0
   

The Communist Origin of the Modern Conservative Movement VI

 
 
Baldimo
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 12 May, 2018 01:34 pm
@Zardoz,
Quote:
Forty years ago, the union had a healthy treasury but when the WV council was established they had the union dues sent directly to them and returned a few hundred to the local barely enough to pay rent on the union hall. Most of the local union dues go to the international and the state council. Buying politicians from local dues is out of the question. A hundred here or there would be a big political contribution.

Unions are on the decline in the US and for good reason, they don't serve anyone but themselves.

Quote:
At the time the Federal government routinely returned part of the Federal taxes that had been collected which made sense.

That still takes place, millions of people get tax refunds every year, in fact about 50% of the US population gets more back in returns then they pay into the system. In fact, if you make under 50k a year and are married with kids, you fall into that category.

Quote:
The writers of the second amendment in 1791 could not see into the future. They couldn’t even imagine something like an AR-15 let alone grant a right to one.

No Rights were granted, they are inherent and self evident. You have read the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, haven't you?

Quote:
We have a Federal Drug Enforcement Administration for one reason to enforce drug laws across the country.

Tell me, how effect have they been? From what I can tell, they have had almost zero impact on the drug use as can be shown by your state calling in the National Guard and the record number of opioid overdoses there have been. It seems the only states without major out breaks are those who have legalized MJ.

Quote:
It is up to each generation to take their place in politic.

That is the way of things. Unfortunately, there are those on the left who think the children they have been grooming are ready to take over control. They want to by-pass at least 2 other generations simply because they "agree" with they policies. The 60's radicals are trying to let the 16-21 year old kids rule the roost.

Quote:
If I had been paid on a percentage of what I bought in I would have been paid muck better.

Sorry dude, if you wanted something like that, you should have worked in the private sector. To think you would even suggest "getting a cut" of the tickets you wrote, which weren't even criminal offences, is scary. For you writing tickets is a racket in and of itself, filling the town coffers at the expense of the citizens, over regulation is anti-freedom.

Quote:
All rights must have limits.

Does that include abortion?

Quote:
You cannot have a generic term for something you can’t imagine in your wildest dreams. But government is always better armed. Government was better armed then and it is better armed now.

Sure you can. It's why the 2nd Amendment doesn't doesn't mention muskets, they knew better guns would be invented and wanted citizens to have access to new things. Remember the reason for the Revolutionary War was for Liberty and against tyranny. The Founding Fathers understood this, it seems later generations have forgotten.

Quote:
Have you ever heard of an election? Elections decide who will serve in government and who will not.

Our Nation is actually split into different versions of democracy depending on the level of govt you are talking about. Sure we vote but at the federal level we are a not a direct democracy, we send other people to do the voting and they don't get to pass what they want, at this level we are a Constitutional Republic. All laws and regulations must be weighed against the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, it's a system of checks and balances, not majority rule. Even the French dude you mentioned warned about the "extremes of democracy".
The closer you move to the local level, the more local control. You vote for laws in your state and city, you do not vote for laws at the federal level. In the state of CO, the state govt can not raise taxes, they must be put to a vote by the citizens of CO to approve them. If we say no, no new taxes. Guess which party wants to get rid of TABOR? It isn't the GOP.

Quote:
You never had the right to weapons designed for mass murder. Weapons that are designed to fire 400-600 rounds a minute have no place in the streets.

That is your personal opinion, do you think we should be limited to 3 rounds a minute?

Quote:
You can neve make a law that grants a right to things that you can’t imagine.

Keep telling yourself that. With a limited view on what "rights" are, it's no wonder you think this.

Quote:
When any government decides it can take control of internal body functions of it population regulating guns should be no problem.

You really have some work to do on consistency, you don't have any. Either there are unlimited rights or there are limited rights. I happen to favor unlimited rights for those things actually enumerated in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Quote:
The tipping is past and we will see what happens now that the NRA is in bed with the Russians.

Keep undermining your positions with stupid crap like this.

Quote:
You need only look at the Las Vegas mass murder and the pulse Night Club mass murder to realize how deadly assault weapons are without the three parts that make them fully automatic.

First off, none of the weapons used in Las Vegas or Pulse Night club were full auto. In Las Vegas, he used semi-auto weapons with a BumpStock attached. I'm ok with banning the Bump Stock, and not because it makes it shoot like a full auto, I just think it's a stupid invention.
The Pulse Night club shooter used a semi-auto gun as well with no bumpstock though. Using made up words for made up definitions doesn't change what actually happened in those events. In both cases it's the motivation you want to ignore, the Pulse shooter was a closeted and repressed gay man who took his frustrations out on a gay night club. We don't know the motivations by Las Vegas shooter as of yet, which I find pretty suspicious, it might just prove like the majority of the mass shooters, he had a screw loose and was on medication. Did you also know that a majority of the mass shooters were fatherless as well?
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/2018/02/27/of_27_deadliest_mass_shooters_26_of_them_were_fatherless_435596.html
So no dads and psych meds are the biggest common threads that bind mass shooters.

Quote:
All shot guns have common characteristic or they would not be classified as shot guns.

Doesn't change the fact, that they have all the same types of actions and features as the guns you want banned. Want to know the only difference? Most shotguns don't have rifled barrels, they have smooth barrels so that they can shoot shot/pellets. But they also shoot slugs, which are much more deadly than a 5.56/.223 round.

Quote:
The mass murders have already settled the argument and you can tell by the numbers of bodies they have piled up.

I don't think the stats are in your favor, with the way you constantly switch definitions for mass shootings and guns used. You should try posting some links that back your position, instead of just your own unqualified opinion.

Quote:
The mass murders have made the argument against assault weapons and you can never refute it.

Sure I can. Mass shootings are actually rare in the US. Have you seen the numbers out of Chicago? Each weekend is the equal of one mass shooting. 7 dead, 20 wounded: 4 dead 30 wounded. It's the same every weekend and the majority of those shootings are done with handguns, not rifles.
I think Gabby Giffords and the victims of VA Tech would disagree with your notion that only the AR platform is used.

Quote:
All anyone needs to know about the NRA is how they launder Russian money for the Trump campaign.

Now that's funny. How much money was it exactly, you should be able to provide some proof of this, if it happened.

Quote:
Saying they are going to take all guns is just an NRA scare tactic to frighten the stupid. There will always be guns just not those that are designed to fire 400-600 rounds a minute.

No, not a scare tactic, there are several politicans and anti-gun groups who has stated this is their goal. For now they are starting with what they think are easy pickings, and your support of their cause is proof enough. When mass shootings continue, you and your ilk will just move your ban to another gun and then another and another. The very fact you have already said "majority rules", means if the majority of people voted to ban guns, you would support it. You are nothing more than a sheep, socialism/communism has a name for people like you, "useful idiots".

Quote:
No lie, there is an actual bill passed by NRA owned politicians that prohibited the CDC from gather statistic that could be used to control guns
TBC

You should actually try to read the bill, that was singed by Bill Clinton... pesky facts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dickey_Amendment















0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Sat 12 May, 2018 09:29 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo

The people that defended their homes could have just as easily used a flint lock rifle. There was no need for AR-15. In the first story the intruder would have usually taken the AR-15 that had to be laying fully loaded for any child to take to school. The tax business that had to have a security guard armed with AR-15 had to be doing more than taxes. The idiot security guard fired through the wall and could have killed anybody in the office. Your flint lock would do just as well no need for weapons of war on the streets.
___________________________________________________
You can defend yourself with a shotgun or pistol unless your being attacked by the Cuban army.
___________________________________________________
At least the affordable care act made health care affordable for some. Many of our retirees who retired before they were eligible for Medicare could not afford insurance at a time of life they need it the most. Affordable Health Care was the only insurance they could afford. With even an eighty percent health insurance costing over $20,000 a year on a $25,000 pension you have affordable health care or nothing.
____________________________________________________
A gun free zone is not gun free zone when certain people are permitted to have a gun. It is only gun free zone for some people not all people.
____________________________________________________
But that is you a mass murder shooting into a crowd of children is going to pull the trigger as many times as he can as fast as he can.
The AR-15 was designed as an assault weapon designed to take on armies. You might ask a mass murder why they prefer AR-15 rather than Ruger Ranch Rifles but it will no doubt be the kill ratio.
____________________________________________________
When you are shooting into a crowd it is like shooting at the broad side of the barn just fire and you will hit something. Assault weapons were designed to fire enough lead that you can see what you are hitting.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Sun 13 May, 2018 08:23 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo

Zinovyevna (Ayn Rand) was raised during the communist revolution in Russia and educated in a communist university. She did far more than warn people about communism she destroyed a way of life with her political philosophy. Zinovyevna work of philosophy envisions America becoming a utopia for the ungodly greedy. If it had been trated as the garbage it was it would fine but that is not what happened the other communists that founded the modern conservative movement recognized how useful Zinovyevna philosophy could be. “Atlas Shrugged” became the template for the new society the communists that founded the modern conservative movement worked to impose.

