Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness

[FireGod]

Um there are several groups that might represent some of what I believe often times at the cost of being way off base in other areas (I am very sure I am not the only one).

My point is the ability to have a truly representative form of government is lost and is being further eroded with respect to of the people by the people. Now if you are truly OK with corporations/PACs/unions/whatever being your government either directly or proxy, by all means continue to defend them as actual people.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Simply put folks, in no document is 'equality of outcome" addressed.. yet we keep trying to make sure nobody has any more than anyone else either through progressive taxation or other confiscatory policies. It is a doomed endeavor.

Hey, Grandma, do you have ANY idea how much less progressive our income tax is compared to where it was, say, in Eisenhower's time? Or Kennedy? Or Nixon?

And do you realize that every time income taxes have been cut from confiscatory levels that government revenue has increased


The Historical Lessons of Lower Tax Rates

The tax cuts of the 1920s
Tax rates were slashed dramatically during the 1920s, dropping from over 70 percent to less than 25 percent. What happened? Personal income tax revenues increased substantially during the 1920s, despite the reduction in rates. Revenues rose from $719 million in 1921 to $1164 million in 1928, an increase of more than 61 percent.

According to then-Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon:

The history of taxation shows that taxes which are inherently excessive are not paid. The high rates inevitably put pressure upon the taxpayer to withdraw his capital from productive business and invest it in tax-exempt securities or to find other lawful methods of avoiding the realization of taxable income. The result is that the sources of taxation are drying up; wealth is failing to carry its share of the tax burden; and capital is being diverted into channels which yield neither revenue to the Government nor profit to the people.

The Kennedy tax cuts
President Hoover dramatically increased tax rates in the 1930s and President Roosevelt compounded the damage by pushing marginal tax rates to more than 90 percent. Recognizing that high tax rates were hindering the economy, President Kennedy proposed across-the-board tax rate reductions that reduced the top tax rate from more than 90 percent down to 70 percent. What happened? Tax revenues climbed from $94 billion in 1961 to $153 billion in 1968, an increase of 62 percent (33 percent after adjusting for inflation).

According to President John F. Kennedy:

Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the one hand, and the avoidance of large Federal deficits on the other. It is increasingly clear that no matter what party is in power, so long as our national security needs keep rising, an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenues to balance our budget just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits… In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now.

The Reagan tax cuts
Thanks to “bracket creep,” the inflation of the 1970s pushed millions of taxpayers into higher tax brackets even though their inflation-adjusted incomes were not rising. To help offset this tax increase and also to improve incentives to work, save, and invest, President Reagan proposed sweeping tax rate reductions during the 1980s. What happened? Total tax revenues climbed by 99.4 percent during the 1980s, and the results are even more impressive when looking at what happened to personal income tax revenues. Once the economy received an unambiguous tax cut in January 1983, income tax revenues climbed dramatically, increasing by more than 54 percent by 1989 (28 percent after adjusting for inflation).

According to then-U.S. Representative Jack Kemp (R-NY), one of the chief architects of the Reagan tax cuts:

At some point, additional taxes so discourage the activity being taxed, such as working or investing, that they yield less revenue rather than more. There are, after all, two rates that yield the same amount of revenue: high tax rates on low production, or low rates on high production.

It fact that these three tax cuts increased government revenue and it is fact that we still have an unsustainable debt.

So tell me what is the problem here?

The problem is government spending not revenue. And what is Obama doing? More spending.

 

[editec]

I've read this and nowhere does it say justice, equality, and the pursuit of other utopia.

The next time liberals get upset about supposed injustice, inequality, and just being upset that you are not going along with their version of utopia just remind them that our government was not created to do those things. They were created to preserve the freedom of the individual at all cost even if allowing that freedom creates injustice, inequality, or interferes with the creation of utopia.

If a government isn't about supporting justice, and equality, then really, what fucking good is it?

AS to governments allowing freedom? You are more than just a little confused about the nature of governments and individuals

Governments are created with the intention of suppressing freedom of individuals for the benefit of the society as a whole. Individuals give up complete freedom if they choose to be members of every society.

If you want complete freedom, I suggest you migrate to Somalia.

There a man is free to do whatever he can get away with before some equally free individual kills you and takes your stuff.

 

[CMike]

Um there are several groups that might represent some of what I believe often times at the cost of being way off base in other areas (I am very sure I am not the only one).

My point is the ability to have a truly representative form of government is lost and is being further eroded with respect to of the people by the people. Now if you are truly OK with corporations/PACs/unions/whatever being your government either directly or proxy, by all means continue to defend them as actual people.

I don't side with limiting freedom of speech.

 

[CMike]

Newspapers are part of corporations should they have free speech?

 

[ihopehefails]

I've read this and nowhere does it say justice, equality, and the pursuit of other utopia.

