Why do Dems want to shut the government down?

Dave68124

Elder Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
905
Reaction score
403
Location
United States
Country
llUnited States
You clearly did not understand any of my five points.
Any salary or pension that I have earned was based on my perceived value to the company. If they decided that by paying my wage and using my software that they would make extra money over and above my wage (profit = added value - wage), then that is before taxation. If I did not provide surplus value to the company then they should not have employed me, they would be losing money. How much pre-tax profit they would make would be down to pay negotiation between me and them. So either I am a profit or loss to them, changing the tax rate only alters how much they profit or lose.

Say my wage was €1000. Case 1, I provide €1200 of overall value and case 2, I provide €800 of overall value. So in case 1 I generate €200 profit, in case 2 I generate €200 loss. That's before tax. Assume there are 2 tax rates, 25% and 50% just to keep it simple. Also assume that the company is overall profitable, regardless whether I am a plus or minus. In case 1 the company retains a profit of €150 at 25% or €100 at 50%, in case 2 the company loses €150 at 25% or €100 at 50%.

So what I earn has nothing to do with corporate tax rates, that's down to negotiation between me and the company. Either I am of benefit or not. Likewise what tax rate I pay does not affect the company's pre-tax profit.

Now let us progress to the tax paying step. Corporate tax rates here are lower than for middle income individuals and have been for a long, long time. The state decides it needs a particular sum of money. It has direct (wages, profit, etc) and indirect (excise, VAT, etc) taxes to call on.

Indirect taxes like VAT don't affect business to the same degree, they pay (retail price - wholesale price) x VAT rate while the individual pays at retail price x VAT rate. Excise duties are fixed (so much per gram of tobacco, bottle of wine, etc) and are passed on entirely to the consumer, the business only collects. For indirect taxes, excise has no real effect on a business other than accounting costs, VAT only a charge on product markup, while the individual is hit by excise and VAT in full.

Next direct taxes. Corporations pay lower rates than individuals. That means that as an individual I am paying proportionally more to support the state than a corporation even just considering direct taxes alone. Add in the indirect taxation, grossly skewed against the individual, means that I am being shafted in favour of corporations. Not only should I get what I get, I should have had less deducted in tax if corporations had been paying their fair share. So the poisoned fruit is not what I got, it's what I didn't get. There is a moral case that those who are poor should pay at a lower rate or none, I have no problem with that, but a low corporate rate reverses that and gives a lower rate to an entity that earns more than a average person earns. That is simply immoral.
Did you work for a company with a foreign parent? If so, tax rate was one of the primary drivers of you even having a job. You can avoid the conversation all you want and attempt to convolute it with VAT taxes all you want, but ultimately you had a job and upcoming funded pension because companies came to Ireland based on the 12.5% tax rate. Your communist-light leanings may not like it, but you sure as hell benefited from it just like many of your country men, woman and children.

BTW- tax rates aren’t immoral, they are economic decisions on how to fund a governmental entity and ultimately how to compete in a world market. What is immoral is generational welfare by the state and locking their people into hopeless poverty because they want their vote. A job with a high tax rate is better than no job.
 

Dave68124

Elder Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
905
Reaction score
403
Location
United States
Country
llUnited States
Yup, have to say the Dems have their hands dirty for shutting down.

The more I learn about DACA, the more I support it. A raw deal to these people and they should be allowed in.
Then where do you draw the line? An extra billion people allowed to come here? It will always be a raw deal for someone, but eventually we are a nation of laws or we aren’t. Deporting kids who have been here all their lives doesn’t make a lot of sense to me either, but eventually people south of the border should have to follow the same rules as anyone else be it from Asia, Europe, Africa or the Middle East trying to immigrate to the US.
 

Gunner Scott

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
13,082
Reaction score
1,719
Location
Chicago, IL
Country
llUnited States
We are a country of immigrants, but with nazi's in office and in the good old pedophile party, we are see'ing nazi like thinking towards those of non white color from the right.

Then where do you draw the line? An extra billion people allowed to come here? It will always be a raw deal for someone, but eventually we are a nation of laws or we aren’t. Deporting kids who have been here all their lives doesn’t make a lot of sense to me either, but eventually people south of the border should have to follow the same rules as anyone else be it from Asia, Europe, Africa or the Middle East trying to immigrate to the US.
 

