Not Yours to Give
#17
Quote:So, your local police station would run on charity donations?
I think I clarified that in a different post. My property taxes pay for the bulk of the government in my locality, while the bulk of State and Federal taxes pays for entitlement programs.
Quote:Back then, plenty of current issues were not forseen, or did not exist. Holding on to the technical practices (As opposed to the goals) of a 240 year old document sounds like a bad idea, allright. All of the things you've cited benefit - or could benefit all people, should they take advantage of the services provided. It just so happens that some benefit more then others, which is again unavoidable.
I think there has been a slow erosion of federalism, a federation of States and slow replacement of it with a growing kleptocracy. The tax burden is not equally distributed, such that the middle class pay the most punitive taxes. The poor and lower middle classes pay nothing, and the rich do complain, and *are* unfairly burdened but are not "suffering" in a way that would make anyone care. My sister, a very rich socialist, once said "I am rich and I should pay 50% of my earnings in taxes". I don't think she understands freedom. I am not even opposed to having a safety net, but more things should be States issues, or local issues and not managed from Washington. Here is an example, why should all the citizens of the US pay for the rebuilding of a city that is 40 feet below sea level, built in river delta, and at high risk of being swamped by a large hurricane? Its not in a good place. If the people of Louisiana want to save their city, so be it, but here is an example of where compassion defies reason. If you live in a flood plain, live with it, or move. I have insurance so that if my house is destroyed by fire, or natural disaster I can rebuild one. Maybe I would move it to safer ground though.
Quote:It really should be a case-by-case basis. (omitted text) Case-by-case, it's an example of useless pork. On the other hand, taxing all the people to pay for something that an area needs, if it were to avoid facing economic ruin, but can't afford, is something else. Want an example? I live in a small municipality. We have two major roads running through it. Those roads are hammered day after day in the summer, by tourists going to the rec centers beyond them. My municipality simply can't afford to pay for the repairs to the roads. Right now, they are a mess. Potholes every ten meters. More cracks then I'd like to count. What we're asking for is provincial and federal grant money to fix the road, already.

Do you think that since we can't afford to pay for repairs, we should just let our road be destroyed in the next year? Because without some grant money this summer, that's exactly what's going to happen.
I'd beg to differ. If anything, my involvement with local politics has amplified the importance of the gun. The masses simply wouldn't care otherwise. I see it every time I hear a report on the state of negotiations with neighbouring municipalities over budget issues.
I think usable roads are a government expense in promoting commerce, and I also would have no problem making those roads Toll Roads such that those who use them pay for them.
Quote:People are, in general, greedy, self-serving, and looking out for themselves, and I don't blame them.. Some of us who can afford it get a warm and happy feel-good feeling when we give money for 'good causes'. However, with your ideas, all that'll happen is that the country will be ran off the sweat of their backs, while the rest will benefit.
I disagree on the nature of people. There are some who are greedy, but I find the majority of people are compassionate. I think this is why people are not really upset with the government taking away peoples money to give away for "noble" causes. I am not opposed to those taxes that are used to run the government, defend the nation, regulate and promote commerce, or provide for the general welfare. But, these things must benefit all (or at least a vast majority in every State) those who contribute. I also believe the tax burden should be shared equally, as a flat percentage. Every citizen should contribute an equal percentage, and while the rich would still contribute more, any thing that benefits one or burdens the people does so equally. I would also transition the burden of taxation from "Income" based to "Consumption" based to promote investments, savings, and conservation.
Quote:We see the need to make apple pie. As of now, each of us puts an apple in the pot, from which we make the pie. What you want is to give people the option to not put an apple in the pot. Yet we still need the apple pie. What's going to happen is that either a minority will slave away to make apple pie for the rest, or the apple pie will be far smaller. You can argue about how many apples are currently wasted, how the pie gets burnt, or that you don't even like apple pie, but either way, we are all going to be in a worse situation then we already are.
Ok, if it works for government, then why not the private sector, or persons? We pool all the money for all the people or businesses in a town, and then divide the pie evenly. We have eroded the principle that a person's property is their own. The government has the right to reach into your pocket and take what it deems appropriate for giving to people it deems more needy than you.

