John Smith wrote in news:irh49m$id0$3@dont-
email.me:

On 5/24/2011 1:18 PM, wrote:
...
You chose the easy point of my post to reply to.

The point you ignored is that your suggested system - "Let me put this
more bluntly. If I buy and item and pay 7% sales tax, the top one
percent should buy an item and pay a 42.7% sales tax, that way they
will be contributing their fair share to run government ..." - is
either impossible to implement, or requires a dictatorship.
...

Yes, that is a fair system, you simply want to take it literally and
say
it doesn't work. I am not stuck on any particular system to implement
it with. Any system which can demonstrate that it can successfully
accomplish the goal, and costing the least, would be great.

THINK for a change, John. How would a system like that have to work?
How would a merchant know whether to charge 7% sales tax or 42% sales tax
or some amount in between?

Any system only needs to manage that 1% of those with control of 42.7%
of the financial money pay 42.7% of the sales taxes. And that 20% at
the top pay 50.3% of the taxes.

And just how do you think it knows which one you are? Or who is in those
brackets? You are looking at Big Brother from 1984 big time.

I simply gave a simplified version of what is to be accomplished.

No, you showed that you really don't understand what is involved in that
scheme.
Those
with any common sense would have realized it was over simplified ...

REally, really oversimplified....so much so that you don't seem to have
any grasp of the basics.

I don't give a rats arse how you get the water from the well, just that
the water comes from the well ...

If you are whining about the costs and fairness of things, you really
should care. In this case you are pushing the costs would completely
overwhelm the result.


--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.

On 5/25/2011 12:43 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
John wrote in news:irh49m$id0$3@dont-
email.me:

On 5/24/2011 1:18 PM, wrote:
...
You chose the easy point of my post to reply to.

The point you ignored is that your suggested system - "Let me put this
more bluntly. If I buy and item and pay 7% sales tax, the top one
percent should buy an item and pay a 42.7% sales tax, that way they
will be contributing their fair share to run government ..." - is
either impossible to implement, or requires a dictatorship.
...

Yes, that is a fair system, you simply want to take it literally and
say
it doesn't work. I am not stuck on any particular system to implement
it with. Any system which can demonstrate that it can successfully
accomplish the goal, and costing the least, would be great.

THINK for a change, John. How would a system like that have to work?
How would a merchant know whether to charge 7% sales tax or 42% sales tax
or some amount in between?

Any system only needs to manage that 1% of those with control of 42.7%
of the financial money pay 42.7% of the sales taxes. And that 20% at
the top pay 50.3% of the taxes.

And just how do you think it knows which one you are? Or who is in those
brackets? You are looking at Big Brother from 1984 big time.

I simply gave a simplified version of what is to be accomplished.

No, you showed that you really don't understand what is involved in that
scheme.
Those
with any common sense would have realized it was over simplified ...

REally, really oversimplified....so much so that you don't seem to have
any grasp of the basics.

I don't give a rats arse how you get the water from the well, just that
the water comes from the well ...

If you are whining about the costs and fairness of things, you really
should care. In this case you are pushing the costs would completely
overwhelm the result.



I said everyone needs taxed at an equal rate on every dollar earned ...

I said crooks will always attempt to avoid this.

Regards,
JS

John Smith wrote:
On 5/25/2011 12:43 PM, RD Sandman wrote:

John wrote in news:irh49m$id0$3@dont-
email.me:

On 5/24/2011 1:18 PM, wrote:

...
You chose the easy point of my post to reply to.

The point you ignored is that your suggested system - "Let me put this
more bluntly. If I buy and item and pay 7% sales tax, the top one
percent should buy an item and pay a 42.7% sales tax, that way they
will be contributing their fair share to run government ..." - is
either impossible to implement, or requires a dictatorship.
...


Yes, that is a fair system, you simply want to take it literally and

say

it doesn't work. I am not stuck on any particular system to implement
it with. Any system which can demonstrate that it can successfully
accomplish the goal, and costing the least, would be great.


