leejo

So am I different from "people" or do you merely insult me in a general manner. All people like me are miserly, not just me in particular?

I was watching the BIG GAME Saturday night, and it occurred to me that I don't like Tom Brady. He's taller than I am. He can throw the ball harder than I can. He makes a TON more money than I do, and let's face it, he's better looking. CRAP.

So I think that a more equitable set of rules that helped people like me (the "less fortunate") score as many touchdowns and appear to be as good looking as Tom Brady would be a good thing. I saw a study the other day that showed that the top 1% of all touchdown scorers score 90% of the touchdowns in the NFL! That's totally unacceptable, and something must be done to stop these players who have benefited so much from scoring touchdown after touchdown on the backs of we less fortunate. Preferably something that doesn't involve my working harder or somehow magically having the same talents as these who have so very many touchdowns....to spare!

Look, it is NOT about whether or not you care about "people". It's about whether or not you feel that you are getting decent value for your (extracted-by-force) investment - that it isn't simply wasted. AND it depends on whether or not you think that government's role is to solve every little problem that exists in society or between two people. I think government should focus on protecting borders, foreign policy, establishing policies that promote commerce and establish laws that keep things basically civil. I don't think that government should be out on patrol looking for people who are "less fortunate" than I am. I don't even have a problem with someone being "less fortunate" than I. Hell, I don't have a problem with someone being "more fortunate" than me. Keep things fair and let's compete.

PanzerHans

What is your argument exactly. It is so full of nonsense I can hardly apprehend it.

Your posting is saying that your government is stealing daddy's money. Stealing is per definition wrong, so the government is wrong in collecting taxes. Are you suggesting a system where people can choose whether they wish to pay taxes? How do you imagine that your government would keep a police force, or military system for that sake. Not to mention other parts of the government functions.

Leejo, if I read your posting in #33 correctly, you are suggesting a system not even a mental patient would consider when it comes to running a country.
I don't believe for a second that you really mean what your posted. This looks much like many of the posts I have seen you writing in the Sandbox, where you are arguing just for the sakes of creating a debate.

__________________

CingularDuality

And there's the line in the sand. Almost everyone agrees that government is necessary and taxes are needed to provide things that individuals simply can't provide for themselves. The disagreement isn't over infrastructure, police and military, or anything that is obviously in the best interest of the people to invest in. The disagreement comes when we get to the Robin Hood part of the argument. Income redistribution. Taking from the rich to give to the poor. I know that people from other countries might not understand, as I believe that the USA is far more charitable than other countries, but we have private social organizations that can take care of the poor. Churches have been doing a fine job of exactly that for hundreds and hundreds of years. Why do we suddenly (in the last hundred years) need the government to take care of our poor? Does this not lead to an entitlement society where people will actually choose to live off of the government's (actually the people's) handouts?

Pretending not to see leejo's point doesn't become you, Panzer.

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

leejo

Then obviously you read it incorrectly!

ScratchMonkey

Precisely.

The United States for over a hundred years ran with no income tax. And after that, the income tax was still paid primarily by the rich for quite some time. (It kept getting introduced to fund various wars, such as the Civil War and WWI. Withholding was added to support WWII.) Yet we weren't a country of lawlessness and chaos.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxatio..._United_States

I guess that makes the Founders of the US Constitution nuttier than mental patients. If this be insanity, I say let's make the most of it!

El_Gringo_Grande

Or we can continue to use the democratic system and to determine the taxing and spedning levels and have all that don't like the system move to another country.

No. And really there isn't proof that this actually happens except in pretty small numbers. Our poor where not all that well taken care of, either.

Plus, I don't think many realize how much we all do depend on the the government (actually the people).

And there are some of us that believe that the government taking care of certain aspects of the poor is, in fact, infrastructure. Some also believe that allowing too much wealth in a small segment of the people is a recipe for disaster. (Unless you want to apply laws based on wealth.)

So that line in the sand is mighty wavy. What one considers necessary another considers wasteful. Again, the democracy takes care of this over time.

And many would say the the US suffered because of this with things such as high infant mortality compared to our relativly high income. We ran for 100 years because we where basically a frontier and organized government doesn't do to well in those situations. Not fluid enough.

__________________
Sen. John McCain (AZ) For President '08
---
I’m not racists, I have republican friends.
---
"The essence of tyranny is the denial of complexity". -Jacob Burkhardt
---
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" - emerson
----
"People should not be afraid of it's government, government should be afraid of it's People." - Line from V for Vendetta

El_Gringo_Grande

Oh, and that had nothing at all to do with taxes.

__________________
Sen. John McCain (AZ) For President '08
---
I’m not racists, I have republican friends.
---
"The essence of tyranny is the denial of complexity". -Jacob Burkhardt
---
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" - emerson
----
"People should not be afraid of it's government, government should be afraid of it's People." - Line from V for Vendetta

CingularDuality

I don't know what you desire as proof, but you're full of it, or have never lived in a city. Come live for a month in Dallas, and tell me that there isn't proof except in small numbers.

BTW, how's New Orleans doing?

