Why is there anger when people leave a state for tax reasons???

[madgator]

Originally Posted by fredsanford

I envy how far Phil hits it and how my wife swoons when she sees him.

how your wife swoons? or his?

[rpmGator]

When they sent captured Afrika Corps soldiers to Texas. There was a man shortage to do the farm work. So they offed them money, that they could use to buy beer, in return for work.

Some quit as they said it was hotter than the Sahara Desert... Texas isn't for everyone.

If all you love is money, you are missing the best things in life.

[wygator]

Originally Posted by 108

look i get where you are coming from, but i think its completely unrealistic to discuss this from a POV that you earn your money in a vacuum...paying taxes doesn't just help someone else, it directly helps you in many many ways.

sure we would all like to pick and choose where are taxes go, but that isn't going to happen

screw small or big, just give me efficient government that isn't beholden to big money special interests

I didn't say we shouldn't pay taxes, or that we can pick and choose which ones to pay.

Do you disagree that the government is trying to do too much? When we're borrowing 40 cents of every dollar we spend it is self-evident.

It isn't a revenue problem...it is a spending problem.

There is a point somewhere on the percentage continuum where you can't continue to increase taxes whether fed, local or state. I think we've passed it already...some will disagree.

[MichiGator2002]

Originally Posted by 108

for Christ's sake, nobody said there was anything unjust about how he earned his money

all i am saying is that conservatives mistake any sort of push against wealth inequality as a sign of enviousness

and I still haven't been shown how his apology was because of liberals...it was purely to not hurt his future ability to make more $$$, which is completely fine

There is no way to say soaking Phil is in the interest of "economic justice" without the collateral implication that him being left to his wealth is somehow a perpetuation of some sort of economic injustice. Don't get to have it both ways.

[mocgator]

Something about Atlas Shrugging?....

[rpmGator]

Did Atlas move to Texas also...

[secgator]

Originally Posted by 108

for Christ's sake, nobody said there was anything unjust about how he earned his money

all i am saying is that conservatives mistake any sort of push against wealth inequality as a sign of enviousness

and I still haven't been shown how his apology was because of liberals...it was purely to not hurt his future ability to make more $$$, which is completely fine

Hmmmmm....now THIS part really is interesting. It is the complete root of your view. Care to define or rationalize "wealth inequality"??? Perhaps the simple fact of life escapes your critical thinking, but you need to accept the cold hard truth that will ALWAYS be a difference in degrees of wealth among society. Unless that is your goal--to make damn sure everyone has the same amount of wealth.

Is that what you are really trying to say here 108??

In reality, having that inequality as you state---should, and DOES help to motivate those who want a bigger share to go out and get some. Excluding lazy ass libs who want it spread around after taking from the wealthy to give it to them. After all, it is the libs who...as you state... "push against wealth inequality".

[ArtVandelay]

Originally Posted by 108

i tend to find people project their own issues

wealth accumulation seems much more of a conservative obsession than a liberal one

hence why taxes are such a big issue for them

i never think about my taxes...it's just like rent to me

sure I wouldn't complain if they were lowered, or I was able to put it towards areas I agree with, but much of it is out of my control, and its not something i spend precious time on

Don't you know by now that "they" only know how to use talking points like "liberal" and "class envy". No original thought of their own.

This has nothing to do with either. I think as a human being with common sense. I don't agree with all liberals and disagree with all right-wings.

I made the comments I did because I heard he was talking about retiring because he was paying too many taxes. I don't have a problem with someone moving to keep more of their earnings.

I am not envious of Phil. I might be a little jealous of Phil for being as talented as he is and for having as much money as he does, but I am happy for him. I contribute to his wealth personally. I am very content with my life and money isn't the most important thing, but I don't see anything wrong with being a little jealous of someone that never has to worry about money again for him or his family.

Phil is entitled to talk about how he isn't happy. It just seems a little greedy and insensitive to the people that have trouble scraping 2 nickels together or who work extremely hard and often and still have to live paycheck to paycheck.

I don't think he needed to apologize, but I do think that if anyone with that kind of money makes a comment like he did, he will get a ton of backlash and I don't see anything wrong with that.

[CalSFGator]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

... which it is. Amazing that leftists don't see this.

even billionnaire and millionnaire leftists? This "envy" thing is so trite and unthoughtful by conservatives, and it seems to come mostly out of the lower class and middle-class right. Few actual rich people I know think like this (on both sides of the spectrum).

We have a long tradition in Westernized social life that the wealthy seem petty and cheap when they bitch in public about the costs of life. I bitch about taxes all the time, because I don't like paying 53% either, to fund wars, and aircraft carriers and bailouts, and border patrols, and DEA agents, etc, but I have the manners not to do it in front of members of my family struggling from paycheck to paycheck. I also don't tell them how much my clothes cost or bitch about how expensive apartments in SF are. It's common courtesy.

For some reason, the trailor park righties come out in droves to talk about class envy on the left whenever anyone points out the above. It's weird.

[wgbgator]

No one wants to see MTV Cribs: Tax Policy Edition, they want Lord Grantham.

[gator421]

Originally Posted by CalSFGator

even billionnaire and millionnaire leftists? This "envy" thing is so trite and unthoughtful by conservatives, and it seems to come mostly out of the lower class and middle-class right. Few actual rich people I know think like this (on both sides of the spectrum).

