Of course the Civil war and the Confederate flag was not about slavery

budlover13 said:
SOMETIMES, a person has to suffer severe hardships to accomplish the task at hand. While dude stuck under a boulder in the desert didn't WANT to lose his arm by cutting it off with a pocket-knife, he saw the idiocy of keeping his arm and losing his life. He even realized that cutting the arm off MIGHT kill him but laying under a rock in the desert would've done the same.
Click to expand...

Yes, but a person and a nation are different, and different rules apply. An individual cutting his hand off to save his butt would be (to reach into Rob Roy's bag of words) voluntary. There's no way to get that sort of focus on purpose from an agora, let alone the frighteningly self-indulgent people of Facebook. cn
 
budlover13 said:
That just gives more money to re-distribute.
Click to expand...


I get a kick out of the redistribution is bad folk.


All taxation is redistribution of wealth, that is unless each person taxed makes the same amount of money and uses the exact same amount of government services.
 
cannabineer said:
Yes, but a person and a nation are different, and different rules apply. An individual cutting his hand off to save his butt would be (to reach into Rob Roy's bag of words) voluntary. There's no way to get that sort of focus on purpose from an agora, let alone the frighteningly self-indulgent people of Facebook. cn
Click to expand...


An agora? you went there?
 
canndo said:
Hopefully, but smaller does not imply more efficient. Also, smaller government is less able to protect individuals from other large entities - like other countries, or big business.
Click to expand...
I guess that all depends on how small it is. Heres an example - a housing code inspector came to my house because there was one brand new trash can outside on the side of my porch 2 days after trash day in public view. He also complained about 4 new fence pickets I had left over from replacing my fence, he saw the pickets laying on the porch floor when he came on my porch to issue a citation for the trash can. My house is no dump or a trouble spot, this guy has nothing to do but go around and find things like that because there are too many inspectors and the city government is too big. I'm sure you can see my point. It's a waste of resources.
 
Moses Mobetta said:
I guess that all depends on how small it is. Heres an example - a housing code inspector came to my house because there was one brand new trash can outside on the side of my porch 2 days after trash day in public view. He also complained about 4 new fence pickets I had left over from replacing my fence, he saw the pickets laying on the porch floor when he came on my porch to issue a citation for the trash can. My house is no dump or a trouble spot, this guy has nothing to do but go around and find things like that because there are too many inspectors and the city government is too big. I'm sure you can see my point. It's a waste of resources.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. How tightly should a regulation be enforced? Suppose the guy next door had two dozen fence parts, suppose he never dealt with his trash. Where is that point between abuse and reason?
 
canndo said:
I get a kick out of the redistribution is bad folk.


All taxation is redistribution of wealth, that is unless each person taxed makes the same amount of money and uses the exact same amount of government services.
Click to expand...

Exactly. ALL taxes are "bad" for the individual. A necessary evil that must be controlled.
 
budlover13 said:
Exactly. ALL taxes are "bad" for the individual. A necessary evil that must be controlled.
Click to expand...


Why are all taxes bad for the individual? This is akin to saying that paying for anything, having one's house painted or one's trash removed is "bad". The point is that it is all redistribution so those that hold that term up to ridicule because Obama said it seem to think that there is some state where redistribution does not occur.
 
canndo said:
Why are all taxes bad for the individual? This is akin to saying that paying for anything, having one's house painted or one's trash removed is "bad". The point is that it is all redistribution so those that hold that term up to ridicule because Obama said it seem to think that there is some state where redistribution does not occur.
Click to expand...

Because when i pay for painting the house or trash removal, it is my choice to do so. In other words, i get to pay for what i want, need and use and nothing else.

How would you like it if you went to the grocery store and bought what you needed to pay your family all while working on a tight budget so you can also pay rent, electric, trash, water, sewer, gas to get to work, etc and the cashier saw a woman behind you with 3 kids and very little money so he decided to take some of what you bought and give it to her or even better yet, put 90% of what she was going to buy on your bill?

Whether something is good for society or not, it is up to the individual to decide whether it's good for him or not imo.
 
budlover13 said:
Because when i pay for painting the house or trash removal, it is my choice to do so. In other words, i get to pay for what i want, need and use and nothing else.

How would you like it if you went to the grocery store and bought what you needed to pay your family all while working on a tight budget so you can also pay rent, electric, trash, water, sewer, gas to get to work, etc and the cashier saw a woman behind you with 3 kids and very little money so he decided to take some of what you bought and give it to her or even better yet, put 90% of what she was going to buy on your bill?

Whether something is good for society or not, it is up to the individual to decide whether it's good for him or not imo.
Click to expand...


you intend then to buy 1/10000th of a tank, 1/100000000th of a war plane, pay for the salary of a fraction of one soldier and the like. This is what you propose. Kinda hard to keep track of don't you think? and which things would you buy? how would you even know what to purchase?
 
canndo said:
Perhaps. How tightly should a regulation be enforced? Suppose the guy next door had two dozen fence parts, suppose he never dealt with his trash. Where is that point between abuse and reason?
Click to expand...

The object being to prevent pile ups of junk in areas that can be seen, good object but when theres nothing to do now it becomes harassment and intrusive. My neighbor had a dead plant in a pot and he hassled her about it too. She threatened him with an ass kicking and now he won't come back. I can only feel he is doing this same thing on another street.
 
Moses Mobetta said:
The object being to prevent pile ups of junk in areas that can be seen, good object but when theres nothing to do now it becomes harassment and intrusive. My neighbor had a dead plant in a pot and he hassled her about it too. She threatened him with an ass kicking and now he won't come back. I can only feel he is doing this same thing on another street.
Click to expand...


It could also be that the guy is just being a dick, both because he can, and because he is bored. You may not be able to attribute this to government at all but dickishness of an employee.
 
canndo said:
I cannot agree. Your statement is akin to saying that once the opiate user becomes addicted he is doomed. It may well be hard, but we see many people come through it.
Click to expand...

So if we take the major entitlement programs ... SS and Medicare, and some of the other areas into which gov't has grown ... education, environmental and workplace health, etc. ... I don't see where to humanely cut, and shrink the gov't's liability. The opiate addict is an individual, making a decision about and for that individual. I submit it's not an apt metaphor. cn
 
canndo said:
you intend then to buy 1/10000th of a tank, 1/100000000th of a war plane, pay for the salary of a fraction of one soldier and the like. This is what you propose. Kinda hard to keep track of don't you think? and which things would you buy? how would you even know what to purchase?
Click to expand...

i can make that easy. i don't wanna pay for a tank, a war plane, OR the soldier.

i purchase what benefits me and mine.
 
I am a supporter of taxation. For me though, no one should be giving more than 10% of their earned money to the government.
The government has to limit itself to be able to function on 10% of the American income. Any more than that and government has expanded too much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top