Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 3 of 4
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 7:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

don muntean wrote:
Why the need for that cuss word??

On a guess, I would say he spoke in frustration as he's sick and tired of being taxed to debt. Those of us who are in the top tax brackets tend to get annoyed when people suggest more and different taxes...

Like when someone says something like they're okay with governments subsidizing wind farms, knowing that'll mean tax dollars being thrown to support yet another unsustainable industry, I find it hard to bite back a nasty retort.

-Mac
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 9:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mac wrote:
I would say he spoke in frustration as he's sick and tired of being taxed to debt. Those of us who are in the top tax brackets tend to get annoyed when people suggest more and different taxes...


What annoys me is how you can't have a discussion about tax REFORM without people going insane.

You know what - I support a carbon tax IF it replaces another tax. That was the Liberals biggest problem. We don't need another tax. But if a new tax replaces an existing one then that is fine. The Liberals promised to lower another tax not replace it and people don't believe that kind of promise. Had Dion promised to replace the GST with a carbon tax I think he would have won - and while I would never vote for an imbecile like Dion I would have supported that policy.

Note - I support a carbon tax because I support any policy that helps move us away from funding the expansion of Islam.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Mon May 11, 2009 10:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
What annoys me is how you can't have a discussion about tax REFORM without people going insane.

You know what - I support a carbon tax IF it replaces another tax. That was the Liberals biggest problem. We don't need another tax. But if a new tax replaces an existing one then that is fine. The Liberals promised to lower another tax not replace it and people don't believe that kind of promise. Had Dion promised to replace the GST with a carbon tax I think he would have won - and while I would never vote for an imbecile like Dion I would have supported that policy.

Note - I support a carbon tax because I support any policy that helps move us away from funding the expansion of Islam.

No-one in government ever considers getting rid of a tax unless they're replacing it with something that's even wider in scope and deeper in gouge.

Likewise, no-one in government ever considers getting rid of a social program unless they're replacing it with something that's even wider in scope and deeper in trough.

Flat-tax and massive program cuts, anyone? :)

-Mac
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Tue May 12, 2009 10:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
What annoys me is how you can't have a discussion about tax REFORM without people going insane.

You know what - I support a carbon tax IF it replaces another tax. That was the Liberals biggest problem. We don't need another tax. But if a new tax replaces an existing one then that is fine. The Liberals promised to lower another tax not replace it and people don't believe that kind of promise. Had Dion promised to replace the GST with a carbon tax I think he would have won - and while I would never vote for an imbecile like Dion I would have supported that policy.

Note - I support a carbon tax because I support any policy that helps move us away from funding the expansion of Islam.
Well, you have to stop suggesting insane tax reforms. Maybe, just one time, you could suggest something that does not increase the power and size of government. Maybe just once, you could maybe think of something that gives government less influence and power. Look in the mirror.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Tue May 12, 2009 11:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kwlafayette wrote:
Well, you have to stop suggesting insane tax reforms. Maybe, just one time, you could suggest something that does not increase the power and size of government. Maybe just once, you could maybe think of something that gives government less influence and power. Look in the mirror.


These are forums buddy. It is a place for discussing ideas.

Every single proposal I have made has been either a tax CUT or revenue neutral. If you can prove otherwise then go ahead (but you can't).

Not every thread can be about a flat tax :roll:

Note: This particular thread was in jest. I don't honestly support a tax on fat people. And I don't think a carbon tax is an "insane tax reform".
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Tue May 12, 2009 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
Note: This particular thread was in jest. I don't honestly support a tax on fat people. And I don't think a carbon tax is an "insane tax reform".

I wonder how many folks you actually hooked? :D

-Mac
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Tue May 12, 2009 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mac wrote:
I wonder how many folks you actually hooked? :D


Maybe enough that we'll see the emergence of the "Anti-Fat People Party of Canada"

I hope I'm not offending the obese readers of these forums. I do indeed love fat people - I just love them less per pound.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Tue May 12, 2009 9:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
Maybe enough that we'll see the emergence of the "Anti-Fat People Party of Canada"

Given all the stats on our bulging population, I doubt they'd get many votes... although if they manage to ban Kirstie Alley & Oprah, I'd vote for them!