The Doctor

Junk Science Debunker
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
334
Reaction score
47
Location
Houston/Dallas, TX
Country
llUnited States
Then where do you draw the line? An extra billion people allowed to come here? It will always be a raw deal for someone, but eventually we are a nation of laws or we aren’t. Deporting kids who have been here all their lives doesn’t make a lot of sense to me either, but eventually people south of the border should have to follow the same rules as anyone else be it from Asia, Europe, Africa or the Middle East trying to immigrate to the US.
The DACA solution is easy. Establish a Conditional Resident Alien Visa... a conditional green card. This will allow them to stay in the country as long as they are law-abiding productive residents. However, if they want to apply for Permanent Resident Alien status (AKA green card) and eventually citizenship, they would have to return to their country of nationality and apply like everyone else.

I think President Trump would accept this as part of a deal that ended chain migration, terminated the diversity visa lottery program, established a 100% merit-based immigration system and fully funded at least 700 miles of a border wall.

However, no Democrats in the Senate would go for this... At least 3 or 4 Republicans would also reject it.

Come February 8, there will be no bipartisan DACA deal, DACA will either be voted down (if it even gets a vote in the House) or Trump will veto it as a stand alone bill.
If the parties don’t agree to a deal by Feb. 8, McConnell vowed to take up stand-alone legislation to fix the matter and let the Senate work its will on the floor — as long as the government remained open.

The deal, however, doesn’t bind the House. Senate Democrats had sought a commitment from Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) that he would put any Senate-passed immigration deal on the House floor. They didn’t get that.


https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/22/government-shutdown-deal-democrats-lose-355997
If the Democrats are sincere about wanting to save the DACA'ns from deportation jeopardy, they will agree to a deal. If the Democrats just want to use 700,000 DACA'ns as a pathway to import and/or legalize 11-20 million new Democrat voters, they won't agree to a deal.
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,423
Reaction score
3,439
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
No, totally Irish owned when I was there, at least. It was food priority supermarket (IE no clothes, CDs, etc), one of only two natively owned supermarket chains. People have to buy food, so while they were competitive and I contributed value to the company I see little connection to foreign investment. People having better than otherwise jobs in foreign based companies may have contributed a little bit, but there is only so much food that a person eats, soap, shampoo, polish and detergent that they use. Going from the poverty line to passable comfort might allow you to make some increase in domestic spending, but that tails off pretty dam quick. Once you can house, feed, clean and at least minimally clothe yourself, you are going to be spending what is left on extra clothes, books, music, holidays, cars, etc.

As for welfare, it was not Karl Marx that started the first state welfare system, it was Otto von Bismark. He regarded some form of social security net as of benefit to the nation and especially the state. This was someone who was, even in his own time, regarded as an extreme reactionary. He did not have to buy votes, just blow the current Kaiser. If you kick out your dog and leave him/her to starve on the street, you will rightly get prosecuted. A state that discards or neglects its citizens has no legitimacy and no claim to loyalty. Which is worse, giving basic support or forcing people to starve to death in the gutter?

The welfare state is here to stay and will increase it's scope simply because human productivity has increased dramatically due to automation. Barring nuclear war, super volcano or asteroid strike, most human needs will be done by machines with little or no human intervention. It will not be in my lifetime and unlikely for a generation afterwards, but there will come a time when useful/productive work will be an unusual or elite luxury. The mini-supermarket 2 doors away from me has self service checkouts as well as human manned ones and my guess is that 2/3 or 3/4 of transactions are self service. The main human activity is shelf stocking and cleaning, a job within current robotic capabilities.

As for locking into states of dependencies, except for isolated individual hunter gatherers, we are all locked into dependencies. What I eat, I bought from a store, the store gets the food from a supplier, the supplier gets from a farmer who buys fertiliser, fuel, etc from someone else and so on and so on. We have achieved our human success precisely because of our cooperation and mutual dependencies. We are all in this together, all of us. If you don't like that then walk naked into the wilderness, find some sticks and suitable knapping stones, hunt for food and clothing. Oh and good luck finding a mate! Oh, sorry you don't want to be dependant, so jerking off is your lot.
 

Ed Caswell

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2004
Messages
255
Reaction score
41
Location
Knob Noster, MO
Country
llUnited States
The DACA solution is easy. Establish a Conditional Resident Alien Visa... a conditional green card. This will allow them to stay in the country as long as they are law-abiding productive residents. However, if they want to apply for Permanent Resident Alien status (AKA green card) and eventually citizenship, they would have to return to their country of nationality and apply like everyone else.

