Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Makes me wonder how much faster and farther it would have grown without the government slowing it down. I suppose you two idiots are trying to claim progress was because of taxes. It is dispite of.
quite specifically my point, yes. i submit that mexico failed to tax progressively and fulfill the obligation as a government to place infrastructure for business and... brace yourself... 'spread it around a little' with regard to wealth.
studying mexico, granted that about 100 years ago, their economy was neck and neck with ours, and granted the par in natural resources like oil which we share, they are your smaller, low-tax government. they have freer enterprise than we do still. quite a bit could be extracted from the divergence of our states, but its the fable of the turtle and the hare that sums up the merits of your 'faster and farther' theory.
many of the developing economies of the world adhere to your model, but that doesnt make them great (far), just fast. could you bring to bare any, any whatsoever, highly conservative country where free-enterprise isnt partenered with government investment via tax? of course i mean countries in the 1st world, not anywhere where donkeys, mules, camels or elephants are considered capital.
*passes the idiot ball back to saveliberty*
The natural resource of America is and was the people. People intent on building a future under liberty and pursuit of happiness. The infrastructure you speak of was built by private industry. Railroads? Government or private? Agriculture was built by farmers, who took risks. Your model is simplistic and without merit.
Nail? meet hammer. great thread, and what I've been thinking for years.
IF the Politicians think they haven't anything to do to justify thier existence? How about repealing alot of the Liberty-Limiting crap on the books. That'll keep 'em busy for DECADES, no?
I say we start a companion thread to see what LAWS can be repealed to foist liberty again on the people.
I'm really curious what "liberties" have been snatched from you.
He has to pay taxes!!!!
I'm really curious what "liberties" have been snatched from you.
He has to pay taxes!!!!
*YAWN* Wake me when you have a point Snoozey. You are boring the shit out of me BOY.
quite specifically my point, yes. i submit that mexico failed to tax progressively and fulfill the obligation as a government to place infrastructure for business and... brace yourself... 'spread it around a little' with regard to wealth.
studying mexico, granted that about 100 years ago, their economy was neck and neck with ours, and granted the par in natural resources like oil which we share, they are your smaller, low-tax government. they have freer enterprise than we do still. quite a bit could be extracted from the divergence of our states, but its the fable of the turtle and the hare that sums up the merits of your 'faster and farther' theory.
many of the developing economies of the world adhere to your model, but that doesnt make them great (far), just fast. could you bring to bare any, any whatsoever, highly conservative country where free-enterprise isnt partenered with government investment via tax? of course i mean countries in the 1st world, not anywhere where donkeys, mules, camels or elephants are considered capital.
*passes the idiot ball back to saveliberty*
The natural resource of America is and was the people. People intent on building a future under liberty and pursuit of happiness. The infrastructure you speak of was built by private industry. Railroads? Government or private? Agriculture was built by farmers, who took risks. Your model is simplistic and without merit.
And certain kinds of farming began to be unprofitable. Dairy farmers continue to struggle just to save their family farms. Is milk taxed? Nope. Do we need milk? Yup. So at what point does this become a problem only government can solve? Just an example, mind you.
Vast LWC, would you be too offended if I said it was Pelosi and my Congressional representatives? Before you answer, I have Levin, Stabenow and a Democrat freshman hack.
He has to pay taxes!!!!
*YAWN* Wake me when you have a point Snoozey. You are boring the shit out of me BOY.
UH OH, Looks like somebody's been hanging out all afternoon with their friend Johnny Walker.
Great post PR.
I must still be naive because as I read it I thought to myself "who couldn't agree with this?". Then I read the posts that followed and was amazed.
I think the really interesting part of the posts that followed was that in general conservatives were willing to say Yes, our government has let us down and we're at least partially to blame, that's taking responsibility. Then the liberals, in general, took the opposite, finger pointing approach. That would be not taking any responsibility. Funny how this same dynamic plays out over and over.
