Random Arguments & Strawmen #15

言語: JP EN DE FR
2010-06-21
New Items
users online
フォーラム » Everything Else » Politics and Religion » Random Arguments & Strawmen #15
Random Arguments & Strawmen #15
First Page 2 3 ... 25 26 27 ... 46 47 48
 Garuda.Chanti
Offline
サーバ: Garuda
Game: FFXI
user: Chanti
Posts: 11372
By Garuda.Chanti 2016-12-06 11:09:10  
Yatenkou said: »
Any update on Pennsylvania? ...
Haven't seen Pennsylvania in the news this AM but Florida is there.

Florida voters sue for recount
USA Today

Quote:
TALLAHASSEE — Three central Florida voters are mounting an unlikely bid to overturn the presidential election result in the Sunshine State.

In a lawsuit filed Monday in Leon Circuit Court, they assert that Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump, actually won Florida. The plaintiffs, who live in Osceola and Volusia counties, say the state’s official election results were off because of hacking, malfunctioning voting machines and other problems.

They're asking for a hand recount of every paper ballot in Florida, at the expense of defendants including Trump, Gov. Rick Scott and the 29 Republican presidential electors from Florida.

But even lawyers for the plaintiffs acknowledge time isn’t on their side. Clint Curtis, an Orlando attorney representing the plaintiffs, said the defendants may not respond by the time the Electoral College meets on Dec. 19.

"They can ignore it entirely,” he said.

He said he has received a “deluge” of reports from voters across the state of problems on election day, including people being turned away at the polls and told they’d already voted. Florida Division of Elections officials reported only a few "minor issues" on election day.

Curtis said he hopes Trump, who has blasted recount efforts elsewhere, will get behind one in Florida. Officially, Trump got more than 4.6 million votes in Florida, beating Clinton by more than 112,000 votes.

“He’s mentioned he wants to fix the rigged system,” he said. “This will give the opportunity to do that. If it were a normal politician, I’d say our chances are very slim. But it’s not a normal politician — it’s Donald Trump.”
 Garuda.Chanti
Offline
サーバ: Garuda
Game: FFXI
user: Chanti
Posts: 11372
By Garuda.Chanti 2016-12-06 11:10:42  
Oooo... Paged!

Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2016-12-06 11:13:35  
Garuda.Chanti said: »
Oooo... Paged!


Home of the best gas station to stop and piss when travelling from where I currently live to my hometown, more like.
Offline
Posts: 2442
By eliroo 2016-12-06 11:18:20  
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
They do have a tax burden.
No they don't. The pay taxes, that doesn't mean they have a tax burden, your reasoning for this is poor.

Asura.Kingnobody said: »
So, yes, they have a tax burden. A very large one, in fact. Offering these companies tax reliefs in order to keep manufacturing in the US is a smart move, and one that states have been doing for decades. Attributing Trump to this particular one is a little silly, but if he really negotiated it, then kudos for him.
You could also actually place a tax burden on these companies if they have a certain number of jobs overseas vs. In the US. That would make it more beneficial for them to have their companies in the US. There are definitely multiple ways to skin this cat and none of the answers will be good enough for either group in the argument. So really a fair compromise should take place that doesn't make the government a lapdog to corporate owners.

Asura.Kingnobody said: »
And they are entitled to their opinion. Do you know what their opinion is, and can you describe it in your own words?

Not sure what you are getting at here? Their conclusion is that % wise the wealthy are paying their fair share and sometimes more while the less wealthy have a negative net tax.

Asura.Kingnobody said: »
What this tells you is what it exactly means. While the top 1% of the US owns 35% of the total US wealth (I heard so many differing values to this, ranging between 25 to 60%), and their average rate is 24.7% rate, that means that most of their income is considered capital in nature, which is taxed at 23.8%. No illegal "tax evasion" done. It also shows that most of the income from the top 1% of the nation in terms of wealth is investment. Investment with money that has already been taxed before, and only the income from the investment is being taxed (and not the principle).