I think President Trump would accept this as part of a deal that ended chain migration, terminated the diversity visa lottery program, established a 100% merit-based immigration system and fully funded at least 700 miles of a border wall.

However, no Democrats in the Senate would go for this... At least 3 or 4 Republicans would also reject it.

Come February 8, there will be no bipartisan DACA deal, DACA will either be voted down (if it even gets a vote in the House) or Trump will veto it as a stand alone bill.
If the parties don’t agree to a deal by Feb. 8, McConnell vowed to take up stand-alone legislation to fix the matter and let the Senate work its will on the floor — as long as the government remained open.

The deal, however, doesn’t bind the House. Senate Democrats had sought a commitment from Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) that he would put any Senate-passed immigration deal on the House floor. They didn’t get that.


https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/22/government-shutdown-deal-democrats-lose-355997
If the Democrats are sincere about wanting to save the DACA'ns from deportation jeopardy, they will agree to a deal. If the Democrats just want to use 700,000 DACA'ns as a pathway to import and/or legalize 11-20 million new Democrat voters, they won't agree to a deal.
All the Democrats have ever been concerned about are the votes. They don't care about you, me, immigrants, blacks, etc; just votes. They screwed up big time shutting down the govt to help illegals and allow our military not to get paid while being shot at. Their judgement was about equal to that of the NFL and the kneelers. The kneelers got what they claimed they wanted but are still kneeling. Cowardly antiAmerica millionaires. I am a veteran of 22 years with 3 of them in VietNam. The Democrats and NFL can go to Hell. I will never view the NFL again and I will never vote for any Democrat again.
 

zgrose

Elder Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2004
Messages
3,621
Reaction score
568
Location
Kingwood, TX
First name
Zoltan
Country
llUnited States
So by extension, the Republican Party does care about you, me, immigrants and blacks? They have an interesting way of expressing their support.
 

Gunner Scott

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
13,082
Reaction score
1,719
Location
Chicago, IL
Country
llUnited States
The republicans prefer to support pedophiles and their rich donors then help the American people. BTW, the good old pedophiles control the government, not the dems, so the shutdown can be layed squarely at putins er I mean trumps feet and the republican pedophiles.
 

Dave68124

Elder Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
905
Reaction score
403
Location
United States
Country
llUnited States
No, totally Irish owned when I was there, at least. It was food priority supermarket (IE no clothes, CDs, etc), one of only two natively owned supermarket chains. People have to buy food, so while they were competitive and I contributed value to the company I see little connection to foreign investment. People having better than otherwise jobs in foreign based companies may have contributed a little bit, but there is only so much food that a person eats, soap, shampoo, polish and detergent that they use. Going from the poverty line to passable comfort might allow you to make some increase in domestic spending, but that tails off pretty dam quick. Once you can house, feed, clean and at least minimally clothe yourself, you are going to be spending what is left on extra clothes, books, music, holidays, cars, etc.

As for welfare, it was not Karl Marx that started the first state welfare system, it was Otto von Bismark. He regarded some form of social security net as of benefit to the nation and especially the state. This was someone who was, even in his own time, regarded as an extreme reactionary. He did not have to buy votes, just blow the current Kaiser. If you kick out your dog and leave him/her to starve on the street, you will rightly get prosecuted. A state that discards or neglects its citizens has no legitimacy and no claim to loyalty. Which is worse, giving basic support or forcing people to starve to death in the gutter?

The welfare state is here to stay and will increase it's scope simply because human productivity has increased dramatically due to automation. Barring nuclear war, super volcano or asteroid strike, most human needs will be done by machines with little or no human intervention. It will not be in my lifetime and unlikely for a generation afterwards, but there will come a time when useful/productive work will be an unusual or elite luxury. The mini-supermarket 2 doors away from me has self service checkouts as well as human manned ones and my guess is that 2/3 or 3/4 of transactions are self service. The main human activity is shelf stocking and cleaning, a job within current robotic capabilities.

As for locking into states of dependencies, except for isolated individual hunter gatherers, we are all locked into dependencies. What I eat, I bought from a store, the store gets the food from a supplier, the supplier gets from a farmer who buys fertiliser, fuel, etc from someone else and so on and so on. We have achieved our human success precisely because of our cooperation and mutual dependencies. We are all in this together, all of us. If you don't like that then walk naked into the wilderness, find some sticks and suitable knapping stones, hunt for food and clothing. Oh and good luck finding a mate! Oh, sorry you don't want to be dependant, so jerking off is your lot.
LOL So predictable when you get caught in your own bullshit. You have no issue with dishing it, but get it back in the same way you dish it you are almost child like your responses. Comical...
 