THINK for a change, John. How would a system like that have to work?
How would a merchant know whether to charge 7% sales tax or 42% sales tax
or some amount in between?

Any system only needs to manage that 1% of those with control of 42.7%
of the financial money pay 42.7% of the sales taxes. And that 20% at
the top pay 50.3% of the taxes.


And just how do you think it knows which one you are? Or who is in those
brackets? You are looking at Big Brother from 1984 big time.

I simply gave a simplified version of what is to be accomplished.


No, you showed that you really don't understand what is involved in that
scheme.
Those

with any common sense would have realized it was over simplified ...


REally, really oversimplified....so much so that you don't seem to have
any grasp of the basics.

I don't give a rats arse how you get the water from the well, just that
the water comes from the well ...


If you are whining about the costs and fairness of things, you really
should care. In this case you are pushing the costs would completely
overwhelm the result.



I said everyone needs taxed at an equal rate on every dollar earned ...

I said crooks will always attempt to avoid this.

I have no real problem with a "luxury" tax, too.
Cell Phones for instance? Noop
Cell phones with camera's all the "apps?" Yup.
Basic 19" TV's? Noop.
Large screen LED/LCD things that cover an entire wall? Yup.
Chevy's? Noop. They are already sorry for buying them.
Cadillac's, BMW's, Mercedes' and the like? Yup.

Dave LaRue wrote in news:4ddd70a9$0$9061
:

John Smith wrote:
On 5/25/2011 12:43 PM, RD Sandman wrote:

John wrote in news:irh49m$id0$3@dont-
email.me:

On 5/24/2011 1:18 PM, wrote:

...
You chose the easy point of my post to reply to.

The point you ignored is that your suggested system - "Let me put
this
more bluntly. If I buy and item and pay 7% sales tax, the top one
percent should buy an item and pay a 42.7% sales tax, that way they
will be contributing their fair share to run government ..." - is
either impossible to implement, or requires a dictatorship.
...


Yes, that is a fair system, you simply want to take it literally and

say

it doesn't work. I am not stuck on any particular system to implement
it with. Any system which can demonstrate that it can successfully
accomplish the goal, and costing the least, would be great.


THINK for a change, John. How would a system like that have to work?
How would a merchant know whether to charge 7% sales tax or 42% sales
tax
or some amount in between?

Any system only needs to manage that 1% of those with control of 42.7%
of the financial money pay 42.7% of the sales taxes. And that 20% at
the top pay 50.3% of the taxes.


And just how do you think it knows which one you are? Or who is in
those
brackets? You are looking at Big Brother from 1984 big time.

I simply gave a simplified version of what is to be accomplished.


No, you showed that you really don't understand what is involved in
that
scheme.
Those

with any common sense would have realized it was over simplified ...


REally, really oversimplified....so much so that you don't seem to have
any grasp of the basics.

I don't give a rats arse how you get the water from the well, just
that
the water comes from the well ...


If you are whining about the costs and fairness of things, you really
should care. In this case you are pushing the costs would completely
overwhelm the result.



I said everyone needs taxed at an equal rate on every dollar earned ...

I said crooks will always attempt to avoid this.

I have no real problem with a "luxury" tax, too.
Cell Phones for instance? Noop
Cell phones with camera's all the "apps?" Yup.
Basic 19" TV's? Noop.
Large screen LED/LCD things that cover an entire wall? Yup.
Chevy's? Noop. They are already sorry for buying them.
Cadillac's, BMW's, Mercedes' and the like? Yup.






Do the words "equal protection" mean ANYTHING to you?

I fail to see anything in there about income levels determing anything.

--
Herman Cain for President! http://hermancain.com/
If you don't support him you are a Racist!!
He beat Cancer. He'll beat Obama (who is just like cancer)

Remember Desert One, Carter 0? Ain't it sad to wish that Obama had as much
ambition but being glad he doesn't knowing he doesn't have THAT much
competence?

