White House: There No Reason Not To Tax Violent Media

FiveFig said:
there's no legal reason why we can't tax our population back to the stone age
if they didn't want to be taxed like this they'd have voted in representatives who would NOT vote for them right???:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Problem is, there are no representatives worth voting for. The scumbags are there for a reason, all a bunch of greedy sobs.
 
Biden is just another typical doublespeaking politician giving lip service to both sides, but in the end it's nothing more than just talk like what happened with gun control. Everyone was eager to show support when it was in the headlines, but when it came time for action, no one was dumb enough to sacrifice their political career over it. I would love for him to say hey you hypocrites, how about a tax on churches to pay for a fund to help victims of child molesters or something, but that would be the political equivalent of telling a sizable chunk of my clients at work to go fock themselves and would result in my boss sending me to the nearest unemployment line.
 
The games industry needs more lobbyists, obviously. When someone like the NRA says that games cause violence, everyone sane knows they are stupid, but as they are paying money they get listened to (the customer is always right). If EA/Ubisoft/Activision was paying out corruption money too, then it would be a non issue. :p
 
These idiots are starting to make me feel violent. Does that mean we can start taxing politicians?
 
ktk_ace said:
If they do that to STUPID and MISLEADING media, im all in.

Else FUCK NO.
Click to expand...

You mean like the IRS scrutinized conservative non profits more than non-conservative ones? I guess your man is in office right now. You must be proud.
 
DeathPrincess said:
The games industry needs more lobbyists, obviously. When someone like the NRA says that games cause violence, everyone sane knows they are stupid, but as they are paying money they get listened to (the customer is always right). If EA/Ubisoft/Activision was paying out corruption money too, then it would be a non issue. :p
Click to expand...

I thought it was a cheap shot at deflection for the NRA to try and move focus to games as well. It's just one of the many reasons I stopped supporting the NRA. (Well, all the phone calls begging for money that really turned me off on them).
 
Pretty slippery slope towards using taxes to limit free speech.

A tax on violent media probably could be used to limit political free speech. It always amazes me how liberal people profess unwavering support for personal freedoms, yet they elect politicians that are more than happy to trample personal freedoms as much if not more than the fundamentalist fringe of the "Religious Right".

I didn't think liberal was supposed to mean a liberal helping of big government.
 
flatrock said:
Pretty slippery slope towards using taxes to limit free speech.

A tax on violent media probably could be used to limit political free speech. It always amazes me how liberal people profess unwavering support for personal freedoms, yet they elect politicians that are more than happy to trample personal freedoms as much if not more than the fundamentalist fringe of the "Religious Right".

I didn't think liberal was supposed to mean a liberal helping of big government.
Click to expand...

agreed. All name calling aside, the true radical thinking is
libertarianism
Click to expand...
not
liberalism
Click to expand...
.
you should be able to live your life the way you wish, watch/read/listen/play/love/eat/worship/do what ever you want, as long as your not infringing on someone else in the process.
pass or fail is up to you, not the government.
 
JimmayLong said:
way to discriminate Biden, what a asshat. I propose a special politican tax paid by elected @ 50% tax on their wage to combat stupidity but then again that won't be enough.
Click to expand...

They get paid with our tax dollars. If you tax their income more either they will just raise their pay more. They will justify it by saying that such low take home pay just makes politicians more susceptible to bribes. I don't think it's possible to pay them enough to not be susceptible to bribes of some sort. Maybe not money, but power and influence tend to be more seductive than cash.

Most of these comments and even a large percentage of the votes in Congress are just political posturing to gain the support of some particular voting group. A lot of bills get introduced and voted on that are never intended to get implemented.

How many times have we seen Congress vote to construct a border fence along most of the southern border, only to have them never provide funding to build it? How many laws get passed that they know can't or won't be implemented. That doesn't even count all the non-binding resolutions.

Maybe we should consider giving each politicians a limited number of votes per year, or maybe per quarter. Let them abstain, but require a majority vote to pass anything. That way we can dispense with some of the BS. If they don't vote on it, then it isn't important to them.

We could likely significantly decease the expenses of Congress and lighten the burden on the courts as well. Our government has made an art form out of actually doing very little at a very, very high finical burden on taxpayers.

Will Congress tax violent media? It seems unlikely it would pass Constitutional muster, but there is little evidence that a law having no chance of passing muster impeding it's passage through Congress.

