Originally Posted by Guest

Really? So everybody should pay 15% of their income (that's the most commonly stated flat tax amount) whether they can afford it, or not. If the choice is between them living in their car with their kids or paying 15% of their income to the government, you'd choose confiscating their income.

There is no doubt that there is abuse. There is abuse in any program, of any type, public or private. Can't be stopped because there are unscrupulous people out there. It would be great if it could be reduced. But does that mean that we condemn everybody that participates in those programs?

You wrongly, again, assumed the rate of 15% for everybody to pay. I guess to make YOUR case. I merely stated where does it state whether one could afford it or not as a factor to pay taxes or not.

Affordability is an all too often abused, by design, term.

As in those on food stamps cannot afford to pay for almost anything. But it is easy to see what many can afford when they shop.

"As in those on food stamps cannot afford to pay for almost anything. But it is easy to see what many can afford when they shop."

Precisely, tell us what YOU have PERSONALLY SEEN people purchase with their SNAP EBT card (food stamps) that you think is not appropriate. What stores were being used?

How can you actually determine if a person is using an EBT card rather than a regular debit or credit card when they are paying for their purchases?

Originally Posted by Guest

"As in those on food stamps cannot afford to pay for almost anything. But it is easy to see what many can afford when they shop."

Precisely, tell us what YOU have PERSONALLY SEEN people purchase with their SNAP EBT card (food stamps) that you think is not appropriate. What stores were being used?

How can you actually determine if a person is using an EBT card rather than a regular debit or credit card when they are paying for their purchases?

I did not say or did not infer what card anybody used to buy anything with! You have, fast forwarded, again, on your incorrect conclusion, of what I said.
May suit your case, but not what I said or inferred or alluded.

Your style or pattern is concerning as it mis-represents one's intentions.
Henceforth I will no longer respond to the incorrect presentation of my posts.

Originally Posted by Guest

I did not say or did not infer what card anybody used to buy anything with! You have, fast forwarded, again, on your incorrect conclusion, of what I said.
May suit your case, but not what I said or inferred or alluded.

Your style or pattern is concerning as it mis-represents one's intentions.
Henceforth I will no longer respond to the incorrect presentation of my posts.

You should read the list of items that cannot be purchased with the SNAP program. You should also know that there are no real "stamps" for food stamps. Those were done away with years ago and now, people have a plastic card that looks like any other debit or credit card.

Get outside and play some golf. Try to be happy. The Villages is a great place. Enjoy it and enjoy other people. Go to the squares and be happy.

Originally Posted by Guest

You should read the list of items that cannot be purchased with the SNAP program. You should also know that there are no real "stamps" for food stamps. Those were done away with years ago and now, people have a plastic card that looks like any other debit or credit card.

Get outside and play some golf. Try to be happy. The Villages is a great place. Enjoy it and enjoy other people. Go to the squares and be happy.

Not one new piece of information or revelation in the first paragraph.

Also missing the point that someone on the food stamp program could use another card or method of payment to pay for those things not aloud.....like wine, beer, cigarettes, lobster tails, etc. (all REAL examples from real live cashiers).

Get It???? Food stamps for what is allowed. Other means for non allowed. Another reminder the subject is affordability.

The inference of the second paragraph above is BS!

Originally Posted by Guest

snipped
Get outside and play some golf. Try to be happy. The Villages is a great place. Enjoy it and enjoy other people. Go to the squares and be happy.

I venture to post that following such advice is perhaps one reason for low information voters taking part in our local and national elections!

Participating in exchanges - even as small as this forum - contributes to better informed voters - IMHO anyway.

Originally Posted by Guest

You wrongly, again, assumed the rate of 15% for everybody to pay. I guess to make YOUR case. I merely stated where does it state whether one could afford it or not as a factor to pay taxes or not.

Wrong. You stated that the poor should pay their fair share of taxes. Whether they could afford it or not. This was stated in conjunction with your previous statements that a flat tax is fair, and a progressive tax is not. Therefore, one can only assume that you believe that the poor should pay the same tax as everyone else. Even if it means that they can't afford housing. 15% is the most commonly used hypothetical flat tax. Please feel free to substitute any percentage. The flaw in your argument remains the same.

My only argument has been that a flat tax is more onerous on the middle class, and devastating to the budgets of the poor, then a progressive tax is confiscatory to the relatively wealthy.

I'm all in favor of broadening the tax base and, if feasible, lowering tax rates, without pushing people further into poverty. That can be done with a progressive tax plan, not with a flat tax.

With that, I am done.

Originally Posted by Guest

I venture to post that following such advice is perhaps one reason for low information voters taking part in our local and national elections!

Participating in exchanges - even as small as this forum - contributes to better informed voters - IMHO anyway.

I know Rush Limbaugh coined low information voters but what does that mean?

