Salandriagado wrote:Nulla Bellum wrote:
For SNAP benefits? 62% of them.
This is what we call a lie. In particular most SNAP recipients are employed.
Cuav.
Advertisement
by Nulla Bellum » Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:43 pm
Salandriagado wrote:Nulla Bellum wrote:
For SNAP benefits? 62% of them.
This is what we call a lie. In particular most SNAP recipients are employed.
by Salandriagado » Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:55 pm
Nulla Bellum wrote:Salandriagado wrote:
Yeah, no. That's not the claim that we've made. You have specifically claimed that those benefits add up to more than $35,000/year (and also that you think that ability to use google translate to write fucking abysmal Japanese makes you look intelligent, apparently, but that one's clearly wrong). You have provided zero evidence of that, and until you do, it's bullshit.
Ulikuwa na matatizo ya kusoma Kiingereza. Kwa nini Google haiwezi kuunga mkono madai yako?
by Salandriagado » Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:57 pm
by Nulla Bellum » Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:57 pm
by USS Monitor » Mon Jun 04, 2018 1:05 pm
Nulla Bellum wrote:Salandriagado wrote:
Yeah, no. That's not the claim that we've made. You have specifically claimed that those benefits add up to more than $35,000/year (and also that you think that ability to use google translate to write fucking abysmal Japanese makes you look intelligent, apparently, but that one's clearly wrong). You have provided zero evidence of that, and until you do, it's bullshit.
Ulikuwa na matatizo ya kusoma Kiingereza. Kwa nini Google haiwezi kuunga mkono madai yako?
by Great Minarchistan » Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:01 pm
by Thermodolia » Mon Jun 04, 2018 4:29 pm
Great Minarchistan wrote:Taxes are taxes for a reason, if you create an opt out system then you'll have revenue massively reduced. Around 55% of the taxpayers believe that the federal income tax they pay is fair, so we are talking about 45% that don't. Assuming that some 25% would not pay taxes and the other 20% would pay... half? of what they current pay, this would imply in an effective loss of 35% in revenue. Income taxes bring up 1800bn in revenue yearly, so it's a loss of 600 billion a year (implying a budget deficit twice as large). That's not to say of course about dangerous fluctuations that could happen through general lack of satisfaction due to political, social and economic factors, resulting on an uncertain source of revenue.
by Petrolheadia » Thu Jun 07, 2018 10:12 pm
Nulla Bellum wrote:Galloism wrote:Generally speaking yes. However, there may be circumstances where the job costs more to maintain than its worth. Think of a single father with three kids, but the only job he can get is working at night, which means he has to hire someone to babysit.
That person who babysits is making at least as much as he is (minimum wage and all), so what have we accomplished?
A system that rewards sloth. Or at least makes stupid non-lethal.
by Isilanka » Fri Jun 08, 2018 12:37 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Bienenhalde, Decolo, Google [Bot], High Earth, Ifreann, Nazel Geldiic, Port Carverton, San Lumen, SVN
Advertisement