BMW X5
BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      11-16-2016, 11:57 AM   #89
GabeS
Crazy!
GabeS's Avatar
1124
Rep
1,365
Posts

Drives: E93 M3/S14 SRT 10 viper swap
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Las Vegas

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAxiom View Post
What others are 'bringing to light' are factually substantiated in any way, unlike my position. It's hilarious how dismissive people are in light of how incorrect and stupid their opinions are.
You could read the post back to your self, it's pretty much what I just told you.
You are so dismissive of other opinions and attempt to ridicule to gain some sort of advantage.
edit my post: not everything is a fact, but sometimes an idea, or method of thinking and opinions that shouldn't be written off because it is different than the way you think.
__________________
First "real" widebody M3 ever thread.http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthr...1#post17461963
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 11:59 AM   #90
Chihuahua
Colonel
Chihuahua's Avatar
1408
Rep
2,141
Posts

Drives: BMW
Join Date: May 2012
Location: SE US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaghave View Post
IRS will be abolish the moment we revoke the income tax, we shouldn't be tax for just working
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAxiom View Post
What stupid ideas, you should be ashamed for simply believing they are remotely credible.
I think what Jag was referring to is the notion that perhaps the US should go to some type of consumption based taxation versus what we have now. The problem with what we have now is that there is no mechanism in place to prevent the government from changing your tax rate to 100% and taking all of your earnings in the form of taxation. That is obviously an extreme example, but you get the idea. The fact that it's even possible for that to happen is a problem in the minds of many people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GabeS View Post
Every political thread has some guy that takes the bully stance, anything that he doesn't agree with is just stupid/idiotic/blah blah, hard head and close minded, never even thinks about the possibility of what the others are bringing to light.
, which is a big reason why Donald Trump won the presidency. People are tired of being talked down to. A little introspection would do a lot of people a lot of good.
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 12:56 PM   #91
Taskmaster
Banned
Japan
2325
Rep
9,157
Posts

Drives: M235i 6MT / E92 328 Msport 6MT
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Florida

iTrader: (6)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GabeS View Post
You could read the post back to your self, it's pretty much what I just told you.
You are so dismissive of other opinions and attempt to ridicule to gain some sort of advantage.
edit my post: not everything is a fact, but sometimes an idea, or method of thinking and opinions that shouldn't be written off because it is different than the way you think.
I'll write it off if it's factually incorrect, I have no time to entertain fairytales.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle B View Post
I think what Jag was referring to is the notion that perhaps the US should go to some type of consumption based taxation versus what we have now. The problem with what we have now is that there is no mechanism in place to prevent the government from changing your tax rate to 100% and taking all of your earnings in the form of taxation. That is obviously an extreme example, but you get the idea. The fact that it's even possible for that to happen is a problem in the minds of many people.



, which is a big reason why Donald Trump won the presidency. People are tired of being talked down to. A little introspection would do a lot of people a lot of good.
No. Not at all.

A consumption based tax is a regressive tax and a stupid idea (which would substantially drop revenue from the current levels. There is also the fact that until the 50s, we had tax brackets in the 90% for high income. You example is silly on the basis that NO ONE is advocating raising taxes that high again - and as for 'no mechanism in place to prevent it' That's why you vote.

Donald Trump didn't win his platform on low taxes, he won it on being a Washington outsider who wanted to shake up the establishment and bring back jobs. His tax policy is a disaster, much like every other conservative talking point.
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 01:28 PM   #92
Jaghave
Colonel
804
Rep
2,136
Posts

Drives: 2016 BMW 340i (Auto) RWD
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: New Jersey

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAxiom View Post
I'll write it off if it's factually incorrect, I have no time to entertain fairytales.


No. Not at all.

A consumption based tax is a regressive tax and a stupid idea (which would substantially drop revenue from the current levels. There is also the fact that until the 50s, we had tax brackets in the 90% for high income. You example is silly on the basis that NO ONE is advocating raising taxes that high again - and as for 'no mechanism in place to prevent it' That's why you vote.

