Agree w Orkster on taxes. It's representative democracy. The issue being, it's been hijacked by business oligopoly. If you have the stores, people use roads to get to your place. You hire people who were educated by the state at some point. You are afforded police and fire services. You are afforded the protection of our legal system. Where is a lot of common property that we all benefit from, it may be time to progress from the caveman mentality.

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

AHTOH:

Mark, lookup socialism.WTF? Who's socialist? People like you are duped by this idea that one day you are going to make it into the inner circle. This is similar to communism - with only difference that everyone else was going to end up there. This is bunkers. You are grasping at some hopes and dreams, while any possible opportunity to succeed was effectively underwritten and lobbied out of the system. Don't you realize the monopolies and multi-nationals own this country? The saddest past is, a foreigner has to explain it to you on Internet forum. 

Let me break it to you, your chances are higher at playing the lottery. You are going to work hard all your life and then just prior to retirement, some newly concocted Wall Street scheme will destroy all your savings and you will be born again as Wal Mart greeter. Don't forget the "flair".

Well, that's an overstatement. Plenty of people live good quality life, wealthy, healthy, in large comfortable houses... Chances are none of us will be Wallmart greeters. It really wouldn't brake Mark's back if Wallmart greeters get decent health coverage and good public transportation. I doubt it will change people's incentives. That's not socialism :-) 

---

Jedem Das Seine.

Orkster:

AHTOH:

Mark, lookup socialism.WTF? Who's socialist? People like you are duped by this idea that one day you are going to make it into the inner circle. This is similar to communism - with only difference that everyone else was going to end up there. This is bunkers. You are grasping at some hopes and dreams, while any possible opportunity to succeed was effectively underwritten and lobbied out of the system. Don't you realize the monopolies and multi-nationals own this country? The saddest past is, a foreigner has to explain it to you on Internet forum. 

Let me break it to you, your chances are higher at playing the lottery. You are going to work hard all your life and then just prior to retirement, some newly concocted Wall Street scheme will destroy all your savings and you will be born again as Wal Mart greeter. Don't forget the "flair".

Well, that's an overstatement. Plenty of people live good quality life, wealthy, healthy, in large comfortable houses... Chances are none of us will be Wallmart greeters. It really wouldn't brake Mark's back if Wallmart greeters get decent health coverage and good public transportation. I doubt it will change people's incentives. That's not socialism :-) 

Ok, I'll bite. So do you propose that we continue subsidizing Wal Mart with government sponsored coverage? I would rather have Wal Mart pay decent wages and benefits, instead of picking up the tab for the Wal Mart board's misguided agenda. They are a for-profit conglomerate, they can afford paying their workers. If you Google Wal Mart benefits you'll see a plethora of cases where it is obvious Wal Mart is abusing the system. Even Mark's hypothetical store could not abuse the system to the extent that Wal Mart does. Because Mark is one little person, and Wal Mart and their industry "association" has an army of lobbyists and deep pockets to contribute to the likes of Herman Cain.

As to the "plenty of people" statement, it is definitely an overstatement. I am not sure what it means quantitatively. When more of a third of Americans are obese, close to 20% don't have any health coverage I don't think this nation is "healthy". And surviving on $35K average income, it's not "wealthy" either. It's a nation which leaved of borrowed time and dime and now it keeps falling further and further behind, while the top 1% are increasingly successful. But like I've stated this numerous times, this is not a personal argument to me. Plenty of Americans would like to be in my shoes, my concern here in purely philosophical. I would like to understand at what point system inequity becomes so apparent that the majority starts waking up to it. I think this is precisely what's going on now, hence all the talk about "republic" vs "democracy". You know, the protected "minority" they are talking about are the filty rich mofos who are pulling the strings now.

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

Yes, I propose we continue subsidizing Wall Mart with government sponsored coverage. Precisely because WM is a corporation aimed at producing profits, not providing healthcare coverage. We don't ask WM to pave roads leading to its stores or provide security, do we? We don't allow it to investigate and prosecute shoplifting (gibbets by the store anyone?). I'd rather WM pay taxes then provide services. It's much easier to keep it accountable that way. As well as competitive.

Apparently the point that you are talking about has not arrived yet. Americans I know are doing just fine, although plenty of them are obese. Yes, real wages are stagnant. Yes, riches get richer while the poor get... children. That's why I am for some more redistribution, tax reform, social services expansion, financial reguilation... But I wouldn't stand for anything radical, like squeezing the rich dry or restructuring the economy through government regulation.

(Dog on it, why can't I paste stuff here directly from Word and have to screw around deleting stupid HTML code??!!)