Lilly Tang has not come up with a political philosophy designed to destroy America.
Baldimo
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 14 May, 2018 02:18 pm
@Zardoz,
Quote:
The people that defended their homes could have just as easily used a flint lock rifle. There was no need for AR-15.

No they couldn't have.

Quote:
In the first story the intruder would have usually taken the AR-15 that had to be laying fully loaded for any child to take to school.

Are you trying to discredit yourself?

Quote:
The tax business that had to have a security guard armed with AR-15 had to be doing more than taxes. The idiot security guard fired through the wall and could have killed anybody in the office. Your flint lock would do just as well no need for weapons of war on the streets.

Continue to discredit yourself, that's fine by me.
You asked for proof that people use AR-15's for self-defense, and I have done that. Those were just 5 stories, I can find you more. Trying to place your BS motives on others is a sure sign of a weak argument.

Quote:
You can defend yourself with a shotgun or pistol unless your being attacked by the Cuban army.

I should be able to defend myself and family with what I choose, your utter lack of knowledge on guns is proof enough that you shouldn't be let within 100 miles of any sort of gun legislation.

Quote:
At least the affordable care act made health care affordable for some.

At the expense of the majority though, more people saw their costs increase than saw saving, it was rotten legislation and an attempt by the federal govt to take over the health care industry.

Quote:
Many of our retirees who retired before they were eligible for Medicare could not afford insurance at a time of life they need it the most.

Who's are these "retirees" you are talking about? Sounds like fake vague talk to me.

Quote:
Affordable Health Care was the only insurance they could afford. With even an eighty percent health insurance costing over $20,000 a year on a $25,000 pension you have affordable health care or nothing.

I call BS and I think you are making things up. There were plenty of affordable insurance plans for the elderly. I wonder how that forced birth-control coverage is working out for them... are those old ladies still taking the pill?

Quote:
But that is you a mass murder shooting into a crowd of children is going to pull the trigger as many times as he can as fast as he can.

Nice transference and a continued discrediting of your opinion.

Quote:
The AR-15 was designed as an assault weapon designed to take on armies. You might ask a mass murder why they prefer AR-15 rather than Ruger Ranch Rifles but it will no doubt be the kill ratio.

Lets solve this right here and now, the AR-15 is not an assault weapon. You can keep using this language but you are only giving bad information, it's on purpose so it isn't information, it propaganda.
https://www.fox25boston.com/news/trending-now/assault-weapon-vs-assault-rifle-what-is-the-difference-1/530112579
Knowledge is power.

Quote:
When you are shooting into a crowd it is like shooting at the broad side of the barn just fire and you will hit something.

No, it's not. I can tell you have never fired one of these weapons before. Your stunning lack of knowledge could fill a book "What Not to Do and How to Not Do It." It would be a best selling book for gun safety and proper firearms handling.

Quote:
Assault weapons were designed to fire enough lead that you can see what you are hitting.

No they weren't.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 14 May, 2018 02:26 pm
@Zardoz,
Quote:
Zinovyevna (Ayn Rand) was raised during the communist revolution in Russia and educated in a communist university.

True.

Quote:
She did far more than warn people about communism she destroyed a way of life with her political philosophy.

No she didn't. If you mean the "union's", then she might have played a part, but that is a good thing. The Unions have been taken over by the Socialists and want to implement Communism.

Quote:
Zinovyevna work of philosophy envisions America becoming a utopia for the ungodly greedy.

You didn't read the books. I can tell you didn't read the books.

Quote:
If it had been trated as the garbage it was it would fine but that is not what happened the other communists that founded the modern conservative movement recognized how useful Zinovyevna philosophy could be.

You are funny. A communist is mad at an ex-communist because she was providing knowledge to fight against the real communists. You sound bitter.

Quote:
“Atlas Shrugged” became the template for the new society the communists that founded the modern conservative movement worked to impose.

No, it provided a templete for how to keep communism from envading the US. Less, not none, leads to more liberty. When the govt makes the rules and tells us how to live, that isn't Liberty, that is tyranny.

Quote:
Lilly Tang has not come up with a political philosophy designed to destroy America.

She lives by the same political philosophy as Ayn Rand, less govt control and more power to the people. Communism is about just the opposite. I'm not sorry that the unions have lost power in this country, that is a good thing. The Unions outlived their usefulness and should be dead and gone.
0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Mon 14 May, 2018 09:30 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo

Looking at an AR-15 and Ruger Ranch Rifle is like looking at a Ferrari and a golf cart there is a world of difference. When I buy a sports car one of the first specs I look for is 0-60 time and the top speed. When we bought my wife’s Rogue the 0-60 or top speed was not important. The AR-15 stated at 600 rounds a minute the gas tube melts. The number of rounds a Ruger Ranch rifle will fire is not important like the 00-60 sped on the Rogue. Two different guns designed for two different purposes.
___________________________________________________
Just looking at the two there is a world of difference. If they were the same you would care less if they banned the AR-15 because you would have all kinds of other semi-automatics to choose from but you want the one that will fire 600 rounds a minute.
___________________________________________________
The difference an assault weapon is designed to fire 600 rounds a minute and a semi-automatic can only fire a fraction of that.
____________________________________________________
Engineers are very good about design vehicles for a specific purpose. I have a jeep that will go straight up a mountain and in a snow storm but its 0-60 speed is not great and the the five speed was not designed for speed shifting I was use to a Porsche racing transmission there was a world of differenc. My Nissan 370 is quick from 0-60 but don’t even think about driving it in the snow it is rear wheel drive and it won’t go far in a snow storm. When the engineers designed these vehicles, they had a purpose in mind. Guns are no different when assault weapons were designed to kill as many people as possible in as short of period of time as possible. The Ruger Ranch rifle was not designed as a weapon of war. Pistols were not designed as weapons of war and none are designed to fire 600 rounds a minute.
____________________________________________________
There have been many mass murders at schools and other places where the police did exactly how they were trained and assembled outside until the swat team arrived have police discussed changing their procedure and going in to serve as another target for the shooter. Response time is determined by where the patrol units are at the time of the call. Patrol cars are in zones and additional Traffic units work school zones if a mass murder takes place a police car would be there in a minute or two. I have ridden with some of these idiots and I was use to 135 mph in the race car on week-ends but they scared me driving like idiots in town where a child could come out at any minute or a car cross in front of them. Though your article said it changed in 1999 after Columbine it may have changed in Colorado but not across the country because many places have not faced a mass murder. It does no good to get more policemen killed when they have no chance of stopping a mass murder armed with an AR-15 until swat arrives with their AR-15s. Then the police have a fighting chance.
____________________________________________________
The people that will make the laws against assault weapons will not be the engineers that design guns but they will have access to all the experts who designed weapons of war. The real experts are the mass murders who carefully studied which weapons would kill the most people. The bodies of the dead supply the best expert testimony.
___________________________________________________
They can change the rules and send all the police to a sure death by sending cops with pistols to engage someone with a weapon of war. The first mass murder in a school where the teachers are armed will no doubt happen soon and the number of people shot will double. The teachers will no doubt form a circular firing squad and you know what happens then. The Charleston Police Department did exactly that and they were trained.


Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 15 May, 2018 11:19 am
@Zardoz,
Quote:
Looking at an AR-15 and Ruger Ranch Rifle is like looking at a Ferrari and a golf cart there is a world of difference.

Wrong, it's like looking at a Camaro vs a Mustang.
The rate of fire is actually higher for the Ruger Ranch rifle. See, it's you lack of posting facts, which destroys your entire argument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruger_Mini-14
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite_AR-15
750 rpm vs the AR-15 which by your claims is 600 rpm. Now the problem with your info is that rate of fire is on full auto and not semi-auto. The AR-15 does not shoot full auto, it is a semi-auto just like the Ruger Ranch Rifle.

Quote:
When we bought my wife’s Rogue the 0-60 or top speed was not important. The AR-15 stated at 600 rounds a minute the gas tube melts. The number of rounds a Ruger Ranch rifle will fire is not important like the 00-60 sped on the Rogue. Two different guns designed for two different purposes.

The barrel would only melt under sustained auto fire, which the civilian model of the AR-15 does not do.

Quote:
Two different guns designed for two different purposes.

The is no difference between the 2 guns, only the outside appearance is different, they work exactly the same, they shoot the same ammo, 5.56 or .223. I'm exposing your ignorance if you couldn't tell.

Quote:
Just looking at the two there is a world of difference.

As I pointed out above, the only difference is the looks.

Quote:
If they were the same you would care less if they banned the AR-15 because you would have all kinds of other semi-automatics to choose from but you want the one that will fire 600 rounds a minute.

That is faulty reasoning. Why should we allow the banning of a gun for purely cosmetic reasons? There should be no ban in the first place, the guns are not the issue, it's the people. The question is why do you keep pointing the finger at the wrong people. None of the groups you have mentioned, and you also hate, have been shooters in these events, it's a bias on your part.

Quote:
The difference an assault weapon is designed to fire 600 rounds a minute and a semi-automatic can only fire a fraction of that.

The AR-15 is a semi-automatic rifle, that's what I've been trying to show you. You ignore my knowledge for your own bias and ignorance.

Quote:
Engineers are very good about design vehicles for a specific purpose. I have a jeep that will go straight up a mountain and in a snow storm but its 0-60 speed is not great and the the five speed was not designed for speed shifting I was use to a Porsche racing transmission there was a world of differenc. My Nissan 370 is quick from 0-60 but don’t even think about driving it in the snow it is rear wheel drive and it won’t go far in a snow storm. When the engineers designed these vehicles, they had a purpose in mind.

Why do we need a car that can go over 100 mph? There are no roads in the US where it is legal to go that fast, maybe we should ban all cars that go over the max speed limit. Say nothing over 80 mph?

Quote:
Guns are no different when assault weapons were designed to kill as many people as possible in as short of period of time as possible.

That isn't the purpose of a gun let along the AR-15.

Quote:
The Ruger Ranch rifle was not designed as a weapon of war. Pistols were not designed as weapons of war and none are designed to fire 600 rounds a minute.

All semi-automatic rifles have about the same rate of fire. As I pointed out above with actual facts and links, they operate the exact same and use the same type of ammo.

Quote:
There have been many mass murders at schools and other places where the police did exactly how they were trained and assembled outside until the swat team arrived have police discussed changing their procedure and going in to serve as another target for the shooter.

Yes, that entire type of response changed after Columbine, which was over 20 years ago. It seems that your understanding of police tactics is a bit out-dated. Current response doctrine for a majority of LEO, is to get on scene and engage the shooter, waiting only costs innocent lives since a majority of these shootings take place in "gun free zones".

Quote:
Response time is determined by where the patrol units are at the time of the call. Patrol cars are in zones and additional Traffic units work school zones if a mass murder takes place a police car would be there in a minute or two.

This is why the "gun free zones" are a joke. When as you claim, someone can shoot 30 people in 15 seconds, how many will die in 2-5 minutes waiting for units to respond?

Quote:
I have ridden with some of these idiots and I was use to 135 mph in the race car on week-ends but they scared me driving like idiots in town where a child could come out at any minute or a car cross in front of them.

You call them idiots... Your motives are clear. I guess you didn't take into account that they have driving training you don't, who's the idiot?

Quote:
Though your article said it changed in 1999 after Columbine it may have changed in Colorado but not across the country because many places have not faced a mass murder. It does no good to get more policemen killed when they have no chance of stopping a mass murder armed with an AR-15 until swat arrives with their AR-15s. Then the police have a fighting chance.

Nope, the response tactic's changed nation wide, none of those police depts wanted to be caught off guard, if such an event happened in their towns. Most depts carry the M4, which is a full auto gun that can't be owned by civilians. Since the North Hollywood shooting, the police got smart and were sick and tired of being out gunned. The only LEO who would not have an M-4, would be the on-site resource Officer. They know the danger of the post, the FL cop failed in his duty to protect the innocent.

Quote:
The people that will make the laws against assault weapons will not be the engineers that design guns but they will have access to all the experts who designed weapons of war.

They won't actually listen to anyone who wouldn't support their position for banning a gun on cosmetic reasons alone. Even you, after being provided with facts and links, refuse to accept the facts, you are stuck in your dogma and continue to push propaganda based on false facts.

Quote:
The real experts are the mass murders who carefully studied which weapons would kill the most people. The bodies of the dead supply the best expert testimony.

They didn't study anything, you are giving a majority of the mass shooters way too much credit. They grabbed a rifle that has been mentioned in the news by the MSM and the false facts pushed by that same group.

Quote:
They can change the rules and send all the police to a sure death by sending cops with pistols to engage someone with a weapon of war.

It's not a weapon of war. No sane military person would go to war with an AR-15, it's only a semi-auto rifle. There is no full auto and there is no 3 round burst. Those are on military rifles only. Besides, a majority of LEO carry a real weapon of war, the M4. The M-16 isn't full-auto, it only fires in 3 round bursts, the AR-15 is semi-auto, it only fires 1 bullet when you pull the trigger. We have already banned both semi-auto and burst fire weapons from civilian ownership. You really need to work on your facts.

Quote:
The first mass murder in a school where the teachers are armed will no doubt happen soon and the number of people shot will double.

It's sad that you think so, will you eat your words when the teachers prevents mass murder or think it is a fluke?

Quote:
The teachers will no doubt form a circular firing squad and you know what happens then.

So they are smart enough to teach our children but not smart enough to not shoot each other? Maybe schools should focus their hiring efforts on hiring military vets?

Quote:
The Charleston Police Department did exactly that and they were trained.

They did what? Without links I have no idea what you are talking about. Do your own research, don't be lazy.

0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Wed 16 May, 2018 09:35 am
@Baldimo,
Baldimo

I will agree that the government was corrupted by the gun manufacturer’s money and is responsible for letting assault weapons on the streets to start with but it tells us more about unlimited political contributions by corporations than anything else. Corporations should never be allowed to make political contributions to corrupt our government. I don’t want to take anything from government that government didn’t already have but I do want to take the power that corporations exercise over government. ___________________________________________________________________________________
The Maryland shooting was not a mass murder the shooter had specific targets in mind. The article on the shooting says he had a hand gun not a semi-automatic. The shooter had no need to fire 20 rounds in less than a minute and had already stopped shooting and walked away by the time the policeman arrived. Why do the mass murders choose assault weapons instead of semi-automatic hand guns? Because assault weapons are designed to kill large number of people in a shortest period of time. The policeman in FL was doing exactly what he was trained to do 30 years ago when he was hired which was long before Columbine. Now it looks like that they willing to make shooting dummies out of policemen to save face in the press. You have no idea whether the FL had retrained its officers after Columbine.
___________________________________________________
I will give you the fact that civilians are not suppose to have guns in a gun free zone but that does not mean that there are no guns there.
___________________________________________________
I don’t know whether WV tracks stolen guns separately from other property but Justice Department does track the number of guns stolen. Between 2005 and 2010 over 1.4 million guns were stolen over 200,000 a year. The average loss if one gun is stolen is $400. The illusion that gun manufacturers push, that gun ownership keeps your family safe is just that an illusion. Owning guns make your family a target for thieves not to mention accidental shootings and suicides.
____________________________________________________
I worked with the fireman for thirty years and he lives a short distance up the road. The state policeman who investigated the break in told the fireman that whoever took his guns knew his routine. The fireman always believed it was a neighbor but could never prove it. There were other break-ins in that neighborhood including one of the police lieutenant’s son who had his door kicked in three times and no doubt he owned guns also. Again, gun ownership makes you a target.