Donald Trump didn't win his platform on low taxes, he won it on being a Washington outsider who wanted to shake up the establishment and bring back jobs. His tax policy is a disaster, much like every other conservative talking point.
Since when forcing the government to work on a tighter budget became a bad thing, in general you want the government as small as possible so it doesn't bully us.
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 01:30 PM   #93
D_M
Private
44
Rep
98
Posts

Drives: 08_Interlagos_Blue_E92
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (0)

Political discussions are often entertaining because they inevitably end up in the same place, one corner yelling at the other. Politicians and other individuals that thirst for power, currency is rhetoric. Every organization can be better managed, but contemplating whole sale elimination in some cases, does more harm than good. The federal government and it's various departments were created because of the hodgepodge amalgamation of various State or Colonial inefficiencies. Whether it was treaties, common defense, currency, or a number of other reasons. The bottom line is our romanticize notion of state rights, just was not working for society as a whole.

You guys have to first agree on your baseline facts before you can have a productive debate about the issues that we face. My suggestion would be to start with the various reports from the Congressional Research Service, Office of Personnel Management, Office of Management and Budget, and the Government Accountability Office. Each report often offers recommendations to improve the various problems that were uncovered. Regardless if it's a left or right think tank, it's a rare occasion that some outside organization has better information than big government.

Last edited by D_M; 11-16-2016 at 01:46 PM..
Appreciate 1
Taskmaster2325.00

      11-16-2016, 01:51 PM   #94
bbbbmw
Major General
2381
Rep
6,083
Posts

Drives: 135i
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southwest

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by D_M View Post
Political discussions are often entertaining because they inevitably end up in the same place, one corner yelling at the other. Politicians and other individuals that thirst for power, currency is rhetoric. Every organization can be better managed, but contemplating whole sale elimination in some cases, does more harm than good. The federal government and it's various departments were created because of the hodgepodge amalgamation of various State or Colonial inefficiencies. Whether it was treaties, common defense, currency, or a number of other reasons. The bottom line is our romanticize notion of state rights, just was not working for society as a whole.

You guys have to first agree on your baseline facts before you can have a productive debate about the issues that we face. My suggestion would be to start with the various reports from the Congressional Research Service, Office of Personnel Management, Office of Management and Budget, and the Government Accountability Office. Each report often offers recommendations to improve the various problems that were uncovered. Regardless if it's a left or right think tank, it's a rare occasion that some outside organization has better information than big government.
I would start with: What was previously managed by the states but now by the Feds, and is there evidence that there is value received (meaning benefit that outweighs the cost)?
__________________
<OO (llll)(llll) OO>
Appreciate 1
      11-16-2016, 02:09 PM   #95
Anthony235
Lieutenant Colonel
Anthony235's Avatar
United_States
687
Rep
1,545
Posts

Drives: m235i
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: OC, Ca

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
2015 BMW  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbbbmw View Post
I would start with: What was previously managed by the states but now by the Feds, and is there evidence that there is value received (meaning benefit that outweighs the cost)?
That is a good starting point and I think you'll find in most cases the Fed has grossly mismanaged the programs after taking them over from the state and/or private sector.
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 03:00 PM   #96
Taskmaster
Banned
Japan
2325
Rep
9,157
Posts

Drives: M235i 6MT / E92 328 Msport 6MT
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Florida

iTrader: (6)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaghave View Post
Since when forcing the government to work on a tighter budget became a bad thing, in general you want the government as small as possible so it doesn't bully us.
In general, I don't want private industry to have free reign so they can bully us.
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 03:01 PM   #97
Taskmaster
Banned
Japan
2325
Rep
9,157
Posts

Drives: M235i 6MT / E92 328 Msport 6MT
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Florida

iTrader: (6)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaghave View Post
Since when forcing the government to work on a tighter budget became a bad thing, in general you want the government as small as possible so it doesn't bully us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony235 View Post
That is a good starting point and I think you'll find in most cases the Fed has grossly mismanaged the programs after taking them over from the state and/or private sector.
Like Charter Schools. Like Medicare. Like defense research. Like. Like.