The point is that if they own 35% of the US wealth, they should pay 35% of the tax, if we were going to operate on a "fair" % based tax.

Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Define fair.

That is the pivot point for each position. They simply disagree one what "fair" is based on their perspective. Like your perspective:

Asura.Kingnobody said: »
You just defined income redistribution. How is taking income from people who earned it and giving it to the government, who redistributes said income in various programs, including welfare, considered fair?

This is the problem, and where we will eternally disagree. I also don't think anyone that is for tax fairness has wanted to rob the pockets empty of CEOs but alas, any point I make on this will just bounce of your stubborn shell. It is a human issue but one that the greedy will always have a hard time understanding.

Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Believe it or not, this discussion was already done in a separate thread.

Just going to reply to the rest of your post here. What are you arguing? I'm not saying the companies are in the wrong. They are a business and it is their prerogative to try and make as much money as possible. I'm simply saying that we need to close up any exploitable tax loopholes. I'm not sure why you are against the government having more money do you not think people should have a right to live? Do you not believe in the Declaration of Independence?

Quote:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

I get how that may seem like a strawman, but that is the point of this debate to begin with. This is what things like welfare and medicaid are all about. They are human issues and when people fail to take care of others then we turn to the government. There is a reason capitalism cannot exist in its purest form but strives in a modified form with some government control.

Most people don't sit there hoping to get free money from the government and steal from the rich. They want to live, they want others to live happily. It is hard to take money from the working class because every bit of their money is used while the wealthy often have an abundance of money that isn't used.

[Edited for formatting to make a little less wall o' texty - Meshi]
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2016-12-06 11:26:53  
I guess Trump said something about the government contract with Boeing and the liberal media are outraged of course.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-boeing-air-force-one-232243
Offline
Posts: 17780
By Viciouss 2016-12-06 11:32:31  
An uninformed opinion tweeted out and stocks go down? Where is the harm in that?
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2016-12-06 11:34:10  
fonewear said: »
I guess Trump said something about the government contract with Boeing and the liberal media are outraged of course.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-boeing-air-force-one-232243

Smokescreen for the money he's going to cost people by leaving his brat and mail-order bride in NYC and splitting more time between the two himself.
 Bahamut.Ravael
Offline
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: Ravael
Posts: 13638
By Bahamut.Ravael 2016-12-06 11:39:43  
eliroo said: »
No they don't. The pay taxes, that doesn't mean they have a tax burden, your reasoning for this is poor.

You're taking the words at face value. There is an actual economic definition to the term that perhaps you don't understand:
"In economics, tax incidence or tax burden is the analysis of the effect of a particular tax on the distribution of economic welfare. Tax incidence is said to "fall" upon the group that ultimately bears the burden of, or ultimately has to pay, the tax."

eliroo said: »
The point is that if they own 35% of the US wealth, they should pay 35% of the tax, if we were going to operate on a "fair" % based tax.

This is a mathematical fallacy and makes no sense.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2016-12-06 11:42:27  
Ramyrez said: »
fonewear said: »
I guess Trump said something about the government contract with Boeing and the liberal media are outraged of course.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-boeing-air-force-one-232243

Smokescreen for the money he's going to cost people by leaving his brat and mail-order bride in NYC and splitting more time between the two himself.

You're a smokescreen !
[+]
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2016-12-06 11:43:14  
Actually I think he is right 4 billion for some jets to visit countries that hate us seems a bit much...
 Shiva.Nikolce
Offline
サーバ: Shiva
Game: FFXI
user: Nikolce
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2016-12-06 11:46:35  
eliroo said: »
No they don't.

Would you *** please knock it off with the text walls or move it to pm. It's really really really really really really *** annoying.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 17780
By Viciouss 2016-12-06 11:53:49  
Shiva.Nikolce said: »
eliroo said: »
No they don't.

Would you *** please knock it off with the text walls or move it to pm. It's really really really really really really *** annoying.