Gray Ghost wrote:

Dave LaRue wrote in news:4ddd70a9$0$9061
:


John Smith wrote:

On 5/25/2011 12:43 PM, RD Sandman wrote:


John wrote in news:irh49m$id0$3@dont-
email.me:


On 5/24/2011 1:18 PM, wrote:


...
You chose the easy point of my post to reply to.

The point you ignored is that your suggested system - "Let me put

this

more bluntly. If I buy and item and pay 7% sales tax, the top one
percent should buy an item and pay a 42.7% sales tax, that way they
will be contributing their fair share to run government ..." - is
either impossible to implement, or requires a dictatorship.
...


Yes, that is a fair system, you simply want to take it literally and

say


it doesn't work. I am not stuck on any particular system to implement
it with. Any system which can demonstrate that it can successfully
accomplish the goal, and costing the least, would be great.


THINK for a change, John. How would a system like that have to work?
How would a merchant know whether to charge 7% sales tax or 42% sales

tax

or some amount in between?


Any system only needs to manage that 1% of those with control of 42.7%
of the financial money pay 42.7% of the sales taxes. And that 20% at
the top pay 50.3% of the taxes.


And just how do you think it knows which one you are? Or who is in

those

brackets? You are looking at Big Brother from 1984 big time.


I simply gave a simplified version of what is to be accomplished.


No, you showed that you really don't understand what is involved in

that

scheme.
Those


with any common sense would have realized it was over simplified ...


REally, really oversimplified....so much so that you don't seem to have
any grasp of the basics.


I don't give a rats arse how you get the water from the well, just

that

the water comes from the well ...


If you are whining about the costs and fairness of things, you really
should care. In this case you are pushing the costs would completely
overwhelm the result.



I said everyone needs taxed at an equal rate on every dollar earned ...

I said crooks will always attempt to avoid this.

I have no real problem with a "luxury" tax, too.
Cell Phones for instance? Noop
Cell phones with camera's all the "apps?" Yup.
Basic 19" TV's? Noop.
Large screen LED/LCD things that cover an entire wall? Yup.
Chevy's? Noop. They are already sorry for buying them.
Cadillac's, BMW's, Mercedes' and the like? Yup.

Do the words "equal protection" mean ANYTHING to you?

Indeed I do understand.
What's that got to do with a luxury tax?

I fail to see anything in there about income levels determing anything.

I wasn't talking about income levels.

I was talking more about a "fair sales Luxury tax", that keeps, or
rather helps keep in check, the "truly poor" from buying said items
whilst they are on welfare and food stamps, like they do now as they
fool the system.

Most wealthy people could care less what they pay for anything.
They already want and buy the biggest and baddest, and buy the first
models and prototypes just because it's there!
THEY bring the costs down when they finally go into major production!

Cost means NOTHING to them!

But poor slobs don't need, nor want them, until the items or tech
becomes more afforable.

Again, thank us, the rich that bring these items to the masses at a
lower cost, to the poor!

So again, don't tax our (the rich) incomes, tax SAID ITEMS that even the
poor choose to buy, instead of the food they need.

Have you got any diesel fuel?
///If I had any more diesel fuel, they would make me join that Opec!///
cuhulin

On 5/25/2011 2:12 PM, Dave LaRue wrote:

...
I said everyone needs taxed at an equal rate on every dollar earned ...

I said crooks will always attempt to avoid this.

I have no real problem with a "luxury" tax, too.
Cell Phones for instance? Noop
Cell phones with camera's all the "apps?" Yup.
Basic 19" TV's? Noop.
Large screen LED/LCD things that cover an entire wall? Yup.
Chevy's? Noop. They are already sorry for buying them.
Cadillac's, BMW's, Mercedes' and the like? Yup.


