documents. He was probably told about the contents of them and the security implications. Most of the stuff I've actually read was useless information.

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
He pushed for mandatory DNA testing for those arrested for crimes, even if they have not been convicted.
I really don't see the problem with this. DNA testing is a valid reason for conviction and must be done before a conviction to link evidence.

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
He undercuts whistleblowers.
To be fair some whistleblowers are breaking laws while doing so. Not condoning any of them sets an interesting precedent that could be exploited with false whistleblowing. There are numerous laws in place (some contradictory) that allow whistleblowing without reprecussions for instance in the US militrary and government. I guess it would depend on which case you were talking about.

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
He promised $30bil in military aid to Israel over the next decade.
Yeah that's the one where they must use a lot of it to purchase weapons from us. We have a fairly advanced weapons program that is mostly subsidized by such deals. It's actually not as bad as it sounds. It was actually one of his campaign promises to keep Israel as a close ally. Most of the money essentially goes back into the US economy indirectly. I'm not a big fan of Israel, but from the people I talk to from there online they seem far more stable than the surrounding countries. (Even if some of their decisions are questionable).

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
He gives $250,000 to Chevrolet every time they make a Volt.
That number was grossly exagerated you realize that right? It was mostly a sensationalized headline to get readers and assumed only 6K cars would ever be produced. This article explains the flawed math pretty well.

Originally Posted by Shanesan View Post
I have links for all those.
Sigh, why didn't you link them all. It would have saved time.

Originally Posted by Sobekeus View Post
A national sales tax is the way to go, but it needs to be capped (as in Amendment) so the greedy elected 'elite' cant grab more and more of it.
You realize that would mean switching from a progressive tax system to a regressive tax system. Poor people aren't taxed currently so the change would basically just tax them more while removing current taxes on the wealthy (since their investments wouldn't be taxed. Only their purchases). This allows the wealthy to accrue wealth more easily. Basically your stance on this depends on if you think wealthy people are being held back by a progressive tax and could do more for the economy. A lot of conservatives believe that. It's a very complex subject so I'd recommend for you to read up on it. (I've already stated I prefer progressive tax systems since they've been proven to create a more linear wealth distribution rather than gaps, but it's mostly based on an idea for increasing overall quality of life).

Originally Posted by Malorn View Post
He's also already made his fortune so its not like a higher tax is going to really affect him.
Buffet has talked about long-term capital gains taxes actually in this regards. Those kinds of taxes would affect him and he understands that and talked about them before.

Last edited by Sirisian; 2012-04-13 at 04:26 PM.
Sirisian is offline  
Old 2012-04-13, 04:43 PM   [Ignore Me] #87
Shanesan
Sergeant
 
Shanesan's Avatar
 
Re: Santorum Drops Out


Sirisian, I love you. Taking on the tough stuff. You're pretty awesome.

I'll actually respond to most of the stuff later. I'm busy at the moment.

Originally Posted by Sirisian View Post
Sigh, why didn't you link them all. It would have saved time.
Ran out of space.
__________________
Planetside since 2004.
Shanesan is offline  
Old 2012-04-13, 09:32 PM   [Ignore Me] #88
Figment
Lieutenant General
 
Re: Santorum Drops Out


I like how you attempt to claim Buffett for your argument while clearly not even having read what he had to say. I also like how you make the outrageous claim that rich people don't trust the government, that they would spend all their money in the interest of other citizens and the even bigger ones where you pretend that national departments sit around doong nothing all day, while also ignoring that centralised government makes for a smaller government as state governments have everything double, where you prefer over 50 same job departments over one with subsidiaries for proper execution on a state level.

I don't think you want to though, since you think states need significantly different laws and trust that each State will do what is best for its citizens. Clearly the opinion on what is best has always differed greatly between the states to the point of war. And had it not been won by the north, I do wonder if the south would have moved beyond segregation and ethnic suppression already.

Also, you ignore that the Gates foundation does not supply funds for community stuff like the repair of bridges. It is not their task to. Buffett states he and others would not mind paying more taxes and indicates that this would be good for the economy. His point though is that HE could do this and others would do this, but that there are plenty others that need to be told to, since it is not now and that this has to be fair. Not just among them, but also towards other people who earn far less and yet pay more. This is not as you try to make it out an individual issue nor solved with a donation. It is about a structural fair tax policy change for ALL people currently exploiting low taxes on HUGE earnings.
Figment is offline  
Click here to go to the next VIP post in this thread.   Old 2012-04-13, 10:00 PM   [Ignore Me] #89
Malorn
Contributor
PlanetSide 2
Game Designer
 
Re: Santorum Drops Out


Meh.
__________________

Last edited by Malorn; 2012-09-11 at 04:32 AM.
Malorn is offline  
Old 2012-04-13, 10:12 PM   [Ignore Me] #90
Baneblade
Contributor
Lieutenant General
 
Baneblade's Avatar
 
Re: Santorum Drops Out


Originally Posted by Vash02 View Post
Oh I thought he meant to unify the sales taxes under one national tax. But that would make too much sense.

Though really, adding yet another tax onto sales is just another way of stomping on the poor.
The national sales tax could literally be 0.1% and generate more than enough revenue for the federal government to do its Constitutionally required duties.

Also, politicians should not be paid more than minimum wage equivalent to a 40 hour work week.
__________________
Post at me bro.

Baneblade is offline  
 
  PlanetSide Universe > General Forums > Political Debate Forum

Bookmarks

Discord

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:16 AM.

Content © 2002-2013, PlanetSide-Universe.com, All rights reserved.
PlanetSide and the SOE logo are registered trademarks of Sony Online Entertainment Inc. © 2004 Sony Online Entertainment Inc. All rights reserved.
All other trademarks or tradenames are properties of their respective owners.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.