GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Wow....2257 is no F'ing Big Deal Compared to THIS!! (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=495283)

mardigras 07-23-2005 02:25 PM

^xcept CP & beastialityat^
LOL, I used the mouse to highlight and edit, then it jumped as I saved and left this blub in, then it said my 3 minutes to fix it were up :1orglaugh

What I was trying to say is I agree adults should be able to look at any porn they want featuring conscenting adults. Alberto Gonzales does not. I have less sayso than he does. I didn't vote for this pack and I encouraged others not to as well. It's not me you have to convince of your beliefs :upsidedow

jimmyf 07-23-2005 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spunkmaster
WASHINGTON - A Democratic lawmaker is planning to propose a new 25 percent federal tax on Internet pornography and new requirements for adult Web sites to help prevent children from looking at them.

I swear over 70% of the asswipe in Washington are a bunch of imbecile's, both parties.

Giorgio_Xo 07-23-2005 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking
Porn is free speech...serving up porn for sale is not free speech it is a for sale service...entertainment service.

Again, you are wrong.

jimmyf 07-23-2005 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed
That might actually SAVE us some tax money... I'll have to run some numbers. A reduction in taxes for porn peddlers would be an ironic fuckup! Whats next, directly subsidizing us? Woo hoo!

you really don't want the Gov't 2 do any thing, because if they do they are sure to fuck it up.

Giorgio_Xo 07-23-2005 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking
I know what he said and I know what you said.

" It wouldn't be free speech if the government could decide which speech was protected and which was not."

And I pointed out to you that the government...city...county...state...and federal can and do control limitations on free speech.

If that's the case why did the American Nazi Party get to march in Illinois in the 60s, 70s, 80s?

jimmyf 07-23-2005 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hinc
We need those people out of office....

Cant we get someone slightly liberal to produce voting machines ?

it's a Democratic that want's 2 do it.... how much more liberal do you want them.. :helpme

jimmyf 07-23-2005 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Fiction
They are talking about 25% more than what you already pay.

This politician needs to be impeached or exposed for whatever illegal shit he might be doing when no one is looking.

impeach a Demo.... you say :thumbsup

GatorB 07-23-2005 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmyf
it's a Democratic that want's 2 do it.... how much more liberal do you want them.. :helpme

She's from Arkansas. Who did Arkansas vote for in 2000 and 2004? BUSH. Fact is if you are a democrat in a republican state you have to act like a republican to keep your job. Actually republicans aren't really republicans anymore if you break it down. If you're "republican" and you actually believe in "republican" values them start voting liebrtarian please.

jimmyf 07-23-2005 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antonio
You get taxed 25% for running a porn site, THEN you get to pay your company tax , so you end up paying more taxes than before.



Ever heard of 'sin' taxes? Why do you think alchohol and cigarettes are so expensive?

yep, and in California you pay tax on a computer and desk when you buy it, and then you pay the county a use tax ever year to use it... you pay taxes on all Equipment you have.

For you people in California don't let the county you are in know that you work out of your home or they will be knocking on your door.... Checking out all your Equipment, computers, camera's, printers, desk's all kinds of shit... AND they will TAX you on it every year....

Mr.Fiction 07-23-2005 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmyf
impeach a Demo.... you say :thumbsup

A right winger is a right winger no matter which party they claim. Kick all of the right wingers out if they are against free speech! http://www.gofuckyourself.com/images.../xyxthumbs.gif

blackfeet 07-23-2005 02:51 PM

i don't understand why we can't do something about this ourselves. all of us combined have millions of web pages online. can't we inform the public about what's going on and have them write these politicians to lay off? we all grunt and bitch but we don't do anything but take it up the ass everytime.

Mr.Fiction 07-23-2005 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mardigras
How is taxing porn prohibiting or curtailing it?

What if the tax was 90%? If you tax speech because you don't like it, you reduce it's effectiveness, thereby "abridging" it. Under the U.S. constitution, the government is not allowed to abridge speech that it does not like.

It is unconsitutional to tax speech because you don't like the speech.

Would it be constitutional to tax any book that promotes Christianity? :1orglaugh

jimmyf 07-23-2005 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bringer

yep that's true and now some guy in California got a few people together and are starting a company or have started it.. They want 2 take Sutter's (spelling) house he's one of the Justices that voted for this. They want 2 put there office building where his house is... :1orglaugh

bringer 07-23-2005 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmyf
yep that's true and now some guy in California got a few people together and are starting a company or have started it.. They want 2 take Sutter's (spelling) house he's one of the Justices that voted for this. They want 2 put there office building where his house is... :1orglaugh

hopefully they get every judge who voted for it. once their houses are walmart supercenters or apartment buildings they might see the error of their ways

jimmyf 07-23-2005 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bringer
using that logic news papers could be heavily taxed as well. i wonder how far we are from that reality

They are taxed in California

mardigras 07-23-2005 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Fiction
What if the tax was 90%? If you tax speech because you don't like it, you reduce it's effectiveness, thereby "abridging" it. Under the U.S. constitution, the government is not allowed to abridge speech that it does not like.

It is unconsitutional to tax speech because you don't like the speech.

Would it be constitutional to tax any book that promotes Christianity? :1orglaugh

The state of Louisiana slaps new property taxes anytime they feel like it. One of the poorest states in the country is the highest property taxed. If people don't like a 90% porn tax maybe they'll stop voting for fuckwits, it doesn't seem to matter in the other areas of their lives. :upsidedow

Who says the real reason Ms. Lincoln wants to tax internet porn because is because she's against it? I suspect it's more like Acacia and she sees the industry as "low hanging fruit".

tony286 07-23-2005 06:37 PM

this is not a christian right plot, the christians dont want a online porn tax. If there is a tax then we are a legimate business and much much harder to prosecute because of that it will never pass.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:27 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123