However taxes on guilty pleasures date back at least as Catholic indulgences being abused and corrupted by corrupt priests during the Dark Ages. It is something that to some extent we have all been conditioned to accept. Hopefully the courts aren't stupid enough to buy into it and ignore our constitutional protections. Generally they are, but I've seen some ridicules things come out of the court when they are trying to justify something they feel strongly about.
 
This is such a stupid idea I can't even put it into words. The thing I realize is that instead of raising the income tax which would have pissed off just about everyone in the US, they tax the living crap out of everything. "Oh you are alive?" Well we need to tax you. To be honest with you, all of those people who think legalizing certain drugs is a bad idea, right now its probably the best idea ever. Legalize it and tax the crap out of it and you have that much more money coming in that was never there before. I would never go out and buy weed or any other drug that has been legalized but there are people that would and you can take their money for their bad habits......look at the history of alcohol. Just sayin'
 
I love it. I really do.

I love it when the Donkeys continually make giant Jack-Asses of themselves like this.

Keep it up. Makes the next election easier with every money-grabbing faux pas.
 
wonderfield said:
Maybe an implication; maybe not. Time will tell.

I see no reason to flip out. Flip out when specific legislation starts flying around.
Click to expand...

No. The time to start flipping a nut on this is NOW.

Not after they've had a chance to piece together legislation and ram it down people's throats.
 
Oh, look, foot-in-mouth disease strikes Old Joe yet again. There's a shocker.

I just find it utterly depressing that people completely ignored that things that this administration has been doing have all been things that he said he would do when running for election. And they get all shocked and disappointed when he tries to, or succeeds with, carrying through. The cognitive dissonance of those people is just mind-boggling.

But, I also concede that a huge problem is that both options have been lackluster the last few cycles, and that's being overwhelmingly generous.
 
melteye said:
The [H] should tax stupid posts. Kyle could retire.
Click to expand...

He would of gotten 12 years off of you!

Like someone raised though... who would pay? The creator or the purchaser? (I'm thinking purchaser) Because the creator's probably has quite a bit of money in politician's pockets to ever let that get passed. But then, if it is the purchaser, what about the news? On public tv, there are quite a few scenes that are shown that would be considered violent.
 
Red Machine D said:
Or we could have the opposite demanding mspecial rights for white Protestant males only and enacting strict puritanical laws on the populace, effectively making women and non-whites into secnd-class citizens worth, oh, about three fifths of a white male.

Like it or not, the leadership we have is infinitely better than the alternative, and infinitely times better than the alternative to that. Can you imagine that psychotic extremist Ron Paul or his fundie kid running this country? We'd all be dead.
Click to expand...

You, my friend, need to get out more.

It's not the 18th century, and your view of the "opposite" party is so out-of-step with reality it's laughable.

Perhaps read some history on who the political party was that resisted desegragation, women's rights, and dominated Confederate politics?
 
Ticker305 said:
I would love for him to say hey you hypocrites, how about a tax on churches to pay for a fund to help victims of child molesters or something...
Click to expand...

Then you should tax public schools as well, which have watched over and protected more child-molesters (and continues to) than the Roman Catholic Church ever has (or will).

Oh wait, that's not politically correct, is it? Public Schools are just full of saints that will work out of love for their careers and not a ridiculous benefits package... oh wait, wrong again!

Then again, it's not fair to lump all public schools into the same child-molesting category, is it? (Just like it's not fair to lump all churches into the same category).
 
This is stupid.

First politicians blame violence in society on violent movies and games. That in one way or another, people die because of these products. Nevermind the fact that murder has been an issue well before video games and movies.

So for these same politicians to change their thoughts from "These products inadvertantly kill people and should be banned," to "these products kill people and that's ok as long as we can get $2 per game," just shows their true motives, lack of character, and lack of conviction.

Biden may have said it. But just because the conservatives didn't, doesn't mean they aren't thinking it.
 
Kelby said:
This is stupid.

First politicians blame violence in society on violent movies and games. That in one way or another, people die because of these products. Nevermind the fact that murder has been an issue well before video games and movies.

So for these same politicians to change their thoughts from "These products inadvertantly kill people and should be banned," to "these products kill people and that's ok as long as we can get $2 per game," just shows their true motives, lack of character, and lack of conviction.

Biden may have said it. But just because the conservatives didn't, doesn't mean they aren't thinking it.
Click to expand...

do not confuse conservatives with republicans. yes there is not much difference between republicans and democrats, both want to win and stay in power for sure. but they have different strategies. but there is a huge difference between conservatives and liberals.
98% of the democratic party is liberal and there are very few "true" conservatives in the gop. but thanks to libertarian and conservative groups, we are seeing more and more win elections though.
 
