Do you honestly believe Obama has a chance in 2012?

[damndl0ser]

TheRealMafoo said:

fastyxx said:

You're still not answering.  You're rambling around the edges, but you are not answering.  Are all taxes against human rights or not?  

 

"Now there are rights as a condition of law. For example, you have as right to drive after the age of 16, provided you prove your capable. That's an entitlement, and thus a right, and does not violate anyones human rights."

Your arguments are so flawed it's laughable.  We have a right to drive because we turned 16 and that's the law?  But if they pass a new law that says we have a right to health care, that's not ok.  Where in the Constitution does it say 15 year olds can't drive but 16 year-olds can?  Where does it say the government gets to restrict our access to machinery?  How is it any different than any other law that's been passed and is now accepted as normal?  Totally contradictory.  

 

The point of the driving one, is to use an example of an entitlement, that doesn't cost anything. To allow you to drive or not to drive does not effect me or anyone else. To give you healthcare, does.

As for the question of is all taxes unconstitutional, no. There is a cost to running the country, and we all own the country, so it's all our responsibility to maintain it.

In a perfect world (and I realize logistically this is impossibly), the US would figure out how many man hours it takes per person to run the country, and then it would collect those hours either by taking the money you earn in that time, or by allowing you to contribute those hours.

So let's say it came to 200 hours a year is what everyone needed to contribute. If you didn't want to contribute time, you just did whatever you do, and the income you earn for those 200 hours you gave. If you didn't want to give by the way of income, you worked 200 hours for the government doing road work, construction, or office work. Whatever you were good at.

This is the concept of taxes, but the problem is, 43 out of every 100 people contribute 0 hours a year, while the rest of us contribute far more then 200 hours. We are being forced to do your work for you, yet we each own the same percentage of the US.

For me, it's about 500 hours. If the 200 hour figure was correct, taking 200 hours from me is constitutional. Taking the other 300 hour so someone else doesn't have to contribute theres, is not.

Are you saying that everyone should pay an equal amount per person?  This logic fails me.

Generally the more money you make the more resources you use from the general public.  As an example, if I am a truck driver and I drive continually year round and make $70,000 a year.  I have used more resources than the average Joe Blow who works down the street that unloads my truck and makes $15,000 a year.  Since I use more resources , generally I should pay more tax.  Everyones tax should be different.  

If I miss understood your point sorry.  But a flat tax is simply not fair, the upper class who generally use more of these resources our Government provides would basically turn whats left of the middle class into peasants if this happend.  Sure it sounds nice that everyone would pay an equal amount and that this is a fair share but it is not.  The rich would get richer, the middle class would perish and the lower class would have an even smaller chance of climbing out of it.

The example of the truck driver is just a basic one, and generally it would work with about anyone who makes a lot of money (at any job).