Republicans latest attempt to save a dying party - raise the voting age

Ok, so that sounds just like what you said when you posted "Yep, Democrat appeal is putting 10 people in a room, one of them is Bill Gates, then asking the room to vote on whether we should equitably distribute Bill Gates's money.". Which is why I asked how else should a civilized society do it? Glad you agree that we should do it democratically.

 

Circumstances.

 

So not a problem?

 

Depends. What do you think inequity is a sign of?

 

Alone, it’s not a sign of anything. Just an outcome that’s neither good nor bad.

 

That's pretty dumb. So if an umpire intentionally calls more strikes for one team than the other you think that's an outcome that's neither good nor bad? I think it's an outcome that's good for one team and bad for the other.

 

I had to be 21 when I first voted. “Goldwater in 64” got my first vote for President. I certainly thought it was an honor and I still do. Then when they dropped the voting age to 18 I was shocked by that. I was thinking age 20 would be just right. Once you left your teenage years, then you could now vote.

 

Inequity is like one woman who's jealous of the other woman who has the better man. Sometimes the solution is to suck it up butter cup because you don't get to have everything someone else has.

 

It might be a fair outcome overall.

It's actually probable that one team will throw more strikes than the other team and they should be rewarded for it.

That's certainly much better for the overall product than for the umpire to go into a game with the plan to call an identical number of strikes for each team, regardless of where the pitches are placed.

 

Life ain’t fair. And no matter how much you complain and no matter how many laws you write, it won’t change the fact.
Some people aren’t good at life.
Some people are unlucky.
Some folks have shitty genes and a shitty environment.
Higher taxes won’t save the world.

 

Actually, higher taxes might. This country particularly has a problem with billionaires meddling with things that them having less money might prompt them to butt out instead.

 

This is a dumb argument. Of course the guy making $50,000,000/yr pays more in taxes than some indigent or even a blue collar worker making $25,000. How could they not? Even if we went full flat tax, that would still obviously be the case.

The issue is in terms of rates. At the bottom, some people pay zero taxes. Here is the issue, at the very top, some also pay zero (or very low) tax rates. A high income W-2 earner gets squeezed with the very highest tax rate. I think the issue most dems have with the tax code is the effective rate shouldn’t be shaped like a bell curve. We shouldn’t be squeezing high income W-2 earners and letting others get a free lunch from even higher income. Obviously you have those like Bernie who want like 90% tax on billionaire income. In reality I think most just want to see the effective tax rate issue addressed from a “passive income” standpoint, to bring all high incomes in line on rates. You could probably cut real rates if you simplified the code and cut out opportunities to manipulate the “effective” tax rate, which tend to highly favor billionaires and donor class. That’s what true tax reform is. Don’t forget tax avoidance and tax evasion is a 10 figure problem as well.

 

Not a surprise you simply can’t follow their point. The umpire “intentionally calls more strikes for one team”, regardless of where those pitches land. You think that has the potential for a “fair outcome”?

 

Not surprising that you believe the system is rigged.
Another “it’s not fair” liberal.
SMH.

 

These guys aren't interested in fair outcomes.

 

And neither should you.
It’s a gigantic waste of energy trying to make everything fair.
If a person has fallen on bad times, there are ample resources to help people get back on track.
You’re just an unhappy soul.

 

Your post was ok until you decided to include "You’re just an unhappy soul" at the end. What does that have to do with anything? It just makes you look really dumb.

I disagree that trying to make things fair is a gigantic waste of time. That's why we have laws and law enforcement.

 

That’s fair, lol.
You are consistently looking for fairness and to me, it makes you look unhappy and irrational because you’ll never be satisfied.
That’s why I said that. It makes me look insightful not dumb.

 

So you are making a laffer curve argument. You in theory get 0 revenue at 0% and 100% taxation. Somewhere in between these to numbers you maximize revenue to the government. Adding another variable we also want to maximize growth while minimizing inflation. My guess is we are way under taxing the one percenters.