What presidential candidate would be most beneficial to the climbing community and land access?

Todd Graham wrote:Healy ..Why not tax everyone the same rate? Why not treat people the same? I know why ... because politicians and the IRS and the tax lawyers and the bureaucrats would be out of a job ... jobs that feed off the current complicated system. Just another reason showingthat the more government you have ... the less freedom and wealth you have.

I am curious, Todd, are you actually against a standard deduction?

Todd Graham wrote:because politicians and the IRS and the tax lawyers and the bureaucrats would be out of a job ... jobs that feed off the current complicated system.

Naive. The IRS does the best it can and no one there is making hay off it. Further, they don't determine the taxes, merely implement them. Congress determines the taxes and the tax code is wholly stacked in favor of special interests and corporations. It's pointless railing against the IRS, rail against your senators and congessmen, they're the ones stacking the deck for large corporations.

The FAIR Tax is exactly what this country needs.
Currently, BOTH sides of the Duopoloy use our tax system to benefit their favorite constituents, and penalize their opponents. In doing this they have enabled the IRS into a massively rights-violating and law breaking entity.
Manipulation of tax policy is exactly what keeps both of the Statist parties in business, it also keeps differing social groups at not only constant odds, but increasingly adversarial at each other.
If we tax financial transactions ABOVE THE POVERTY LINE VIA A ANNUAL PREBATE, we fund our government with the same tax revenue it gets today, only a far more moral fashion.

Income tax is theft of the minutes of your FINITE minutes on this planet you spend acquiring wealth. It is as evil as any other form of slavery, the only difference between it an antibellum is that you are a free range slave.

Universal principles matter. Whether a system is moral or immoral is hugely important in regards to survival.

What this government did in 1913 not only enslaved all of us to global banking cartel, it also set us up for never ending warfare. Because not only is war a Keynesian principle at work, it and personal taxation are exactly how you do not own your life.

Mike Lane wrote: In doing this they have enabled the IRS into a massively rights-violating and law breaking entity.

Again, not really, you are suffering from dogma-induced hysteria.

Mike Lane wrote: Income tax is theft of the minutes of your FINITE minutes on this planet you spend acquiring wealth.

Tripe and balderdash.

Mike Lane wrote:It is as evil as any other form of slavery, the only difference between it an antibellum is that you are a free range slave.

Again, hysterical exaggeration.

Mike Lane wrote:Universal principles matter. Whether a system is moral or immoral is hugely important in regards to survival.

Projection and not really, a messy, ambiguous, good-enough system is completely suited to survival.

Mike Lane wrote:What this government did in 1913 not only enslaved all of us to global banking cartel, it also set us up for never ending warfare. Because not only is war a Keynesian principle at work, it and personal taxation are exactly how you do not own your life.

Utter nutjobbery, pure and simple.

Nothing but hyperbole in rebuttal. Why Leftists suck.
Try actually refuting my points Statist.

Mike Lane wrote:Nothing but hyperbole in rebuttal. Why Leftists suck. Try actually refuting my points Statist.

I would if you had a cogent point to be rebutted, so far it's all hysterical dogma. That you would use the word 'statist' just shows how lost and far gone you are.

To put taxation into perspective as far as what it takes from an individual let's consider that your income is taxed at 25%. That's just federal income tax, so let's not worry about social security; Medicare; Medicaid; state income tax; sales taxes for state, county, or city; or property taxes. Just 25% federal income tax.

You can look at this two ways:

- You earned $100 today, give the government $25.

- You just worked 3 hours for yourself and you get to keep the profits of your labor. Now you must work 1 hour for the government.

Mike Lane wrote:

how about #8. Life isn't fair. Deal with it.

Helay.. again... tell me why it is fair to tax people at different rates?

I love how the title is about climbing presidents, the evidence has been delivered in the form of Bernie, and not one of the Fox parrots on this site will touch it with a ten foot pole. You all don't want to actually have conversations and learn. You want to project the anger you have for your kids on others by TYPING IN ALL CAPS.

Todd Graham wrote:Healy ..Why not tax everyone the same rate? Why not treat people the same? I know why ... because politicians and the IRS and the tax lawyers and the bureaucrats would be out of a job ... jobs that feed off the current complicated system. Just another reason showingthat the more government you have ... the less freedom and wealth you have.

Because by taxing everyone the same rate, it actually works out to a regressive system.

History has shown, progressive tax systems make great civilizations, a flat tax actually work out to regressive tax system, and makes for a really shitty civilizations which is bound to erupt in violent revolution. Think Russia, they have a flat tax, and as we all know, they are certainly the envy of the free world.

How about we let people who understand the situation explain it.