---

Jedem Das Seine.

sorry dude, a dissapointingly flat argument. I would even say, a false argument. Compensation is a part of running business. Do you know each large company has executive compensation committee for example? They are charged with making sure execs and board members are not paid less than at other businesses. It's the race to the Moon, and I am all for it. If margins and profits allow for great executive compensation, it's the shareholders business to take care of that. Unfortunately, what you are proposing is that we the taxpayers pickup the tab for the workers compensation, so that the company could focus solely on executives. You are actually shilling for the corporations here, in a pretty devious way if you think about it. The labor pool shall be sustained by the taxpayers, while the execs will be sustained by the money that should have been spent on the labor pool, and then some. What sort of an idea is this? Compensation of their labor is Wal Mart's business, no one elses. Especially if you consider that fact that Wal Mart (and I am not picking on them specifically but as far as we've opened that can of worms...) has been subsidized by taxpayers in a multitude of ways already:

 1. Wal Mart buys cheap crap made in China, prices of which are manipulated by sustaining low yuan.
2. Wal Mart buys cheap crap made in China, which could have been produced here in the US, had we not outsourced our manufacturing and destroyed blue collar workers with WTO and low tarriffs.
3. Wal Mart replaces smaller "mom and pop" stores like that of Mark's, which could have employed people at higher wages and benefits.

and as if this was not of a subsidy enough, now you are proposing that taxpayers pick up another tab for Wal Mart labor pool...

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

no time to reply, would take too long and I have to check out.  Besides, I feel the need to go outside and throw up.

---

Make each day count to improve yourself and those around you

it's probably because you overdosed on Koolaid and your own body rejects it. This is a good sign!

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

AHTOH:

sorry dude, a dissapointingly flat argument. I would even say, a false argument. Compensation is a part of running business. Do you know each large company has executive compensation committee for example? They are charged with making sure execs and board members are not paid less than at other businesses. It's the race to the Moon, and I am all for it. If margins and profits allow for great executive compensation, it's the shareholders business to take care of that. Unfortunately, what you are proposing is that we the taxpayers pickup the tab for the workers compensation, so that the company could focus solely on executives. You are actually shilling for the corporations here, in a pretty devious way if you think about it. The labor pool shall be sustained by the taxpayers, while the execs will be sustained by the money that should have been spent on the labor pool, and then some. What sort of an idea is this? Compensation of their labor is Wal Mart's business, no one elses. Especially if you consider that fact that Wal Mart (and I am not picking on them specifically but as far as we've opened that can of worms...) has been subsidized by taxpayers in a multitude of ways already:

 1. Wal Mart buys cheap crap made in China, prices of which are manipulated by sustaining low yuan.
2. Wal Mart buys cheap crap made in China, which could have been produced here in the US, had we not outsourced our manufacturing and destroyed blue collar workers with WTO and low tarriffs.
3. Wal Mart replaces smaller "mom and pop" stores like that of Mark's, which could have employed people at higher wages and benefits.

and as if this was not of a subsidy enough, now you are proposing that taxpayers pick up another tab for Wal Mart labor pool...

Sorry to disappoint you. You forgot to include the fact that Wall Mart provides tons of cheap products that made meager 35K go that much further for an average family.

Compensation for labor is definitely is business' responsibility. However, the degree of compensation is determined by the market price of labor, not by the needs of the workers. That's where the state comes in. It first secures the existing market price of labor through labor regulations such as minimal wage and other legislative means (workers comp, safety) - this provides the floor. It then imposes taxes on businesses (and labor). It then uses the tax money to fund healthcare. Pretty simple really.

Money is the only reasonable way to keep business accountable. You can cheat and cut corners with the money, but you can do that with service provision to a much greater degree. Making businesses pay for healthcare is essentially a tax in kind. Administering this is technically more challenging than administering cash tax. If we agree that SOMEONE should sponsor healthcare for individuals, civil service is much more suited for this task than businesses.

I am sure any business owner had this (rather limited) choice, he or she would rather pay the money and be done with it... Larger businesses on the other hand would rather provide the service and demand that gov'nt do not interfere - it will cost them less and the workers would ultimately get less healthcare.

Although what does this have to do with Cain? He is still unelectable.

 

---

Jedem Das Seine.

AHTOH:

it's probably because you overdosed on Koolaid and your own body rejects it. This is a good sign!

No, I totally understand how he feels. He is doing alright and works hard for it. And here we are, salivating at his pie… explaining to him how his pie really belongs to all… But the sad (or happy?) fact is that it does belong to all! We’ll let him keep the largest share however. And I hope he gets right back to baking…

 

---

Jedem Das Seine.