Already taken care of. If the poor guy buys a $400 dollar TV he has
already paid the tax on the $400. If the rich guy buy a $4000 TV, he
has already paid the taxes on the $4000.

It is only important that each of the dollars in the $400 has been taxed
at a rate equal to those in the $4000.

"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." --
Albert Einstein

Regards,
JS

John Smith wrote:

On 5/25/2011 2:12 PM, Dave LaRue wrote:

...

I said everyone needs taxed at an equal rate on every dollar earned ...

I said crooks will always attempt to avoid this.


I have no real problem with a "luxury" tax, too.
Cell Phones for instance? Noop
Cell phones with camera's all the "apps?" Yup.
Basic 19" TV's? Noop.
Large screen LED/LCD things that cover an entire wall? Yup.
Chevy's? Noop. They are already sorry for buying them.
Cadillac's, BMW's, Mercedes' and the like? Yup.


Already taken care of.

No it hasn't, you retard!

John Smith wrote in news:irk1i9$9kn$5@dont-
email.me:

On 5/25/2011 2:12 PM, Dave LaRue wrote:

...
I said everyone needs taxed at an equal rate on every dollar earned
....

I said crooks will always attempt to avoid this.

I have no real problem with a "luxury" tax, too.
Cell Phones for instance? Noop
Cell phones with camera's all the "apps?" Yup.
Basic 19" TV's? Noop.
Large screen LED/LCD things that cover an entire wall? Yup.
Chevy's? Noop. They are already sorry for buying them.
Cadillac's, BMW's, Mercedes' and the like? Yup.


Already taken care of. If the poor guy buys a $400 dollar TV he has
already paid the tax on the $400. If the rich guy buy a $4000 TV, he
has already paid the taxes on the $4000.

And if he buys a $400 TV? He is now paying the same as your poor guy.

It is only important that each of the dollars in the $400 has been
taxed
at a rate equal to those in the $4000.

Then why are you and others whining about the rich not paying their
share?

What happened to your dream of the rich guy paying a hundred times more
tax than the little guy?


"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." --
Albert Einstein

Do you understand what Albert just said?


--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.

John Smith wrote in
:

On 5/25/2011 12:43 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
John wrote in news:irh49m$id0$3@dont-
email.me:

On 5/24/2011 1:18 PM, wrote:
...
You chose the easy point of my post to reply to.

The point you ignored is that your suggested system - "Let me put
this more bluntly. If I buy and item and pay 7% sales tax, the top
one percent should buy an item and pay a 42.7% sales tax, that way
they will be contributing their fair share to run government ..." -
is either impossible to implement, or requires a dictatorship.
...

Yes, that is a fair system, you simply want to take it literally and
say
it doesn't work. I am not stuck on any particular system to
implement it with. Any system which can demonstrate that it can
successfully accomplish the goal, and costing the least, would be
great.

THINK for a change, John. How would a system like that have to work?
How would a merchant know whether to charge 7% sales tax or 42% sales
tax or some amount in between?

Any system only needs to manage that 1% of those with control of
42.7% of the financial money pay 42.7% of the sales taxes. And that
20% at the top pay 50.3% of the taxes.

And just how do you think it knows which one you are? Or who is in
those brackets? You are looking at Big Brother from 1984 big time.

I simply gave a simplified version of what is to be accomplished.

No, you showed that you really don't understand what is involved in
that scheme.
Those
with any common sense would have realized it was over simplified ...

REally, really oversimplified....so much so that you don't seem to
have any grasp of the basics.

I don't give a rats arse how you get the water from the well, just
that the water comes from the well ...

If you are whining about the costs and fairness of things, you really
should care. In this case you are pushing the costs would completely
overwhelm the result.



I said everyone needs taxed at an equal rate on every dollar earned
...

I said crooks will always attempt to avoid this.

If you are going to keep dodging the questions put to you, there really
isn't much sense continuing this.


--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.