"The regressivity of the flat tax is another big problem. Our current federal income tax code is progressive (rates rise with income), and every distributional analysis I’ve ever seen of a flat tax shows a transfer of the tax burden from the wealthy to the middle class. According to the Tax Policy Center’s score of the Perry tax plan, the tax bill of families with incomes between $30,000 and 40,000 would go up by about $450, while that of millionaires would fall by about half a million bucks."

Boo-hoo, it's not fair to be born a millionaire and have responsibilities!

So it does sound good, for millionaires and their news corporations, but not so much for the great unwashed masses up here on the Proj.

So you actually are very lucky that liberals protect you from yourself.

This is just one piece of literature among thousands dating back to the Mughal empire.

washingtonpost.com/postever…

Mike Lane wrote:Nothing but hyperbole in rebuttal. Why Leftists suck. Try actually refuting my points Statist.

Oh my gosh I didn't realize, you type in all caps when you get angry, how could you not be right? It's like you are babbling in Klingon and are upset that no one wants to have a discussion.

You will not be convinced, just like a bible bumpers faith in heaven, you have your own type of faith, and it seems a little mean to fuck with faith.

I've posted my views on taxation, government services and war elsewhere, but I'll repost them here:

TAXATION

• No corporate tax (close all offshore 'double dutch' type loopholes)
• 10% flat income tax, no exemptions
• It doesn't kick in until $50k
• %15 tax on capital gains and dividends
• 2% federal VAT on non-essential goods

GOVT SERVICES

• Eliminate all corporate welfare (starting with the sugar and energy industries)
• Slash the defense budget in half (and only go to war under the protocols below)
• Decouple transportation infrastructure funding from fuel and mileage (the former is rapidly going obsolete, the latter penalizes rural drivers)
• Zero interest student loans (invest in our future - don't bankrupt it)
• Free re-education for jobs lost offshore
• Basic, universal single-payer healthcare (go to any doctor or hospital you want - all payments through a single clearinghouse - business shouldn't be in the business of basic healthcare; they can offer additional premium private add-on health insurance as a hiring / retention incentive)
• Increase social security (business shouldn't be in the basic pension business - they can offer private pensions above the basic as a hiring / retention incentive)

WAR PROTOCOLS

Simple measures which could be instituted relative to putting how we go to war on a sane and rational footing:

• Allow the President to dispatch up to 20k troops to any two discontiguous conflicts for six months on their signature alone with a one week notice to Congress.
• Within that one week Congress can override with the same margin required to override a veto.
• The day the President want's a third dispatch, a contiguous dispatch, one body more than 20k in any one conflict, or wants one more day past six months in any one conflict, they will need to seek a formal Declaration of War agreed to by Congress by the same margin required to override a veto.
• The day a passed Declaration of War is signed by the President the following will occur: non-exempt military draft lottery for ages 18-35, freeze on the fed rate, freeze on wholesale prices, 15% national war sales tax, 15% war tax on capital gains and dividends.
• Those protocols would remain in effect until the day troop levels are below 20k and the Congress rescinds the Declaration of War by the same margin required to override a veto.

Do that, and there will be precious few wars started, corporations and republicans will become anti-war protesters overnight, and what wars do get past those hurtles will be staggeringly brief.

TAXATION
No corporate tax (close all offshore 'double dutch' type loopholes)
10% flat income tax, no exemptions
It doesn't kick in until $50k
%15 tax on capital gains and dividends
2% federal VAT on non-essential goods
GOVT SERVICES
Eliminate all corporate welfare (starting with the sugar and energy industries)

These I agree with.

Universal health care? Look at Britain. No thanks. Having the folks who gave us the VA, the DMV, the CIA, the IRS ... now in charge of health care? No way.

Todd Graham wrote: Universal health care? Look at Britain. No thanks. Having the folks who gave us the VA, the DMV, the CIA, the IRS ... now in charge of health care? No way.

Absolutely, having SMBs and corporations involved in basic healthcare and pensions is just stupid comparatively speaking.

Thanks for the cogent response. I will refrain from yelling.

Healyje wrote:TAXATION * No corporate tax (close all offshore 'double dutch' type loopholes) * 10% flat income tax, no exemptions * It doesn't kick in until $50k * %15 tax on capital gains and dividends * 2% federal VAT on non-essential goods

Agree with a lot of that. Corporate taxes when applied directly out of their balance sheets simply become another cost they add on to their pricing structure, so the consumers pay it, not them. With the point-of-sale collection of the FAIR Tax, in a roundabout way corporations do actually still pay.
The FAIR Tax eliminates all exemptions and loopholes. A point I would include in both your tax plan and the FAIR Tax is a % tax on every stock trade.
The problem with a flat tax is that it still retains the IRS in an invasive capacity, and corrupt congress can and will still generate loopholes for its sponsors.

