Thinking Right

By JoeD

December 20, 2006 08:14 AM | Link to this

Just curious: What does the headline have to do with the article?

By Jim Wooten

December 20, 2006 08:25 AM | Link to this

Good point, JoeD. In the newspaper, the person who writes the headline is not the one who writes the editorial or the news story. They’re done at different times and on different desks. But Thinking Right is a low-budget, multi-tasking operation and the same person usually writes both. So in this instance, since I wrote both and believe both to be true, the commentary has been revised slightly to address the question you raise.

By Brian Curtis

December 20, 2006 08:25 AM | Link to this

So is this a rant against “raising taxes” (as opposed to unlimited spending and borrowing), or a solicitation for ideas on how to reform the tax system we have here in Georgia?

By Jim Wooten

December 20, 2006 08:29 AM | Link to this

The rant against raising taxes, Brian, is an effort to take that option off the table for this General Assembly. A tax-neutral shift, including even the tax on services I object to, could be an option if a greater good is achieved by eliminating a tax or taxes elsewhere.

By sct

December 20, 2006 08:31 AM | Link to this

The Sonny Perdue land deal proves the Republican Georgia legislature and Governor cannot be trusted with changing the tax system.

By JoeD

December 20, 2006 08:33 AM | Link to this

I have to agree with Jim on one point: Eliminate bounties that must be paid to future competitors by existing companies. That should help open the market to competition within the state, and foster better job opportunities.

By Jim Wooten

December 20, 2006 08:42 AM | Link to this

JoeD, I’ve never understood why Southern governors didn’t just get together and declare that they won’t compete in ways that burden each other’s taxpayers with costly giveways.

By Buy Danish

December 20, 2006 08:43 AM | Link to this

Should property taxes be eliminated? I’m not keen on that. The tax is unpopular, but property is wealth. An argument can be made that encouraging ownership by eliminating taxes on that form of wealth achieves social good by promoting responsible behavior and stable communities.

?????I don’t understand this. Whatever one’s opinion is on property taxes, while exorbitant property taxes can force existing owners out of their homes, I find it hard to believe that the mere existence of property taxes is an unsurmountable obstacle to home ownership.

Even renters pay property taxes indirectly as the tax on the landlord gets figured into the rent.

That being said, getting rid of the income tax is a great way to go and would be a boon to Georgia’s economy.

By Dusty

December 20, 2006 08:48 AM | Link to this

If taxes are raised just color me rant red. I like to foster better opportunities for MY family.

Questions: As to bounties given to lure new business to our state, doesn’t every state do that? Do these bounties come from corporate taxes only?

By Mrs. RepubLady

December 20, 2006 08:58 AM | Link to this

I think the tax code should be reformed, so the more money you make, and the more wealth and asetts you acumulate, the less taxes you should pay. That encourages lazy, crack smoking, fornicating liberals to work harder to not pay taxes. Besides, it’s the Godly thing to do.

By CJ

December 20, 2006 09:07 AM | Link to this

Earlier this year, Georgia lost a bid to have Swiss drug maker, Navortis AG, locate a vaccine production facility here. Despite the fact they would have paid lower taxes in Georgia, Navortis decided to locate their facility in North Carolina because, they said, of NC’s better education system and better-trained workforce. When it comes to attracting industry to this State, House Speaker Richardson is right when he says that we’re at a competitive disadvantage —but this disadvantage has more to do with our sorry public education system than our tax code.

With regard to overhauling the state tax code, sales or consumption taxes result in those at the bottom paying a larger share of their income in taxes and those at the top paying a smaller share. As a result, those who can least afford it are, proportionately, carrying the larger burden. We all feel the ramifications (e.g. higher crime rates, more prisons) of this additional obstacle to moving from the ranks of low-income to middle-income. The lottery is bad for the same reason – the more somebody needs to win, the more likely he or she is to play.

If I were king for a day, I’d eliminate the lottery and the State sales tax and adjust our State income tax brackets as needed to make up for the lost revenue. The end result would be that citizens pay taxes based on their ability to pay (i.e. annual income). This simple approach would be a significant step toward growing the middle class, a growing economy, fewer social ills and ultimately more revenue to the State that can be reinvested in education. We’d help break the vicious cycle of poverty and spark a positive cycle of growth.

Former Gubernatorial candidate Mark Taylor was on the right track when he suggested eliminating State sales taxes on prescriptions. We need to chip away at sales taxes, not increase them. Unfortunately, most of our legislators only see the short-term benefits of eliminating or replacing State income taxes and refuse to see the long-term costs. Or, is it that they don’t care?

By Mid-South Philosopher

December 20, 2006 09:10 AM | Link to this

Good morning, Jim,

Good and relevant topic this morning.

I would like to see the state tax structure changed in several ways.

First, the income tax, corporate and individual, should be eliminated.

The truth my conservative friends realize is that the income tax, at it very best, retards initiative and stunts economic growth and development.

The truth my liberal friends realize is that, no matter how hard we try, the income tax will never be fair. Progressive or flat tax, there is no way to achieve equity.

I would like to see a consumption tax replace the income tax. Neal Boortz (and that scares the he** out of me) has the right idea for such a scheme at the national level. John Linder (one of the better politicians) has been championing it for years. Some level of adjustment can be made for common living expenses. The important thing is that this sort of tax (again, adjusted for common living expenses) would place the decision of whether to spend on the consumer, aka, the tax-payer.

I am afraid that I have to disagree with you on the issue of taxing services…but only if we eliminate the income tax.

As to property tax…there should be two digests…”Value As Is” and “Value Generated.” Property that generates wealth (Value Generated) should be taxed at a higher rate than property that may be worth more but is not generating any wealth (Value as Is)…such as family farms that are no longer producing income for the old people living on them.

At death (since it seems that we are he**bound to keep the death tax) or when the property is sold, the real worth of the property could be taxed.

The truth of the matter is that I hate all form of taxes…surprise, surprise; however, I realize that to provide the “excellent” services we have in Georgia, taxes are a necessary evil. I just have not seen a General Assembly in this state over the past third-of-a-century with the intelligence to restructure the tax code without causing us to have to reach for the Vaseline bottle.

Maybe Richardson has a spark. We shall see.

By Buy Danish

December 20, 2006 09:10 AM | Link to this

I’ve had my second cup of coffee and have more questions/comments.

Jim says that he likes the lump sum aspect of property taxes. Don’t most people like myself pay property taxes monthly into an escrow account, and see the total at the end of the year when the county sends out the bill? We also look at a W-2 at the end of the year and see what was paid out.

I also think the “revenue neutral” concept is silly and implies that there is a non-expandable revenue pie. Shouldn’t we be looking at cutting taxes and raising revenue? For instance, cutting capital gains taxes and income tax rates results in more revenue to the Federal government every time its tried. The more we are free to spend, invest and save as we choose and the less we are penalized for growing our own income, the more the overall economy benefits.

By dahreese

December 20, 2006 09:10 AM | Link to this

Jim Wooten says, “For me, I’d eliminate the corporate income tax — and all incentives given through the tax code that force existing companies to pay bounties to future competitors willing to locate in Georgia.”

I don’t recall all of the facts. However, at sometime past (perhaps during the Warren supreme court era), corporations were ruled to have the same rights as individuals to dodge taxes. Yet, today, corporations have more ways to dodge paying their fair share of taxes than an individual ever dreamed of.

So, Jim, if you want to eliminate corporate tax, then eliminate it for all individuals.

Not only that, Jim, but if you believe in “no taxation without representation”, and you want to drop corporate income tax, then drop corporate representation in government as well.

But, I’ll bet you aren’t willing to go that far.

By Political Foreskin

December 20, 2006 09:13 AM | Link to this

The shia and sunni have a better chance of conspiring to ban sweetheart corporate tax deals than the southerns governors, sir. Hell, they cant even agree on who is SEC champion.

By Buy Danish

December 20, 2006 09:17 AM | Link to this

CJ,

Your “knowledge” of economics is a fine parroting of Marxism 101. You can’t wait to “adjust” the income tax to penalize the very middle class you want others to aspire to.

btw, that lottery pays for the higher education of Georgia’s kids. You know - the ones companies like Novartis need to hire.

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 09:32 AM | Link to this

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need”

For those educated in government schools, that was Karl Marx, not CJ.

By time for the truth

December 20, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

@ the black bigot Vic baby

cheers indeed for the fabulous cyber entertainment yesterday … which as usual was enormously amusing. Funny how sullen dimwitted black bigots like you always end up twisting/ignoring actual facts that are posted and injecting utterly specious hysterical empty rhetoric. Unfortunately I was much too busy yesterday to do justice to your efforts.

Ignoring your blatant PIG ignorance of racial matters - perhaps you should get your current probation officer or an educated officer of the court to explain the odious likes of D Duke to you. Duke, a convicted felon, is an avowed nazi, which is why he was in Iran recently at the despicable gathering of legitimate IAF targets i.e. mohammedan and Euopean nazis feasting on their bloated frenzy of biological anti-semitism.

But black bigot Vic … credit where credit is due - I was hugely gratified that it was so easy to reduce you to such worthless (repeated) moronic imbecilic racially charged hissy fits. Especially pleasing was your charmless witless naivete equating Realist and yours truly with overt klan racists. It sure did seem that merely perpetrating this brainless bigoted stupidity was sufficient to satisfy what little passes for your mind. I noted with increasingly larger and larger smirks that you predicktably and abysmally failed to make any kind of case for your absurd shiite. As did the other simpleton tw@ats who simply screeched “racist” like demented energiser parrots.

Funny also how legitimate FACTUAL commentary on black criminality ALWAYS elicits such mindless bollocks from you and your ilk. Still its wonderfully reassuring to know we have an afriKan-ameriKan Pavlov’s dog ready willing and able to humiliate itself in cyber space every time.

The BLACK hippety hop puppy killers and the (mostly) black jurors who pathetically (in the face of overwhelming evidence) ultimately refused to condemn them to long prison terms in the big house are worthy of ALL of our contempt. If they’d been WHITE puppy killers I would have been just as contemptuous of their murderous cowardly actions.

Occasionally I do enjoy publically skewering bigoted scum like you - and its worth the effort of typing a rather long post during a late breakfast.

I currently have a puppy of about the same age as the one roasted to death. I sure wish I could have been on that jury!!

Off to feed my pup now and make sure she doesn’t do a pile of Vic in the kitchen.

Merry Christmas … and no hard feelings - eh?

By Andy

December 20, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this

Buy Dumbish definitely needs to cut down on the caffeine. Anyone want to follow along with me here to expose a blog-simpleton? Lets just look at Sell Sweden’s 9:10 and you’ll know what I mean: the lump sum escrow objection was stupifyingly ignorant of the contextual juxtapostion of the narrative in wooten’s blog.

Then she commits the same blunder in comprehension with the revenue nuetral drool. Sematics aside, this chick is purposefully combative just like all her comments where she nags a fellow blogger instead of advancing the discussion.

I implore Wooten to ban Shoplift Canolis once and for all. If not, this blog will always suffer the stench of flamethrowing trolls like Rent Norway, Lease Scandinavian, and Jack Jellyrolls.

By Backwords

December 20, 2006 09:39 AM | Link to this

“Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.”

For those of you educated in Republican churches, that was Jesus Christ, not Al Franken. (Luke 12.15.)

By Buy Danish

December 20, 2006 09:45 AM | Link to this

RW,

I love the way CJ blames the sales tax for high crime rates and the prison population!

I don’t think even Karl Marx thought of that one.

By TW

December 20, 2006 09:47 AM | Link to this

CJ - if the public education is truly ‘sorry’, what good would reinvestment be? What would you do differently with the funds to make it…less sorry?

By Andy

December 20, 2006 09:50 AM | Link to this

RW(the unimaginable), is another troll whose ignorance is surpassed only by his aliases. The Marxist quote is double speak, and has absolutely no meaning. Marx himself knew that, but it sounds good, and it was WAY over the heads of the rabble it was meant to appease.

I implore Wooten to ban RW, (the aborginal) along with Barter Berliners.

If RW and Buy Danish looked in the Time Magazine Cover Mirror together would the person of the year be a helmet?

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this

What’s a Republican Church?

Backword,

Any chance Jesus was imploring man to be generous to his fellow man out of the goodness of his heart and not talking about a government taking away an achiever’s possessions, at the point of a gun, to give it to slackers?

By Andy

December 20, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this

Good one, Backwoods.

I’ve noticed that there has been an explosion of jokes about Jesus this Xmas season. The Daily Report and The Colbert Report are merciless.

If we keep it up, maybe we can conjure up the 2nd coming and judgement day and we’ll all find out soon who really kilt nicole, stuffed the puppy in the oven, and how big of a crook Perdue really is.

Just think, we’ll know who the second shooter was. Did W lie about Hussein? Is there a santa clause. (it’s still possible, nobody has ever actually not seen him).

By two 2 too

December 20, 2006 10:04 AM | Link to this

time for truth: I thought only one juror held out on the verdict — at least that was what was printed in the AJC yesterday.

By Andy

December 20, 2006 10:04 AM | Link to this

RW: Stick to Jesus’s cautions about the vow of silence, sir, and glean your heavenly reward.

Amen.

By Backwords

December 20, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this

RW, Any chance CJ was imploring his fellow citizens to look logically and rationally at long-term cause & effect relationships between different types of taxation and the relative benefits to the majority of citizens vs. a few?

By time for the truth

December 20, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this

this inadequate wankpig andy pandy seems to be suffering from the same chronic coprophagia that deranged foreskin does.

By Raise my taxes hell

December 20, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this

Even renters pay property taxes indirectly as the tax on the landlord gets figured into the rent.

True. The same can be said about corporate income taxes and the cost of goods and services. Our tax code needs a massive overhaul at the state level, and I won’t even go into the federal level behemoth known as the IRS. People think we are wasting money in Iraq? They should look at how much we have wasted at home at the federal and state level taxation policies and the bureaucratic nightmares their organizations entail. But of course, nobody wants to do anything about it, especially the left, because the rich snobs might actually get away with paying less.

But that’s ok, because for every left wing tax raise, there’s a tax loophole to be found. For example, instead of giving my son $25,000 and having to report that as a gift payment and his having to report that as income, I can just go buy a $25,000 car and sell it to him for $1. There is nothing on my 1040 that says I have to report that expenditure and nothing on my son’s 1040EZ that says he has to report that as a gift [because he bought it] or income of $24,999 if he sells the car. I can do the same for a house, boat, jewelry, or any other hard commodity I wish. There are countless other legal ways to legally bypass overtaxation in this nation, let alone ways overseas.

Here’s an interesting consideration. Listed below are a few manifests in Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto. Take a look at how many line up with how the left and liberal republicans in this nation think and what they push for -

• Abolition of private property and the application of all rent to public purpose.

[The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (1868), and various zoning, school & property taxes. Also the Bureau of Land Management.]

• A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

[Misapplication of the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, 1913, The Social Security Act of 1936.; Joint House Resolution 192 of 1933; and various State “income” taxes. We call it “paying your fair share”.]

• Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

[We call it Federal & State estate Tax (1916); or reformed Probate Laws, and limited inheritance via arbitrary inheritance tax statutes.]

• Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

[We call in government seizures, tax liens, Public “law” 99-570 (1986); Executive order 11490, sections 1205, 2002 which gives private land to the Department of Urban Development; the imprisonment of “terrorists” and those who speak out or write against the “government” (1997 Crime/Terrorist Bill); or the IRS confiscation of property without due process.]

• ‘Free’ education for all children in government schools.

[People are being taxed to support what we call ‘public’ schools, which train and indoctrinate the young to work for the communal system to support the government. We also call it the Department of Education and Outcome Based “Education”.]

Pay special close attention to the second and third manifests, and then ask yourself where liberals and most democrats today [r.i.p. JFK] stand on progressive taxes and inheritance/death taxes. Flat taxes or a ‘fair’ tax? Fat chance from the left. One of the biggest differences between the left and the right in this nation [in general] is the belief of the role of the government. The left thinks the government should own and control all the wealth. The left thinks that the government actually earns wealth, hence their phrases of the government ‘giving back’ to the wealthy more of their income in a tax cut. This is totally 180 degrees of course from what the right thinks. The right thinks the government is a subservient entity of the people, by the people, and for the people, and ultimately funded by them accordingly. Now, who is more in line with this nation’s founding principles and core beliefs of freedom from the tyranny of the government that we so fought against nearly two and a half centuries ago? The left or the right?

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

What I don’t understand about CJ’s manifesto is how a consumption tax means the poor will pay more of the taxes. I think it’s fairly obvious that the occupants of a six bedroom home with a boat and five cars are going to consume a heckuva lot more than the typical lottery player.

I think Marx and his kind always do have a blame the lawlessness on some social inequality though, so they can make the claim that it will be a paradise of equality, but will need a dictator temporarily to maintain order. Of course temporary is defined as, as long as said dictator is alive.

By ClayBoy

December 20, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this

Jim, in contrasting the state taxes we pay with FL and TN’s lack of sales tax, you failed to mention that in Fl there is no ad valorem tax on autos. My wife’s ad valorem tax on her 2004 model 745 BMW was almost $1,200 in Muscogee County. That included the car tag. In FL the tag would have cost about $50 or $60 for the year. And CJ, your Socialist point of view never changes, apparently. Demorats (sic) always want anyone but themselves to pay the taxes for the services they use.

By Brian Curtis

December 20, 2006 10:08 AM | Link to this

For RW’s benefit:

““From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” is indeed from Karl Marx.

And “To whoever much is given, of him will much be required.” is from Jesus. Luke 12:48, in fact.

By Diogenes

December 20, 2006 10:08 AM | Link to this

Jim,

Yesterday afternoon (3:19), you made the comment, “… I ran into State Rep. Barry Fleming (R-Harlem), who says he plans to introduce a bill in January that will allow for less than unanimous decisions in the penalty phase of capital punishment trials.”

Jim, that’s insane.

Georgia has a history of convicting the wrong people, and now you and Rep. Fleming want to make it easier to execute people? That’s a terrible piece of legislation, and I sent Rep. Fleming, my REpresentative, and my Senator emails last night pleading with them not to allow such a heinous piece of legislation to pass.

We need to be introducing legislation to do away with the death penalty because Georgians so often convict the wrong person, not make it easier to impose.

By time for the truth

December 20, 2006 10:10 AM | Link to this

two 2

I was laughing too much and typing too fast this morning to catch the way I expressed that … my post yesterday reflected this FACT though.

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 10:10 AM | Link to this

Polly Prepuce,

Is it “rooster” night at the Star Bar again already? Is that why you’re trotting out a man’s name today?

By Ewoeirul

December 20, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this

The General Assembly is good at adusting the tax laws … to help their own. Hopefully, the feds will now finally uncover at the crap Perdue has been covering up for two years.

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this

Thanks Brian Curtis,

My response to your cohort’s invocation of Luke applies to yours as well.

Backwords.

Why don’t you ask CJ?

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

December 20, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this

To hell with those Swedes at Novatis AG. They can kiss the state’s confederate redneck butt. If they don’t appreciate the fine ignoranuses of Georgia, Delta is ready when they are.

I mean US Air. You know, the airline from Arizona.

LOL.

By Peridot

December 20, 2006 10:16 AM | Link to this

Time for the Truth: Just so you know — only ONE of the mostly black jurors you mentioned failed to convict in the puppy torture trial. And I believe she was mostly white. Just so you know.

By getalife

December 20, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this

The gop will raise your taxes.

U.S. Not Winning in Iraq, Bush Says for First Time.

Duh, resign in disgrace already.

Pathetic failure.

By Diogenes

December 20, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this

RW,

Here’s something that I know will make you happy. Scientists have discovered religion in the laboratory.

“In two or three 8-hour sessions, with two months in between each session, the volunteers were given either psilocybin [‘the active ingredient in hallucinogenic mushrooms’] or Ritalin. Seven hours later, and again months afterward, they completed questionnaires about their experience. More than 60 percent of the subjects who received psilocybin had what they described as a ‘complete mystical experience.’ Only 11 percent of the placebo group did. Two months later, 71 percent recalled it as one of the five most spiritually significant events in their lives.”

Yep, religion’s nothing but hallucinogenic mushrooms.

I know that will please you, RW, since you value religious (or is it hallucinogenic) experience so highly. Guess you’ve been nibbling the ‘shrooms too long.

“Power of Hallucinogenic Mushrooms Revealed,” Discover, January, 2007, p. 49.

By RagingMad

December 20, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this

The Fair Tax is the right way to go. You can play “Robinhood” all you want with the tax codes - in the end those in the higher income bracket will always end up on top. Until the lower and majority of the middle class learn the basics of economics and personal finance, they will never be ahead of the game no matter how much money or incentives you throw at them. You can tax and penalize the upper incomes all you want and try to redistribute the wealth - give it a couple of years and see what happens.

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 10:26 AM | Link to this

Diogenes,

Can you point to a single time I have ever invoked religion on this blog or discussed my own beliefs?

Now since I know you can’t do that, let’s try one that a girl of your intellect might be able to handle, how is Ritalin considered a placebo?

By getalife

December 20, 2006 10:27 AM | Link to this

“Gingrich has written off Bush The only people left who are giving George Bush any credibility are those in the corporate media.”

And the idiotic wingnuts.

By Buy Danish

December 20, 2006 10:30 AM | Link to this

To whoever much is given, of him will much be required.

Brian Curtis,

Since you are using this quote in a discussion of taxes, you seem to assume that everyone who is succesful, or at the very least escapes poverty, was handed (or “given”) their success instead of earning it.

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

December 20, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this

Dio, RW’s brain chemistry is more than a little off - she has been living in a self-generated fantasy world since Ronnie Reagan was Pres. Sort of a blithering Alzheimers.

By jbmlaw

December 20, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this

Good morning all. After Philosopher’s brilliant 9:10 essay, I have nothing to contribute. I second every point there, and Philosopher makes every argument I would make.

By Raise my taxes hell

December 20, 2006 10:33 AM | Link to this

It’s quite interesting to note that the only time liberals and democrats bring up Jesus quotes and the Bible is when we talk about taxation and the right to private property and individual wealth.

By Buy Danish

December 20, 2006 10:34 AM | Link to this

RW,

Have you ever discussed how much you value “religious experience” either here or at MLs, or is Diogenes hallucinating again?

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 10:46 AM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

Let’s just say, Dio wasn’t in the “placebo” Ritalin group.

Al KKKaeda’s concubine,

I really do feel sorry for you. It must be hell going around making the Brian Curtis’ and Backwords of the world look moderately literate, but damned if you don’t do a good job of it.

By Raise my taxes hell

December 20, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this

You can play “Robinhood” all you want with the tax codes - in the end those in the higher income bracket will always end up on top. Until the lower and majority of the middle class learn the basics of economics and personal finance, they will never be ahead of the game no matter how much money or incentives you throw at them.

Very well said Ragingmad. What liberals and democrats fail to understand is that the successful [who are not ‘fortunate’] always do things to better themselves and those in the lower economic spectrums almost never do. If all one wants to do in life is work 9-5 and then go to a bar afterwards, or go home and drink beer and watch MTV cribs after work, then that person is never going to materialize. Naturally, the left doesn’t see it that way. They think those who choose to not better themselves by not taking weekend and night classes or not learning new skills are just being passed over or left behind. Therefore, the government should step in and right that alleged ‘wrong’ via redistribution programs.

By Backwords

December 20, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this

It’s quite interesting to note that the only time conservatives and republicans bring up Jesus and the Bible is when demanding that the government reach into our bedrooms, marriages, wombs, personal choices, and backyard vegetable gardens to force their beliefs on our personal freedoms. Try to discuss feeding the poor, healing the sick, and creating a society where the least among us can thrive, and they flee from it.

By Buy Danish

December 20, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this

Dio,

You’ll be disappointed to hear that I am going to WalMart and other Capitalist locations where I will be exploiting the working class to satisfy my personal greed.

Here’s something to keep you busy while I’m gone.

By Andy

December 20, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this

Here’s something to keep you busy while you’re a moron: (o)

By Joe T

December 20, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this

Right on Lady who on 12-20 @ 8:58 said it all.

By Raise my taxes hell

December 20, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this

Another taxation issue you never hear the liberals and democrats talk about - state and local governments artificially inflating property values through millage ‘reassessments’ for higher tax revenue.

By Andy

December 20, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this

We are trapped in Iraq. There’s no exit. It’s dawning on folks, but slowly.

A draft is certain. We’re stuck, and we are forced to send our youth. ALL of our youth. Millions will be drafted. Millions.

Taxes? Oh, we’re gonna get higher taxes. We’re going to be bled dry. The cost of Iraq will be trillions.

Once the truth is generally realized, fear is going to grow.

Buy Stocks. (The wall of worry).

The hard times haven’t even started yet. So far, this is nothing. We lose more lives to food poisoning in a few weeks than we do in three years in Iraq.

But the piper is dunning us all. The checks in the mail. The chicks are really males. It’s a world gone crazy!!

Stop the world, I want off!!!

Buy Danish is a (o). RW is a <=3. If they look in Time Magazine Cover Mirror together is the person of the year a donkey show from tijuana???

By Brian Curtis

December 20, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this

Backwords: Well done. You’ve totally nailed the so-called “Christian right,” now watch them backpedal and try to change the subject.

By I Voted for the War Even Though I'm a Sissy

December 20, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this

Andy, I have that picture of RW and Bi in my album. We often vacation in Tijuana and Subic Bay, with the Sailor.

Andi.

By Raise my taxes hell

December 20, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this

Ok backwords, that sounds fair enough. I promise to not support any government policies that pry into your womb, your bedroom, your personal choices [whatever those are], and your veggie garden. Actually I don’t support the government getting into any of that anyway, but that’s beside the point here.

Now I want you to promise you’ll reject any government policies that pry into the wallets and punish the successful and reward the incompetent who choose to not pick themselves up by the bootstraps and get out there in this great land of opportunity and better themselves. Of course, I won’t hold my breath for your end of that agreement.

By Diogenes

December 20, 2006 11:24 AM | Link to this

RW,

Your comment, “Can you point to a single time I have ever invoked religion on this blog or discussed my own beliefs?”

Exactly the point, RW. You haven’t an opinion about anything that you have balls enough to post.

By the bye, what do you think Paul (or Saul) was nipping or nibbling that day near Damascus?

I suspect you lack the brains to handle that one, also.

By Filster

December 20, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this

How a column on taxation disintegrates into racism, Iraq, and even a donkey show in Tijuana (got to admit Jim W’s bloggers have varied interests!). At the risk of being oversimplistic, I strongly favor a flat tax as the sole source of raising revenue. Those who argue agasint is apparently misconstrue it as being hardest on the low income, but in actuality a flat tax is nothing more than a consumption tax. Ergo, Mr. “my wife paid thousand in ad valorum on her 745 beamer” would pay even more while someone whose budget is restricted to a lesser vehicle, say a Kia or Hundai, would pay less. Consumption taxes would also recover what I beleive to be a vastly underestimated amount from those who are here illegally (and no, this isn’t a “kick em all out” comment) because as most are paid as 1099 independent contractors whose are responsbile for paying their own taxes (yeah, right!), whether they pay taxes or not once again they all consume. Buy the new F150 and viola! Consumption tax. perhaps a way to mitigate the impact on the economically disadvantaged is to designate an amount at which no consumption tax should be levied, have those folks register with the state and/or federal governements (along the lines of filing taxes like they do now), and then receiving a monthly rebate from the coffers of the state/feds. As for estate taxes, capital gains, etc., in most cases that is simply double taxation and should be outlawed. Face it, a lot of personal wealth is generated through the stock market which not everyone can play big but everyone can, with sacrifice and discipline, play. And what do we typically buy stocks with? Our after tax income (ergo the double taxation angle). Yup. Flat tax instead of sales tax. No income or proerty tax. Cn’t wait to see the replies…

By Randy

December 20, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this

A*******Backwords, Helping the poor and enabling the poor to develop a lifestyle dependent on government is not kindness. It’s destructive feel good politics. You don’t really care about anybody. You just want to feel good.

Bleeding heart liberalism will bleed this country dry.

By William Fielder

December 20, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this

Good column, Jim. We should eliminate all “hidden” taxes, including the corporate tax which is simply passed on to the consumer in the form of increased prices for goods and services. All taxes should be obvious as to their impact on the public and the reason for their being. whf.

By Diogenes

December 20, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this

Pope rednecks - Amerikkka’s Al Qaeda I (1031)

Your comment, “living in a self-generated fantasy world since Ronnie Reagan was Pres.”

Ouch! That’s a low blow. Reagan was a Republican.

By Brian Curtis

December 20, 2006 11:37 AM | Link to this

Filster: I disagree with the consumption-tax idea. I favor taxing all forms of wealth (including and especially those tilted in favor of the rich, such as estate and capital-gains taxes), preferably on a progressive scale. Also, I favor restoring corporate tax levels to the “halcyon good ol’ days” levels of the 1950s.

A consumption tax would inevitably be regressive, as the poor income categories inevitably spend a larger share of their money on consumer items.

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 11:39 AM | Link to this

Dio,

So you’re proving my point that I have never discussed religion or my religious beliefs here. Odd that you would agree with me by attempting to insult me. On to your next pointless question that’s apparently only here to disguise the fact that you dodge every question you’re ever asked.

By the bye, what do you think Paul (or Saul) was nipping or nibbling that day near Damascus?

I suspect you lack the brains to handle that one, also.

I haven’t the first clue what you’re babbling about, but you’ve asked a question of opinion not a question of fact. Do you know the difference?

By Jim Wooten

December 20, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this

Thank you, Filster, for returning us to the topic. Actually, Georgia has something close to a flat tax now. The top rate is 6 percent and taxpayers get there when they earn more than $7.000.

By RagingMad

December 20, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this

Back on task people! This is not a blog on religion or your lack of knowledge or hatred towards it. However, it is interesting that those of you that bash the religious (right) and the same ones want tolerance (left). If you want the “bible thumpers” out of your life, stop imposing your immoral behavior on them. It’s called tolerance and understanding, and it is suppose to go both ways.

By Diogenes

December 20, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this

Randy (1130)

Your comment, “Bleeding heart liberalism will bleed this country dry.”

You’re as silly as RW. Bush’s War has already bled us dry, and there’s no relief in sight.

More people would benefit if the money were spend on social welfare programs.

By Diogenes

December 20, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this

RW,

Your comment, haven’t the first clue what you’re babbling about, but you’ve asked a question of opinion not a question of fact. Do you know the difference?”

I think I very clearly asked for your opinion.

I doubt that you’d know a fact if it slapped you in the face. I haven’t seen you state one yet. No facts, no opinions, just open attacks on others. You demagogues aren’t real bright.

By Diogenes

December 20, 2006 11:52 AM | Link to this

RW

So you do agree with Diogenes about religion? as well as teaching students in Georgia to read and write and do math? and on Jim advocating eugenics.

My goodness, I guess you do have some opinions. It’s amazing how boring you are when one really gets to know you.

But then, most demagogues are just shadows anyway. They don’t have the balls to be real people with honest to goodness opinions. As long as they can suck someone else’s blood, they’re happy, and you appear to be Jim’s blood sucker.

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 11:53 AM | Link to this

Jim Wooten and RagingMad,

As much as I would like to keep a religious discussion out of the topic, you can’t discuss taxation in a public blog without liberals invoking Jesus, and claiming that Jesus was for a punitive tax on success. So you almost have to counter the point over whether you think he meant confiscation by government or good will toward your fellow man.

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this

Dio,

As I’ve said on many occasions, your inability to understand what I write and the facts I present are your failures not mine. There is not one single thing I can do to change that for you.

Day in and day out you insult me with your petty name calling, I don’t respond in kind, yet you call me a demagogue that doesn’t nothing but launch personal attacks.

If Mr. Wooten agrees with your assessment all he need do is ask that I leave. It’s my opinion that you have a real pot/kettle problem to work on.

By Tonya C

December 20, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this

Before any of you go off and use FL as an example, do some research. Although there is no income tax, the property taxes are outrageous. Although there is no ad valorem tax on cars, the gas tax sharply increases the cost of gas in a state with numerous sea ports. Let us not even mention automobile and property insurance.

In addition, the education system is not any better if not worse than FL. The lack of a state income tax trickles down somewhere, whether it be in higher taxes on certain goods or the needs of the system going unmet (more law enforcement officers, education intiatives going unfunded, etc.)

By Tara

December 20, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this

Those who believe that estate taxes, capital gains taxes and dividend taxes are “double taxation” have been conned. We’re paying higher income taxes on your earnings from work and higher sales taxes because we’ve fallen for this scam. As a result, those who make most of their money from setting their alarm clocks and going to work everyday are subsidizing those who get most of the money from investments. Investment is important to the economy, but it isn’t more important to our economy than work. Most Americans would be paying lower taxes if income from investments were taxed at the same rates as income from work. Unfortunately, we fall for this “double-taxation” con to our demise.

By Backwords

December 20, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this

Raise my taxes hell,

Okee dokee! That is, if you’ll promise to reject any government policies that pry into the wallets of the hard-working middle class and and reward the rich oil men with no-bid, unaudited contracts (can you way welfare?) in a war carefully staged over ginormous oil reserves, while sucking the life (literally) out of those who choose to pick themselves up by the bootstraps by joining the military under the misguided premise of protecting freedom and democracy. Go ahead and reject the borrow-and-spend bankrupting of our collective national finances to the benefit of a few well-connected country-club golfers and yachters while the basic services we pay for are slashed again and again, while asking the few that benefit to sacrifice NOTHING. (Not one Hummer left behind on the lot….) Of course, I won’t hold my breath for your end of that agreement.

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 12:13 PM | Link to this

…doesn’t nothing…

Feel free to change that to …does nothing… or …doesn’t do anything…

By Randy

December 20, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this

Diogenes, No, not silly. Realistic not idealistic. I’m not here to read very often. I used to read your comments but their value has deteriorated over time.

Your opinion (selectively utopian) is noted and discarded.

I think it’s our responsibility to enable and encourage people to be self-sufficient. Instill confidence, not take it away.

By getalife

December 20, 2006 12:24 PM | Link to this

No taxation without representation.

Big oil making record profits should pay record taxes.

w’s disater in Iraq has done this:

Iraq pumped 3.5M barrels daily before Bush invaded and then they got their 2003 Halliburton upgrade:

Bush’s oil gouge, which is going to $100 a barrel makes $350,000,000 Bush will steal every day.

No wonder they were so eager to start a war, stealing $350,000,000 every day.

It’s the biggest theft in Earth’s history.

Exxon has made $2B profit so far in December.

Think The BFEE is ready for this war to end?

Don’t bet a soldier’s life on that.

By Jenkins, L.

December 20, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this

So, 90% of Americans have pre-marital sex. How does this compare to the number of people having marital sex? Did I screw up again?

I don’t have anything to say about taxes.

By JK

December 20, 2006 12:31 PM | Link to this

Tara, nicely put at 12:05!! Hard work gets a lot of lip service, but the tax loopholes available only to the wealthy say otherwise.

Also regarding taxes, do those who’d eliminate the estate tax also think the janitor in South Georgia who won the lottery should get a free pass and keep it all too? Being born to wealthy parents is kind of like winning the lottery, isn’t it? Neither worked for that chunk of dough, and both could claim divine destiny… Just curious.

By Diogenes

December 20, 2006 12:33 PM | Link to this

RW,

“yet you call me a demagogue that doesn’t nothing but launch personal attacks”

You have such a grandiose notion of yourself. You have yet to throw an opinion out for public debate. Do you have any opinions? It’s obvious that all they taught you in that fantasyland school you attended and which you refuse to debate is demagoguery — how to distort, insult, distract, and otherwise fail to have an opinion of your own.

That is such a prissy response. You really do think you know how to debate? Don’t you? What a comedy act.

Now I know why you oppose evolution so intensely (or have you forgotten that you do have an opinion on this subject?). Your species hasn’t evolved since it climbed down out of the trees 6 million years ago and toddled across the veldt. Since your species hasn’t evolved, of course, you’re the “hopeful monster” you refer to all the time. What a comedy act!

By Jessie

December 20, 2006 12:53 PM | Link to this

Diogenes,

I’m going to butcher it, but there’s a famous quote that advises to never argue with an idiot. He’ll only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Your posts on public policy are great, but RW doesn’t deserve so much of your attention. Like so many Dittoheads, he’s absorbed and institutionlized the lies and no longer has the capacity for learning, thinking or growth.

Good luck.

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 12:57 PM | Link to this

Dio,

Maybe you should munch a few of those mushrooms.

Jim and others have said they want to stick to the subject of taxes. After this response to you I’ll get out of the way as I’ve said all I need to on topic. I know they don’t want to turn this into an evolutionary debate and frankly the liberals over at luckovich’s are far more informed on the topic than you’ll ever be, so it’s more of an intellectual challenge to debate them.

As for your latest misguided assumption, I have never said I’m opposed to Darwin being proved to me through the fossil record. Paleontologists have been trying for decades and are largely giving up on Darwin. The myth of Darwinism is primarily promoted by evolutionary biologists that need the funding to continue and anti-religious zealots like you.

As for the “beautiful monster” I bring up that IS YOUR THEORY remember? You called it punctuated equilibrium and you use to claim that the lack of proof is proof.

I hope you have the decency to allow Jim his own wishes on his own blog. I know I will and I won’t be sucked into this childish game of name calling that you can’t seem to shake.

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 01:06 PM | Link to this

Oh and your little dog Jessie too!

By Jessie

December 20, 2006 01:06 PM | Link to this

RW (1257) “The myth of Darwinism is primarily promoted by evolutionary biologists that need the funding to continue…”

See what I mean?

By Lee

December 20, 2006 01:23 PM | Link to this

Often forgotten is the multiplier effect of taxes. For example, you work and earn $5000. A significant percentage of that $5000 is confiscated in the form of income taxes (and Social Security taxes, but that is another story..). You take what is left and go buy lumber and materials to build a deck on your home. Yep, another 6-8% taken in the form of sales taxes. You get the deck built and here comes the property appraiser raising the value of your home and charging even more property taxes. You pay property taxes every year until you die and then, if your estate is large enough, your heirs will pay an estate tax.

I’ve read articles estimating the overall tax burden on the average American is around 70-80%. I’d say that is a fair estimate.

By Raise my taxes hell

December 20, 2006 01:24 PM | Link to this

Backwords -

That is, if you’ll promise to reject any government policies that pry into the wallets of the hard-working middle class and reward the rich oil men with no-bid, unaudited contracts (can you way welfare?)

The middle class don’t pay the majority of the federal income taxes. That’s the upper and wealthy classes - to the tune of nearly 70% of all federal income tax revenue generated - and that starts for people/households making over $90,000 which is hardly ‘rich.’ So tell me again how any policies of the government are going to pry into the wallets of the middle class?

in a war carefully staged over ginormous oil reserves, while sucking the life (literally) out of those who choose to pick themselves up by the bootstraps by joining the military under the misguided premise of protecting freedom and democracy.

If you want to talk about a war and oil, and no-bid contracts, go find another blog. You liberals are great at going off on a tangent. This topic is about taxes.

Go ahead and reject the borrow-and-spend bankrupting of our collective national finances to the benefit of a few well-connected country-club golfers and yachters

Those who earn the money control it. Got it? You sound like the typical wailing liberal jealous of those with more than you.

while the basic services we pay for are slashed again and again, while asking the few that benefit to sacrifice NOTHING.

I would like you to tell me just one government spending program that has been reduced/slashed/cut under president Bush. Oh, did you know that there is no written legal guarantee that you’ll ever see one thin DIME of the social security money you paid into during your lifetime of working?

(Not one Hummer left behind on the lot….) Of course, I won’t hold my breath for your end of that agreement.

All you jealous psuedo-Jesus liberals need to know that envy is one of the Seven Deadly Sins. Jealousy of your betters will get you nowhere in life, and as I referenced earlier, sitting on your butts will get you nowhere in life either.

By getalife

December 20, 2006 01:31 PM | Link to this

Can someone please decrease the intellectual level of your blogs? I have no idea what you guys are talking about.

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 02:00 PM | Link to this

Jessie,

By Jessie

See what I mean?

I’ve put up a special thread just for you to come and give us the proof

The comments are not moderated and don’t require you to sign in. I’ll look forward to the wisdom you intend to impart.

By Buy Danish

December 20, 2006 02:11 PM | Link to this

Backwords,

Since you brought up golfers, it’s worth mentioning that I see a lot of descendants of former slaves on the golf course with country club memberships. How can this be? Are they rich oil-men who got Haliburton contracts from the Neo-cons? Did they inherit great fortunes? Win the lottery?

Or is it possible that they managed to prosper through hard work in a country which offers opportunities to succeed?

Would you prefer that these people who “picked themselves up through their bootstraps” be able to leave their estates to their heirs, or do you think the government should confiscate a good portion of their estate and make their children start from scratch all over again?

By Andy

December 20, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this

It’s only 2PM and RW and Buy Danish have commented over 20X.

By Buy Danish

December 20, 2006 02:33 PM | Link to this

RW,

Darn it, I have to run out again.

I’m really looking forward to Jessie proving Darwinism and I’m sure Dio will be an invaluable source.

This is great!

By Getalife

December 20, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this

Seriously, can you guys please stop talking over my head. My Bush material is getting old, I know. Help me with easy topics ok? Thanks.

By getalife

December 20, 2006 02:47 PM | Link to this

PF,

Stop jacking my name wanker.

So, Abizaid will retire.

Surge the troop levels and purge the Generals against the surge.

Yes, w sure listens to the Generals.

w will pick sides and create a larger regional war for oil.

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

I’m running out too, maybe when we get back we’ll have all the answers and the proof. Who Knew that Dio and Jessie could do what thousands of scientists couldn’t.

Let’s meet up for a glass of wine in case Dusty starts to pawn that other stuff off on us later.

Dio,

I didn’t mean to exclude you, please give us your contribution at: Jessie the lib proves Darwinism

By Middle America

December 20, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this

Wow, two days in a row, Wooten and I are on the same page. Raising taxes is not an option, because until the state government (and especially the federal govt) demonstrate that they will spend said tax revenue on things that the taxees want, and stop doing things with our money that the public doesn’t want (i.e. Iraq war), then why should we subsidize further wastes of money? For example, in GA we have some of the worst traffic in the country, because our road systems, especially in and around the metro area are 25 years out of date (not the road surface itself, as they are always re-paving something, but the amount of lanes, traffic control systems, etc.). Hwy 400 in particular is currently in the process of being expanded, but it is too little too late. Plus they waste an entire lane for buses only. Since when should my tax dollars go to fund a lane that is 98% empty and unused, while I sit still at 5 mph every day? These are reasons why accountability needs to be built into the system. I don’t mind parting with some of my money if it goes to fund things that serve the common good. But right now most of our money goes to blind projects that the public has no idea how our money is spent. No-bid contracts to Halliburton for Iraq War reconstruction is a huge offender.

You can’t spend our money, and then totally ignore public opinion on issues.

By RagingMad

December 20, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this

Again, the FAIR TAX is the answer. I want to spend MY MONEY the way I want to - not give it to the government to waste. Year-to-date the government has TAKEN $36,000 (federal) and $10,500 (state) of MY MONEY. I earned that money through hard work and making the right choices. Why should I be FORCED to give MY MONEY to the government?

By Jessie

December 20, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this

BD (233) “I’m really looking forward to Jessie proving Darwinism…”

The term “Darwinism” can apply to any theory or understanding about biology that is grounded in one or more theories or ideas promulgated by Charles Darwin.

My proof of Darwinism is as follows:

Four conditions must be true to prove Darwinism:

Since all four conditions are true, I have proved Darwinism. As you are now aware, Darwinism is not a myth – to the contrary, it thrives today.

By Political Deckhand

December 20, 2006 04:16 PM | Link to this

Gov. Perdue must really be angry with Jim Wooten for highlighting his tax problem by bringing up taxes in a blog. You would think Luckovich himself had authored the article. I’ll bet Mr. Wooten will have to leave town soon and take his henchmorons, RW and Buy Danish with him.

bwa

By Raise my taxes hell

December 20, 2006 04:19 PM | Link to this

I want to spend MY MONEY the way I want to - not give it to the government to waste…I earned that money through hard work and making the right choices. Why should I be FORCED to give MY MONEY to the government?

Ragingmad, the socialist left doesn’t look at it that way, let alone even comprehend it that way. Those people aren’t wired like we are. They think if you have something that someone else does not, then it’s just plain not fair. Everything else belongs to them and it’s up to them to distribute and allocate accordingly. If you haven’t read it, please see my 10:06AM post. It removes a lot of the mystery of where these people’s mindset comes from and where it’s headed.

By Kelly

December 20, 2006 04:48 PM | Link to this

“please see my 10:06AM post. It removes a lot of the mystery of where these people’s mindset comes from and where it’s headed.”

If your 10:06 were true, it would take the mystery out of these people’s mindset. But, it’s not true.

The real mystery is why would you attribute the following BS in your 10:06 post to anybody who disagrees with you about which approach any government should use to cover it’s expenses:

Attributing these beliefs to the “left and liberal republicans” (aka: fellow Americans) shows that you’re either stupid, dishonest or as detailed-oriented as a toddler. Since the last few years have demonstrated that “conservative” Republicans in Washington spend and waste signicantly more money than Democrats, I have a feeling that all three characteristic apply.

By Kelly

December 20, 2006 05:15 PM | Link to this

RMTH @1:24 “I would like you to tell me just one government spending program that has been reduced/slashed/cut under president Bush.”

One? Okay — The C.O.P.S. program. Have you noticed that the violent crime rate increased nationwide last year for the first time in about 14 years? This rate has also gone up during the first six months of 2006 according to FBI statistics.

I thought “conservatives” believed that the first priority of any government is security and law enforcement. Well, you suck at it — both here and in Iraq.

By RagingMad

December 20, 2006 05:35 PM | Link to this

Comments like “you suck at it” are so typical of the left. You try to come up with valid points - and in some cases you do. In the end - when you have failed to do so - the best you can do is “you suck at it”? You are so mired in the stats you fail to see the plain truth. The government (Republicans & Democrats)is robbing us blind - they have been for years. In conclusion, it is MY MONEY and I want to keep it. The Fair Tax is the only answer. Have a good evening!

By Buy Danish

December 20, 2006 05:38 PM | Link to this

Jessie,

RW left you a golden opportunity to prove to the world how brilliant you are here.

Are you too cowardly to respond directly to him? It must be a trick you picked up from Dio:

You hide behind me, while Dio hides behind Wooten.

By Jessie

December 20, 2006 05:44 PM | Link to this

BD — I apologize.

RW,

Happy BD?

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 05:50 PM | Link to this

Jessie,

I already responded to you over on the blog I set up just for you.

The question was to prove that Darwin was right about the origin of man, you come up with “Darwin was alive, had theories, and some believed him”

If you recall you started the day calling me an idiot. With that response I think you were looking into the Time magazine cover when you spotted the real idiot.

By Kelly

December 20, 2006 05:52 PM | Link to this

RagingMad,

I failed to come up with a valid point? The guy’s question was asked and answered — directly.

It’s MY MONEY too, and the Fair Tax will take more of it. The so-called Fair Tax is actually a tax increase for most Americans, and it’ll lead to more deficits — meaning it would result in higher taxes for future generations too (that’s THEIR MONEY).

I want to keep MY MONEY as much as you want to keep yours. Have a good evening!

By Political Deckhand

December 20, 2006 05:52 PM | Link to this

I would rather pay higher property taxes, state sales taxes, and state income taxes than go see Rocky 6.

By Buy Danish

December 20, 2006 05:56 PM | Link to this

Jessie,

RW already saw your 4:48 and responded here.

You’re turning out to be quite the disappointment - I had such high expectations.

By Jessie

December 20, 2006 05:57 PM | Link to this

RW,

See my 3:36. Some “leftist” confused me with her bullet points at 4:48.

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 06:17 PM | Link to this

Jessie,

If you scroll back to 5:50 it’s pretty obvious I responded to the proper comment from 3:36. Are you sure that you want to keep calling me the idiot in this conversation?

By Jessie

December 20, 2006 06:34 PM | Link to this

RW “I already responded to you over on the blog I set up just for you.”

RW,

Feel free to write to me on your “special” blog. Fair warning…I won’t be reading it. If you intend for me to actually see what you have to say, then stick to Wooten’s blog.

On this blog, you and BD asked me to prove Darwinism. Mission accomplished.

Still, you’re not easily satisfied. Now you’re asking me to prove that Darwin was right about the origin of man. FYI, evolution is a theory. Do you know what a theory is RW?

Now I have a question for you. You wrote that Darwinism is a myth (you do know what a myth is, don’t you). You made that ridiculous assertion, so prove it.

I take it that you believe in Creationism. While you’re at it, prove that the Book of Genesis, Chapter 1 is right about the origin of man. I don’t see any reason why you can’t kill two birds with one stone.

With regard to your question, “Are you sure that you want to keep calling me the idiot in this conversation?” The answer is yes.

I’ll be looking for your proof tomorrow. Good luck…idiot.

By RW-(the original)

December 20, 2006 08:06 PM | Link to this

Ah Jessie,

You sad pathetic waste of perfectly good oxygen, let’s review.

RW,Feel free to write to me on your “special” blog. Fair warning…I won’t be reading it. If you intend for me to actually see what you have to say, then stick to Wooten’s blog.

The off topic conversation you butted into to dealt with an ongoing discussion with Diogenes. You began by saying Dio had great points to make and that I wasn’t worth the time because, in your opinion, I’m an idiot.

It was your next comment that you rolled your cyber eyes at my myth of Darwinism comment. When tied together those two comments would indicate that you embrace Dio’s views on Darwinism, which is what you were asked to respond to.

Now there’s a reason I went to the trouble of setting up a web post for the discussion and I’m afraid this will be way over your head, but it has to do with respect. We had been asked by the host of this blog to limit the off-topic conversations and Darwin’s theory of the origin of man is not a quick discussion and is often very disruptive. I notice that you show an absolute absence of respect or decency and even defy your host by demanding that his blog be the place for anything Jessie wants to discuss.

Next point:

On this blog, you and BD asked me to prove Darwinism. Mission accomplished.

See above for the this blog explanation, maybe it will sink in if you read it again. You were not asked to prove Darwinism in the bizarre sense that you did. Since you had declared the infallibility of Dio’s argument and the vacuousness of mine, your obligation was to prove how Dio had been right about Darwin. Now since Dio hadn’t laid that out today, you’re either a blind fool being led by a complete moron, or you’ve read her ideas in the past and somehow buy into them. That places the burden of proof on you and the cutsie obfuscation really makes you look foolish.

Next point:

Still, you’re not easily satisfied. Now you’re asking me to prove that Darwin was right about the origin of man. FYI, evolution is a theory. Do you know what a theory is RW?

Others, like rusncap, that did have the good taste and decency to make their comments on the blog I set up and not disrupt the host here, will tell you gravity is a theory. He’s right, but the theory of gravity works every time you test it. The theory of evolution falls apart like a house of cards when it’s given any scrutiny.

Next point:

Now I have a question for you. You wrote that Darwinism is a myth (you do know what a myth is, don’t you). You made that ridiculous assertion, so prove it.

There has never been any credible evidence of any species ever becoming another one. That probably doesn’t qualify as absolute proof of a myth, so I’ll give you partial credit for exposing a slightly hyperbolic statement. (You do know what hyperbole is don’t you Jessie?)

In any case there has probably never been any one theory that’s had more time and money put into it, with an absolute goal of finding the holy grail that proves it and had less results, in fact disproving itself along the way, than Darwin’s theory of the origin of man.

Next point:

I take it that you believe in Creationism. While you’re at it, prove that the Book of Genesis, Chapter 1 is right about the origin of man. I don’t see any reason why you can’t kill two birds with one stone.

Creationism has about as much proof as Darwin’s theory of evolution, which is to say virtually none. Nothing quite shows an amateur to this debate like immediately labeling the opponent a religious zealot just because you believe in Darwin and your opponent questions it. Sorry amateur Jessie, but that isn’t an argument.

My reading of Genesis tells me that the story is completely impossible and, unlike Darwin’s theory, the fossil record backs me on that.

Both Creationists and Darwiniacs are operating on faith, but the Creationists are honest about it, while the Darwiniacs make wild claims that they are backed by science.

Your other two points are more of the same. You have no argument so you call names and obfuscate. That’s fine by me as all the other readers here can make up their own minds. I’m completely secure in my beliefs and in myself as a person so keep making yourself look small and we’ll all get a good laugh at your expense.

By Raise my taxes hell

December 21, 2006 08:15 AM | Link to this

To Kelly from 4:48 -

*Attributing these beliefs [Marxist taxation policies] to the “left and liberal republicans” (aka: fellow Americans) shows that you’re either stupid, dishonest or as detailed-oriented as a toddler.

Yeah I know, the truth hurts you people on the left. I can’t help it if your actions, beliefs, and virtues override your mouths every time.

Since the last few years have demonstrated that “conservative” Republicans in Washington spend and waste signicantly more money than Democrats, I have a feeling that all three characteristic apply [I’m stupid].

I’m a Conservative first and Republican second [aka: like a lot of fellow Americans]. I’m happy the Republicans got the jolt. Perhaps it will wake them back up. Now, if you believe that the Republicans lost Congress this year because Democrats won on strong points instead of alleged Conservatives not holding to their core values and being fired by the people who elected them, then perhaps it is you that is really the stupid one among us.

But it is rather entertaining to listen to you liberal democrats lecture we Conservatives on spending, especially when it comes to taxation policies. You policy wonks on the left already have just ten percent of the tax paying population paying nearly seventy percent of all federal income taxes. You policy wonks on the left want the estate taxes increased again. Hey, it’s not my fault those virtues you people on the left believe in are in line with Karl Marx virtues

By Raise my taxes hell

December 21, 2006 08:27 AM | Link to this

RW wrote -

I notice that you show an absolute absence of respect or decency and even defy your host [Wooten] by demanding that his blog be the place for anything Jessie wants to discuss

Well RW, do you really expect anything more from the holier than thou, smarter than thou liberals and democrats on this blog? I don’t. They have no respect for anyone who doesn’t abide by their philosophies straight up and down with no wavering, just like textbook fascists.

By Jim

December 21, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this

No matter what they do about restructuring taxes, they still need to bring in the same amount of money. I would rather pay taxes that give me a tax deduction, like property taxes and a state income tax, than pay all the taxes and fees that Floridians have to pay and get no deduction for it. Taxes and fees in FL are often times significantly more that what is charged in GA for similar items.