Who actually pays taxes?

catsrback76 · Post by **catsrback76** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 4:49 pm

Here is a book to be read if there is interest in understanding a poverty mindset,
"A Framework for Understanding Poverty"
Ruby K Payne Phd.
www.ahaprocess.com

It is written from an educators perspective, not hard to read and for those who want to help those in poverty a good beginning read.

ChiOCat · Post by **ChiOCat** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:08 pm

G.W.Bush wrote:
ChiOCat wrote:It's just like the reported speach where the pres was called a Nazi. Once you use a phrase like "caste system" people are going to get caught up in it. Because Caste System means you are born into one class and can not, never ever, under any circumstances do any better. If he says Caste System, then he sure as he77 better mean that we have a system where you are absolutely forbidden from rising above your born social status. If he means anything other than that, then don't use that term. Make one up if necessary.

I also love how GW has to keep excluding people to make his case stand. We don't count because we all got 4 year degrees. There are people all over this country in thousands of universities getting 4, 6 or 10 year degrees. Many probaly are first in their family to attend college. But they don't count, because they don't fit the CASTE SYSTEM SENARIO that he is trying to perpetuate.

Nor do the several self made people that we have listed here. For some reason or another, they don't count. I want to know who has the master plan and dictates who gets to rise above their born class. And how many they have to allow for us small minded, brainwashed people to believe that this is actually the LAND OF GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY.

Three days after I returned from my first maternity leave, I was laid off because the postion I had was being eliminated. Now, I sure as $hit could have used my "protected female class" to fight it, and more than likely would have been reinstated and someone else laid off. Rather than playing the victim, and blaming this and that and this and that, I went on numerous interviews and accepted a new postion. Was it hard with a three month old at home? Yes. Did I complain, probably more than a bit. But I did it, and before my severance kicked in, I was gainfully employed again.

For once I am happy that my step dad is deceased, because I will not have to tell him that he was just an "example" and someone allowed him to rise above his birth state. Not the hard work and ingenuity he believed got him to where he was.
ChiOCat- I use the term caste system more loosely than you obviously do. There really are no “true” caste systems in the world any longer- people are not born serfs and royalty in any countries that I am aware of. Now that does not mean that there are not systems that share similar characteristics. Granted, there are countries in the world that have more commonalities to a caste system than the United States, but we certainly do have some characteristics of a caste system. I simply view a caste system differently than you do. I am sure there are a number of terms that you and I would not see eye to eye on. I chose this particular term because it was one that I felt would most fittingly described thoughts I was trying to convey.

I exclude anomalies. You can not say Mark Cuban is anything other than an anomaly. I child growing up in the ghettos of New York are statistically more likely to remain in the ghetto as an adult than they are to become a millionaire. Most people will agree an anomaly should not be representing an entire group- in this case Mark Cuban should not be representing the middle class. I also explained why I did not consider all of the posters experiences on BN. We are not a random sample of the United States- therefore our characteristics and experiences are not comparable to Americans’ as a whole. My arguments are not based on personal experiences, rather they are based on studies and different lectures and literatures I have been able to study from. Your arguments however are based on your experiences and people that you know. Do I personally know a number of poverty stricken people? No, because I am middle class citizen. The people that I know are for the most part in the same income bracket as I am, and are not a good representation of all Americans. One group does not represent all of America, and trying to use only examples of certain people will not be a good illustration of the 280 million people in the United States. Sorry ChiOCat, but your arguments are from a VERY small selection of the United States; therefore hold no bearing to my argument

Any time you have to leave a demagraphic out, for any reason, you results are skewed, or even predetermined.

My point is that even in my small world, I've seen too many people rise above their parents or original social status to believe that there is any sort of system trying to keep the man down (I'll use that instead of Castey system, since that isn't really what you mean, although you keep using that term)

No, not everyone born in the getto is going to get out. It takes vision, determination, and a little brains (or beauty - J Lo, but she probably doesn't count for some reason). My point is, they can if they want and try hard enough. I'm sure there are many that think they are stuck, and therefore do not try. But there are also many who learn early in life to work the system, and know they never have to hold a job.

