Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Next >  [ show all ]
InvisibleDividedQuantumM
Outer Head
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
Re: Republicans [Re: luvdemshrooms] * 1
    #23495615 - 07/31/16 01:19 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

I don't think there's any question that presidents politically shape tax legislation, and many other forms of legislation, for that matter.  We are at an all time low in this, but the president and congress historically have worked together, as in theory this should happen.  I will say that at the moment, such a dynamic is largely absent (for obvious reasons), but normally things work that way.  You seem to have a hard-on not to lose face in this thread.


--------------------
Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Republicans [Re: DividedQuantum] * 1
    #23495650 - 07/31/16 01:30 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

Who sets the rate?

Before you answer...

Sixteenth Amendment
 
Quote:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.




My 'hard-on' as you so moronically put it, is for accuracy. The constitution states who has the power, not me.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
Re: Republicans [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #23495979 - 07/31/16 03:09 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

If your hard on is for "accuracy", the 16th amendment simply allowed congress to levy an income tax.  It said nothing about how rates would be set.

The Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 gave the President the power to submit the annual budget for the entire federal government.

Yes, that budget goes to Congress for review and approval and to tweek a bit, but the President has the first say (which sets the tone for Congress) and he also gets the final say.

For you to believe that Reagan wasn't responsible for the Reagan tax cuts is simply :cuckoo:.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Republicans [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #23495993 - 07/31/16 03:15 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

Let's go through it one step at a time...

1. The President makes a proposal.

2. Congress sets the rate.

3. The President either agrees or disagrees with what Congress has done.

4. If the President signs on, the rate Congress set is the rate.

5. If he doesn't sign on, it starts again at step 1.

Did I miss the part where the President magically gains the power to set the rate?


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Republicans [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #23496004 - 07/31/16 03:18 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
If your hard on is for "accuracy", the 16th amendment simply allowed congress to levy an income tax.  It said nothing about how rates would be set.




Sure it does.

Quote:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.




Congress sets the rate.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
Re: Republicans [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #23496036 - 07/31/16 03:30 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

luvdemshrooms said:
Let's go through it one step at a time...

1. The President makes a proposal.

2. Congress sets the rate. determines whether to accept the President's proposal or offer a counter proposal.

3. The President either agrees or disagrees with what Congress has done.

4. If the President signs on, the rate Congress set is the rate close enough to the rate the President initially proposed for him to sign.

5. If he doesn't sign on, it starts again at step 1.

Did I miss the part where the President magically gains the power to set the rate?



I revised your summary above to make it even more accurate.

Quote:

luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:

lFalcon91Wolvrn03 said:
If your hard on is for "accuracy", the 16th amendment simply allowed congress to levy an income tax.  It said nothing about how rates would be set.



Sure it does.

Quote:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.




Congress sets the rate.



I missed it in your quote above.  Does anyone else here see it, or is LDS once again going :cuckoo: to defend another losing argument?


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Republicans [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #23496104 - 07/31/16 03:50 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:

luvdemshrooms said:
Let's go through it one step at a time...

1. The President makes a proposal.

2. Congress sets the rate. determines whether to accept the President's proposal or offer a counter proposal sets the rate.

3. The President either agrees or disagrees with what Congress has done.

4. If the President signs on, the rate Congress set is the rate close enough to the rate the President initially proposed for him to sign  the rate.

5. If he doesn't sign on, it starts again at step 1.

Did I miss the part where the President magically gains the power to set the rate?



I revised your summary above to make it even more accurate.




Your alterations were inaccurate. The President doesn't write the bill. He doesn't get to force a rate. It doesn't become the rate simply because he wishes it be so. A 'proposal' doesn't become an edict simply because the President wishes it to be so.

Quote:

luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:

lFalcon91Wolvrn03 said:
If your hard on is for "accuracy", the 16th amendment simply allowed congress to levy an income tax.  It said nothing about how rates would be set.



Sure it does.

Quote:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.




Congress sets the rate.



I missed it in your quote above.  Does anyone else here see it, or is LDS once again going :cuckoo: to defend another losing argument?




I'll put it separately then... "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes"

So seeing as you seem to agree that after Congress is done the President can only agree/sign or disagree/veto, where's part where the President magically gains the power to set the rate?

Appealing to others won't change the accuracy of my statements.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
Re: Republicans [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #23496120 - 07/31/16 03:54 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

I think by now everyone here gets it but you.  Feel free to keep trying to convince yourself though.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Republicans [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #23496172 - 07/31/16 04:17 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

Convince myself that Congress sets the rate? I don't have to convince myself of what is true.

The President 'proposes' a rate. Congress 'sets' a rate.

Propose ≠ set.

I get it just fine.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
Re: Republicans [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #23496196 - 07/31/16 04:26 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

luvdemshrooms said:
Saying one President is good for keeping rates low (or high) and that another President is bad for doing the opposite, doesn't wash. Credit, or blame, falls on Congress.


Does the President or Congress have more influence on tax rates?
You may choose only one


Votes accepted from (07/31/16 04:24 PM) to (No end specified)
You must vote before you can view the results of this poll



--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblemycoprog
Modular Heretic
 User Gallery


Registered: 01/12/06
Posts: 797
Loc: N. America
Re: Republicans [Re: luvdemshrooms] * 1
    #23496198 - 07/31/16 04:26 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

Do you believe that Reagan was responsible for his tax cuts?


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Republicans [Re: mycoprog]
    #23496218 - 07/31/16 04:32 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

I believe Reagan made a proposal and Congress set the rate. Which is precisely what I've been saying all along.