How annoying?
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2016-12-06 11:54:41  
Viciouss said: »
Shiva.Nikolce said: »
eliroo said: »
No they don't.

Would you *** please knock it off with the text walls or move it to pm. It's really really really really really really *** annoying.

How annoying?

This annoying:

YouTube Video Placeholder
 Bahamut.Kara
Offline
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: Kara
Posts: 3544
By Bahamut.Kara 2016-12-06 12:02:43  
Garuda.Chanti said: »
Yatenkou said: »
Any update on Pennsylvania? ...
Haven't seen Pennsylvania in the news this AM but Florida is there.

Michigan

Quote:
One-third of precincts in Wayne County could be disqualified from an unprecedented statewide recount of presidential election results because of problems with ballots.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2016-12-06 12:07:30  
You know, I'm actually more scared for this country if The Donald were to lose in a recount.

It really wouldn't be pretty. I'm afraid a lot of people would hurt.

Years of peaceful power transfers will vanish like a fart in the wind.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2016-12-06 12:07:30  
It's 2016 can we have once election without a damn recount. It isn't 1916 when they probably had to vote by using a quill or some *** !
[+]
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2016-12-06 12:08:09  
fonewear said: »
This annoying:

Say what you want about Mr. Simmons, but he's helped more people in this world than any *** politician
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2016-12-06 12:09:11  
fonewear said: »
It's 2016 can we have once election without a damn recount. It isn't 1916 when they probably had to vote by using a quill or some *** !

Personally, I say you should have to vote with a quill! On a paper ballot you have to read!

You can't read? You can't vote!


...I feel like this would disqualify a lot of people on both sides and maybe that's not a bad thing.

*** me. Did I just have an evil thought?
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2016-12-06 12:09:20  
Ramyrez said: »
fonewear said: »
This annoying:

Say what you want about Mr. Simmons, but he's helped more people in this world than any *** politician

Never. He gave them false hope ! You can't dance your way to happiness...well maybe you can...
 Lakshmi.Zerowone
Offline
サーバ: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
user: Zerowone
Posts: 6949
By Lakshmi.Zerowone 2016-12-06 12:13:36  
Quote:
United Technologies CEO Greg Hayes, who oversees the Carrier Corporation, has come forward in a new interview with CNBC’s Mad Money host Jim Cramer, saying that there was no “quid pro quo” deal as Trump as previously suggested.



He also seemed to suggest that because there’s no deal, the company is still liable to do whatever it wants.

Just recently, Carrier announced a price increase of 5 percent on all its residential and commercial HVAC equipment, an announcement that came just days after Trump said he was helping keep a 1,000 jobs from moving to Mexico.

Here were his comments:

“I think we came up with a relatively good solution for everybody … We still got to do the preponderance of the restructuring, which we were going to do anyways. So it’s — I would say no “deal,” but at the end of the day a good deal for UTC.”

He’s getting $7 million in tax breaks from Indiana, in addition to other federal incentives that haven’t been completely disclosed still to this day. And – in the end – Carrier will still be shipping more jobs to Mexico when you add in the fact that they are also closing their Huntington, Indiana plant.

In total, 1300 jobs are going to Mexico and only 800 jobs are staying. The 1,100 number was bogus because 300 of them were corporate jobs – and they weren’t moving regardless of what happened under Trump’s deal.

The CEO’s comments about there not being a “deal” are striking. With no “quid pro quo” as he says it, that means Carrier is under no obligation to keep its word going forward – and they still get to keep all the tax incentives coming their way. That’s a smart move – at least for United Technologies. Not so much for the taxpayer.

Mr. Hayes also seemed to imply that in the future they would use their Mexico plant more, a plant that is some 1 million square feet. That’s another strike against Trump. He went on to explain why free trade was so important, despite Trump saying he would place heavy tariffs on companies who outsourced:

“This country was founded on two principles, right — immigration and free trade. And that is what made America great over time because we had to develop and innovate in the U.S. and take those products and sell them around the world.”