We have a long tradition in Westernized social life that the wealthy seem petty and cheap when they bitch in public about the costs of life. I bitch about taxes all the time, because I don't like paying 53% either, to fund wars, and aircraft carriers and bailouts, and border patrols, and DEA agents, etc, but I have the manners not to do it in front of members of my family struggling from paycheck to paycheck. I also don't tell them how much my clothes cost or bitch about how expensive apartments in SF are. It's common courtesy.

For some reason, the trailor park righties come out in droves to talk about class envy on the left whenever anyone points out the above. It's weird.

Ignorant would be a better word than weird. IMO.

[northgagator]

Originally Posted by 108

serious campaign finance/lobby reform

That type of reform is impossible. People from the very start were bartering goods and service to obtain special favor. All reform does is catch the stupid politicians and drive the smart politicians to operate in the dark where they can't be seen.

The best approach is to take money and politicians out if the equation as much as possible.

How do you feel about:
1, Going back to the the system where the US Senators are elect by the State Houses in there home state.
2, Make it illegal for lobbyist to pay or treat US Congress men/women.
3, Campaign contributions can only come from private individuals who reside in or do business in the candidate's home district (for House of Reps) and home state (for Senators).
4, Term limits or at the least make a Us Congressman sit out a term after serving two consecutive terms.
5, Do not allow the piggybacking of an unrelated bill or budget item onto a bill.

Doing this has three impacts.
One. It makes it harder for a lobbyist to buy or influence a US Senator.
Two, it makes the US Senator more beholden to his/hers home state instead of to an out of state and out of country special interest. Also, it has the US Senator voting more in line with how the his state house votes.
Three, Cut down on the pork.

[ArtVandelay]

Originally Posted by gator421

Ignorant would be a better word than weird. IMO.

Ignorant would be a great word for most of the people on here...

[jimgata]

Is it greedy an insensitive to spend millions of tax payers money on vacations and more millions on White House parties? All this being done by the self acclaimed champion of the middle class.
Poor old Phil, greedy and insensitive but not a peep about millions being spent for personal pleasure by the occupants of the White House. It is Phil's money and while Obama may think so, it is damn sure not Obama's money Obama is spending.

[secgator]

Originally Posted by jimgata

Is it greedy an insensitive to spend millions of tax payers money on vacations and more millions on White House parties? All this being done by the self acclaimed champion of the middle class.
Poor old Phil, greedy and insensitive but not a peep about millions being spent for personal pleasure by the occupants of the White House. It is Phil's money and while Obama may think so, it is damn sure not Obama's money Obama is spending.

But that is totally different. That is because he is...The Messiah. And he can do with OUR money, any thing he damn well pleases. Merely because--he is the smartest human to have ever lived. He is the Great Uniter and he is working his magic on his many vacations, bringing mankind together in the name of Obama.

Haven't you read the latest Liberal Lemming manual? When something is wrong and unjust, and done by someone other than a lib--it is profusely wrong. When the same is done by one of the comrade kinship of Liberals....it is completely acceptable.

Face it jimgata...the left would NEVER admit to anything Obama does as being wrong, unethical, or lacking common sense judgement. Never.

[Swampmaster]

why would any person not do everything in their legal power to avoid paying any of these obscene taxes to the corrupt u.s. government, that wastes or steals 80% of the money???

[neisgator]

Originally Posted by oragator1

He apologized because:

A- he sponsors products and his clients don't want him dipping in political waters.
B- because as he eloquently said today, many of his fans who can't find work or are underemployed living paycheck to paycheck and he doesn't want to alienate them.

If you are going to do it then just do it, but avoid the public political displays of anger.

Pussification of America, your table is now available.

[108]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

I suppose I should have pointed out that you're confusing categories to begin with (along with ignoring history).

There is a difference between tax inequality and wealth inequality. Nobody likes the former, leftists hate the latter and use it gin-up unrest, even if they have to call envy by another name, like 'social injustice.'

you don't have to be envious to recognize that the average worker has been getting the short stick ever since Reagan brought in Trickle Down

[108]

Originally Posted by northgagator

That type of reform is impossible. People from the very start were bartering goods and service to obtain special favor. All reform does is catch the stupid politicians and drive the smart politicians to operate in the dark where they can't be seen.

The best approach is to take money and politicians out if the equation as much as possible.

How do you feel about:
1, Going back to the the system where the US Senators are elect by the State Houses in there home state.
2, Make it illegal for lobbyist to pay or treat US Congress men/women.
3, Campaign contributions can only come from private individuals who reside in or do business in the candidate's home district (for House of Reps) and home state (for Senators).
4, Term limits or at the least make a Us Congressman sit out a term after serving two consecutive terms.
5, Do not allow the piggybacking of an unrelated bill or budget item onto a bill.

Doing this has three impacts.
One. It makes it harder for a lobbyist to buy or influence a US Senator.
Two, it makes the US Senator more beholden to his/hers home state instead of to an out of state and out of country special interest. Also, it has the US Senator voting more in line with how the his state house votes.
Three, Cut down on the pork.

that would be a great start

[wygator]

Originally Posted by 108

you don't have to be envious to recognize that the average worker has been getting the short stick ever since Reagan brought in Trickle Down

A comparison of the top 1% to an average of a much larger group is going to be misleading. The top 1% (a group that will change over time) is the people doing exceptionally well at any particular time.

Would like to know if the data is inflation adjusted. I'm guessing it is.