As long as you can go to your corner gun store and buy an AR-15 why should a mass murder bother to steal it. At a council meeting I told one councilman he was a faithful follower of PLR. He asked what that was and I told him the Path of Least Resistance and mass murders follow that path also.
____________________________________________________
A cutting torch will melt most metals and if I cut it up there would be no useable parts left.
____________________________________________________
The basic principal of democracy is majority rule. Office holders are elected by majority with the exception of Trump and baby Bush who were elected by a majority of electoral votes. Bills in congress are not passed by the minority. School bonds often require a super majority to pass. No school bonds are passed by a super minority.
___________________________________________________
I was able to copy and paste the quote but the word “quote” appeared at the bottom of the quote not the top. A dialogue box appeared and I hit save and it wiped out 2 hrs of work and after an hour of searching documents I gave up.

I don’t remember the topic it might have been about gay marriage since that was not a big topic in law classes at that time.
____________________________________________________
Most professional know that the structure of questions can influence the polls outcome but if it gives them a false result their polls will not be reliable and they would lose business. There are push polls like the one used by baby Bush in South Carolina where voters were called and asked what they thought about John McCain’s black child. It was designed to make the public in South Carolina aware that McCain had a black child (adopted) but the public was given the impression the child was from an affair.

It is always a good idea to know where the weapons of war are just in case there is a war and they are needed.
____________________________________________________
If you don’t have to register a gun to buy it we are in far more trouble than many thought.
____________________________________________________
Republicans gripe all the time that movies are used to influence public opinion against them. Ronald Reagan job during WWII was to make propaganda movies for the military to influence the public. I think the operation was called Funpoo or something similar and they cranked out movie after movie. The military would not have spent millions on the project during wartime if it was not effective. The movies were effective in influence Americans to join the military and go off to war. Did the movies make the public more violent? Beyond any and all doubt they picked up guns and went to kill the enemy. Your study better take a look at those movies and what they were designed to do and what they accomplish and then rethink their lame conclusions.
____________________________________________________
Hunting and guns go together like spaghetti and meatballs. As hunting declines and it is declining so will the number of guns. What else is there? Protect your home? Guns are an open invitation to worst criminals in your area. That leaves with target practice. Most people will eventually get tired of going bang, bang.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Statistics show beyond any doubt that gun ownership is declining. At one time many Americans fed their families by hunting and a gun was a required tool to feed their family. Now hunting is primarily recreational, a sport. Like it or not the Western’s infused the idea into a generation that guns were a masculinity symbol and everyone needed one to show how masculine they were. Those movies and the gun philosophy they drove are riding off into the sunset now. The fantasy of guns and the reality of guns are far different. It is the fantasy you are in love with.
____________________________________________________

Any of the cases you provided could have just as easily been handled with a hand gun. The security fired two bullets not thirty.
_____________________________________________________
Cowards are usually the ones holding the gun and that is why they have to have one in the first place.


Baldimo
 
  0  
Reply Wed 16 May, 2018 12:04 pm
@Zardoz,
Quote:
I will agree that the government was corrupted by the gun manufacturer’s money and is responsible for letting assault weapons on the streets to start with but it tells us more about unlimited political contributions by corporations than anything else.

Twisting my words again? You should really include my comments if you are going to play games. Oh wait, with my actual words, you couldn't play those games.

Quote:
Corporations should never be allowed to make political contributions to corrupt our government. I don’t want to take anything from government that government didn’t already have but I do want to take the power that corporations exercise over government.

If you won't want companies making political contributions, then stop using the govt to control business and create fake markets. The people have a right to petition their govt and that includes people who own companies, to fight against pointless regulation and govt control.

Quote:
The Maryland shooting was not a mass murder the shooter had specific targets in mind.

Having specific or none specific targets in mind has no bearing on the definition of a mass shooter.

Quote:
The shooter had no need to fire 20 rounds in less than a minute and had already stopped shooting and walked away by the time the policeman arrived.

Link?

Quote:
Why do the mass murders choose assault weapons instead of semi-automatic hand guns?

The AR-15 is not an assault weapon, it is a semi-auto, just like the handguns. The rate of fire depends on how fast you can pull the trigger, which does not equal being able to hit a target.

Quote:
Because assault weapons are designed to kill large number of people in a shortest period of time.

That isn't even close to the truth. Remember the AR-15 is not an assault weapon, assault weapons fire full auto, not semi-auto.

Quote:
The policeman in FL was doing exactly what he was trained to do 30 years ago when he was hired which was long before Columbine.

This has got to be your weakest thought yet. He was retrained when the police dept updated their response tactic's. He would only have been at that school if he had received the training and was qualified. He failed to do his job, plain and simple.

Quote:
Now it looks like that they willing to make shooting dummies out of policemen to save face in the press. You have no idea whether the FL had retrained its officers after Columbine.

Yes, we do. The Sheriff has even come out a week afterwards and said exactly what their protocol is for an active shooter, they engage and do not wait for SWAT. Don't believe me, read this article.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/02/23/what-deputy-supposed-do-school-shooting-go/368252002/
See how that works, see how easy it is to prove facts... the rest of what you say is a lie.

Quote:
I will give you the fact that civilians are not suppose to have guns in a gun free zone but that does not mean that there are no guns there.

You are really twisting in the breeze on this one. No guns for civilians means no gun zone, read the law again.

Quote:
I don’t know whether WV tracks stolen guns separately from other property but Justice Department does track the number of guns stolen. Between 2005 and 2010 over 1.4 million guns were stolen over 200,000 a year. The average loss if one gun is stolen is $400. The illusion that gun manufacturers push, that gun ownership keeps your family safe is just that an illusion. Owning guns make your family a target for thieves not to mention accidental shootings and suicides.

Thief's when interviewed, said they avoid houses they think have guns, they don't want to be shot.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/01/04/ex-burglars-say-newspapers-gun-map-wouldve-made-job-easier-safer.html
See, proof, not hard.

Quote:
I worked with the fireman for thirty years and he lives a short distance up the road. The state policeman who investigated the break in told the fireman that whoever took his guns knew his routine. The fireman always believed it was a neighbor but could never prove it. There were other break-ins in that neighborhood including one of the police lieutenant’s son who had his door kicked in three times and no doubt he owned guns also. Again, gun ownership makes you a target.

Proof?

Quote:
As long as you can go to your corner gun store and buy an AR-15 why should a mass murder bother to steal it.

So you amend you other statement about people stealing AR-15's? You had claimed before that people who stole them whet on to be mass shooters.

Quote:
At a council meeting I told one councilman he was a faithful follower of PLR. He asked what that was and I told him the Path of Least Resistance and mass murders follow that path also.

So you throw baseless actusations at people who don't follow your beliefs? I"m not surprised by this in the least, I see how you talk about gun owners.

Quote:
A cutting torch will melt most metals and if I cut it up there would be no useable parts left.

Good for you.

Quote:
The basic principal of democracy is majority rule.

We are not a basic democracy. I have already provided proof, keep avoiding the truth.

Quote:
Office holders are elected by majority with the exception of Trump and baby Bush who were elected by a majority of electoral votes.

