About the 5th congressional district (Dayton: daycare, felons, public school)

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by Thedosius

Nope - not necessarily. I also support a simplified tax system but it must be more progressive than it currently is to give the middle class and poor a break. The marginal tax rate could be as high as 60-70% on extremely high incomes and greatly simplified. There's nothing mutually exclusive about higher marginal rates and a simplified tax system. The concentration of wealth we are seeing in this age are profoundly destructive to this country.

Then you shouldn’t cite the last part of the 20th century to try to show that such high marginal rates can work without adversely affecting economic growth since, as explained in the WSJ article, the system of deductions, credits, tax shelters, and especially the looser requirement for capital gains treatment effectively reduced those high marginal rates to something significantly lower. I know that you understand this.

What you are proposing is radically different and a much high level of taxation than we have ever before experienced. Argue for it on its own merits. To pretend that we are going back to something we had before is incorrect and intellectually beneath you.

[Thedosius]

Originally Posted by Glenfield

Then you shouldn’t cite the last part of the 20th century to try to show that such high marginal rates can work without adversely affecting economic growth since, as explained in the WSJ article, the system of deductions, credits, tax shelters, and especially the looser requirement for capital gains treatment effectively reduced those high marginal rates to something significantly lower. I know that you understand this.

What you are proposing is radically different and a much high level of taxation than we have ever before experienced. Argue for it on its own merits. To pretend that we are going back to something we had before is incorrect and intellectually beneath you.

In the interest of brevity and assuming a level of common sense in some readers of my posts, I did not include every qualifier to my statements that would cause warm feelings to someone of your political perspective. From now on, I will add qualifiers regardless of how lengthy that makes my posts, if only to make you feel better. I'm sorry about the missed naptime.

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by Thedosius

In the interest of brevity and assuming a level of common sense in some readers of my posts, I did not include every qualifier to my statements that would cause warm feelings to someone of your political perspective. From now on, I will add qualifiers regardless of how lengthy that makes my posts, if only to make you feel better. I'm sorry about the missed naptime.

Now what kind of an answer is that? There really was no need to get snotty.

I take it you realize that your idea is indefensible so you revert to personal attack. We have all seen this from you before.

[faranbrygo]

Originally Posted by Glenfield

Now what kind of an answer is that? There really was no need to get snotty.

I take it you realize that your idea is indefensible so you revert to personal attack. We have all seen this from you before.

This, from mister "But thanks for revealing yourself as a complete partisan. “SF Bay Area” says it all. LOL."

You hide behind false erudition, but you are just as shallow a debater as most. His idea is perfectly defensible, you are simply being pedantic when it suits you, and ignoring fact and detail when it does not.

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by faranbrygo

This, from mister "But thanks for revealing yourself as a complete partisan. “SF Bay Area” says it all. LOL."

You hide behind false erudition, but you are just as shallow a debater as most. His idea is perfectly defensible, you are simply being pedantic when it suits you, and ignoring fact and detail when it does not.

Wow. You just figured out this is social media? You thought it was the Harvard Business Review online? Of course debate here is shallow. Read your own posts sometime.

He falsely equated his plan to the tax scheme of the 60s. I called him on it, so he got mad.

Where do you fit in that exchange, peanut?

[faranbrygo]

Originally Posted by Glenfield

Wow. You just figured out this is social media? You thought it was the Harvard Business Review online? Of course debate here is shallow. Read your own posts sometime.

He falsely equated his plan to the tax scheme of the 60s. I called him on it, so he got mad.

Where do you fit in that exchange, peanut?

Cue the "social" part of social media. Clue.

Caught you being flip when you accuse others of the same. I called you on it, so you got mad.

No need to get snotty... peanut.

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by faranbrygo

Cue the "social" part of social media. Clue.

Caught you being flip when you accuse others of the same. I called you on it, so you got mad.

No need to get snotty... peanut.

Fair enough. I could have been nicer to you, though your original comment to me (#14) started the rude tone.

[MidwestRedux]

Originally Posted by Thedosius

Nope - not necessarily. I also support a simplified tax system but it must be more progressive than it currently is to give the middle class and poor a break. The marginal tax rate could be as high as 60-70% on extremely high incomes and greatly simplified. There's nothing mutually exclusive about higher marginal rates and a simplified tax system. The concentration of wealth we are seeing in this age are profoundly destructive to this country.

Given that the bottom half a (as in 50% of all taxpayers) pay an
average effective tax rate of interest 3.6% and less than 3% of all taxes, how can you really give them a break?" Do you mean that top wage earners should give them some free stuff?

While the US has tremendous wealth inequality and our federal government has a revenue problem, it is intellectually disingenuous to say that top earners need to "pay their fair share" and give the poor folks a break. The US tax system is incredibly progressive. Most of the countries that are touted as more egalitarian, have more regressive tax policies when VATs, sin taxes, usage taxes, etc. are accounted for.

[Teak]

Originally Posted by InnovativeAmerican

You don't respond well to change, do you? Also, that "syndrome" isn't in the DSM last time I checked....

And you are ignorant.

Yet again this week the 5th District Jihadist came out with yet another idiotic pronouncement that top tax rates should go to 90% for "fairness". Ms. Omar is appealing to the liberal left to get her religion entrenched into American culture. If Somali culture is so rich and vibrant why did her family leave that basket case of a country?

I love how the liberals are embracing Islam now. Liberals are at best ignorant of Islam and what Muslims want this country to become. I spent nearly 20 years living in a country ruled by Muslims and the rate at which the country and government have become a hell hole has slowed only for the fact that some non-Muslims still live there. The non-Muslims control the bulk of the economy while the Muslim politicians bleed the government coffers dry.

Name a single country with a Muslim majority that would score high in the things that you liberals hold near and dear.

[Teak]

Originally Posted by Kavalier

The U.N. puts gun to globalist US politicians heads making us take "refugees" like her, she comes in and her district (basically all U.N.-forced "refugees") puts her in power, then she forces U.S. citizens to insane policies she backs.
And people wonder why there are conspiracy theorists like me out there.

Exactly. The liberals want "diversity" so they are willing to bring in the world's worst religion -Islam- to "enrich" the USA. When the Muslims reach a certain small percentage of the population, they will begin to demand things that will "enrich" American culture like they "enriched" Somali culture. (And we all know how wonderful Somalia is.) It happened in France and the United Kingdom. It's happening in Germany and Sweden. And it will happen here.

Female genital mutilation? Check.
Burkas? Check.
Groups of men surrounding a woman at a music concert and raping her? Check. (You see, she was asking for it by the way she dressed they will say.) This has happened in Germany already.
Child marriage? Check. (Muhammad took Aishah as a wife at age 6 and consummated the marriage when she was 9.)
Muslim prayer rooms in US schools? Check.
Teaching of Islam to American students in public schools? Check. This has already begun to happen.

The only error in your post, Kavalier, is that you state that you are a conspiracy theorist. This isn't theory. It is already happening in the USA.

This is what the 5th District voted for.