Saying that a thief steals $30 and gives $20 back to you is not really a well reasoned argument. You have not calculated how much marginal benefit would be in the system if Wal Mart wasn't there. People would be paid more, there would be more small businesses, and manufacturing would be in much better shape. What I am telling you is that you are falling for the same trap Wal Mart invented - we'll "save you money" on micro level, while costing you more on "macro" level.

I cannot support delegating more wage controls to the government. You seem to think that by growing the government and having the government manage/regulate health insurance compensation for large companies would somehow solve the problem. It wouldn't. It would only provide large companies with carte blanche to further supress wages and health coverage. Dumping business liabilities on the taxpayers is the exactly what TARP did.

And yes, Cain is a joke. Anyone on this forum, and I mean anyone could embarass him is any form of a debate. But I am glad republicans have splintered into so many versions of the same song. It means a flaky candidate will advance via primaries and lose the elections.

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

Orkster:

AHTOH:

it's probably because you overdosed on Koolaid and your own body rejects it. This is a good sign!

No, I totally understand how he feels. He is doing alright and works hard for it. And here we are, salivating at his pie… explaining to him how his pie really belongs to all… But the sad (or happy?) fact is that it does belong to all! We’ll let him keep the largest share however. And I hope he gets right back to baking…

 

I dunno. I don't want none of his pie. I just want all the pie bakers (including myself) to pay their pie baking licenses. Otherwise some will bake shyte and sell as pies and it's not right.

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

Oh, but you do! 

They say an invisible hand will strike those who make shyte and so the problem will fix itself. Not before you get a mouthful of *** though…

Still, society demands a share of his gains and stands ready to impose its will by force. That’s understandably upsetting and does lower enthusiasm for producing. We should always remember that taxes are wealth taken (by right and with due process!) from some people and given to others.

 

---

Jedem Das Seine.

Orkster:

Oh, but you do! 

<!--[endif]-->

They say an invisible hand will strike those who make shyte and so the problem will fix itself. Not before you get a mouthful of *** though…

Still, society demands a share of his gains and stands ready to impose its will by force. That’s understandably upsetting and does lower enthusiasm for producing. We should always remember that taxes are wealth taken (by right and with due process!) from some people and given to others.

 

No, taxes is exchange of value, like any other payment. I want to drive a car. I buy a car, I pay it's "value" and in exchange I get the car. Then I go to DMV and pay the tax on the title, so I can drive my car on public roads. That's an exchange of value. Otherwise, I can keep my car in my carage and not drive it, while also keeping the tax money. Or risk driving it without registered title and pay a much larger penalty when I am caught. This is the correct analogy. No one demands anything from anyone, except being sensitive to the social contract we all hold. Taxes are payments IN EXCHANGE to being able to live and profit in this great US of A. If someone doesn't like paying taxes, they can conduct business in other jurisdictions where taxes are non-existent, like Somalia. There is no big govmint there, actually a libertarian paradise. I don't understand why people aren't more excited about living there.

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

AHTOH:

No, taxes is exchange of value, like any other payment.

 

What??!! You are misinformed. Take it from student of government. :-) Taxes are NOT an exchange of value and they are NOT a form of payment. Those are FEES you are talking about. You and I pay same fee for getting a drivers license, but we pay different income taxes. And when it comes to calculating how much exactly you pay in income taxes, the amount of value you received from the government does not enter into the equation at all.

Taxes are a financial charge or levy imposed on you by the state. It's imposed not because YOU received some value from the state and the state needs to be compensated, it's imposed because the state needs funds and you got them. By the same token, you are due certain state services simply because you are within its borders or because you are a human and not a carrot, NOT because you paid taxes.

---

Jedem Das Seine.

Orkster:

AHTOH:

No, taxes is exchange of value, like any other payment.

 

What??!! You are misinformed. Take it from student of government. :-) Taxes are NOT an exchange of value and they are NOT a form of payment. Those are FEES you are talking about. You and I pay same fee for getting a drivers license, but we pay different income taxes. And when it comes to calculating how much exactly you pay in income taxes, the amount of value you received from the government does not enter into the equation at all.

Taxes are a financial charge or levy imposed on you by the state. It's imposed not because YOU received some value from the state and the state needs to be compensated, it's imposed because the state needs funds and you got them. By the same token, you are due certain state services simply because you are within its borders or because you are a human and not a carrot, NOT because you paid taxes.

No, but I am glad we have identified precisely the true nature of the dispute. In fact, I believe I am correct on this, and if more people understood the key principle of taxes, their whole viewpoint would change. Taxes are exchange of value on income. You engaged in economic activities in the jurisdiction, you pay a rate of your income derived from these activities in exchange. This is precisely what it is.

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"