You are wrong again. The President is and has always been elected by getting the required number of votes in the Electoral College, the "popular vote" has NEVER been used to elect a President. See, the Constitution is preventing mob rule.

Quote:
Bills in congress are not passed by the minority. School bonds often require a super majority to pass. No school bonds are passed by a super minority.

They also do not usually pass without some votes for the minority. The House has usually required a super majority, 60+ votes to pass something onto Congress. I don't think you really understand how our govt works.

Quote:
I was able to copy and paste the quote but the word “quote” appeared at the bottom of the quote not the top. A dialogue box appeared and I hit save and it wiped out 2 hrs of work and after an hour of searching documents I gave up.

Yeah sure... I've read your responses, I doubt it took you 2 hours of reading. You can just paste the links for the stories as plain text, I'll copy and paste the link. No link no proof.

Quote:
I don’t remember the topic it might have been about gay marriage since that was not a big topic in law classes at that time.

Do you base all of your arguments off of 30 year old data? Gay Marriage has been a major issue in this country for about 10 years. Don't be daft.

Quote:
Most professional know that the structure of questions can influence the polls outcome but if it gives them a false result their polls will not be reliable and they would lose business.

Wrong, the majority of "polls" are looking for a predefined outcome. In our world of political bias, these people will have jobs for decades to come.

Quote:
There are push polls like the one used by baby Bush in South Carolina where voters were called and asked what they thought about John McCain’s black child.

Proof? You make up way to many things for me to believe anything you have to say about the GOP.

Quote:
It was designed to make the public in South Carolina aware that McCain had a black child (adopted) but the public was given the impression the child was from an affair.

Sounds more like a tactic by the DNC.

Quote:
If you don’t have to register a gun to buy it we are in far more trouble than many thought.

You don't even know what the real gun laws are... wow. The only purpose of such a registration would be to take those weapons later on. Sorry, the Constitution protects my right to privacy from undue search or seizure, that pesky 4th Amendment and all.

Quote:
Republicans gripe all the time that movies are used to influence public opinion against them.

That is very true. The very liberal left controls the entertainment industry and the MSM and has for about 30 years now. There are very few news outlets that are not operated by the left.

Quote:
Ronald Reagan job during WWII was to make propaganda movies for the military to influence the public. I think the operation was called Funpoo or something similar and they cranked out movie after movie. The military would not have spent millions on the project during wartime if it was not effective. The movies were effective in influence Americans to join the military and go off to war. Did the movies make the public more violent? Beyond any and all doubt they picked up guns and went to kill the enemy. Your study better take a look at those movies and what they were designed to do and what they accomplish and then rethink their lame conclusions.

I don't know which study you are talking about, you don't quote anything that is said.

Quote:
Hunting and guns go together like spaghetti and meatballs. As hunting declines and it is declining so will the number of guns.

Do you have any facts to back this claim that hunting in on the decline? I also don't see a connection between hunting and gun ownership, unless you think the 2nd Amendment only applies to hunting... which it doesn't, no mention of hunting in the 2nd Amendment.

Quote:
What else is there? Protect your home?

That is one of the reasons people purchase a gun. The 2013 CDC report said 500,000 to 2.5 million uses of guns in self-defense. Unless we live in a crime free world, people will always have the need to protect themselves. Those who are the weakest among us should always have the choice.

Quote:
Guns are an open invitation to worst criminals in your area. That leaves with target practice. Most people will eventually get tired of going bang, bang.

I don't think you live in the real world.

Quote:
Statistics show beyond any doubt that gun ownership is declining.

Proof? Current studies and not something from 30 years ago?

Quote:
At one time many Americans fed their families by hunting and a gun was a required tool to feed their family.

Some still do, depending on where they live. So people choose to not use meat from the store and hunt for their own.

Quote:
Now hunting is primarily recreational, a sport.

People still eat what they kill or donate it to places that feed the homeless and hungry. I'm not sure what hunting has to do with my Constitutional Right to own a gun.

Quote:
Like it or not the Western’s infused the idea into a generation that guns were a masculinity symbol and everyone needed one to show how masculine they were.

Transference is the worst way to debate, you should really give it a rest.

Quote:
Those movies and the gun philosophy they drove are riding off into the sunset now.

Action movies are the biggest money makers in the movie business, without those action movies, the studios wouldn't have the money to make all those other types of movies that make no money. Action movies subsidize the drama's and the other far left movies you more than likely love. How much money did that anti-gun movie, Miss Sloane, cost vs how much it made?
https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Miss-Sloane#tab=summary
It cost $18 million and made $5.9 million, that's a $12 million dollar loss for an anti-gun propaganda film.

Quote:
The fantasy of guns and the reality of guns are far different. It is the fantasy you are in love with.

You are completely wrong. I've forgotten more things about guns then you actually know. The reason I enjoy those movies is because I know they are fake and nothing in them is real, let alone how guns work and what a real gun fight is actually like, it's fantasy. I know how guns work, that's why I laugh at well over 80% of the things you post about them. I'm beginning to think you treat this gun debate like an article in the Onion, the facts about equal.

Quote:
Any of the cases you provided could have just as easily been handled with a hand gun. The security fired two bullets not thirty.

They could have, but they weren't, they used an AR-15, that is what you asked for proof of.
Is that the best you got? You ask for proof of the AR-15 being used as a defensive weapon and I provide it. I can post plenty more stories, just ask. With 500,000 to 2.5 million defensive gun uses per year, there are plenty to go around. Of course the majority of those stories will be with handguns, it still proves that people use the AR-15 for defense far more than it is used in mass shootings.

Quote:
The security fired two bullets not thirty.

He fired as many as he needed to, to stop the treat. Sounds like very sound judgement and correct action taken by the LEO, unlike the guy in FL who failed to follow active shooter protocol.

Quote:
Cowards are usually the ones holding the gun and that is why they have to have one in the first place.

Cowards always question the bravery of others. I think the women who defends herself from a violent stalker is no coward.
http://fox17.com/news/local/goodlettsville-woman-shoots-stalker-hiding-under-her-bed
He was under the bed, how far away were the police?

You are also aware that the SCOTUS has ruled that the police have no right to protect you, so it is really up to you to protect yourself. When the average police response time is between 9 and 11 minutes, that leaves a lot of time for some to kill you. According to you, it only takes a single bullet and a fraction of a second. When the police get there, you are dead and the homicide detectives show up.




0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Wed 16 May, 2018 09:27 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo

That dog and pony show has been put on by the gun manufacturers for years to scare the stupid. The sad thing is it works. The NRA would buy television time prior to elections and not commercial time but 30 minute blocks of program time. These 30-minute infomercials would claim the sky was falling and to make sure you vote for the most corrupt politician who was taking the gun manufacturers money. The problem with the dog and pony show is that in 242 years the country has existed no one has ever passed a bill to take guns but it sure makes a nice straw man to attack.
____________________________________________________
“Those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat.” Greed is a disease that will kill every one not only those who suffer from it but everyone that doesn’t suffer from it. In the United States in the last century the ungodly greedy went from being “robber Barons” to being admired on “Lifestyle of the Rich and Famous.” That was quite a transition to go from robber baron to most admired. The trouble with letting a relatively few people accumulate most of country’s wealth is that wealth is not only wealth it is political power. We all know what happens to country when a relative few people have all the political power.

The ungodly greedy realized that when the press was calling them robber barons that they needed to control their image in the media but they needed to label anyone that opposed their taking a bigger and bigger share of the nations wealth label anyone a communist to squelch and debate on any more equitable distribution of wealth. Years ago I was discussing good books I had read with a neighbor when I bought a book by famous economist it scared him and he claimed the ideas in the book were communist. He would not even read the book. The man was not a communist by any means but the neighbor was brainwashed by the ungodly greedy. By the 60s any idea other than making the ungodly richer were considered as “communist.” Every other economic theory in the world today is not communist. The give everything to the ungodly greedy economic theory is bad for everyone.
____________________________________________________
I found the BBC code editor but I still can’t copy and paste the quote.
______________________________________________________________________________
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 17 May, 2018 10:57 am
@Zardoz,
Quote:
That dog and pony show has been put on by the gun manufacturers for years to scare the stupid.

