Politics Thread

[Snipe]

I would be in favor of an IQ test to own a gun. And to vote as well. And I would like gun owners and voters to be tax payers in good standing. You don't pay taxes? No gun and no vote.

[xudash]

I would be in favor of an IQ test to own a gun. And to vote as well. And I would like gun owners and voters to be tax payers in good standing. You don't pay taxes? No gun and no vote.

You are making way too much sense.

You contribute to society and know how to behave, you get to play.

You don't contribute to society and are three sheets to the wind when it comes to cognitive thinking, then:

- You shouldn't be allowed to procreate.
- Vote.
- Own a gun.

But, on the matter of guns and what types should be made generally available to the private sector (public): any device that allows for volume shooting should be restricted to the military and law enforcement agencies of any type.

Why allow access to these killing machines to the general public?

[X-man]

You are making way too much sense.

You contribute to society and know how to behave, you get to play.

You don't contribute to society and are three sheets to the wind when it comes to cognitive thinking, then:

- You shouldn't be allowed to procreate.
- Vote.
- Own a gun.

But, on the matter of guns and what types should be made generally available to the private sector (public): any device that allows for volume shooting should be restricted to the military and law enforcement agencies of any type.

Why allow access to these killing machines to the general public?

Snipe isn't making sense. For one thing, how much in taxes should one pay to be able to vote? Is paying $1 per year in taxes enough? Are you in favor of a poll tax, for example? Should high income people pay more in taxes than low income people to be able to vote, because they have more at stake from protecting property rights and law enforcement? It's nonsense.

[Snipe]

Why not have voters who have skin in the game? You reject the idea as some sort of crazy talk. It's nonsense!

Instead, lets let in a third world horde of millions who can't speak English and go on benefits. That is a great plan there pal, and if you don't like it you are one big meanie racist!

[Lloyd Braun]

In his own words he stated that using a handgun he would not have stopped the shooter.

So the guy who owns an AR-15 says he needed it. Gotcha. I’m not saying it’s feasible to get rid of them but at least start on some common ground with the discussion that they are unnecessary for civilians.

[X-man]

Why not have voters who have skin in the game? You reject the idea as some sort of crazy talk. It's nonsense!

Instead, lets let in a third world horde of millions who can't speak English and go on benefits. That is a great plan there pal, and if you don't like it you are one big meanie racist!

You still haven't answered any of my questions. How much tax must one pay? Are you in favor of a poll tax? Because everyone buys something, everyone pays sales taxes. Do they count? Whether you rent or own, you pay property taxes. Do they count? Should high income households pay more because they have more to gain from the legal property protections funded by taxes? If yes, how much more? Your rule on taxes to vote makes no sense, either philosophically or operationally.

[xudash]

You still haven't answered any of my questions. How much tax must one pay? Are you in favor of a poll tax? Because everyone buys something, everyone pays sales taxes. Do they count? Whether you rent or own, you pay property taxes. Do they count? Should high income households pay more because they have more to gain from the legal property protections funded by taxes? If yes, how much more? Your rule on taxes to vote makes no sense, either philosophically or operationally.

That right there is an interesting insight into your way of thinking.

If you want to talk about utter nonsense, you provided it with that statement. If you're argument is they're paying into property taxes through their rental payment, and that gives them a de facto say in matters having to do with property ownership, then you are simply wrong.

Rent is rent. A renter has no skin in the game. They have no risk of ownership. They sign a rental agreement and they pay their rent and otherwise maintain their units in a proper manner as dictated by the requirements of the landlord/owner. Rental prices are otherwise set based on a number of factors, including coverage of any and all taxes related to the particular property and the local rental market. But you know all that already.

The idea that you can support your argument because they are a "contributor" to property taxes through a portion of their rental payments is absurd.

High income households are already responsible for the vast majority of actual cash tax dollars paid into the system. That is a FACT and it is not up for debate.

Answer this simple question: should an irresponsible person who does not contribute but takes from society, and has no intention of ever contributing to society be allowed to vote? I'm requesting a simple "Yes" or "No" initially; you may follow with whatever commentary you like.

[X-man]

That right there is an interesting insight into your way of thinking.

If you want to talk about utter nonsense, you provided it with that statement. If you're argument is they're paying into property taxes through their rental payment, and that gives them a de facto say in matters having to do with property ownership, then you are simply wrong.

Rent is rent. A renter has no skin in the game. They have no risk of ownership. They sign a rental agreement and they pay their rent and otherwise maintain their units in a proper manner as dictated by the requirements of the landlord/owner. Rental prices are otherwise set based on a number of factors, including coverage of any and all taxes related to the particular property and the local rental market. But you know all that already.

The idea that you can support your argument because they are a "contributor" to property taxes through a portion of their rental payments is absurd.

High income households are already responsible for the vast majority of actual cash tax dollars paid into the system. That is a FACT and it is not up for debate.

Answer this simple question: should an irresponsible person who does not contribute but takes from society, and has no intention of ever contributing to society be allowed to vote? I'm requesting a simple "Yes" or "No" initially; you may follow with whatever commentary you like.

You clearly know nothing about tax incidence. Of course renters pay part of property taxes. Landlords charge more when there are property taxes. How much they can pass forward to renters depends upon the elasticity of demand vs. the elasticity of supply...what renters are willing to pay vs. the competition from other landlords. No one who knows anything about the way markets work would claim that that sellers pay all of a tax levied on their product. Don't get into this unless you actually know something about the conversation.

[xudash]

You clearly know nothing about tax incidence. Of course renters pay part of property taxes. Landlords charge more when there are property taxes. How much they can pass forward to renters depends upon the elasticity of demand vs. the elasticity of supply...what renters are willing to pay vs. the competition from other landlords. No one who knows anything about the way markets work would claim that that sellers pay all of a tax levied on their product. Don't get into this unless you actually know something about the conversation.

Ha! Okay.

Do renters pay directly to taxing authorities?

What part of me acknowledging that landlords account for all costs, including taxes didn't you comprehend?

BTW, your tone is childish.

[Masterofreality]

Not sure if it's your intention, but this reads as you saying Dems and the liberal media need to take care of this since their idea of gun control obviously doesn't work. If it is what you mean, please name one tangible solution proposed by any Republican politician.

What I am clearly saying is that the Democrats and their liberal media cohorts always like to scream about stuff like gun control when they aren’t in power. Well, there were 24 mass shootings of note during Obama’s administration, 6 of them while the Dems had full power. They did NOTHING. They could rush up and pass a lousy, flawed “Healthcare” bill but ignored guns. Probably because there is a Second Amendment at play. So, my point is quit shouting about something that is clearly an empty political points effort and get to work crafting a proposal that may pass muster... with all sides... And by the way, get your own ineffective Government house in order too where the Database and background checks are accurate. That might actually help.

And unlike the Dems, the Repubs aren’t screaming hysterically - even though one of their own, Steve Scalise, was gunned down by a leftist shooter. They know NRA members don’t commit shootings. So, c’mon hysterical Dems. Shut up and propose a solution that fits the, you know, pre-existing Constitution.