Interesting to say the least.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2016-12-06 12:15:04  
fonewear said: »
Ramyrez said: »
fonewear said: »
This annoying:

Say what you want about Mr. Simmons, but he's helped more people in this world than any *** politician

Never. He gave them false hope ! You can't dance your way to happiness...well maybe you can...

No but you can stop eating donuts and dance your way away from obesity-related disease processes!
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2016-12-06 12:25:28  
Ramyrez said: »
fonewear said: »
Ramyrez said: »
fonewear said: »
This annoying:

Say what you want about Mr. Simmons, but he's helped more people in this world than any *** politician

Never. He gave them false hope ! You can't dance your way to happiness...well maybe you can...

No but you can stop eating donuts and dance your way away from obesity-related disease processes!

No reason to stop eating donuts think of all the bakery jobs we would lose !
Offline
Posts: 2442
By eliroo 2016-12-06 12:39:05  
Shiva.Nikolce said: »
eliroo said: »
No they don't.

Would you *** please knock it off with the text walls or move it to pm. It's really really really really really really *** annoying.

You will be ok. Its a forum not twitter.





Bahamut.Ravael said: »
This is a mathematical fallacy and makes no sense.


How? I don't see how its a mathematical fallacy at all, nor how it doesn't make sense. You can explain.

Also the definition of Tax Burden has been used incorrectly to even the post I originally quoted so I'm working with the literal definition that was being used and not the economic one. Thanks for correcting me and no one else though.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
サーバ: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2016-12-06 12:50:58  
Shiva.Nikolce said: »
eliroo said: »
No they don't.

Would you *** please knock it off with the text walls or move it to pm. It's really really really really really really *** annoying.
Um...let's see here.

"tough ***"

Yeah, that's where I'm going here. Point to the teacher where the man touched you rules where explaining things is against rules.
 Asura.Dameshi
Forum Moderator
Bug Hunter
Offline
サーバ: Asura
Game: FFXI
user: dameshi
Posts: 29745
By Asura.Dameshi 2016-12-06 12:52:29  
Alright class, let's stay on topic here before I scratch my nails on the chalkboard.
Offline
Posts: 24505
By Ramyrez 2016-12-06 12:53:37  
Asura.Dameshi said: »
Alright class, let's stay on topic here before I scratch my nails on the chalkboard.

You do and I'm going to have my first Nik moment of reporting a mod!
[+]
Offline
Posts: 2442
By eliroo 2016-12-06 12:55:29  
Asura.Dameshi said: »
Alright class, let's stay on topic here before I scratch my nails on the chalkboard.


How does one stay on topic, when there is no topic to begin with.
[+]
 Asura.Dameshi
Forum Moderator
Bug Hunter
Offline
サーバ: Asura
Game: FFXI
user: dameshi
Posts: 29745
By Asura.Dameshi 2016-12-06 13:04:25  
This is a politics and religion thread. Not a jump on each other's throats thread.

So basically don't do the latter and you're golden.
 Valefor.Sehachan
Guide Maker
Offline
サーバ: Valefor
Game: FFXI
user: Seha
Posts: 24219
By Valefor.Sehachan 2016-12-06 13:07:41  
Can I be silver?
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
サーバ: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2016-12-06 13:13:38  
eliroo said: »
No they don't. They pay taxes, that doesn't mean they have a tax burden, your reasoning for this is poor.
What is your definition of a "tax burden" then? Because it sounds different than the rest of the world.

eliroo said: »
You could also actually place a tax burden on these companies if they have a certain number of jobs overseas vs. In the US. That would make it more beneficial for them to have their companies in the US. There are definitely multiple ways to skin this cat and none of the answers will be good enough for either group in the argument. So really a fair compromise should take place that doesn't make the government a lapdog to corporate owners.

You could. Have to get it passed through Congress first. You can't enforce tax laws if there is none there.