Which dog and pony show? Without my comments quoted I have no idea what you are talking about. I clicked my name to see my post you're "replying" to, and this comment does not line up with anything in that post.

Quote:
The sad thing is it works. The NRA would buy television time prior to elections and not commercial time but 30 minute blocks of program time. These 30-minute infomercials would claim the sky was falling and to make sure you vote for the most corrupt politician who was taking the gun manufacturers money. The problem with the dog and pony show is that in 242 years the country has existed no one has ever passed a bill to take guns but it sure makes a nice straw man to attack.

Proof? 30 minute ads? I did some google searches and the vast majority of info I find on gun ads, comes from anti-gun groups buying full page ads in newspapers to decry candidates they don't like.

Quote:
“Those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat.” Greed is a disease that will kill every one not only those who suffer from it but everyone that doesn’t suffer from it.

No we don't know, it has never happened. The Communists used this lie to gain power in Russia and all they did was cause more harm to their economy and ended up killing millions of their own people not to mention the death they spread to other nations with their flawed ideals.

Quote:
In the United States in the last century the ungodly greedy went from being “robber Barons” to being admired on “Lifestyle of the Rich and Famous.”

This is the flaw in your theory. Everyone who appeared on that show was a self-made wealthy person. No one on that show who was featured was from family wealth, it was all self made. That is what the American Dream actually is.

Quote:
That was quite a transition to go from robber baron to most admired.

They were living the American Dream, Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. You have a very twisted view of what the US is and what you think it should be.

Quote:
The trouble with letting a relatively few people accumulate most of country’s wealth is that wealth is not only wealth it is political power. We all know what happens to country when a relative few people have all the political power.

Yeah, what happens?

Quote:
The ungodly greedy realized that when the press was calling them robber barons that they needed to control their image in the media but they needed to label anyone that opposed their taking a bigger and bigger share of the nations wealth label anyone a communist to squelch and debate on any more equitable distribution of wealth.

Where in the Constitution or any of the founding documents does it say the US is a country that deals in the equitable distribution of wealth? That is a Communist agenda, not the agenda of a free nation.
I always find it funny when atheists use religious language in their own views. How can you believe in the "ungodly wealthy" when you don't believe in God?

Quote:
Years ago I was discussing good books I had read with a neighbor when I bought a book by famous economist it scared him and he claimed the ideas in the book were communist. He would not even read the book.

By failing to name the book and author, I'm going to guess that it was indeed a Communist economics book. If it wanted to take away from the people who actually own the companies and give it to the "workers", that is Communism. It is never good when govt owns and controls the means of production.

Quote:
The man was not a communist by any means but the neighbor was brainwashed by the ungodly greedy. By the 60s any idea other than making the ungodly richer were considered as “communist.” Every other economic theory in the world today is not communist. The give everything to the ungodly greedy economic theory is bad for everyone.

Why would I start a company and have it be profitable if the people I hired were only going to remove me from the leadership position and run it instead? It's my company, not theirs.

Quote:
I found the BBC code editor but I still can’t copy and paste the quote.

hit the quote button, and then past what you want to be quoted between the words.
ie: quote]PLACE COMMENTS HERE FOR QUOTES[/quote



0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Thu 17 May, 2018 09:13 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo

Income tax was a tax levied against "excess wealth," so I should never have paid the very first penny of income tax. In order to get elected Trump posted an income plan on his site that said he would change the income tax tables so no one who made less than $50,000 would pay a penny in income tax. But as soon as the House took up the plan they decided to raise the 10% bracket to 12% to pay for the ungodly greedy tax cut the House version didn’t pass but there was no tax cut for the 10% bracket. Trump playing the familiar con game called bait and switch quickly took down his tax plan from his web site.
____________________________________________________
You do realize that $4,000 in 1913 dollars is now worth $100,702.51 in today's dollars because of inflation and for a couple the first $4,000 was exempt from the tax on "excess wealth." I have no idea where you came up with $600 dollars. “Revenue Act of 1913” on Wikipedia will give you the correct figure. The ungodly greedy would like to rewrite history but this information is an actual law.
____________________________________________________
If you put a tax on cars we don’t tax people without cars. If we put a tax on houses those without houses are not taxed. But if we put a tax on excess wealth all of sudden people who have no excess wealth are taxed and the ungodly greedy are absolutely outraged that the people without excess wealth are not paying “their share” of a tax on "excess wealth." This show the political power of the ungodly greedy. Excess wealth was what was debated in congress in 1913 and the amount of money exempted leaves no doubt. No workingman made $4,000 in 1913.
____________________________________________________
The government didn’t get greedy greed is a sin of the individual it was the ungodly greedy who quickly constructed loopholes that assured that much of their income could not be taxed. Trusts and other artificial constructs became common tax avoidance schemes. Costs prohibits the working people from using these trusts from exempting their income. If you don’t have at least $500.000 lawyers will tell you the expenses of the Trust will consume the principal.
__________________________________________________________________________________
When I make over a $100,752.51 I will have no problem paying income tax on the dollar I made over $100,702.51. That would be my fair share.
_________________________________________________________________________________
It is very easy to look at the actual tax brackets for every year. You simply do a search for “historical tax brackets.” The tax brackets for every year are listed there. Regan was the one that pushed the tax cuts through and raised the taxes on the poor by raising social security five different times along with tripling the national debt. It was called the Reagan tax cuts. The 1981 tax cut bill was a Republican bill sponsored by Representative Jack Kemp and Senator William Roth Jr both republicans.
TBC
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 18 May, 2018 12:11 pm
@Zardoz,
Quote:
Income tax was a tax levied against "excess wealth," so I should never have paid the very first penny of income tax.

Are you still talking about your 1972 taxes?

Quote:
In order to get elected Trump posted an income plan on his site that said he would change the income tax tables so no one who made less than $50,000 would pay a penny in income tax. But as soon as the House took up the plan they decided to raise the 10% bracket to 12% to pay for the ungodly greedy tax cut the House version didn’t pass but there was no tax cut for the 10% bracket. Trump playing the familiar con game called bait and switch quickly took down his tax plan from his web site.

Is that your complainant, that the people at the lowest end of the tax bracket and pay the least amount to almost no Federal Taxes didn't get a tax brake? How can people who pay almost no taxes get a tax break?

Quote:
You do realize that $4,000 in 1913 dollars is now worth $100,702.51 in today's dollars because of inflation and for a couple the first $4,000 was exempt from the tax on "excess wealth." I have no idea where you came up with $600 dollars. “Revenue Act of 1913” on Wikipedia will give you the correct figure. The ungodly greedy would like to rewrite history but this information is an actual law.

I'm not going to debate 100 year old tax law. Besides, the Tax Law never used the term "excessive wealth", that is a made up term used by Communists, such phrases come from Marx, Lenin and Stalin.

Quote:
If you put a tax on cars we don’t tax people without cars. If we put a tax on houses those without houses are not taxed. But if we put a tax on excess wealth all of sudden people who have no excess wealth are taxed and the ungodly greedy are absolutely outraged that the people without excess wealth are not paying “their share” of a tax on "excess wealth."

We don't put a tax on "excessive wealth", we have a tax on income. If you earn an income, it is taxed. Welcome to the modern US, where everyone pays.

Quote:
This show the political power of the ungodly greedy. Excess wealth was what was debated in congress in 1913 and the amount of money exempted leaves no doubt. No workingman made $4,000 in 1913.

