Civil Unrest in France

#51
#51
ClearwaterVol said:
No offense, but that is a stupid question for a message board. You are asking a bunch of people who aren't in the business for specifics. General propositions are all that you can reasonably expect, but then you know this and think this "gotcha" question is some sort of game changer when everybody else recognizes it for what it is.
Click to expand...
I’m asking people who want to “Do something” and who support taxing their way out of “climate change” to provide specifically what they want to happen.

If it’s something people on here support then people on here should at least say what specifically they want the money spent on. If not, they can piss off about it.

In addition, I’m well aware that there’s what people want and what the government will do...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83
#52
#52
ClearwaterVol said:
No offense, but that is a stupid question for a message board. You are asking a bunch of people who aren't in the business for specifics. General propositions are all that you can reasonably expect, but then you know this and think this "gotcha" question is some sort of game changer when everybody else recognizes it for what it is.
Click to expand...
Damn dude, I could go on and on about what you wrote in the post, but I'll leave it to what I highlighted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83
#54
#54
n_huffhines said:
Pretty sure the left was bragging about low gas prices under Obama whenever they could.
Click to expand...

Yep, that's the way the left rolls - use anything (proven or manufactured) to make an argument. If gas prices were up (but because of taxes), they are saving the environment; if they are down, they claim their current great leader is an economic wizard. No factual accountability lives in the land of the left/lost.
 
#55
#55
ClearwaterVol said:
No offense, but that is a stupid question for a message board. You are asking a bunch of people who aren't in the business for specifics. General propositions are all that you can reasonably expect, but then you know this and think this "gotcha" question is some sort of game changer when everybody else recognizes it for what it is.
Click to expand...
Except that there haven't been any specifics from the real world either. Seems like this is exactly the type of thing that should have come up. A lack of specifics is worrisome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and tumscalcium
#56
#56
tumscalcium said:
I’m asking people who want to “Do something” and who support taxing their way out of “climate change” to provide specifically what they want to happen.

If it’s something people on here support then people on here should at least say what specifically they want the money spent on. If not, they can piss off about it.

In addition, I’m well aware that there’s what people want and what the government will do...
Click to expand...
I support tax and dividend policies.

https://citizensclimatelobby.org/basics-carbon-fee-dividend/

Do I think it will happen? No. It went up for vote in Washington. The left wants the tax money to buy votes. The right doesn't want taxes. And modern politics doesn't compromise.
 
#57
#57
Also, this is a large riot. But France riots all the time. It's hard to compare from our perspective. And they are known for burning cars.
 
#60
#60
a73cfd159d0aa22a561b22509f41dc2c23421982.png
columbusriots.jpg
20031102apdompostwva_230.jpg
 
#63
#63
jvol1 said:
Why are conservatives in favor of consumption taxes? It's a regressive form of taxation. Tax wealth instead.
Click to expand...
Because they are essentially user fees. If you use the roads a lot, you buy a lot of gas and pay the tax.
 
#65
#65
It taxes the least wealthy disproportionately, making the poor poorer. This also, of course, makes the rich less wealthy as well when folks have less to spend at their businesses. It just makes no sense at any level and any notion that it's more "fair" relies on a morally bankrupt concept of fairness.
 
#67
#67
jvol1 said:
It taxes the least wealthy disproportionately, making the poor poorer. This also, of course, makes the rich less wealthy as well when folks have less to spend at their businesses. It just makes no sense at any level and any notion that it's more "fair" relies on a morally bankrupt concept of fairness.
Click to expand...
FairTax.org
 
  • Like
Reactions: azVolFan and Obsessed
#68
#68
jvol1 said:
It taxes the least wealthy disproportionately, making the poor poorer. This also, of course, makes the rich less wealthy as well when folks have less to spend at their businesses. It just makes no sense at any level and any notion that it's more "fair" relies on a morally bankrupt concept of fairness.
Click to expand...
don't spend. there are about 5 things you "need", the rest are luxuries.

what if basic food items (at a grocery store), water (from the tap and bottle), basic clothes, and housing under 100k (maybe 50k depending on area) were consumption tax free?

the last item would be medical so maybe medicine/procedures that is actually life saving is also tax free. but if its merely quality of life you are taxed.

but you want to buy a $500 TV, taxed. even if you make $10k a year.
you want the fancy new Iphone, taxed, even if you make $5k a year.
etc etc etc.
 
