If you disagree with a government program, are you forbidden to use it?

[Baruch Menachem]

An interesting argument over the local tax effects of Obamacare degenerated into a weird slanging match over Glen Beck using a public library.

I don't believe Beck has ever said anything about public libraries, except that he uses them. I would imagine with his income he can buy a house, the taxes on which would support a nice library. Plus other taxes he would pay into the local taxing authority for other amenities.

Let us accept for the moment the weird proposition that libraries are a useful private businesses that all the local governments have nationalized. With funds from all the taxpayers. I think this argument is silly, but lets run with it.

Lets also assume that Beck has a beef with the idea of publicly funded libraries. He hasn't said that either, as far as I am aware.

How is it that someone who pays for something should not get it because he opposed it. Since he is paying for it, isn't he just as, or even more so, entitled to use the amenity than someone who thought it a great idea, put contributes nothing toward it but some warmth on the seats in the reading room?

 

[Dr Gregg]

An interesting argument over the local tax effects of Obamacare degenerated into a weird slanging match over Glen Beck using a public library.

I don't believe Beck has ever said anything about public libraries, except that he uses them. I would imagine with his income he can buy a house, the taxes on which would support a nice library. Plus other taxes he would pay into the local taxing authority for other amenities.

Let us accept for the moment the weird proposition that libraries are a useful private businesses that all the local governments have nationalized. With funds from all the taxpayers. I think this argument is silly, but lets run with it.

Lets also assume that Beck has a beef with the idea of publicly funded libraries. He hasn't said that either, as far as I am aware.

How is it that someone who pays for something should not get it because he opposed it. Since he is paying for it, isn't he just as, or even more so, entitled to use the amenity than someone who thought it a great idea, put contributes nothing toward it but some warmth on the seats in the reading room?

I do find it completely bullshit for people that whine all the time about taxes, thinking they get to determine what their tax money should go to. THey benefit from some gov't things that is funded by taxpayer money, but they want to prevent things that other's use. or they think becuase they pay taxes they should get to determine where the money goes and what programs are or are not worthy of taxpayer money.

 

[Oddball]

If you disagree with a government program, are you forbidden to use it?

I believe the converse should apply even more:

If you're so stupid as to pimp for and demand all these gubmint programs, you should never ever be allowed any access to any free market based version of that program.

 

[Yurt]

it makes no sense. for instance obama whining that repubs are using/spending stimulus funds when they were against it. i mean really, this is nothing but a cheap political pot shot. in our republic, you can be against something and if that position is the minority position, you are still entitled to use or take advantage of that which you opposed. to suggest otherwise goes against the very fabric of this country.

now, that doesn't mean you have to take advantage of it, just that you are entitled to.

 

[Ragnar]

If you disagree with a government program, are you forbidden to use it?

No. And your not necessarily a hypocrite either.

If the government does it, you pay for it one way or another. Obliously through taxes in the direct sense. However, you also pay in a dozen non-direct ways as well. Take public anything (library, school, road, bathroom, jobs, welfare etc etc) and often times you get a monopoly type effect on the market. (either literal or de facto). When the market is thrown askew by government force, your still allowed to participate in it to your own best advantage guilt free.

Typical examples:

Republicans vote against "stimulus" then still take the money. Not hypocritical because once passed the money is still coming out of their constituants pockets anyway. They may as well spend it as best as they can.

Democrats vote against tax cuts then still keep the money. Not hypocritical because once passed the money is still coming back to them. Why should they put themselves at a competative disadvantage in the marketplace verses their peers?

 

[chanel]

Yes It's almost as comical as Bill Ayers calling the police on trespassers. Well maybe not that comical.

 

[Political Junky]

Beck used public libraries when he was poor. I don't think it dawned on him that they were a form of socialism.

 

[txlonghorn]

An interesting argument over the local tax effects of Obamacare degenerated into a weird slanging match over Glen Beck using a public library.

I don't believe Beck has ever said anything about public libraries, except that he uses them. I would imagine with his income he can buy a house, the taxes on which would support a nice library. Plus other taxes he would pay into the local taxing authority for other amenities.

Let us accept for the moment the weird proposition that libraries are a useful private businesses that all the local governments have nationalized. With funds from all the taxpayers. I think this argument is silly, but lets run with it.

Lets also assume that Beck has a beef with the idea of publicly funded libraries. He hasn't said that either, as far as I am aware.

How is it that someone who pays for something should not get it because he opposed it. Since he is paying for it, isn't he just as, or even more so, entitled to use the amenity than someone who thought it a great idea, put contributes nothing toward it but some warmth on the seats in the reading room?

I do find it completely bullshit for people that whine all the time about taxes, thinking they get to determine what their tax money should go to. THey benefit from some gov't things that is funded by taxpayer money, but they want to prevent things that other's use. or they think becuase they pay taxes they should get to determine where the money goes and what programs are or are not worthy of taxpayer money.

So you're ok with tax payer money being spent on a tunnel for turtles to cross a highway in Tallahassee? Are you ok with unemployed illegal immigrants getting free healthcare? If they can get it, why can't you?