-Mac
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Wed May 13, 2009 10:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ah, Mark Steyn. He just seems to get it, and he always says it so much better than I do.

Quote:
If you're an individual, the impact is even starker. Once you have government health care, it can be used to justify almost any restraint on freedom: After all, if the state has to cure you, it surely has an interest in preventing you needing treatment in the first place. That's the argument behind, for example, mandatory motorcycle helmets, or the creepy teams of government nutritionists currently going door to door in Britain and conducting a "health audit" of the contents of your refrigerator. They're not yet confiscating your Twinkies; they just want to take a census of how many you have. So you do all this for the "free" health care—and in the end you may not get the "free" health care anyway. Under Britain's National Health Service, for example, smokers in Manchester have been denied treatment for heart disease, and the obese in Suffolk are refused hip and knee replacements. Patricia Hewitt, the British Health Secretary, says that it's appropriate to decline treatment on the basis of "lifestyle choices." Smokers and the obese may look at their gay neighbor having unprotected sex with multiple partners, and wonder why his "lifestyle choices" get a pass while theirs don't. But that's the point: Tyranny is always whimsical.
http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/.....p;month=04

I repeat, your tax ideas are insane.

PS. Not to draw to fine a distinction, but you are either for liberty, are you are not. You are either for smaller government with less power and influence in our daily lives, or you are for light bulb bans.
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Wed May 13, 2009 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Man, that Steyn article was one of the greatest articles I have ever read. Everything I have been trying to explain to people is laid out so clearly. All the words I have been looking for.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Wed May 13, 2009 11:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kwlafayette wrote:
Not to draw to fine a distinction, but you are either for liberty, are you are not.


That's BS. So you don't support ANY laws at all? You don't support ANY role for government? What's that - you do? Then I guess you aren't for "smaller government" since you are either "for liberty or you are not".

Quote:
or you are for light bulb bans.


I have never advocated banning lightbulbs. You should get your facts straight before being critical of people. I have posted on these forums advocating that people buy LED lightbulbs but I've never suggested that other types of lightbulbs be banned.
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Wed May 13, 2009 3:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey, attack a weaker parallel argument if that will help you sleep at night. It is no skin off of my nose. The fact is that you support things like light bulb bans, which increase the power of government. So go ahead and call me whatever names you like, it is your site.

PS. Instead of flying off into a rage whenever anyone dares question you, why don't you just explain how a fat person tax would help shrink government down and increase liberty and freedom. The goal should always be to increase liberty and freedom for the individual.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Wed May 13, 2009 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kwlafayette wrote:
The fact is that you support things like light bulb bans, which increase the power of government.


I'll ask you again - please provide ONE link where I advocate a light bulb ban. You won't be able to. And even if you could - who gives a crap - a lightbulb ban indicates that I'm a Nazi or warrants a suggestion that I "always" advocate for larger and more intrusive government - why the exageration???

Quote:
why don't you just explain how a fat person tax would help shrink government down and increase liberty and freedom.


A fat person tax was suggested in jest. But if I were to seriously consider a fat person tax I would replace an existing tax and ensure that government revenues didn't increase - that is how it wouldn't increase the size of government and while it would become more intrusive in some ways it would be less intrusive in other ways.

And in terms of me going into a rage because you "questioned me". If you "questioned me" in a disrespectful manner than I will respond in kind - and you did...

Quote:
Well, you have to stop suggesting insane tax reforms. Maybe, just one time, you could suggest something that does not increase the power and size of government. Maybe just once, you could maybe think of something that gives government less influence and power. Look in the mirror.


You could have been polite about it. I have advocated for lower taxes. I've even spoken out in favor of your flat tax. But I'm not a libertarian.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Wed May 13, 2009 7:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
But I'm not a libertarian.

You're not yet but I'm still working on you, Craig... :lol:

-Mac
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Wed May 13, 2009 8:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mac wrote:
Craig wrote:
But I'm not a libertarian.

You're not yet but I'm still working on you, Craig... :lol:


You are a brave man to tackle such a monumental task.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 3 of 4

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


A tax on fat people?

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB