The Republicans are the problem

[Lucrum]

Quote from 377OHMS:

He seems to have a vocation that is highly mobile. I can never understand it when guys that could enjoy that mobility don't take advantage of it....

Nurses are evidently in demand almost everywhere. His kids are grown, he isn't married if anything he says is to be believed. Why stay in a graveyard shift deadend in Boredom USA?

unless of course he doesn't have the vocation he claims to have

Lets assume he is a nurse, add his dreadlocks, compulsive lying, self delusions of grandeur and the safe to assume accompanying personality faults. He's probably lucky to have ANY kind of job.

Maybe he really works at a convenience store.

 

[indythink75]

Quote from Lucrum:

unless of course he doesn't have the vocation he claims to have

Lets assume he is a nurse, add his dreadlocks, compulsive lying, self delusions of grandeur and the safe to assume accompanying personality faults. He's probably lucky to have ANY kind of job.

Maybe he really works at a convenience store.

Thread to thread, unable to function without this odd obsession with RCG, who is a veteran, and an actual functioning member of both society and a noble profession. Cyber stalking is so depraved. Are you both out of a job and broke? Why else are you so jealous?

 

[Brass]

Quote from jem:

are you living in Canada on the dole or not?

Try not to be absurd. In the meantime, see if you can actually answer my question:

Quote from Brass:

As I understand it, it was a revolt against taxation without representation. I think you'll find that to be different. In any event, does the government formed in 1776 represent the level and scope of government you now want to have, hopefully recognizing that it was then fully Third World by today's standards?

 

[jem]

Quote from Brass:

Try not to be absurd. In the meantime, see if you can actually answer my question:

Answer mine first

Do you live in Canada?
Do you receive money from govt entities?

 

[Brass]

Quote from jem:

Answer mine first...

I did. You didn't.

 

[jem]

I would have enjoyed answering your question... but you continue to show the integrity of a leftist. So I will not waste my time with you and your distorted world filled with bullshit and juvenile gotcha type games.

Quote from Brass:

Try not to be absurd. In the meantime, see if you can actually answer my question:

 

[Brass]

Quote from jem:

...distorted world filled with bullshit and juvenile gotcha type games.

That would be you.

I asked you an obvious follow-up question to the inaccurate (or at the very least incomplete) comment you made about the reason your country "was formed." And your response to me is to ask if I'm on the dole? You want me to post an O'Donnell-type "I am not a witch" denial response, and you accuse ME of "juvenile gotcha games?" How about this: Did you engage in heavy petting with your family goat last Christmas? See how that works, jem? But what do these questions, being of fairly equal quality and relevance, have to do with the fact that the principal reason for dissent and subsequent US sovereignty was taxation without representation? And how does that answer my perfectly reasonable question as to whether, by implication of your sovereignty-due-to-taxation comment, you now want the level and scope of government that was in force at the time of US independence in 1776?

Seriously, are you a performance artist with an affinity for the abstract?

 

[377OHMS]

Quote from jem:

I would have enjoyed answering your question... but you continue to show the integrity of a leftist. So I will not waste my time with you and your distorted world filled with bullshit and juvenile gotcha type games.

This is what it comes down to everytime with Thunderdog/Gabfly/Brass. He is simply incapable of being forthright or honest. I have never seen him deal squarely in any discussion he has been engaged in. He always responds with something pedantic or snarky and his central purpose is not to debate an issue. The guy thinks he is clever and is just looking an opportunity to say something snippy.

He is the least contributive poster in this forum except for some of the learning disability types like Spiker.

 

[tomdavis]

Quote from Brass:

You mean one with no government?

Why do you say "no government"?

About 40% of federal revenues come from income taxes. If we cut defense and other wasteful spending and increased tariffs and excise taxes, then income taxes wouldn't be necessary.

 

[Brass]

Quote from tomdavis:

Why do you say "no government"?

About 40% of federal revenues come from income taxes. If we cut defense and other wasteful spending and increased tariffs and excise taxes, then income taxes wouldn't be necessary.

Jem is voting for Romney. Romney is a Republican. Republicans are not about cutting defense. Want to increase tariffs? That works both ways, right? Cause and effect. In any event, the taxes you propose would essentially and effectively translate to consumption tax at the end of the day. Proportionately, consumption tax hits lower income groups the hardest. Why am I not surprised?