The only idiots around here are the morons like yourself who think this nation could have advanced without taxation, I kind of like having paved highways.
Lots of us don't disagree with taxation - as long as it is:
a. Constitutional or, if not,
b. 'We, the People' are consulted prior to an unconstititional bill being passed to raise taxes.
If it is not Constitutional, then, either they ask us or it is theft.
Nope. YOU vote for representatives to make your choice FOR you. That's the way it works, Constitutionally.
Frankly, the only suggestion that ever makes any sense to me when politics gets as fierce as it is these days is to advise as many people you know to NOT vote for any incumbent, even if you happen to like him/her. Generally speaking, when Congress is trashed and thrashed, and individual voters are asked if they like their own, inevitably they will say YES. Go figure. I do happen to like my own, but I have two that have been around too long and I'd like to see some new blood, so I won't vote for them next time.
Lots of us don't disagree with taxation - as long as it is:
a. Constitutional or, if not,
b. 'We, the People' are consulted prior to an unconstititional bill being passed to raise taxes.
If it is not Constitutional, then, either they ask us or it is theft.
Nope. YOU vote for representatives to make your choice FOR you. That's the way it works, Constitutionally.
Frankly, the only suggestion that ever makes any sense to me when politics gets as fierce as it is these days is to advise as many people you know to NOT vote for any incumbent, even if you happen to like him/her. Generally speaking, when Congress is trashed and thrashed, and individual voters are asked if they like their own, inevitably they will say YES. Go figure. I do happen to like my own, but I have two that have been around too long and I'd like to see some new blood, so I won't vote for them next time.
Excuse me? I vote to give someone else the power to trash the US Constitution? Do then explain to me why we bother having this Constitition if the people I vote for are perfectly at liberty to grant themselves any power they so choose?
We have deficits because voters just like all of you vote the people out that raise their taxes and then vote the people out that cut spending on programs that you support.
Right Wingers are like spoiled little children.
You people don't want to have to pay your taxes, but you're more than happy to go fight an expensive war overseas. And God forbid anyone should mention cuts in Medicare spending.
You get the most money in federal funding, per capita, pay the least taxes, per capita, and have the most representation, per capita, and then you just complain and complain about spending and taxes. Well, here's a hint YOU'RE THE PROBLEM.
You all complain and complain about your politicians, but how do you think they got there? YOU VOTED FOR THEM. Right-wingers in general have MORE representation, per capita, than democrats, because a larger percentage of them come from smaller states.
The average person in Wyoming, for instance has 1 representative in congress for every 177,556 people (including one House epresentative and 2 Senators). While the average person in California has 1 representative in congress for every 668,303 people.
That means that every citizen of Wyoming has almost four times the representation of the average citizen of California. And Washington DC, which has more people in it than Wyoming, has no representation at all.
You complain about deficit spending and the debt, but you voted the administrations into office that CREATED ALL THE DEBT. We have 11 Trillion Dollars of debt, almost all of which was created during Republican administrations. Administrations that the majority of the people that thanked the OP for their post voted for.
And you wait until NOW to voice your "outrage"? What the hell were you all doing in 1984, 1988, 2000 and 2004? You know, the years you all voted in the people that created the debt?
Oh, that's right, you were listening to their promises about how lower taxes were the solution for all of our ills. Yeah, lower taxes, that's just workd out so well, hasn't it?
And the OP goes on and on about how congress is responsible, of course they're responsible, so here's how you fix the problem. STOP VOTING FOR THE PEOPLE THAT YOU'VE BEEN VOTING FOR.
It's not "Nancy Pelosi" or someone else's congressman that's the problem, it's YOUR CONGRESSMAN that's the problem.