Whenever the private sector gets involved, there is a LOT of waste being generated in the name of profits.
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 03:02 PM   #98
Taskmaster
Banned
Japan
2325
Rep
9,157
Posts

Drives: M235i 6MT / E92 328 Msport 6MT
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Florida

iTrader: (6)

Quote:
Originally Posted by D_M View Post
Political discussions are often entertaining because they inevitably end up in the same place, one corner yelling at the other. Politicians and other individuals that thirst for power, currency is rhetoric. Every organization can be better managed, but contemplating whole sale elimination in some cases, does more harm than good. The federal government and it's various departments were created because of the hodgepodge amalgamation of various State or Colonial inefficiencies. Whether it was treaties, common defense, currency, or a number of other reasons. The bottom line is our romanticize notion of state rights, just was not working for society as a whole.

You guys have to first agree on your baseline facts before you can have a productive debate about the issues that we face. My suggestion would be to start with the various reports from the Congressional Research Service, Office of Personnel Management, Office of Management and Budget, and the Government Accountability Office. Each report often offers recommendations to improve the various problems that were uncovered. Regardless if it's a left or right think tank, it's a rare occasion that some outside organization has better information than big government.
Shhs, some people still think the Articles of the Confederation is the constitution.
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 03:09 PM   #99
Anthony235
Lieutenant Colonel
Anthony235's Avatar
United_States
687
Rep
1,545
Posts

Drives: m235i
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: OC, Ca

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
2015 BMW  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAxiom View Post
In general, I don't want private industry to have free reign so they can bully us.
For me when I say "Private sector" that doesn't mean a monopoly. It means free market competition.
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 03:10 PM   #100
Z K
Brigadier General
Z K's Avatar
United_States
1419
Rep
4,862
Posts

Drives: E90 M3, F30 328i
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: San Francisco

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAxiom View Post

A consumption based tax is a regressive tax and a stupid idea (which would substantially drop revenue from the current levels. There is also the fact that until the 50s, we had tax brackets in the 90% for high income. You example is silly on the basis that NO ONE is advocating raising taxes that high again - and as for 'no mechanism in place to prevent it' That's why you vote.

Donald Trump didn't win his platform on low taxes, he won it on being a Washington outsider who wanted to shake up the establishment and bring back jobs. His tax policy is a disaster, much like every other conservative talking point.
This is a point of view that I agree with. Consumption taxes are highly regressive. You are basically taxing the poor more than the rich. The poor and middle class spend more of their income on necessities so they'll pay more of their income to taxes than the rich. The rich may spend more but their spending is less on living necessities than luxury items. As a percentage of income, they spend less on every day necessities like groceries.
__________________
Auto Detailing Enthusiast!
Appreciate 1
Taskmaster2325.00

      11-16-2016, 03:28 PM   #101
Taskmaster
Banned
Japan
2325
Rep
9,157
Posts

Drives: M235i 6MT / E92 328 Msport 6MT
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Florida

iTrader: (6)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony235 View Post
For me when I say "Private sector" that doesn't mean a monopoly. It means free market competition.
Which doesn't exist, and it will ALWAYS lead to monopolies.
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 03:33 PM   #102
Anthony235
Lieutenant Colonel
Anthony235's Avatar
United_States
687
Rep
1,545
Posts

Drives: m235i
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: OC, Ca

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
2015 BMW  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAxiom View Post
Which doesn't exist, and it will ALWAYS lead to monopolies.
Reality seems to contradict your statement.
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 03:50 PM   #103
Taskmaster
Banned
Japan
2325
Rep
9,157
Posts

Drives: M235i 6MT / E92 328 Msport 6MT
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Florida

iTrader: (6)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony235 View Post
Reality seems to contradict your statement.
Yeah, I'd to see it. I gave examples in this very thread where government run programs actually outperform their private sector counterparts. I can point out monoplies that existed that had to be broken up.

