Oh screw that.........I am to feel bad that Bill Gates pays half his income to federal taxes. He has more money than God and even at the rate he gives it away, he will leave billions to his progeny. I can't get all teary eyed for the rich.........they do very well in this country thank you very much!!
There you go again. Taking half of Bill Gate's year after year is fine, and you will not get teary eyed about it. How about Israel confiscating half of Muslim land? The Jews had nothing, Arabs have plenty. Or do you have one system of justice for the rich, different one for the rest?
Joe, I never complained that the Israelis got their land. That's fine......and now its the Palestinians turn. Do you think its reasonable that the Jews got first pick, and now the Palestinians can't even get a second pick? Unfortunately, that's the position they are in......from where I am sitting, there are some valid inequities to the Palestinian complaints. That seems to get lost in the roar of suicide bombs going off.
I think this class warfare idea of socialists is so ingrained in you that you no longer perceive it. Certainly you feel that violence or threat of violence is fine to extract half of the wealth of the rich (while others don't have to contribute).
I grew up with really wealthy kids.......I was not, they were. I never felt 'less than' because of it nor did they ever try to make me feel that I was. I have no complaints against the wealthy. However, I do not believe its healthy for a wealthy society such as ours to have children go to bed hungry, or in serious need of medical attention. For that reason, I think the better off in society have a responsibility to insure that that doesn't happen.
Let me say this......its clear my growing up experiences are different than many. Living in MN and now in WA state, there is more concern for your neighbors than I have seen in other places. There has been the intention that residents should not be without. And it has worked.........particularly, in MN which at times has been dubbed the Land of 10000 taxes....as opposed to the Land of 10000 Lakes which is on the state's license plates.
MN is able to take of its own, maintaining a high standard of living while continuing to grow and prosper. It takes extra work but in my estimation, its worth it in the long run. Consequently, in addition to having a high standard of living, Minnesotans are long lived and have a high literacy rate. There is a spirit of excellance that permeates all aspects of the culture.
To a lesser extent, the same thing exists here in WA state. I am not entirely sure why these and a few other states operate in this fashion and the rest don't but I have lived in both and prefer this type. And going back to Bill Gates..........he was in New Mexico, the land of low taxes when he got his hands on DOS, but chose to come here back here to grow MSFT. And continues to expand here as well. He's a smart man........he could have gone anywhere.
I think the taxing arrangements in this country are very fair. Do you have a specific gripe?
Definitely. A system where 5% of taxpayers is paying 55% of income taxes is very unbalanced and unfair. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Even if that 5% have 50% of the wealth? I appreciate your concern........but I think its misplaced. That 5% is fine.....they don't go to bed hungry, they don't worry where they will get the money to fill their kids' cavities
or pay for their kids' school clothes. I am sorry but I can't be concerned about their unhappiness over paying more taxes than poorer people.
There are tax provision apply to everyone except "the rich" I don't know if it is even constitutional to have a double standard, double sets of laws, where some laws apply to some citizens, others don't.
Our tax system is regressive one.......its fairer than many other systems that exist in developed nations. I understand that conservatives feel there is very little need for gov't and consequently, there should be very little taxes......but they are wrong on both counts IMO.
First, 50 years is not a long time for people to feel angry. Besides, the Germans of 50 years ago had advantages that the Palestinians have never had.
What would those advantages be?
For starters, they had their own nation to go to.....that does alot for one's self esteem, having a place to call home. Whereas the Palestinians were forced out of the place they called home and were pushed into refugee camps.
Plus, the Arabs and the Israelis have used the Palestinians as their pawns in their bitter conflict.......and the Palestinians know that.
Again the moral equivalency. There was time where the misguided part of your party claimed moral equivalency between Communism and the Free World.
When you say my party......I assume that you mean the Dems. Is that a Freudian slip or do you repeatedly forget that I am an independent and belong to no party?
Fortunately, they never completely took over the Democrat party. There were still enough good people left who contributed to bringing about the end of Communism. Why is it that there must be a moral equivalency?
Again, I don't know what you are talking about. BTW what was brought to an end was not communism but a right wing dictatorship playing under the guise of communism.
Arabs refused to admit Palestinian Arabs the way West Germany accepted German refugees. Is Israel to blame for that? Israel may have a blame for what happened 50+ years ago, but since then, the instigators of this never ending conflict have been Arabs, despite your best efforts to deflect the blame from them.
I have said repeatedly the real battle is between the Arabs and Israel........and the Palestinians are the pawns. And the German refugees forced back into Germany is not the same as the Palestinians forced into refugee camps. At least, the Germans understood they were faulted for being the bad guys in a war, and must take what is dished out; but the Palestinians were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.
I don't know why Sharon is behaving the way he is nor why Arafat acts the way he does...........they've been fightng for so long, they probably don't know themselves at this point.
Ok, let me ask you this question differently. Suppose Arafat, Palestinians, Hamas, whatever) have not started the terror attacks with their suicide bombings. Do you think Sharon would today be ordering tanks to re-occupy West Bank. Do you thing there would even be a prime minister named Sharon?
Probably not..........and now my question to you: if there were no Arafat et al and no terror attacks, would the independent state of Palestine be in existence by now?
Sharon phenomenon is just a natural effect to what Palestinians started, and they have no one else (other than themselves) to blame.
That's assuming that everything started with the first suicide bombing. What the truth is that the whole thing started when the first Zionists settled in the Palestinian region in the very early part of the 20th century. By the twenties, the two sides were already in a state of conflict. As more Zionists settled into the area, the Jews developed an edge that became a win when the Brits agreed to let them create Israel.
Since then, the Palestinian position has weakened considerably. Let also not forget what Sharon means to the Palestinians......he is the Butcher. He is a slap in their collective face.
So how come the Israelis elected him over Netanyahu? They share the same politics, are both hard liners.......Netanyahu is the one more articulate, more charismatic, the one more prime ministerial etc. Yet they chose Sharon even as they knew their own tribunal had found him guilty in the early 80's. Why? Netanyahu would have been as hard on the Palestinians. Why Sharon? He is a jigger of salt in the Palestinians' wounds. How could the Israelis not know that?
ted
PS: I just want to commend you for hanging on, and arguing your points with civility.
Ditto! |