The next time liberals get upset about supposed injustice, inequality, and just being upset that you are not going along with their version of utopia just remind them that our government was not created to do those things. They were created to preserve the freedom of the individual at all cost even if allowing that freedom creates injustice, inequality, or interferes with the creation of utopia.

Really? Nowhere does it say equality? The passage begins, we hold these truths to be self-evident, THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL...

Justice? Preamble: We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, ESTABLISH JUSTICE...

You, my friend, are a simpleton.

I knew someone would come up with this but being created equal says that we are equal in nature. Governments are not established to create equality since all men are already created equal and any attempt to mess with that creation such as governments creating equality is messing with God's (or nature) natural creation of man.

To establish justice...can that mean to establish law?

 

[ihopehefails]

Constitutional law, however, states we have the right to "engage in the common occupations of life" and to enjoy the "orderly pursuit of happiness".

Where is that written in the constitution?

14th amendment

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Equality

5th amendment

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation Justice


Like I said....your "utopia" crap is just nonsense

sigh...

equal protection of the law does not say that everyone has to be equal. It states that whatever PROTECTIONS one group gets by the law every other person has to get that same protection as well.

A good example is bankruptcy protection. It protects you from your creditors and the equal protection clause states that no state can create bankruptcy protection laws for whites only. This clause does not give government a mandate to create eqaulity or justice on earth.

 

[ihopehefails]

I've read this and nowhere does it say justice, equality, and the pursuit of other utopia.

The next time liberals get upset about supposed injustice, inequality, and just being upset that you are not going along with their version of utopia just remind them that our government was not created to do those things. They were created to preserve the freedom of the individual at all cost even if allowing that freedom creates injustice, inequality, or interferes with the creation of utopia.

Yes, those evil liberals with their women's suffrage and civil rights

Those are with respect to the law. I was referring to the natural existence of man that is outside the state. That is where people are allowed to be free as sexext as they want especially if that helps them in their pursuit of happiness.

 

[ihopehefails]

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've read this and nowhere does it say justice, equality, and the pursuit of other utopia.

Show me where anyone on the left or right, other than you has ever claimed a right to live in a utopia

The biggest objection to cutting income tax on the wealth or other rich tax is that the rich will get richier, the gap between the rich and poor grows, and etc. It seems like to me that the left thinks that it is unfair, unjust, or just not plain utopian of us if we allow this to happen so we have to crush the rich in order to make everything fair.

 

[ihopehefails]

I've read this and nowhere does it say justice, equality, and the pursuit of other utopia.

The next time liberals get upset about supposed injustice, inequality, and just being upset that you are not going along with their version of utopia just remind them that our government was not created to do those things. They were created to preserve the freedom of the individual at all cost even if allowing that freedom creates injustice, inequality, or interferes with the creation of utopia.

If a government isn't about supporting justice, and equality, then really, what fucking good is it?

AS to governments allowing freedom? You are more than just a little confused about the nature of governments and individuals

Governments are created with the intention of suppressing freedom of individuals for the benefit of the society as a whole. Individuals give up complete freedom if they choose to be members of every society.

If you want complete freedom, I suggest you migrate to Somalia.

There a man is free to do whatever he can get away with before some equally free individual kills you and takes your stuff.

T.Paine said that governments are necessary evil for a society in that people do not have the moral restraint needed to allow us to live in a completely free society. We need government to establish the internal safety of its members.

Governments that see themselves as the thing that creates a utopian vision of justice, fairness, and equality will always claim moral authority over the people (does this sound like most liberals?) over the people because it establishes what is fair, just, and equal and the people then have to follow that template.

 

[rightwinger]

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've read this and nowhere does it say justice, equality, and the pursuit of other utopia.

Show me where anyone on the left or right, other than you has ever claimed a right to live in a utopia

The biggest objection to cutting income tax on the wealth or other rich tax is that the rich will get richier, the gap between the rich and poor grows, and etc. It seems like to me that the left thinks that it is unfair, unjust, or just not plain utopian of us if we allow this to happen so we have to crush the rich in order to make everything fair.

Nice weasel job....but show me where anyone has advocated we should live in a utopia or that all wealth should be evenly distributed.

This is just the right wing painting the left do confuse the issue. So show me where anything you posted has been advocated by the left?

 

[slackjawed]

Show me where anyone on the left or right, other than you has ever claimed a right to live in a utopia

The biggest objection to cutting income tax on the wealth or other rich tax is that the rich will get richier, the gap between the rich and poor grows, and etc. It seems like to me that the left thinks that it is unfair, unjust, or just not plain utopian of us if we allow this to happen so we have to crush the rich in order to make everything fair.

Nice weasel job....but show me where anyone has advocated we should live in a utopia or that all wealth should be evenly distributed.

