Two excellent reasons to OPPOSE gay marriage in the UK

[ideologue08]

I agree with this, but then I agree with referendums for practically every government decision. We have the technology these days, so I don't see why the people can't vote on every new law.

I agree with a referendum as well. And the vote would probably be against gay marriage, that's the only reason I can think of why the gay lobby is determined that there should not be referendum. The director of one of the gay activist groups said: "While we are disappointed that no decision was made today we are pleased that the Scottish government has confirmed that a referendum has been ruled out."

[Tiberius]

[rexbeccarox]

You never answered my question, ideologue08. What scares you about same-sex marriage?

From reading his posts, it seems the main thing that scares him about same-sex marriage is the possibility of other types of marriage.

Not a good enough reason in my opinion. Just because gay marriage being legalized may legitimize other pushes for poly-marriage or incest-marriage doesn't mean gay marriage should be ignored.

That, and slippery-slope arguments are crap.

Now I have to ask: ideologue, what scares you about same-sex marriage and other types of marriage?

[ideologue08]

[rexbeccarox]

Seriously? Still no answer?

Do I have to ask for the fourth time?

[Ryantology]

1) I've argued against income tax in this thread, so your argument against my point makes no sense.

I didn't assume you were talking about taxing income, but rather a sales tax sort of idea, what they call the Fair Tax over here in murica.

2) A flat tax is equal, because the percentage is equal. 10% of 10,000 is less than 10% of 100,000, but it's still 10%...the same equal rate.

Yes, the percentages are equal numbers. Is the real-life impact of this equal? I've been poor enough where even a few dollars was the margin between eating and starving. I daresay this is never the case for a millionaire. A thousand dollars does not have equal relative value to me that it does to a millionaire. Ten percent does not have equal relative value to me that it does to a millionaire. It's a great idea in theory. In practice, it places the highest burden on those least able to bear it.

3) In this thread I've also advocated that under any income tax system, the first $X should be non-taxable, where X is the calculated living wage for a person, dependent on their area (i.e. taking into consideration house prices / rents).

That is a great idea.

oh piss off.

Your debating skills is no better than Ted Cruz's.

[Tiberius]

I didn't assume you were talking about taxing income, but rather a sales tax sort of idea, what they call the Fair Tax over here in murica.

My apologies, but you did open with this:

...by requiring them to pay astronomically higher taxes relative to their income when they already bring in just a tiny fraction of what I have?

Bolding mine.

Yes, the percentages are equal numbers. Is the real-life impact of this equal? I've been poor enough where even a few dollars was the margin between eating and starving. I daresay this is never the case for a millionaire. A thousand dollars does not have equal relative value to me that it does to a millionaire. Ten percent does not have equal relative value to me that it does to a millionaire. It's a great idea in theory. In practice, it places the highest burden on those least able to bear it.

Given that the kind of systems I'm familiar with (UK and to a moderate extend, the US) have both an income tax and a form of sales tax, any real-life impact that currently exists would be much better for everyone if only a sales tax existed, because people would have more money to spend / save.

That is a great idea.

It's what we currently have in the UK. About the only good thing in the current system.

[Angrboda]

[ideologue08]

It's nice to see the face of a fellow Muslim.

[Ryantology]

My apologies, but you did open with this:

Poor choice of phrasing on my part. Apologies.

Given that the kind of systems I'm familiar with (UK and to a moderate extend, the US) have both an income tax and a form of sales tax, any real-life impact that currently exists would be much better for everyone if only a sales tax existed, because people would have more money to spend / save.

Under a progressive tax system, people who have the least amount of money would have more to spend and people with the most amount of money would, in any reasonable sense, still have vast amounts of money to spend on whatever they wanted without any practical limit.

Unless there is something approaching equality in income (there is not and I think you'll agree that it should not be), then equality in taxation is not really fair at all.