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

El_Gringo_Grande

I desire just what I asked for, proof. Everything I have experienced in my life (and I grew up in poverty) has shown me that very few people desire to live off of handouts. Added to my personal experience is my academic learnin'. It has also shown me that people do not seek out the lifestyle of welfare. Added to that I have acquaintances that grew up in European countries that have higher tax rates and none of them wanted to just live off handouts. They had goals and desires and worked hard to attain them.

I live in Oklahoma City and have lived among, and have been, those that have received various forms of welfare from both the state and federal government. Does that count as a big city? I knew nobody that was happy taking assistance from the government. In fact almost to a person they would refuse it. Some would, instead, operate on the wrong side of the law (drugs, prostitution, working on a cash only basis etc) to get by. In fact I admired those that would swallow their pride and use food stamps instead of breaking the law to get ahead. And it was those that used governmental programs that ended up getting out of poverty the most often in my experience.

My mother lived in Chicago growing up. She hated the fact we lived off welfare but we where effectively trapped in poverty. She had it until the last kid left the house. Yet she worked 50-60 hours a week and every one of us now have decent jobs. I am, according to the IRS, in the top 20% of household incomes. That is due in large part to government social programs.

Plus you yourself also admit that helping poor people is a noble cause. Why else would churches and other private organizations take on the task. Or are you saying helping people is only going to hurt them?

I would say to you that maybe you should actually live among those that you condemn and see what they actually do. How they live their lives and why they live the way they do. It has very little to do with welfare. Drugs, violence, lack of education are the biggest problems.

New Orleans is because of Taxes? Now you are full of it. A city was destroyed because the government failed at so many levels. And it is re-building albeit slowly. Part of the reason is that there was a large lower class population. They didn't have flood insurance or any insurance for that matter. The government help has often hurt just as much.

So there are problems in big cities. They are the same problems you see in small towns except concentrated. Blaming them on taxes?

So yea, give me some proof that taxes and social programs are the cause of our societies ills.

I will admit that some social programs are abused. Well, my friend, so are military and law enforcement programs. It is easier to scam something that helps individuals because individuals are harder to track. I don't believe that means giving up.

__________________
Sen. John McCain (AZ) For President '08
---
I’m not racists, I have republican friends.
---
"The essence of tyranny is the denial of complexity". -Jacob Burkhardt
---
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" - emerson
----
"People should not be afraid of it's government, government should be afraid of it's People." - Line from V for Vendetta

Kerostasis

The problem with taxes isn't that they cause society's ills. At least, not frequently enough to be the major complaint. The problem with taxes is that they generally suck at solving society's ills, making the justification for extracting them from our pockets extremely poor. If you're going to be taking my hard earned money away from me, you'd better have a damn good reason for it -- and "well, the rate of waste and abuse on this program is very low" doesn't count as a good reason.

__________________

ScratchMonkey

Ah, part of the problem is that some honest work is criminalized, based on the "morals" of some vocal political base. (These are the same people who wanted to outlaw comics and rock music and now want to regulate or outlaw our video games.) Not only is it illegal to sell sex and pot, but in many areas work with no sin association is criminalized, such as hair styling, because it threatens the local unions and other domestic cartels.

No, we're saying that helping someone with money stolen from others is wrong. It's not a noble sacrifice if you're not the one doing the sacrificing. (I particularly loathe politicians who take credit for such actions, as if it came out of their pockets.)

So we should pay for more of a bad thing? Yeah, that's really an incentive for improvement. "Boss, I want a raise. I've done a really shabby job and it's because you don't pay me enough." Yeah, that's gonna fly. Except that it does, if you're a government program, where failure is rewarded.

Alas, people are now discouraged from private charity because, through taxation, they "gave at the office". Why should I send money to the local church when the government has already claimed that money to "do good"? What's surprising is that, in spite of giving at the office, people still feel the need to donate to private charities and help their fellow man directly.

tHa_KhAn

The tax discussion is always interesting. I think instead of providing directly to "poor" people the focus should be more on assisting them out of their situation. I think that is how many programs start out, but in the end a dependency is created. One argument that is often overlooked is the availability of opportunity in this country to not be poor or needy. Look at all the illegal aliens in this country that make a good living. enough to support themselves and still send some back to their extended families. I live in Florida so which like much of the SW US has a lot of migrant legal or not workers. They bust their butts to survive and do it without government assistance. If the majority of people in the government welfare type programs gave the same effort this would be less of a discussion because welfare would then only be supporting those that have mental or physical conditions that limit their ability to earn a descent wage.

Churches are a good example of how many people can get helped with their actual needs instead given a check from the government. The very reason most Church programs are not utilized is because they often don't provide any kind of cash. I directed a family to local church once and after their meal the went into their sob story of hard life and asked for money for bills. The pastor only offered food, a place to stay, and a job. The head of the family then offered a few choice words to the pastor and was never heard from again. I really feel there are more people who behave like that than those who honestly need help to get back on their feet.

I think most Americans would rather be required to provide proof of donation to charity of their choice than just trusting the Government to do it.(Yes, I'm full aware of the depth of deceit that could occur with that) Same could be said for Social Security and other programs as well.