There's no reason Bidens salary can't be taxed at 90% either. I wonder what he would think of that.
 
cptnjarhead said:
do not confuse conservatives with republicans. yes there is not much difference between republicans and democrats, both want to win and stay in power for sure. but they have different strategies. but there is a huge difference between conservatives and liberals.
98% of the democratic party is liberal and there are very few "true" conservatives in the gop. but thanks to libertarian and conservative groups, we are seeing more and more win elections though.
Click to expand...

liberal =/= progressive. libertarian =/= conservative.

The real divide is between populist or collectivist groups and individualists. The majority of both the R and the D are collectivist/populist scum.
 
I have no problem with them taxing violent media. This way, when news circuits show people getting shot/beaten/killed to get ratings..the government will get a kick back. This way, they can start more wars and get more money. It will be a perfect cycle of us humans, who loves seeing other people suffer, pay for wars. Almost like pay per view!
 
The day we allowed the Fed to use Taxation as a means to enforce social engineering was a bad day for freedom in this country. It started with "Luxury Taxes", then Smoking(It's good for you), and they are trying to do it with guns, and now violent media.

We all better get busy and get these arrogant pricks out of our government and then we better get our States to start pushing the Fed back into it's place.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
liberal =/= progressive. libertarian =/= conservative.

The real divide is between populist or collectivist groups and individualists. The majority of both the R and the D are collectivist/populist scum.
Click to expand...

actually, there is a divide between libertarian and conservative, just not right now.
but if a either gain control of both houses. you will see the sparks fly, but in a good way.
together they can bring balance between anarchy and authoritarianism.
 
To be fair, Biden never said there's no reason not to tax violent media, as the title suggests. He said there isn't anything to stop them from doing so.

Is he still a useless goon? Sure. But there's no indication yet that this is a direction they're looking to take.
Click to expand...

This is just noise, misdirection. They don't want us talking about Benghazi and the IRS bullshit so they are making stupid noise to distract us.
 
Sturmangriff said:
I swear parts of Demolition Man were prophetic. At this point I am waiting for the law makers to introduce their version of the Verbal Morality Statute.
Click to expand...

John Spartan, you are fined 1 credit for a violation of the verbal morality statute. Be well!
 
cptnjarhead said:
actually, there is a divide between libertarian and conservative, just not right now.
but if a either gain control of both houses. you will see the sparks fly, but in a good way.
together they can bring balance between anarchy and authoritarianism.
Click to expand...

I think that's what I was highlighting in my post. Conservatives, typically, are just as much collectivist as their progressive foes. Just on separate issues.
 
lcpiper said:
This is just noise, misdirection. They don't want us talking about Benghazi and the IRS bullshit so they are making stupid noise to distract us.
Click to expand...

they sure wish this could. Benghazi, IRS and the DOJ seizing phone records... now the main stream media is actually reporting on it, this will not go away unless this current admin can create a "wag the dog" situation.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
I think that's what I was highlighting in my post. Conservatives, typically, are just as much collectivist as their progressive foes. Just on separate issues.
Click to expand...

i disagree. conservatives do not believe in collectivism, the main divide is on social issues.
like drugs, on military overseas/diplomatic operations and stances and on immigration.
collectivism has no place in conservatism
 
cptnjarhead said:
i disagree. conservatives do not believe in collectivism, the main divide is on social issues.
like drugs, on military overseas/diplomatic operations and stances and on immigration.
collectivism has no place in conservatism
Click to expand...

Er, what do you think conservative issues like drugs and buttsex are?
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Er, what do you think conservative issues like drugs and buttsex are?
Click to expand...

a true conservative does not care what you do with your body, as long as it does not effect others. Republicans try to tell you how to live, not conservatives.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
I think that's what I was highlighting in my post. Conservatives, typically, are just as much collectivist as their progressive foes. Just on separate issues.
Click to expand...

Uh... no. Not only no, but Hell no.

Wanting a smaller government, that regulates as little as possible, that enforces the laws it maintains, that holds everyone equally under the law, that contends that principled morality is a foundation for man's laws.

VS.

Wanting a larger government, that regulates as much as possible, that enforces laws according to the situation, that holds only those it deems counter to it's beliefs accountable, that contends that man is capable of creating laws that force morality.

Or...

The Consitutional Congress of 1776

VS

The Obama Administration
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top