Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Abin Sur

(771 posts)
19. Not expressing concern for the poor on one particular thread hardly equates with "stating that
Wed Dec 21, 2011, 12:16 AM
Dec 2011

I don't care for anybody but myself"...does it?

in another thread around that time, when I asked if you were a materialist, you said you were.

Do you know what a materialist is? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism

In philosophy, the theory of materialism holds that the only thing that exists is matter; that all things are composed of material and all phenomena (including consciousness) are the result of material interactions. In other words, matter is the only substance. To many philosophers, not only is 'physicalism' synonymous with 'materialism', but they use both words to describe a position that supports ideas from physics which may not be matter in the traditional sense (like anti-matter or gravity).[1] Therefore much of the generally philosophical discussion below on materialism may be relevant to physicalism. Also related are the ideas of methodological naturalism (i.e. "let's at least do science as though physicalism is true&quot and metaphysical naturalism (i.e. "philosophy and science should operate according to the physical world, and that's all that exists&quot .

How in the world is my being a materialist relevant to any conversation that we've ever had? In any case, I'm not on this board for the purpose of wearing my emotions on my sleeve for all to see. I'm simply here to amuse myself. At the moment, I find this conversation amusing...hence this post.

and yes or no, do you support paying more in taxes so that people who have little can have the basics of food, shelter, clothing, education and so forth?

and yes or no, do you support cutting your taxes if the cost was that people who have not enough of the basics will end up with less of them?


I'm sorry, but the questions are too broad. If it clarifies things, allow me to present my general take on taxes. Here's a chart of government spending (federal, state, and local combined) as a percentage of GDP.



This chart's moving in the wrong direction, overall. Given my druthers, I would reduce federal spending to about 17% of GDP. This would be accomplished via across the board cuts to all sectors of the federal government, no exceptions. No bank bailouts. No stimulus spending. A somewhat reduced military. Etc.

On the tax side of the equation, I would implement a flat tax at whatever percentage of income is required to fund this level of spending. No exemptions. No deductions. No exceptions. If this raises or lowers my personal tax rate, so be it For what it's worth, I currently pay a combined federal & state marginal income tax rate of about 30%. My gut feeling? That's plenty, and I'd like to see it go down.

Hope this helps!



Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

The quotes from this woman made me want to throw something at the screen. Gormy Cuss Dec 2011 #1
Seriously. Starry Messenger Dec 2011 #3
it's called despair. barbtries Dec 2011 #9
+1 Solly Mack Dec 2011 #26
Why is the scale unrealistic? Abin Sur Dec 2011 #2
Perhaps "unrealistic" was the wrong word to use. Starry Messenger Dec 2011 #4
And since you have stated that you dont care about anybody but yourself, others' answers don't rate CreekDog Dec 2011 #14
What a fascinating assertion. Would you care to document it? Abin Sur Dec 2011 #15
Apparently you *don't* wish to document it. Why do you suppose that is? Abin Sur Dec 2011 #16
i had a thread on poverty and you never once expressed any concern for the poor CreekDog Dec 2011 #17
Not expressing concern for the poor on one particular thread hardly equates with "stating that Abin Sur Dec 2011 #19
it doesn't help to make you look like a progressive hfojvt Dec 2011 #20
You're right, it doesn't. So what? Abin Sur Dec 2011 #22
it has broad support - so what hfojvt Dec 2011 #28
The point is that you criticized me for not sounding progressive. Abin Sur Dec 2011 #29
Same as mine - very much so (look at profile). alittlelark Dec 2011 #23
The OP said "take steps to balance the scale" is pretty cold and unrealistic". Abin Sur Dec 2011 #24
Uh, Yeah.... Like getting a Stanford MBA and marrying someone alittlelark Dec 2011 #25
Yeesh. Chill. Abin Sur Dec 2011 #27
As long as ordinary people have to work to get money in order to lay claims to goods and services mbperrin Dec 2011 #5
Well said here: Starry Messenger Dec 2011 #6
+1 xchrom Dec 2011 #7
OMFG. "Take steps to rebalance the scale." hunter Dec 2011 #8
+1 Starry Messenger Dec 2011 #10
k&r n/t RainDog Dec 2011 #11
The newly poor are also used to being self-sufficient meow2u3 Dec 2011 #12
When I was unemployed, I took out a mortgage to pay for health insurance. McCamy Taylor Dec 2011 #13
At least you were able to do that. Avalux Dec 2011 #18
even when I was employed, and self-employed working 70+ hours a week hfojvt Dec 2011 #21
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»They are doing everything...»Reply #19