__________________

El_Gringo_Grande

I agree with you. But I never suggested they would cure anything. As I pointed out they didn't cure any of the people I knew growing problems. The best it does is keep you from utter desperation.

It is the person who accepts the responsibility of their situation and uses the few tools and resources provided to them that will, hopefully, better the situation.

It isn't stealing. It is a social contract. Our country was not founded to avoid taxes. It was founded so that you could not be taxed without representation. The only people I can think of that can even come close to making this statement are the residents of Washington D.C.

New Orleans was destroyed because the levy system failed. People knew the levy system would fail given a sever enough storm but they did nothing about it. They still have not done anything about it so it could happen again.

Back in the 90s there was massive flooding up and down the Mississippi river. After that happened some communities actually moved to avoid the flooding in the future. Others increased their defenses. It is a natural thing to do.

Are you asking if we should move New Orleans? I don't know. I do know that in some cases the government has told people that they cannot re-build due to the risk of flooding. So there should be some intervention by government to minimize the impact of future storms.

If it is decided then, yes, spend more money to fix the levy system to provide further protection.

Much of what you say is not true.

A small percentage of people are dependent on social programs. Most of those people are either mentally ill or drug addicts. The rest are scammers. The scammers, if caught, are prosecuted. The mentally ill, do what with them? What about the drug addicts?

Provide help for them? Another social program. See how that works?

Just let them do the best they can? I don't think our country would stand long if we did that.

Second, people do not collect checks for most of the services. Now how the programs work vary from place to place vary. But most aid is from various sources. So you get some "food stamps". If you qualify you get a housing allowance. In many places this money goes directly to the landlord and you never see it. Medicaid is administered by the hospitals and government organizations.

I don't even know if there are actual checks handed out anymore. I know when I was a kid we did get a check for about 300 dollars a month*. That was to cover our rent, utilities, non-food needs like clothing, hygiene and school supplies etc. We also got a break on utility bills if I remember correctly. It doesn't go far. And the month my mother got a job (that paid about $5,000 a year) it was cut to almost nothing.

Now as far as the church and private organizations go, it isn't very consistent. I think people only believe poor people exist during the holidays because during summer there wasn't much available. You could go beg at the church and they would hunt down something. The thing that always pissed me off is that about 25% of the food you would get was expired. Some of it had bugs in it.

Now I know beggars can't be choosers but come on. If you are going to give me 10 cans of creamed corn and beets at least give me a couple of days before they expire. Believe it or not some of the stuff we got was rusted and two years beyond the expiration date. (We would eat up to about nine months beyond.) And the amount of pumpkin pie filling was absolutely amazing. Can any family really use 20 cans of pumpkin pie filling? I tried to eat it straight once thinking "I like pumpkin pie". Now it wasn't bad tasting but after one or two spoonfuls you loose interest.

In addition Churches don't take orders. If you have special dietary needs the church may not be able to provide them. Not their fault it is just the way of charity, you take what is given.

Plus some churches do put their own tax of sorts on what they give. If you don't go to their church you don't get the choice goods. They give out the good stuff at the services then the leftovers go to the rest of Gods Children. (One reason I have experience with many denominations. And why I don't trust religion.) The best churches, those that gave equally and without judgment, had the lowest quality goods. You didn't get lectured or preached to just a smile. So that is where I liked to go because I didn't feel bad about what I received. I actually felt grateful. I could go on and on about churches and their "charity".

To be fair this was a small rural town and there where not many poor people. Many had little money but they could raise much of what they would eat and trade with others for the rest. Electricity was pretty cheap due to co-ops and propane/butane was plentiful because of our location. And during the early eighties when I remember most of this the oil mini-boom was going on so good paying jobs where available to men (and a couple very scary women.) So they didn't really know how to deal with us. The knowledge simply wasn't there.

And what do you do if every body in the town is poor? Give dirt to each other?

I did work at a church kitchen in Virginia Beach once while in the Navy. And they had really good food. Much better than what we got in the mess. Wasn't even Christmas, Thanksgiving or Easter. Was in late August or something. Half the food came from the Navy, however. Always thought that was weird. Everybody there was greeted warmly and no preferences given. Only a very brief prayer before food was served.

The one thing I do agree with you on is that social programs should not lift people out of abject poverty into middle class. Just put them in ject poverty so that they can live without fear of starving or freezing to death. But at the same time offer, freely, the tools and services they can actually use to enter the middle class. If they fail while using the tools, oh well, such is the price of society. Enough will succeed that it will pay for itself and then some.

Then tax the hell out of them! (Just kidding. I am a kidder.)

Now it is time to watch the Fiesta Bowl. BOOOMER!


*I could be off. It was 35 years ago. But I know that it was rare we actually had money left two days after receiving the check.

__________________
Sen. John McCain (AZ) For President '08
---
I’m not racists, I have republican friends.
---
"The essence of tyranny is the denial of complexity". -Jacob Burkhardt
---
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" - emerson
----
"People should not be afraid of it's government, government should be afraid of it's People." - Line from V for Vendetta

ScratchMonkey