This is communism. If I don't want any pie and I refuse to give you my apples you send me to the gulag.
”There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." - Hamlet (1.5.167-8), Hamlet to Horatio.

[Image: yVR5oE.png][Image: VKQ0KLG.png]

Reply


Messages In This Thread
Not Yours to Give - by kandrathe - 02-22-2007, 05:55 AM
Not Yours to Give - by SwissMercenary - 02-22-2007, 07:49 AM
Not Yours to Give - by Occhidiangela - 02-22-2007, 05:02 PM
Not Yours to Give - by eppie - 02-22-2007, 05:49 PM
Not Yours to Give - by Swiss Mercenary - 02-22-2007, 05:52 PM
Not Yours to Give - by eppie - 02-22-2007, 05:52 PM
Not Yours to Give - by ShadowHM - 02-22-2007, 07:10 PM
Not Yours to Give - by Chesspiece_face - 02-22-2007, 09:22 PM
Not Yours to Give - by Nystul - 02-22-2007, 10:56 PM
Not Yours to Give - by SwissMercenary - 02-23-2007, 04:33 AM
Not Yours to Give - by Taem - 02-23-2007, 06:12 AM
Not Yours to Give - by kandrathe - 03-05-2007, 01:31 PM
Not Yours to Give - by kandrathe - 03-05-2007, 01:49 PM
Not Yours to Give - by Jester - 03-05-2007, 05:22 PM
Not Yours to Give - by eppie - 03-05-2007, 09:06 PM
Not Yours to Give - by SwissMercenary - 03-06-2007, 12:02 AM
Not Yours to Give - by kandrathe - 03-06-2007, 08:41 AM
Not Yours to Give - by eppie - 03-06-2007, 10:31 AM
Not Yours to Give - by Sir_Die_alot - 03-06-2007, 02:42 PM
Not Yours to Give - by kandrathe - 03-06-2007, 04:03 PM
Not Yours to Give - by SwissMercenary - 03-06-2007, 04:55 PM
Not Yours to Give - by Occhidiangela - 03-06-2007, 06:31 PM
Not Yours to Give - by Delc - 03-06-2007, 06:49 PM
Not Yours to Give - by SwissMercenary - 03-06-2007, 07:29 PM
Not Yours to Give - by eppie - 03-06-2007, 07:44 PM
Not Yours to Give - by eppie - 03-06-2007, 07:49 PM
Not Yours to Give - by kandrathe - 03-07-2007, 06:49 AM
Not Yours to Give - by Griselda - 03-07-2007, 02:10 PM
Not Yours to Give - by ShadowHM - 03-07-2007, 03:43 PM
Not Yours to Give - by SwissMercenary - 03-07-2007, 04:03 PM
Not Yours to Give - by kandrathe - 03-07-2007, 04:27 PM
Not Yours to Give - by kandrathe - 03-07-2007, 04:55 PM
Not Yours to Give - by SwissMercenary - 03-07-2007, 05:50 PM
Not Yours to Give - by Jester - 03-07-2007, 06:17 PM
Not Yours to Give - by kandrathe - 03-08-2007, 02:49 AM
Not Yours to Give - by Chesspiece_face - 03-08-2007, 03:28 AM
Not Yours to Give - by Griselda - 03-08-2007, 05:22 AM
Not Yours to Give - by kandrathe - 03-09-2007, 06:13 AM
Not Yours to Give - by Griselda - 03-09-2007, 06:30 AM
Not Yours to Give - by kandrathe - 03-09-2007, 06:41 AM
Not Yours to Give - by kandrathe - 03-09-2007, 06:52 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 6 Guest(s)