The Doctor

Junk Science Debunker
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
334
Reaction score
47
Location
Houston/Dallas, TX
Country
llUnited States
All the Democrats have ever been concerned about are the votes. They don't care about you, me, immigrants, blacks, etc; just votes. They screwed up big time shutting down the govt to help illegals and allow our military not to get paid while being shot at. Their judgement was about equal to that of the NFL and the kneelers. The kneelers got what they claimed they wanted but are still kneeling. Cowardly antiAmerica millionaires. I am a veteran of 22 years with 3 of them in VietNam. The Democrats and NFL can go to Hell. I will never view the NFL again and I will never vote for any Democrat again.
 

The Doctor

Junk Science Debunker
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
334
Reaction score
47
Location
Houston/Dallas, TX
Country
llUnited States
So by extension, the Republican Party does care about you, me, immigrants and blacks? They have an interesting way of expressing their support.
The Republican Party is pretty well only interested in votes as well... That's what political parties do... :cool:
 

zgrose

Elder Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2004
Messages
3,621
Reaction score
568
Location
Kingwood, TX
First name
Zoltan
Country
llUnited States
The Republican Party is pretty well only interested in votes as well... That's what political parties do... :cool:
Well, I like to think of votes as a means to an end as opposed to the end itself. Given the percentages that actually vote, you don't really need that many voters to win... just need the ones that actually show up. Adding 10M no-shows is just a waste of money mailing out those fliers. :)
 

bendizoid

Official ***** Dickweed
Joined
Sep 11, 2006
Messages
3,017
Reaction score
883
Location
Viet Nam
Country
llUnited States
Let's see, 95% of the Republicans voted yes on the budget and 95% of the Dummycrats voted against it. Somehow, it the Rupublicans fault if the Government shuts down. Turn off your TVs.
 

zgrose

Elder Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2004
Messages
3,621
Reaction score
568
Location
Kingwood, TX
First name
Zoltan
Country
llUnited States
I believe they voted to kick the can down the road for 3 weeks. TRUE LEADERSHIP!
 

Marty Ward

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
196
Reaction score
197
Location
Maryland
Country
llUnited States
You clearly did not understand any of my five points.
Any salary or pension that I have earned was based on my perceived value to the company.
No your salary is based on what the company could pay you. Whether it matched any perceived value has no bearing on it. You may be worth a million buck to your company but if they don't make enough profit to pay that to you they won't. The lower the tax rate the higher the profits the more they can afford to pay you.
 

Dave68124

Elder Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
905
Reaction score
403
Location
United States
Country
llUnited States
I believe they voted to kick the can down the road for 3 weeks. TRUE LEADERSHIP!
Four times better than Schumer's 5 days I guess. All of them are clowns, but Dems own this mess. Illegal aliens are more important than American citizens, so they will hold up the budget. Pretty simple.
 

zgrose

Elder Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2004
Messages
3,621
Reaction score
568
Location
Kingwood, TX
First name
Zoltan
Country
llUnited States
Four times better than Schumer's 5 days I guess. All of them are clowns, but Dems own this mess. Illegal aliens are more important than American citizens, so they will hold up the budget. Pretty simple.
One could say a fanciful wall to accomplish nothing is also holding up the budget. When the president is more interested in political theater than sound policy, we all lose.
The guy is supposed to be a deal maker. Making deals means both sides come away with something they want.
 

JimWhite

Senior Member
Silver Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
1,374
Reaction score
404
Location
Newark
Country
llUnited States
One could say a fanciful wall to accomplish nothing is also holding up the budget.
Ok...I have to ask.

When people say a wall will accomplish nothing...how exactly would a wall NOT accomplish anything?

Serious question...
 

zgrose

Elder Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2004
Messages
3,621
Reaction score
568
Location
Kingwood, TX
First name
Zoltan
Country
llUnited States
Ok...I have to ask.

When people say a wall will accomplish nothing...how exactly would a wall NOT accomplish anything?

Serious question...
How about... less than advertised? Poor return on investment? Maintenance nightmare? Money best spent elsewhere with more tangible benefits?
 
Top