But haven't you learned from the Obamacare fiasco? What you are proposing will force these companies outside the US and into other countries, physically. Some way to try to preserve jobs by running large corporations out of the country...

eliroo said: »
Not sure what you are getting at here? Their conclusion is that % wise the wealthy are paying their fair share and sometimes more while the less wealthy have a negative net tax.
It means that I'm not sure you understand their argument, as stated below:

eliroo said: »
The point is that if they own 35% of the US wealth, they should pay 35% of the tax, if we were going to operate on a "fair" % based tax.
Are you proposing that they pay less than what they actually do?

Because it's common knowledge that the 1% wealth owners pay 45.7% of all federal taxes. They own 35% of all US wealth (according to you), but they pay 45.7% of all federal taxes, according to multiple sources (IRS included).

Like I said before, I don't think you understand the argument people make on the progressive tax issue.

eliroo said: »
This is the problem, and where we will eternally disagree. I also don't think anyone that is for tax fairness has wanted to rob the pockets empty of CEOs but alas, any point I make on this will just bounce of your stubborn shell. It is a human issue but one that the greedy will always have a hard time understanding.
My point is honestly, fair is an empty word used by people who will never understand the true meaning of it. Fair, in reality, means what one person thinks should occur. Fair, in society, will never exist, because what one person thinks is fair will never align with another person's definition of the word.

eliroo said: »
Just going to reply to the rest of your post here. What are you arguing? I'm not saying the companies are in the wrong. They are a business and it is their prerogative to try and make as much money as possible. I'm simply saying that we need to close up any exploitable tax loopholes. I'm not sure why you are against the government having more money do you not think people should have a right to live? Do you not believe in the Declaration of Independence?
Let me reemphasize this point: Tax loopholes are very rarely defined as what they are, because very few people can even define what a loophole is, much less observe and identify a loophole.

Nearly all tax laws are written and enforced the way Congress (at the time) intended it. When the 99th Congress wrote the tax law we have in place (mostly), they intended it for the way it is being run, and has been corrected a few times (in totality) throughout the years to reemphasize what that specific Congress intended to do when they wrote the law.

Section 179 is not a loophole
Section 168(k) is not a loophole
Section 2555 is not a loophole
etc, etc.

Those are the 3 most common "loopholes" people identify with when they claim to be loopholes, but they work exactly as intended!

eliroo said: »
I get how that may seem like a strawman, but that is the point of this debate to begin with. This is what things like welfare and medicaid are all about. They are human issues and when people fail to take care of others then we turn to the government. There is a reason capitalism cannot exist in its purest form but strives in a modified form with some government control.

Most people don't sit there hoping to get free money from the government and steal from the rich. They want to live, they want others to live happily. It is hard to take money from the working class because every bit of their money is used while the wealthy often have an abundance of money that isn't used.
Wait...a.....second....

Do you honestly believe that these companies, these people who are considered wealthy, that they all have all that cash on hand at all times?

Haven't it occurred to you that the value these people have are not monetary value, but a specific, intrinsic value known as "net worth"? Trump doesn't have $3.7 billion in cash on hand...ever. Most of the value he has is in the properties he holds (Trump Tower, various resorts, some casinos, goodwill (intrinsic goodwill, but this is an accounting term, and is hard to define and value. Think of it as the value of a name), etc.). I would highly doubt he would have on hand at any time any more than $100k. If he does, then he is an idiot because he could be using that money to work for him in terms of stock/bond investments (short term), land investments/property investments (long term), convertible treasury bonds (cash equivalents), or other interest bearing accounts. Hell, even life insurance can be converted into cash pretty easy.

When you see a rich person, I guarantee you that you can't just go up to them and demand half of their money right there and then, because almost all of it isn't easily convertible into cash. All of that is being used in investments, which creates more cash for them in the long run. That, my friends, is the secret to being wealthy.
First Page 2 3 ... 25 26 27 ... 46 47 48
Log in to post.