What do you have? Economic fairy tales that actually have no real world examples to pull from ?
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 04:05 PM   #104
Anthony235
Lieutenant Colonel
Anthony235's Avatar
United_States
687
Rep
1,545
Posts

Drives: m235i
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: OC, Ca

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
2015 BMW  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony235 View Post
For me when I say "Private sector" that doesn't mean a monopoly. It means free market competition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAxiom View Post
Which doesn't exist, and it will ALWAYS lead to monopolies.
"ALWAYS"
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 04:09 PM   #105
Anthony235
Lieutenant Colonel
Anthony235's Avatar
United_States
687
Rep
1,545
Posts

Drives: m235i
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: OC, Ca

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
2015 BMW  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAxiom View Post
Yeah, I'd to see it. I gave examples in this very thread where government run programs actually outperform their private sector counterparts. I can point out monoplies that existed that had to be broken up.

What do you have? Economic fairy tales that actually have no real world examples to pull from ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAxiom View Post
Like Charter Schools. Like Medicare. Like defense research. Like. Like.

Whenever the private sector gets involved, there is a LOT of waste being generated in the name of profits.
I'm not even sure what you're arguing.

Are you using charter schools, medicare, and defense research as examples of the Fed managing programs correctly?
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 04:50 PM   #106
Chihuahua
Colonel
Chihuahua's Avatar
1408
Rep
2,141
Posts

Drives: BMW
Join Date: May 2012
Location: SE US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAxiom View Post
I'll write it off if it's factually incorrect, I have no time to entertain fairytales.


No. Not at all.

A consumption based tax is a regressive tax and a stupid idea (which would substantially drop revenue from the current levels. There is also the fact that until the 50s, we had tax brackets in the 90% for high income. You example is silly on the basis that NO ONE is advocating raising taxes that high again - and as for 'no mechanism in place to prevent it' That's why you vote.
Voting doesn't change the fact that there is no mechanism in place to prevent the federal government from seizing 100% of your income tomorrow, if they wanted to. This is why many people support consumption based taxing, aka 'fair tax'. I am aware we once had a 90% tax bracket. I, and many others, vehemently disagree with that level of taxation on anyone. You can call my example 'silly' all you want, but it is accurate. It IS possible, as evidenced by the fact that we once had a 90% tax bracket.

The reason why people fear a drop in tax revenue is because our government is overspending at an unsustainable rate, and people aren't ready to "pull the plug on the party" so to speak. Current levels of spending are not sustainable, and eventually the weight of our debt will force people's hands. This WILL happen if we do not drastically curb our spending.
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 05:52 PM   #107
bbbbmw
Major General
2381
Rep
6,083
Posts

Drives: 135i
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southwest

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAxiom View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by GabeS View Post
You could read the post back to your self, it's pretty much what I just told you.
You are so dismissive of other opinions and attempt to ridicule to gain some sort of advantage.
edit my post: not everything is a fact, but sometimes an idea, or method of thinking and opinions that shouldn't be written off because it is different than the way you think.
I'll write it off if it's factually incorrect, I have no time to entertain fairytales.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle B View Post
I think what Jag was referring to is the notion that perhaps the US should go to some type of consumption based taxation versus what we have now. The problem with what we have now is that there is no mechanism in place to prevent the government from changing your tax rate to 100% and taking all of your earnings in the form of taxation. That is obviously an extreme example, but you get the idea. The fact that it's even possible for that to happen is a problem in the minds of many people.



, which is a big reason why Donald Trump won the presidency. People are tired of being talked down to. A little introspection would do a lot of people a lot of good.
No. Not at all.

A consumption based tax is a regressive tax and a stupid idea (which would substantially drop revenue from the current levels. There is also the fact that until the 50s, we had tax brackets in the 90% for high income. You example is silly on the basis that NO ONE is advocating raising taxes that high again - and as for 'no mechanism in place to prevent it' That's why you vote.