Sorry, they did not use the term "excesive wealth". The law had nothing to do with wealth, it had to do with lower income to the govt with the fall of tariffs.
Quote:
The Act also provided for the reinstitution of a federal income tax[2] to compensate for the anticipated loss of revenue from the reduction of tariff duties. The most recent effort to tax incomes, the Wilson-Gorman Tariff of 1894, had been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court because the tax on dividends, interest, and rents had been deemed to be a direct tax not apportioned by representation. That obstacle, however, was removed by ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment on February 3, 1913. The Act, which was declared to be constitutional later that year by the Supreme Court in Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad, provided:

"...subject only to such exemptions and deductions as are hereinafter allowed, the net income of a taxable person shall include gains, profits, and income derived from salaries, wages, or compensation for personal service of whatever kind and in whatever form paid, or from professions, vocations, businesses, trade, commerce, or sales, or dealings in property, whether real or personal, growing out of the ownership or use of or interest in real or personal property, also from interest, rent, dividends, securities, or the transaction of any lawful business carried on for gain or profit, or gains or profits and income derived from any source whatever...."[3]
The incomes of couples exceeding $4,000, as well as those of single persons earning $3,000 or more, were subject to a 1% tax.[4] Also, the measure provided a progressive tax structure; those with high incomes were taxed at higher rates.
In only a few years, the income tax became the federal government's chief source of income and greatly exceeded tariff revenues.
Less than 1% of the population then paid federal income tax.[citation needed]
The Act was applicable to incomes for 1913, 1914, and 1915. [5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1913

Quote:
The government didn’t get greedy greed is a sin of the individual it was the ungodly greedy who quickly constructed loopholes that assured that much of their income could not be taxed. Trusts and other artificial constructs became common tax avoidance schemes. Costs prohibits the working people from using these trusts from exempting their income. If you don’t have at least $500.000 lawyers will tell you the expenses of the Trust will consume the principal.

The govt didn't get greedy, the politicians got greedy. The majority of this post has nothing to do with actual tax law, it has to do with you wanting to take from others and redistribute it to lower income people. Sorry, that was never the intention of our govt.

Quote:
When I make over a $100,752.51 I will have no problem paying income tax on the dollar I made over $100,702.51. That would be my fair share.

Sorry pal, but you will be paying taxes and I'm happy that you will be. There are no free rides, if you think there are, then you are mooch and the reason why this country has so many problems.

Quote:
It is very easy to look at the actual tax brackets for every year. You simply do a search for “historical tax brackets.” The tax brackets for every year are listed there. Regan was the one that pushed the tax cuts through and raised the taxes on the poor by raising social security five different times along with tripling the national debt. It was called the Reagan tax cuts. The 1981 tax cut bill was a Republican bill sponsored by Representative Jack Kemp and Senator William Roth Jr both republicans.
TBC

You are still bitching about taxes from over 30 years ago. You should really try living in the modern world.
0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Fri 18 May, 2018 09:22 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo

Your question is simple if there is a tax levied on importing corn should the people without corn pay the tax on something they don’t have. The ungodly greedy treat income tax as it is the only tax in America it is not there are hundreds of other taxes that are regressive. The country decided to formulate a tax that would tax excess wealth it was never intended to tax the workingman.
____________________________________________________
It is not that I want to compare the taxes to 1972 but to 1913 and what the income tax was designed to tax “excess wealth.” The changes on the tax on excess wealth were bought and paid for by the ungodly greedy by paying off conservative politician with “campaign contributions.” What is intellectual dishonest is the ungodly greedy pretending that a tax on excess wealth was levied on the middle class and poor and pretending moral outrage because the poor aren’t paying their fair share when their fair share is zero.
___________________________________________________
If you can actually do the taxes yourself, you have no need of a tax calculator which no doubt is fraudulent. The taxes can be done on a post card according to the Republicans. So, it is extremely easy to figure. I have done my own taxes for 46 years. I was audited only once and when I got through with the IRS auditor she had to apologize and agree I did not owe the taxes they were trying to collect. On a short form there are only a very few numbers that are relevant, your income, the standard deduction and the amount your income exceeds the standard deduction.
____________________________________________________
Pew Research Center was funded by one of the richest oil barons in America. If the Pew Research Center was aske to find who should pay income tax they would say the poor. There is no more powerful motive than self-interest and each and every person who works there is paid by the Pew Trust. All of these “non-partisan” fact tanks funded by the ungodly greedy. Their facts are tainted by wealth.
____________________________________________________
You have to know a little bit about history to know that income tax was levied on excess wealth. But even if you don’t know anything about history the bill speaks for itself when the first $4,000 which is over $107,000 in today’s dollar only excess wealth was taxed in the original bill.
Even if we don’t consider the wealth of the ungodly and use only their income the top 20% have 50% of the income. Do you see a problem there you complain that those over $200,000 pay 58% of income-taxes. Even if we did not have a progressive income tax, which we do, just the top 20% would have to pay 50% of the income tax. So, it is very obvious it is the ungodly greedy who are not paying their fare share. If you treat the ungodly greedy like the got only a small share of their actual income your figures would still be wrong. The ungodly greedy should be paying 4 times as much taxes as the poor because the system is progressive but it is extremely obvious they are not.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
This year repairing a section of the interstate highway the repair cost is $50 million dollars. The huge trucks that destroyed the highway belong to the rich who roll up and down the highway day in and day out. Studies have shown the ungodly greedy get far more in government services there are more kinds of welfare for the rich programs than even you can even imagine.
____________________________________________________
It isn’t a tax credit it is a welfare program and should not be administered by the IRS it should be administered as the other welfare programs. It has nothing to do with taxes and everything to do with welfare.
____________________________________________________
Who does your taxes? You have no clue. You are confusion itemizing your deductions with personal exemptions. You can take personal exemptions with either the standard deduction or itemized deductions. The Republican tax scam took away the personal exemptions. If you had ten children, you had 12 personal exemptions last year that was $48,600 the Republican tax scam eliminated the personal deductions and gave them $11,700 increase in the standard deduction the couple will have to pay taxes on additional $36,900 this year.
____________________________________________________
It is had to argue taxes when you have no idea how it works, and this is what the Republicans counted on for their tax scam to work. The Republicans will say look we gave you a $11,700 increase in standard deduction, but you lost $48,600 in personal exemptions. You only have to pay $3,690 in taxes but if it is any consolation Trump got a $100 million in tax cuts.
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Fri 18 May, 2018 09:26 pm
@coldjoint,
It is easy to see the world it black and white. There were thousands of economic theories before communist ever existed. But if ungodly greedy can convince the ignorant that only the economic theories that benefit them are good and all other economic theories are communist in origin they will shut down any and all debate.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 19 May, 2018 02:25 pm
@Zardoz,
Quote:
Your question is simple if there is a tax levied on importing corn should the people without corn pay the tax on something they don’t have.

The people who use the corn will be paying that tax.

Quote:
The ungodly greedy treat income tax as it is the only tax in America it is not there are hundreds of other taxes that are regressive.

The greedy are those who think others people's money belongs to them. Wanting to keep more of the money you make isn't greed, taking it is.
Which of these taxes are "regressive"?

Quote:
It is not that I want to compare the taxes to 1972 but to 1913 and what the income tax was designed to tax “excess wealth.”

There is no such thing as "excessive wealth", that's a communist idea. Capitalism has no bounds to the limit someone can earn.

Quote:
The changes on the tax on excess wealth were bought and paid for by the ungodly greedy by paying off conservative politician with “campaign contributions.”

There is no such thing as "excess wealth". You were part of a union that provided "campaign contributions", bribes, to politicians to get your way in the city. Don't be angry that someone else can do it as well.

Quote:
What is intellectual dishonest is the ungodly greedy pretending that a tax on excess wealth was levied on the middle class and poor and pretending moral outrage because the poor aren’t paying their fair share when their fair share is zero.

Talk about intellectual dishonesty, we don't tax wealth and have never taxed wealth, we tax income and a variety of other things we shouldn't be taxed on. Greed is the politicians spending money that isn't theirs on their own pet projects. Everyone who makes an income should pay taxes, that is a fair society.

Quote:
If you can actually do the taxes yourself, you have no need of a tax calculator which no doubt is fraudulent.

I see. They won't give you the answer you want, so they must be fraudulent...

Quote:
The taxes can be done on a post card according to the Republicans.