Is it my fault? Should I pay more taxes so they can live a better life without trying to better themselves? I think NO.

I am all for paying taxes to help people out in times of crisis. Both my sister and my sister in law have needed help for short periods of time. And my dad just used up his available un-employment. But he'd worked his entire life and paid into it. He was using what he put in to it. Too many use it, and never put in to the pot. Or have any intention of putting in to the pot.

And why will you not address my question of why you are so derogatory?

couloir41 · Post by **couloir41** » Sat Feb 11, 2006 12:25 am

chiocat...you may or may not agree but...

point one...the reason that extremes are not valid is for that reason...so examples like cuban and gates are out except in cases where the extremes are the demographic being studied...they unrealistically skew the data...just statistics...

point two...the caste remark is not meant to be taken dictionary literally...although i made that distinction in an earlier thread...it is meant to point out a trend in our society...a pernicious trend...one that most don't want to recognize because it speaks to decline of our particular society...kind of like global warming to the environment...ignore it and it doesn't exist...

point three...it is more constructive to clearly state your message rather than posture it in cynicism...(sp)...i have done the same and damaged my point...

point four...taxes...if not for taxes...you may not have have the marvelous education you have (ie. building a university)...why should someone pay taxes so you can have a very valuable education even if you never use it...????...the answer is it makes our society a more high quality experience...more enlightened...more progressive...a better world for your children...all mostly liberal ideas based on taxes and the application of those taxes to a better life for all...taxes should be levied like anything else...if you make a lot of money and have a great quality of life you should pay more taxes (unbegrudingly) because your income gives you more access to the finer things life offers...nothing against wealthy folks it's just fair...most of all productive research begins with public money...taxes...yours and mine...

point five...maybe it's a point maybe not...it is very difficult to persuade intelligent people through argument...or discussion...or reasonable presentation of facts or data...that is unfortunate...what does change the intellectual posture of intelligent people is pain and expeience...i used to be extemely conservative...then i had experiences that profoundly changed my attitude toward people with different realities than i had...now i am moderate to left...with mostly an open mind...

ChiOCat · Post by **ChiOCat** » Sun Feb 12, 2006 9:28 am

couloir41 wrote:chiocat...you may or may not agree but...

point one...the reason that extremes are not valid is for that reason...so examples like cuban and gates are out except in cases where the extremes are the demographic being studied...they unrealistically skew the data...just statistics...

point two...the caste remark is not meant to be taken dictionary literally...although i made that distinction in an earlier thread...it is meant to point out a trend in our society...a pernicious trend...one that most don't want to recognize because it speaks to decline of our particular society...kind of like global warming to the environment...ignore it and it doesn't exist...

point three...it is more constructive to clearly state your message rather than posture it in cynicism...(sp)...i have done the same and damaged my point...

point four...taxes...if not for taxes...you may not have have the marvelous education you have (ie. building a university)...why should someone pay taxes so you can have a very valuable education even if you never use it...????...the answer is it makes our society a more high quality experience...more enlightened...more progressive...a better world for your children...all mostly liberal ideas based on taxes and the application of those taxes to a better life for all...taxes should be levied like anything else...if you make a lot of money and have a great quality of life you should pay more taxes (unbegrudingly) because your income gives you more access to the finer things life offers...nothing against wealthy folks it's just fair...most of all productive research begins with public money...taxes...yours and mine...

point five...maybe it's a point maybe not...it is very difficult to persuade intelligent people through argument...or discussion...or reasonable presentation of facts or data...that is unfortunate...what does change the intellectual posture of intelligent people is pain and expeience...i used to be extemely conservative...then i had experiences that profoundly changed my attitude toward people with different realities than i had...now i am moderate to left...with mostly an open mind...

No, I don't agree you can leave them out. They are rare occurances, but they happened. Leave them out and, yes GW is right, It NEVER HAPPENS. But it did, in a few extreme cases such as them, and many other times on smaller scales, people ending up a little better than their parents. Or also, coming from solid middle class families and ending up poor and struggling.

