|
|
#221
10-23-2007, 02:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Concentration of Power in the US
[ QUOTE ]
Copernicus, not everyone is arguing against government taxes period. We've been talking about taxes for social issues (Health care, welfare, etc) [/ QUOTE ] Not everyone? On 2+2 those 90% of those arguing against taxes are arguing against all taxes and all states. Despite your earlier disclaiming of being an ACist, your posts in this thread do litte if anything to clarify that youre only talking about social programs. 
|
|
#222
10-23-2007, 02:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Concentration of Power in the US
[ QUOTE ]
The grass cutting analogy is asinine, as were all of pvn's posts before I put him on ignore. You are quite capable of cutting the grass on your own, and you are quite capable of doing it for less than $10,000. You are NOT capable of defending the country on your own or through any voluntary cooperative effort, except at exorbitant cost to make up for the free-riders. [/ QUOTE ] So if you're crippled and unable to cut grass on your own, the analogy is valid for you?
|
|
#223
10-23-2007, 02:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Concentration of Power in the US
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Copernicus, not everyone is arguing against government taxes period. We've been talking about taxes for social issues (Health care, welfare, etc) [/ QUOTE ] Not everyone? On 2+2 those 90% of those arguing against taxes are arguing against all taxes and all states. Despite your earlier disclaiming of being an ACist, your posts in this thread do litte if anything to clarify that youre only talking about social programs. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Like I said earlier, most people don't actually take the time to think that there is something wrong with the government taking 1/3 of your income away from you. I never thought about it, and then when I started to, I realized how THAT action (taking money) is what is 'crazy' as you say. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, no one ever talks about how much they hate taxes. [/ QUOTE ] Knee-jerk reactions aside, I was referring specifically to taxes that are taken and then given to poor people (what we've been talking about). I don't hate all taxes, I think taxes are necessary to run the government. I don't hate the government either, I believe it has its place. [/ QUOTE ] That was something like 6 pages ago.
|
|
#224
10-23-2007, 01:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Concentration of Power in the US
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Copernicus, not everyone is arguing against government taxes period. We've been talking about taxes for social issues (Health care, welfare, etc) [/ QUOTE ] Not everyone? On 2+2 those 90% of those arguing against taxes are arguing against all taxes and all states. Despite your earlier disclaiming of being an ACist, your posts in this thread do litte if anything to clarify that youre only talking about social programs. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Like I said earlier, most people don't actually take the time to think that there is something wrong with the government taking 1/3 of your income away from you. I never thought about it, and then when I started to, I realized how THAT action (taking money) is what is 'crazy' as you say. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, no one ever talks about how much they hate taxes. [/ QUOTE ] Knee-jerk reactions aside, I was referring specifically to taxes that are taken and then given to poor people (what we've been talking about). I don't hate all taxes, I think taxes are necessary to run the government. I don't hate the government either, I believe it has its place. [/ QUOTE ] That was something like 6 pages ago. [/ QUOTE ] zomg nub change page settings, was like less than 1 page ago :P
|
|
#226
10-23-2007, 02:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Concentration of Power in the US
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I'm pretty sure there was a Reagan in the White House from 1981-1989. The VP doesn't live there. But your point is an extension of the fact that 2008 will probably be the first election since 1972 in which the GOP ticket did not contain a Bush or a Dole. No sh*t, Sherlock. It's a mandarin system. There is a government class that steers the beast that is government. That's why some of us want to either get rid of government all together, or at least choke off its funds enough to render it functionally impotent. [/ QUOTE ] You can't win by starving the beast. They just borrow more money. The *only* way to fix this country is to prevent their ability to *regulate* and to *spend*. Reducing revenues isn't even achievable through lowering taxes because lowered taxes mostly result in a stronger economy that generates more revenues. Witness exhibit A: Bush administration currently enjoying highest revenues *ever* after their so-called devastating tax cuts. And they are *still* borrowing more than ever. (And by the way, most Dem candidates are barking on about raising the taxes back to what they were because it's so unfair to the govt, when in fact the govt is collecting historically high revenues. They're breaking records and they want even more from you) The only way to stop them is to limit their ability to spend. It's like a young adult female with a credit card. It's going to be full no matter what you do unless you TAKE AWAY THE CREDIT CARD. natedogg [/ QUOTE ] I'm not talking about tax cuts, I'm talking about repealing the 16th Amendment, while at the same time, amending the constitution to require a balanced federal budget. Tell govt it cannot reach into our income reduces revenue by 40%. Requiring a balanced budget limits the amount of debt service that can be carried. I'm not certain what percentage of the budget is debt service, but I'd suspect that the size of the federal government could be halved in one fell swoop and it would still have a budget higher than 25 years ago.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