Those are the types of taxes the GOP would prefer, if you have a single job, are not married, have no kids and no types of investment or property ownership, you can indeed do your taxes on a 1040 ez. If you have 1 of the above listed, you don't have a "simple" return. Our tax code is overly complicated.

Quote:
Pew Research Center was funded by one of the richest oil barons in America. If the Pew Research Center was aske to find who should pay income tax they would say the poor. There is no more powerful motive than self-interest and each and every person who works there is paid by the Pew Trust. All of these “non-partisan” fact tanks funded by the ungodly greedy. Their facts are tainted by wealth.

Where you have no facts and refuse to even try and produce them.

Quote:
You have to know a little bit about history to know that income tax was levied on excess wealth.

You seem to know nothing about history, we didn't tax wealth, we tax income. Hence it's called an income tax, and not a wealth tax. I get it, you think only the rich should pay anything to live in this society. It explains your job, you saw it as your personal duty to soak those greedy bastards for every penny you could get your hands on. How many "fines" did you write to these guys based on the fact they could afford the fine?

Quote:
This year repairing a section of the interstate highway the repair cost is $50 million dollars.

Imagine how much less that would cost if it was done without union labor? How much less without the pointless "environmental impact studies"?

Quote:
The huge trucks that destroyed the highway belong to the rich who roll up and down the highway day in and day out. Studies have shown the ungodly greedy get far more in government services there are more kinds of welfare for the rich programs than even you can even imagine.

I'm not a fan of any sort of subsidies for the most part. Get rid of them all and save taxpayers billions!

Quote:
It isn’t a tax credit it is a welfare program and should not be administered by the IRS it should be administered as the other welfare programs. It has nothing to do with taxes and everything to do with welfare.

People like you want everything to be a welfare program. We already have over 170 social welfare programs between all levels of govt.

Quote:
Who does your taxes?

I used to use one of the big name services, they screwed them up for a couple of years, now I got a guy...

Quote:
You have no clue. You are confusion itemizing your deductions with personal exemptions.

I shared the link and the relative text.

Quote:
If you had ten children, you had 12 personal exemptions last year that was $48,600 the Republican tax scam eliminated the personal deductions and gave them $11,700 increase in the standard deduction the couple will have to pay taxes on additional $36,900 this year.

Who has 10 kids? If you have 10 kids and have to live on welfare, you have bigger issues than taxes. You are worried about those people who don't care for themselves or those kids they are having simply to have bigger welfare check and tax credit. Those are the people who are a drain on society.

Quote:
It is had to argue taxes when you have no idea how it works, and this is what the Republicans counted on for their tax scam to work.

You think only wealthy people should pay taxes, how's that for not understanding anything.
0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Sat 19 May, 2018 09:30 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo

Everyone who voted for Trump may not be racist, but Trump is the most racist president since Woodrow Wilson. No other president has the mob ties or the ties to the Russians. Wilson thought the KKK were heroes. Trump has done more to destroy the environment than 110 presidents. When you make learned ignorance your goal it makes America far worse for everyone.
____________________________________________________
My source for that information was Meet the Press Daily one of the oldest and most trusted new sources in America. When the NRA was asked about laundering money from the Russians to give to Trump the NRA admitted to taking a couple of thousand from the Russians the actual amount is a half million or so. The Russian money was routed through an American company controlled by the Russian bankers close to Putin. The company is under investigation by the Justice Department no doubt part of part of the Russian investigation by Muller. Here is an Internet article on the subject: “FBI Investigating Whether Russian Money Went to NRA to Help Trump” According to Trump he told the public there would be no campaign contributions he was going to finance his own campaign with his own money.
____________________________________________________
Most of the money in a presidential campaign does not go to the candidate but to Political Action Committees (PAC) the money given directly to candidate is limited by law, but the money given to PACs is unlimited by ruling of the Supreme court. For instance, the NRA may spend $100s of millions on television time to help get a president elected. The major amount money given to a presidential candidate is given to the PACs.
Since it has been established beyond any doubt that Russians interfered with the 2016 election the fact that Russia gave far more than is legal campaign contribution is illegal.
____________________________________________________
Hillary came from Arkansas she was a transplant to New York to run for the senate she was not a home town girly from New York. However, Trump was a hometown boy raised in New York. It is almost unheard for a presidential candidate not to carry his home town. The typical New Yorker's impression is he is a clown.
____________________________________________________
The whole intent of home schooling kids is to keep them isolated and away from outside influences. When you want your children to believe that God intended them to have 93 wives you don’t want them to socialize with anybody outside the cult.
____________________________________________________
Brainwashing? That is the objective of homeschooling. They don’t want their children exposed to any ideas that don’t agree with cult thinking.
The forerunner of home schooling was cult education. I can remember growing up in a neighborhood full of children but there was one large family that sent their children to Catholic school of the 100 or so kids in that block they never had anything to do with anyone they were completely isolated. They lived within a couple hundred feet of the house I grew up in. I can not remember even once when they spoke to anyone in the neighborhood. The cult wanted them isolated. Sick minds do that. When you look at the typical profile of a mass murder they are loners. If you knew anything about communism you would know that I am not one. Your use of the word communism just shows your ignorance.
____________________________________________________
Adam Lanza is a perfect example of home schooling while others may have become loners and isolated in a public school the fact is they became loners. Socialization failed them.
0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Sun 20 May, 2018 09:27 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo

Do you actually know anything about communism? Or do you just like to call people names like Coldjoint? There can’t be a football game or a basketball gave without rules and referees. Many people will resent both the rules and the referees, but alternative is far worse.
____________________________________________________
The Republicans have done everything to destroy public education by financially strangling it state by state to give more money to the ungodly greedy in tax cuts. The Republicans have school funding so far that the average teacher must pat for an average of $500 per teacher for school supplies for their class room. The teacher’s unions are now making a stand that the Republicans actually fund the schools and stop cutting taxes on the ungodly greedy. Without the teacher’s unions teachers would be paid less than workers at McDonalds and be expected to buy the text books. The teachers in WV had been taking pay cuts for years when there was a tiny wage increase their health insurance would be raised twice as much as their tiny raise. After years of that and having to work three jobs to pay their bills their backs were against the wall. Sooner or later they have no choice but to fight back.
___________________________________________________
Non-union teachers are under paid and have far fewer benefits. When they say right to work to work state you know it is the right to work for less. School Boards still control the school’s agenda, but unions represent the employees and negotiate wages and benefits. When you have no representation, you get only a beggar’s share when you are organized you are more likely to get a fair share.
____________________________________________________
The actual fact is that tax payers got a $4,050 personal exemption for every person in the family plus the standard deduction. If you had family of eight you had ten personal exemptions amounting to $40,500 last year the Trump tax scam eliminated those personal deductions and you will have to pay taxes on additional $40,500. That is a hell of a lot more taxes you are going to have to pay. That is not a math game it is simply basic taxes 101.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
In the other countries in world where the communists that founded the modern conservative movement did not make unions public enemy number one the standard of living of the middle class continued to improve only in United States did the middle-class standard of living plunge. When I use the word communist unlike you I am referring to card carrying communist of the American Communist Party. The communist party even assigned them a wives whose job it was to watch them to make sure they were not disloyal to the Communist Party. Charter schools are a racket. In FL the charter schools get the money for a student but then can send them back to public school and keep the $8,000 in tax money. Most private schools are run by cults and you might as well have sent your children to Jim Jones or David Koresh.
____________________________________________________________________________________
It is as plain as the nose on your face that the Republican tax scam takes from poorest to give to richest. You can’t deny that. Who did not get a tax cut and on top of that lost their $4,050 per person personal exemptions? The loss of Trump’s $12,150 personal exemption for three people on his multi-million income is meaningless but it will be tragedy to large poor working families. Trump Republican Tax Scam is taking the food out of babies’ mouths to give to ungodly greedy. __________________________________________________________________________________

0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Sun 20 May, 2018 09:31 pm
@coldjoint,
Coldjoint

Right is might.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 05/21/2018 at 04:52:16