I think it is time we put the politicians in the water, literally. ship them to another country. Start over. Yes, that may mean a "REVOLUTION" but it would not be the first time. I would join, but I don't have the energy to start it. LOL
I think it is time we put the politicians in the water, literally. ship them to another country. Start over. Yes, that may mean a "REVOLUTION" but it would not be the first time. I would join, but I don't have the energy to start it. LOL
Keep a close eye on what happens next year. I think a revolution is coming and no one will have to fire a shot. However, if the later is needed, if things get worse, one could be coming.
*YAWN* Wake me when you have a point Snoozey. You are boring the shit out of me BOY.
UH OH, Looks like somebody's been hanging out all afternoon with their friend Johnny Walker.
*Ut Oh* The Idiot Answers...
*YOU*are one bitter piece of Liberal GutterTrash Snoozey.
YOU should KNOW better you Miophic OAF.
if the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red ..
If the army & marines are in iraq , it's because they want them in iraq
if they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.
I think it is time we put the politicians in the water, literally. ship them to another country. Start over. Yes, that may mean a "REVOLUTION" but it would not be the first time. I would join, but I don't have the energy to start it. LOL
Keep a close eye on what happens next year. I think a revolution is coming and no one will have to fire a shot. However, if the later is needed, if things get worse, one could be coming.
Somewhere I started a thread on the effect a third party would have on the next elections, but it got sidetracked. But here is the problem:
More Americans would vote for a "Tea Party" candidate than a Republican, according to a Rasmussen poll released Monday that quizzed voters on a hypothetical three-way ballot. Respondents were asked to assume that the "Tea Party" was an organized new party, despite the fact that it is highly unlikely the grassroots conservative movement that has gained momentum this year will become a third party.
A majority of Americans said they would vote Democratic (36 percent), while the number who said they would vote "Tea Party" (23 percent) slightly edged out Republican voters (18 percent). Another 22 percent say they were undecided.
Among voters not affiliated with either party, the Tea Partiers had a clear advantage: 33 percent said they would support a Tea Party candidate, compared with 30 percent who said they were undecided, 25 percent Democrat and only 12 percent Republican.
Rasmussen Poll: Tea Party Beats GOP on Generic Three-Way Ballot -- Politics Daily
So the news for the Democrats and Republicans is not good when you look at pitiful numbers like that, but a third party is more likely to draw from the GOP than the Democrats which could ensure Democrats staying in power into perpetuity.
Keep a close eye on what happens next year. I think a revolution is coming and no one will have to fire a shot. However, if the later is needed, if things get worse, one could be coming.
Somewhere I started a thread on the effect a third party would have on the next elections, but it got sidetracked. But here is the problem:
More Americans would vote for a "Tea Party" candidate than a Republican, according to a Rasmussen poll released Monday that quizzed voters on a hypothetical three-way ballot. Respondents were asked to assume that the "Tea Party" was an organized new party, despite the fact that it is highly unlikely the grassroots conservative movement that has gained momentum this year will become a third party.
A majority of Americans said they would vote Democratic (36 percent), while the number who said they would vote "Tea Party" (23 percent) slightly edged out Republican voters (18 percent). Another 22 percent say they were undecided.
Among voters not affiliated with either party, the Tea Partiers had a clear advantage: 33 percent said they would support a Tea Party candidate, compared with 30 percent who said they were undecided, 25 percent Democrat and only 12 percent Republican.
Rasmussen Poll: Tea Party Beats GOP on Generic Three-Way Ballot -- Politics Daily
So the news for the Democrats and Republicans is not good when you look at pitiful numbers like that, but a third party is more likely to draw from the GOP than the Democrats which could ensure Democrats staying in power into perpetuity.
If by some unfortunate twist of fate liberals retained power, and we got more of what we already have, I could all but guarantee you, that would force another revolution. When people go broke, when they're paying 60-70% of their income in taxes, when unemployment is 20%, when the government is telling them what they can and can't do from the time they're born 'til when and how they die, when America is just another socialist, broke, third world shit hole, the people will revolt. There will be another Civil War. We're damn close to it now.