Mathias wrote:To put taxation into perspective as far as what it takes from an individual let's consider that your income is taxed at 25%. That's just federal income tax, so let's not worry about social security; Medicare; Medicaid; state income tax; sales taxes for state, county, or city; or property taxes. Just 25% federal income tax. You can look at this two ways: - You earned $100 today, give the government $25. - You just worked 3 hours for yourself and you get to keep the profits of your labor. Now you must work 1 hour for the government.

that's a pretty simple-minded way to look at it

say my company bills my time to customers at $50/hr. does that mean they're stealing half of my paycheck by giving me only $25? no, there's overhead.

the extra $25 was never mine to begin with.

Healyje wrote: GOVT SERVICES * Eliminate all corporate welfare (starting with the sugar and energy industries) * Slash the defense budget in half (and only go to war under the protocols below) * Decouple transportation infrastructure funding from fuel and mileage (the former is rapidly going obsolete, the latter penalizes rural drivers) * Zero interest student loans (invest in our future - don't bankrupt it) * Free re-education for jobs lost offshore * Basic, universal single-payer healthcare (go to any doctor or hospital you want - all payments through a single clearinghouse - business shouldn't be in the business of basic healthcare; they can offer additional premium private add-on health insurance as a hiring / retention incentive) * Increase social security (business shouldn't be in the basic pension business - they can offer private pensions above the basic as a hiring / retention incentive)

Fundamental problem with having the state involved in most of this situations.
The state cannot determine market value on its own. That is why the more involved in markets it gets, the more distorted a market gets.
Student loans are a huge reason why the cost of higher education has skyrocketed. The more money that is available for a market, the more demand is artificially risen. When demand is high, even through artificial means, then supply will become more costly. This what was the foundation of the mortgage crisis. Relaxed lending sent too much capital into the housing market. Too much capital allowed bids for homes to rise above the current market value. Everyone had a huge rise in home equity based not on actual value but an artificial value based on excess demand. Wall Street noticed and took advantage with thousands of easy money schemes.

Todd Graham wrote:Universal health care? Look at Britain. No thanks. Having the folks who gave us the VA, the DMV, the CIA, the IRS ... now in charge of health care? No way.

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/press-releases/2009/may/elderly-medicare-beneficiaries-give-their-coverage-higher-ratings

"Elderly Medicare beneficiaries are more satisfied with their health care, and experience fewer problems accessing and paying for care, than Americans with employer-sponsored insurance (ESI), according to a study by Commonwealth Fund researchers published today on the Health Affairs Web site."

Mike Lane wrote:[Income tax] is as evil as any other form of slavery, the only difference between it an antibellum is that you are a free range slave

cmon son

Some reality re universal health care:

"Britain’s National Health Service is projected to face budget shortfalls of 30 billion pounds — nearly $47 billion — annually by 2020. The government is responding to this fiscal squeeze by effectively rationing care. Last year, the number of family-practice doctors who appealed to the National Health Service to stop accepting new patients doubled. Between April and June, nearly 16,000 scheduled operations were canceled for non-medical reasons. That’s the highest such figure in nine years. As care has become scarce, British patients have taken matters into their own hands. The number of patients paying for treatment on their own has increased tenfold in the past two years. That’s because paying out of pocket allows patients to jump ahead of the interminable waiting lists for care. This winter, the NHS is actually calling on the Red Cross to “stave off an NHS winter crisis as waiting lists reach a record high,” as British newspaper The Telegraph put it. More than 3 million people are on waiting lists for treatment — the most since January 2008. In June, more than 32,000 patients had waited at least 18 weeks for treatment. If Britain’s health-care system has to be rescued by the same folks who deliver emergency care in war zones, perhaps it’s a sign that single payer doesn’t work. Confidence in single-payer health care is also eroding in Canada. An August poll commissioned by the Canadian Medical Association found that 78 percent of Canadians over 45 are worried that they won’t be able to access care when they need it. Eighty-one percent of older Canadians say they are worried about the quality of care they will receive. Countries without single-payer systems are doing their best to keep things that way. Last month, Swiss voters rejected a plan to scrap their private insurance system for single payer. Nearly two-thirds of the country opposed the measure — significantly more than polls conducted before the vote predicted." Sally Pipes.

Bottom line ... you may not like corporations ... but at least when they screw up 1) you can sue them for damages, unlike the governemnt, 2) if there is competiton then corporations have INCENTIVE to give you good service ... unlike the government.

Again ... why on Earth would anyone trust government with running anything as important as our health care system given how much we already know about how government runs everything else? Please explain.

Todd Graham wrote: why on Earth would anyone trust government with running anything as important as our health care system given how much we already know about how government runs everything else? Please explain.

One simple trip to the DMV is enough to make one realize that government = inefficiency.