Replies

Yes, post 904, where you claim that a calculation based on an arbitrary "poverty level" is a safeguard instead of the flaw it quite clearly is, and called my pointing out your intellectual folly "dishonest" and "failed character development".

You erroneously claim it is arbitrary. It's not arbitrary. (arbitrary: Based on or subject to individual discretion or preference or sometimes impulse or caprice) As I wrote in post 904:

"According to your "logic" they can do whatever they want [arbitrary]. Thus they can do whatever they want with your preferred plan too. For with any plan you propose they can simply say the _______ (fill in the blank) level is __________ (fill in the blank). For example, they can simply say a 99% income tax will be withheld from all paychecks where the person's annual income level is $10,000 or more." 904

But I have digressed to catering to you. Not to worry, I'll get over it.

You demonstrated your intent to deceive the reader. Thus rendering yourself not to be trusted or respected because you disrespect the reader. You probably think you can mislead and try to deceive the reader and that they should just comply with you and answer your questions or take you seriously. You deserve no person's attention in a discussion. Scorn. That's what you deserve.

You erroneously claim it is arbitrary. It's not arbitrary. (arbitrary: Based on or subject to individual discretion or preference or sometimes impulse or caprice)

By that definition, it is indeed arbitrary. The determination of the poverty level is whatever the secretary of the HHS determines it is. "Poverty" is an arbitrary value, not some fixed economic constant.

As I wrote in post 904:

"According to your "logic" they can do whatever they want [arbitrary]. Thus they can do whatever they want with your preferred plan too. For with any plan you propose they can simply say the _______ (fill in the blank) level is __________ (fill in the blank). For example, they can simply say a 99% income tax will be withheld from all paychecks where the person's annual income level is $10,000 or more." 904

But such a change as that would NOT be arbitrary. Unlike the "poverty level", which can be changed by administrative fiat, the rate of taxation under the current system must be changed by an act of Congress, whose members are elected by the people. Your attempt to equate the folly of the two systems is nonsensical.

You demonstrated your intent to deceive the reader. Thus rendering yourself not to be trusted or respected because you disrespect the reader. You probably think you can mislead and try to deceive the reader and that they should just comply with you and answer your questions or take you seriously. You deserve no person's attention in a discussion. Scorn. That's what you deserve

Your lies and personal attacks do nothing to refute the clear flaws in the system you are advocating. Government handouts to every household in the United States (the "prebate" mechanism) is socialism. To claim that it is otherwise is a lie. And since that system allows an unelected bureaucrat to determine the value of those handouts (with no additional action by Congress once the system is enacted), the only thing preventing it from becoming pure communism is the goodwill of the bureaucrats.

You demonstrated your intent to deceive the reader.

He fears that too many people will actually learn the truth about the possibility of eliminating the socialist/marxist income tax. He'll do ANYTHING to stop it... sounds a lot like some liberal democrats?

Of course he'll come back denying that he's pro income tax - - - but his lack of well thought options is apparent...as is his knowledge of the nrst bill.

Yeah- "the numbers in the bill are... arbitrary". Sheesh.