Originally Posted by Chi-Town

I know Rush Limbaugh coined low information voters but what does that mean?

1. NOT COINED BY Rush Limbaugh !!!!

2. "Low information voters, also known as LIVs or misinformation voters, are people who may vote, but who are generally poorly informed about politics. The phrase is mainly used in the United States, and has become popular since the mid-1990s."

Low information voter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Origins[edit]
American pollster and political scientist Samuel Popkin coined the term "low-information" in 1991 when he used the phrase "low-information signaling" in his book The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns. Low-information signaling referred to cues or heuristics used by voters, in lieu of substantial information, to determine who to vote for. Examples include voters liking Bill Clinton for eating at McDonald's, and perceiving John Kerry and Barack Obama as elitist for wind-surfing and golfing respectively.[1]

Also to be noted, used on both sides of the "aisle"

"In September 2012, comedian Bill Maher, made fun of undecided voters on his HBO program Real Time calling them "low-information voters, otherwise known as dip****s."[13] Also in September, the NBC program Saturday Night Live ran a mock public service announcement featuring undecided low-information voters asking questions such as "When is the election?" and "Who is the president right now? Is he or she running?”[14][15]

In January, 2013, Alicia Colon used the similar phrase "low-info" in her column, "Low-Info Voters Just Not Interested In Politics", for the Irish Examiner USA newspaper.[16]"

Amazing how LOW INFORMATION posters will say anything.

Originally Posted by Guest

Wrong. You stated that the poor should pay their fair share of taxes. This was not me!!!

Whether they could afford it or not.

This was stated in conjunction with your previous statements that a flat tax is fair, and a progressive tax is not. This was not me either!

Therefore, one can only assume that you believe that the poor should pay the same tax as everyone else. Wrong assumption, again.

Even if it means that they can't afford housing. 15% is the most commonly used hypothetical flat tax. Please feel free to substitute any percentage. The flaw in your argument remains the same.

My only argument has been that a flat tax is more onerous on the middle class, and devastating to the budgets of the poor, then a progressive tax is confiscatory to the relatively wealthy.

I'm all in favor of broadening the tax base and, if feasible, lowering tax rates, without pushing people further into poverty. That can be done with a progressive tax plan, not with a flat tax.

With that, I am done.

Now let's try this again: since when does affordability determine whther one pays a tax or not? Once again trying to ONLY state everybody should have to pay taxes. Nothing about the low end paying the same as the upper end!

There should be no free rides. And we all know that would take a huge plank out of the democratis platform.

[QUOTE=Guest;1030424]1. NOT COINED BY Rush Limbaugh !!!!

2. "Low information voters, also known as LIVs or misinformation voters, are people who may vote, but who are generally poorly informed about politics. The phrase is mainly used in the United States, and has become popular since the mid-1990s."

Low information voter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Origins[edit]
American pollster and political scientist Samuel Popkin coined the term "low-information" in 1991 when he used the phrase "low-information signaling" in his book The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns. Low-information signaling referred to cues or heuristics used by voters, in lieu of substantial information, to determine who to vote for. Examples include voters liking Bill Clinton for eating at McDonald's, and perceiving John Kerry and Barack Obama as elitist for wind-surfing and golfing respectively.[1]

-____________

Low Information Voters are mostly found in the rural areas of the South and rural areas of the Mid-West. Small town closed minds are usually on the right fringe groupings.

I have have looking for a polite "label" for the masses who got duped by Obama.

LIVs......thank you.

Originally Posted by Guest

I have have looking for a polite "label" for the masses who got duped by Obama.

LIVs......thank you.

They're called D-I-P-S-H-I-T-S!

[quote=Guest;1030692]

Originally Posted by Guest

1. NOT COINED BY Rush Limbaugh !!!!

2. "Low information voters, also known as LIVs or misinformation voters, are people who may vote, but who are generally poorly informed about politics. The phrase is mainly used in the United States, and has become popular since the mid-1990s."

Low information voter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Origins[edit]
American pollster and political scientist Samuel Popkin coined the term "low-information" in 1991 when he used the phrase "low-information signaling" in his book The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns. Low-information signaling referred to cues or heuristics used by voters, in lieu of substantial information, to determine who to vote for. Examples include voters liking Bill Clinton for eating at McDonald's, and perceiving John Kerry and Barack Obama as elitist for wind-surfing and golfing respectively.[1]

-____________

Low Information Voters are mostly found in the rural areas of the South and rural areas of the Mid-West. Small town closed minds are usually on the right fringe groupings.

Wow - I find that statement pretty offensive and totally disagree from my own experience. I grew up in a small rural town and I would say there was and still is a pretty even mix of Republicans and Democrats. However, I have spent the last 30+ years in the suburbs of a major northeastern city and I am surrounded by LIVs!