Are you ok with the food stamp program where families of 5 or more are qualifying for over a 1000 a month in free groceries? Why can't you get free groceries? (maybe you do)

I think it's very good to use taxpayers dollars for socially beneficial programs. Programs that benefit EVERYONE in society. But I disagree with handouts to those who are capable of work, but choose not to.

But that's just me. Does that make me a right wing extremist?

 

[txlonghorn]

An interesting argument over the local tax effects of Obamacare degenerated into a weird slanging match over Glen Beck using a public library.

I don't believe Beck has ever said anything about public libraries, except that he uses them. I would imagine with his income he can buy a house, the taxes on which would support a nice library. Plus other taxes he would pay into the local taxing authority for other amenities.

Let us accept for the moment the weird proposition that libraries are a useful private businesses that all the local governments have nationalized. With funds from all the taxpayers. I think this argument is silly, but lets run with it.

Lets also assume that Beck has a beef with the idea of publicly funded libraries. He hasn't said that either, as far as I am aware.

How is it that someone who pays for something should not get it because he opposed it. Since he is paying for it, isn't he just as, or even more so, entitled to use the amenity than someone who thought it a great idea, put contributes nothing toward it but some warmth on the seats in the reading room?

I don't think so...here's another good question... If you disagree with a government program, are you OBLIGATED to use it? And if you choose not to, should you be punished for not using it?

 

[WillowTree]

Works for me. I'm against being forced to pay taxes to educate kids who aren't mine.. so forbid me to use public schools. Go ahead whydonchya?

 

[Oddball]

Works for me. I'm against being forced to pay taxes to educate kids who aren't mine.. so forbid me to use public schools. Go ahead whydonchya?

Likewise, politicians who are pimps for gubmint education should be absolutely prohibited from sending their kids to private schools.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Works for me. I'm against being forced to pay taxes to educate kids who aren't mine.. so forbid me to use public schools. Go ahead whydonchya?

The public paid for your education or some portion that contributed to your education. You don't get to opt out for paying for someone else's kid.

 

[Yurt]

Beck used public libraries when he was poor. I don't think it dawned on him that they were a form of socialism.

that is not a form of socialism....there is no means of production with a library, its simply a government service

 

[Father Time]

An interesting argument over the local tax effects of Obamacare degenerated into a weird slanging match over Glen Beck using a public library.

I don't believe Beck has ever said anything about public libraries, except that he uses them. I would imagine with his income he can buy a house, the taxes on which would support a nice library. Plus other taxes he would pay into the local taxing authority for other amenities.

Let us accept for the moment the weird proposition that libraries are a useful private businesses that all the local governments have nationalized. With funds from all the taxpayers. I think this argument is silly, but lets run with it.

Lets also assume that Beck has a beef with the idea of publicly funded libraries. He hasn't said that either, as far as I am aware.

How is it that someone who pays for something should not get it because he opposed it. Since he is paying for it, isn't he just as, or even more so, entitled to use the amenity than someone who thought it a great idea, put contributes nothing toward it but some warmth on the seats in the reading room?

I do find it completely bullshit for people that whine all the time about taxes, thinking they get to determine what their tax money should go to. THey benefit from some gov't things that is funded by taxpayer money, but they want to prevent things that other's use. or they think becuase they pay taxes they should get to determine where the money goes and what programs are or are not worthy of taxpayer money.

Yeah uh our country was founded by people who were angry that they had no way to influence where their tax money went.

And we are paying taxes shouldn't we get to have some influence over where the tax money goes to? Government is not entitled to our money.

 

[Ame®icano]

Since libraries are funded by (my) tax dollars, local municipalities and (my) donations, I have every right to use their services regardless of someone like it or not.

 

[Avatar4321]

I do find it completely bullshit for people that whine all the time about taxes, thinking they get to determine what their tax money should go to. THey benefit from some gov't things that is funded by taxpayer money, but they want to prevent things that other's use. or they think becuase they pay taxes they should get to determine where the money goes and what programs are or are not worthy of taxpayer money.

Are you suggesting that we shouldnt get to determine where our tax money goes? Isn't this exactly what we rebelled against King George III? No taxation without representation?

I mean how dare we think that we have a say in what our money is spent on. We should be happy to contribute to government appointees buying lingerie for their mistresses on our dime.

 

[Zona]

I wish the teabaggers who got tax refunds last year would donate that money to me.

 

[Ame®icano]

I wish the teabaggers who got tax refunds last year would donate that money to me.

I got refund last year and will get it this year.

Only reason I got it is because I overpaid my dues.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

I do find it completely bullshit for people that whine all the time about taxes, thinking they get to determine what their tax money should go to. THey benefit from some gov't things that is funded by taxpayer money, but they want to prevent things that other's use. or they think becuase they pay taxes they should get to determine where the money goes and what programs are or are not worthy of taxpayer money.

I am a loss what to say to this, and I really don't understand what you are saying.


Are you saying that if I complain about taxes, I give up my right to vote where they go?

Since it is their money that is being apportioned out, your believe they should therefore have no say in the matter? Only those who do not contribute should apportion the funds? Am I reading you right about this?

 

[Avatar4321]

I wish the teabaggers who got tax refunds last year would donate that money to me.

Where on earth did you come up with that convoluted idea?