A President cannot raise, lower or set tax rates.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Republicans [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #23496226 - 07/31/16 04:35 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

Really? A poll?

:lolsy:

You could have at least been honest about it.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
Re: Republicans [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #23496246 - 07/31/16 04:42 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

luvdemshrooms said:
Really? A poll?

You could have at least been honest about it.



What do you mean?  It is a question, not a statement.  I even quoted your original statement that started this whole discussion.  You're really desperate to save a losing argument.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Republicans [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #23496728 - 07/31/16 07:19 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

No, honest about what you seem to really want to ask.


"Do you guys really, really, really like me and is lds (despite knowing the difference between 'propose' and 'set') just a big, old, mean poopy head?"

Check one: Y___  N___

:rofl:

The President 'proposes'. Congress 'sets'. The President either signs off or vetos. If he signs off, the rate Congress 'set' is the rate. If he vetos it goes back to the beginning. As that's what happens, the argument was won some time ago.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKryptos
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 1 day, 2 hours
Re: Republicans [Re: hostileuniverse] * 1
    #23502343 - 08/02/16 03:45 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

Gonna skip this whole tax thing because...Who gives a shit? Taxes get set by a combo of the two. If that is off-topic enough to get edited, then so be it. Let's go back to something from way earlier that I found interesting.

Quote:

hostileuniverse said:
Quote:

spock said:
Bush started 2 wars and did not raise the money to fight them. War is expensive and did not leave our country with much to work with when Obama took over. Add a do nothing congress and senate and, to me, it looks like Obama did pretty good considering what he was/is working with. GW Bush was a puppet of his vice pres.

Peace
Spock




Bush started two wars along with a majority of democrats in congress, a coalition of countries, and the blessing of the UN

Why do leftists always forget who else was involved,

PRESIDENTS CANT DECLARE WAR BY THEMSELVES

FUCK PEACE




No, but presidents, being the commanders in chief, can declare police actions. The US has not officially been in a declared state of war (by congress) since WWII. Of course, that didn't stop us from Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Afghanistan again, Iraq again, and ISIS nowadays. The US hasn't fought a war in over 70 years, but somehow we still have non-geriatric troops overseas dying for I'm no longer sure what (mostly because I really don't care, sorry, vets, pick a better career. Maybe that way you'll actually get benefits).


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinehostileuniverse
Stranger
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/14/15
Posts: 8,602
Loc: 'Merica Flag
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
Re: Republicans [Re: Kryptos]
    #23502407 - 08/02/16 04:03 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

Only for so long, then they need an act of congress to continue, that's why Iraq and Afghanistan were both sanctioned by the US congress


--------------------
http://www.countdowntotrump.com





Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKryptos
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 1 day, 2 hours
Re: Republicans [Re: hostileuniverse]
    #23502453 - 08/02/16 04:18 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

Not in cases of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces." Based on the War Powers Resolution of 1973.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinehostileuniverse
Stranger
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/14/15
Posts: 8,602
Loc: 'Merica Flag
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
Re: Republicans [Re: Kryptos]
    #23502459 - 08/02/16 04:21 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Kryptos said:
Not in cases of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces." Based on the War Powers Resolution of 1973.




Okay, so in cases that don't fall under that, then what authority is used?


--------------------
http://www.countdowntotrump.com





Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKryptos
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 1 day, 2 hours
Re: Republicans [Re: hostileuniverse]
    #23502470 - 08/02/16 04:23 PM (7 years, 5 months ago)

I don't know, seeing as how every case I listed either fell under that law or preceded it (in the specific case of Korea and Vietnam). It would be interesting if there was a single precedent that was not ruled legal under the above mentioned law.

EDIT: maybe you could argue that the bombing of Kosovo under Clinton was not sanctioned by congress under that law, but on the other hand it didn't last long enough to need congressional confirmation.

SECOND EDIT: I would also like to mention that the US is currently under 29 official state of emergencies. Most of these affect trade exclusively, but not all. Five of them establish the entire world as a target, under the guise of terrorism, cyberterrorism, and protection from weapons of mass destruction. One of the worldwide states of emergency specifies trade, and the Export Administrations Act, and another refers to transnational criminal organizations, which I assume means cartels, but can be extended to encompass any crime that crosses international borders. Sorta like the FBI and state borders. By invoking any of these, the president can drop troops anywhere in the world without congressional oversight or approval indefinitely.


Edited by Kryptos (08/02/16 04:36 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Republican Blogger says Obama is Democrat's Reagan
( 1 2 all )
KingOftheThing 2,383 30 01/31/08 10:05 PM
by C21H30O2
* Democrats Celebrate narrow U.S. House loss in Ohio! lonestar2004 662 3 08/03/05 03:55 PM
by Silversoul
* If Republicans Were Democrats luvdemshrooms 3,132 17 11/20/06 01:47 PM
by pokermush
* republicans support john kerry?? KingOftheThing 1,113 6 07/31/04 11:57 PM
by JesusChrist
* Fuck the Democrats..
( 1 2 3 all )
lonestar2004 4,607 52 06/21/08 08:36 PM
by ontherun
* last night's republican debate
( 1 2 3 4 all )
BrAiN 4,727 64 12/01/07 07:45 AM
by fireworks_god
* republicans: invading our privacy KingOftheThing 867 15 07/31/04 01:10 PM
by PuZuZu
* Republican Hypocrisy DoctorJ 3,232 19 01/26/04 04:39 PM
by Viveka

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
4,209 topic views. 2 members, 4 guests and 5 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.051 seconds spending 0.029 seconds on 20 queries.