This is just the right wing painting the left do confuse the issue. So show me where anything you posted has been advocated by the left?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck]YouTube - Obama Bombshell Redistribution of Wealth Audio Uncovered[/ame]

 

[ihopehefails]

Show me where anyone on the left or right, other than you has ever claimed a right to live in a utopia

The biggest objection to cutting income tax on the wealth or other rich tax is that the rich will get richier, the gap between the rich and poor grows, and etc. It seems like to me that the left thinks that it is unfair, unjust, or just not plain utopian of us if we allow this to happen so we have to crush the rich in order to make everything fair.

Nice weasel job....but show me where anyone has advocated we should live in a utopia or that all wealth should be evenly distributed.

This is just the right wing painting the left do confuse the issue. So show me where anything you posted has been advocated by the left?

Why else would you complain about the rich being so rich and poor being so poor and then scream about equality? Why do you guys complain about how unjust our society is all the time in some shape or manor?

I'm OK with society being unjust since I know that it will always be impossible to change man's fundemental nature but we should not tolerate someone interfering with our freedom in order to create a 'just' society.

 

[FireGod]

Um there are several groups that might represent some of what I believe often times at the cost of being way off base in other areas (I am very sure I am not the only one).

My point is the ability to have a truly representative form of government is lost and is being further eroded with respect to of the people by the people. Now if you are truly OK with corporations/PACs/unions/whatever being your government either directly or proxy, by all means continue to defend them as actual people.

I don't side with limiting freedom of speech.

Newspapers are part of corporations should they have free speech?

They already do have free speech nice try.

They should not be able to buy off the Representatives of the people (in reality that is what we are talking about). No matter the make up of the corporations/PACs/unions/whatever they are not voters nor are they living breathing PEOPLE.

 

[ihopehefails]

Um there are several groups that might represent some of what I believe often times at the cost of being way off base in other areas (I am very sure I am not the only one).

My point is the ability to have a truly representative form of government is lost and is being further eroded with respect to of the people by the people. Now if you are truly OK with corporations/PACs/unions/whatever being your government either directly or proxy, by all means continue to defend them as actual people.

I don't side with limiting freedom of speech.

Newspapers are part of corporations should they have free speech?

They already do have free speech nice try.

They should not be able to buy off the Representatives of the people (in reality that is what we are talking about). No matter the make up of the corporations/PACs/unions/whatever they are not voters nor are they living breathing PEOPLE.

Anyone who operated under a PAC fund that had money given to them by a corporation were then subject to this stupid law. They now, by association, could not speak freely and that was why the law violated people's freedom of speech.

Corporations are still subject to other laws that forbid them from buying of representatives.

 

[FireGod]

I don't side with limiting freedom of speech.

Newspapers are part of corporations should they have free speech?

They already do have free speech nice try.

They should not be able to buy off the Representatives of the people (in reality that is what we are talking about). No matter the make up of the corporations/PACs/unions/whatever they are not voters nor are they living breathing PEOPLE.

Anyone who operated under a PAC fund that had money given to them by a corporation were then subject to this stupid law. They now, by association, could not speak freely and that was why the law violated people's freedom of speech.

Corporations are still subject to other laws that forbid them from buying of representatives.

Really you think so?

What do you think wins elections?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

What do you think wins elections?

$

 

[ihopehefails]

They already do have free speech nice try.

They should not be able to buy off the Representatives of the people (in reality that is what we are talking about). No matter the make up of the corporations/PACs/unions/whatever they are not voters nor are they living breathing PEOPLE.

Anyone who operated under a PAC fund that had money given to them by a corporation were then subject to this stupid law. They now, by association, could not speak freely and that was why the law violated people's freedom of speech.

Corporations are still subject to other laws that forbid them from buying of representatives.

Really you think so?

What do you think wins elections?

I think bribery is still illegal but your right to donate to causes for whatever purpose of either good or evil is still intact.

 

[FireGod]

Anyone who operated under a PAC fund that had money given to them by a corporation were then subject to this stupid law. They now, by association, could not speak freely and that was why the law violated people's freedom of speech.

Corporations are still subject to other laws that forbid them from buying of representatives.

Really you think so?

What do you think wins elections?

I think bribery is still illegal but your right to donate to causes for whatever purpose of either good or evil is still intact.

I am not saying that you as an individual voter can not donate to whatever cause floats your boat. I am saying that it is a very bad idea for corporations/PACs/unions/whatever to have even more undue influence over the Representatives of the People.

 

[Ravi]

I've read this and nowhere does it say justice, equality, and the pursuit of other utopia.

The next time liberals get upset about supposed injustice, inequality, and just being upset that you are not going along with their version of utopia just remind them that our government was not created to do those things. They were created to preserve the freedom of the individual at all cost even if allowing that freedom creates injustice, inequality, or interferes with the creation of utopia.

Justice and equality are part of liberty. Pursuing utopia is part of happiness.

Why do you hate America?