#69
#69
jvol1 said:
Why are conservatives in favor of consumption taxes? It's a regressive form of taxation. Tax wealth instead.
Click to expand...
We already do that. Look where it has gotten us.

Besides, how is it fair to keep taxing the same money over and over?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#70
#70
jvol1 said:
It taxes the least wealthy disproportionately, making the poor poorer. This also, of course, makes the rich less wealthy as well when folks have less to spend at their businesses. It just makes no sense at any level and any notion that it's more "fair" relies on a morally bankrupt concept of fairness.
Click to expand...
That's a load of crap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pacer92
#71
#71
jvol1 said:
It taxes the least wealthy disproportionately, making the poor poorer. This also, of course, makes the rich less wealthy as well when folks have less to spend at their businesses. It just makes no sense at any level and any notion that it's more "fair" relies on a morally bankrupt concept of fairness.
Click to expand...
You know progressive Europe uses a VAT, right?
 
#73
#73
This is effectively a trial run. Globalists seeing if carbon tax will be swallowed by the French. OK, so you have your protests, and mischief and vandalism. If the French police and military can beat enough heads in, and the people fall back into line and go back to work, then it was a success. Expect to see it spread throughout the EU.

Macron has jacked gas prices up 22% in just 1 year. He has plans for more increases in January. Middle class getting eradicated, lower class getting turned into homeless serfs.

It's up to the people of France. Macron just effectively said "let them eat cake", they can either roll over and die or take their country back.

Anytime a Democrat talks about climate change or the environment, you better just understand that's code talk for doing this same thing here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FallCreekVols, NurseGoodVol and davethevol
#74
#74
LouderVol said:
don't spend. there are about 5 things you "need", the rest are luxuries.

what if basic food items (at a grocery store), water (from the tap and bottle), basic clothes, and housing under 100k (maybe 50k depending on area) were consumption tax free?

the last item would be medical so maybe medicine/procedures that is actually life saving is also tax free. but if its merely quality of life you are taxed.

but you want to buy a $500 TV, taxed. even if you make $10k a year.
you want the fancy new Iphone, taxed, even if you make $5k a year.
etc etc etc.
Click to expand...

You really have to add energy to that list. It's what heats you, moves you, cooks your food, and takes care of pretty much anything you do. Some energy needs are optional, but many aren't. "Civilization" has made energy from fuels a requirement in many instances. For example, if you live on a farm you might have a well and draw your own water; that's not an option in a city, so energy is a requirement for a fundamental that didn't at one time require anything more than human effort. Anyway energy is what makes everything work these days ... most literally. The cost of energy is like friction to everyday life; adding to that simply increases the friction; therefore, I'd say taxing energy is the very most regressive tax possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: azVolFan
#75
#75
AM64 said:
You really have to add energy to that list. It's what heats you, moves you, cooks your food, and takes care of pretty much anything you do. Some energy needs are optional, but many aren't. "Civilization" has made energy from fuels a requirement in many instances. For example, if you live on a farm you might have a well and draw your own water; that's not an option in a city, so energy is a requirement for a fundamental that didn't at one time require anything more than human effort. Anyway energy is what makes everything work these days ... most literally. The cost of energy is like friction to everyday life; adding to that simply increases the friction; therefore, I'd say taxing energy is the very most regressive tax possible.
Click to expand...
I wasn't under the impression that utilities were taxed. didn't think under a consumption tax they would be either.

point is, that is just a cost. not a tax.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top