I do not agree in that there is any system in place to keep people from moving up or down the social/wealth scale. I think people are free to do whatever they are SELF-MOTIVATED to do.

Sarcasm - ah yes. Something I frequently struggle with.

I have not once said I don't want to pay taxes. I don't bemoan taxes, it's the amount. I am against big government.

briannell · Post by **briannell** » Sun Feb 12, 2006 10:30 am

hey heather can i say i bemoan taxes then? I don't mind paying them, but trying to figure out my own taxes is really aggitating me

as for this Couloir41 he's getting as irritating on this thread as bearbac was on all his posts

sorry couloir41 I just think sometimes it's better to agree to disagree than to keep beating the poor horse

ChiOCat · Post by **ChiOCat** » Sun Feb 12, 2006 12:10 pm

briannell wrote:hey heather can i say i bemoan taxes then? I don't mind paying them, but trying to figure out my own taxes is really aggitating me

as for this Couloir41 he's getting as irritating on this thread as bearbac was on all his posts

sorry couloir41 I just think sometimes it's better to agree to disagree than to keep beating the poor horse

I really think the flat tax has some benefits Rebecca!!! Much easier to calculate, and harder to evade!

couloir41 · Post by **couloir41** » Sun Feb 12, 2006 2:14 pm

flat tax...it could work...

couloir41 · Post by **couloir41** » Sun Feb 12, 2006 2:29 pm

rtb...to the post of 2-9-6 10:00...

the industrialist/labor relationship should be symbiotic...because the "entrepreneur" cannot achieve his goal without labor...one cannot thrive without the other...

i agree...should have said "loose" definition of caste system or phrased the sentence differently...

later in the post i used the term "resources" you used the term "services"...i meant "resources"...it is arguable that people who have more income use more resources...ie consumption...consumerism etc...

Bleedinbluengold · Post by **Bleedinbluengold** » Mon Feb 13, 2006 10:16 am

Hello Kitty wrote:I was just speaking with another public assistance worker about this very thread. I don’t know of any solution but I think being aware of people’s disadvantages is at least a step in the right direction. I sometimes believe that pubic assistance is not even an answer but a perpetuation of poverty. Although there are countries that have a lower level of poverty than the US, that does not make the poverty in this country less of an issue to the people experiencing it.
I don’t know. Frustrating topic. I am glad we can all recognize a problem though.
Happy Friday everyone. Have agreat weekend!

Indeed. The solution will begin to take shape once a significant number of people decide to "change the system." If you have not done so, I suggest reading, "The Tipping Point." Very interesting.

Not sure who said it, but someone pointed out that the gap between the "wealthy" and the "poor" is growing, but should be narrowing if we were doing things "right." (Basically)

I have 2 questions about the so-called "gap." (1) The "gap" is entirely dependent upon the definition of "rich" and "poor." If "poor" was defined as $10,000/yr and "rich" was defined at $100,000/year then the "gap" would be $90,000/year, correct? If both standards were increased 10%, the "gap" would increase to $99,000/year, and would obviously have widened, not narrowed. But, did anything really happen to the people or the Country's economic culture? No! (2) As the definitions changed, did the number of people who were either defined as "rich" or "poor" increase or decrease, in terms of percentage, relative to the overall "working" population and the Country's total population?

I can't tell you how much it just bugs me that we actually allow any definition of "poor." Talk about a self-fulfilling prophecy.

G.W.Bush · Post by **G.W.Bush** » Mon Feb 13, 2006 11:12 am

briannell wrote: as for this Couloir41 he's getting as irritating on this thread as bearbac was on all his posts

That is funny; I was thinking the same thing about all your posts.

briannell wrote: sorry couloir41 I just think sometimes it's better to agree to disagree than to keep beating the poor horse

Isn't it a "dead" horse not a "poor" horse?

briannell · Post by **briannell** » Mon Feb 13, 2006 11:44 am

That is funny; I was thinking the same thing about all your posts.

perfectly fine by me - just don't read or respond to them