Donald Trump didn't win his platform on low taxes, he won it on being a Washington outsider who wanted to shake up the establishment and bring back jobs. His tax policy is a disaster, much like every other conservative talking point.
Point of fact: the top tax rate was like 90% during WW2, but there were huge deductions available so that no one (even rich) paid that.
__________________
<OO (llll)(llll) OO>
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 06:07 PM   #108
Taskmaster
Banned
Japan
2325
Rep
9,157
Posts

Drives: M235i 6MT / E92 328 Msport 6MT
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Florida

iTrader: (6)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony235 View Post
"ALWAYS"
Yes, always. Consolidation of power is natural.

DO you think Anti Trust laws just came about on their own, for no reason?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony235 View Post
I'm not even sure what you're arguing.

Are you using charter schools, medicare, and defense research as examples of the Fed managing programs correctly?
No, I'm saying those are all private run industries that compete with the public sector, and don't do as good a job, and cost more.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle B View Post
Voting doesn't change the fact that there is no mechanism in place to prevent the federal government from seizing 100% of your income tomorrow, if they wanted to. This is why many people support consumption based taxing, aka 'fair tax'.
Silly premise is silly. What is to stop them from putting the tax on consumption at 100, there is no mechanism in place to prevent the federal government from raising the consumption tax.


I stated it before - it's a stupid idea, it disproportionately hurts lower income people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle B View Post
I am aware we once had a 90% tax bracket. I, and many others, vehemently disagree with that level of taxation on anyone. You can call my example 'silly' all you want, but it is accurate. It IS possible, as evidenced by the fact that we once had a 90% tax bracket.
You're welcome to disagree, but what of it? No one is advocatiing tax rates anywhere near there. Trumps plan cuts tax rates so much, it creates massive deficits.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle B View Post
The reason why people fear a drop in tax revenue is because our government is overspending at an unsustainable rate, and people aren't ready to "pull the plug on the party" so to speak. Current levels of spending are not sustainable, and eventually the weight of our debt will force people's hands. This WILL happen if we do not drastically curb our spending.
Saying the "the government is overspending" is so vague and doesn't really address what the government spending money on. Be specific.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbbbmw View Post
Point of fact: the top tax rate was like 90% during WW2, but there were huge deductions available so that no one (even rich) paid that.
That's fine. Just like no one really pays the top tax bracket as it is either.
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 06:51 PM   #109
Chihuahua
Colonel
Chihuahua's Avatar
1408
Rep
2,141
Posts

Drives: BMW
Join Date: May 2012
Location: SE US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAxiom View Post

Silly premise is silly. What is to stop them from putting the tax on consumption at 100, there is no mechanism in place to prevent the federal government from raising the consumption tax.
They can raise it all they want, but I only get taxed if I buy things. I would have to buy some things. Others I could produce myself, or barter/trade within the community. I could keep nearly all, if not all of what I worked for if I chose to. I'd obviously have to drastically modify my lifestyle, but it could be done. That's how a free society should work in my opinion. I'll save you the trouble: "KyleB, you're so stupid. That's such a stupid idea. I'm right and you're wrong." How'd I do?

As for the 'government overspending', you said that comment was too vague and I should supply examples. Our national debt will be $20T by the time Trump is sworn in. What examples are you looking for exactly?
Appreciate 0
      11-16-2016, 07:33 PM   #110
Taskmaster
Banned
Japan
2325
Rep
9,157
Posts

Drives: M235i 6MT / E92 328 Msport 6MT
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Florida

iTrader: (6)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle B View Post
They can raise it all they want, but I only get taxed if I buy things. I would have to buy some things. Others I could produce myself, or barter/trade within the community. I could keep nearly all, if not all of what I worked for if I chose to. I'd obviously have to drastically modify my lifestyle, but it could be done. That's how a free society should work in my opinion. I'll save you the trouble: "KyleB, you're so stupid. That's such a stupid idea. I'm right and you're wrong." How'd I do?

As for the 'government overspending', you said that comment was too vague and I should supply examples. Our national debt will be $20T by the time Trump is sworn in. What examples are you looking for exactly?
You can do all that now, and if you really want to see how well it works - try moving to Somalia.
As for overspending - WHAT specifically is being "overspent" on?
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:22 PM.




xbimmers
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST