Two people to thank for helping you with your expenses

[CodeBreaker]

First, that mortal enemy of Republicans, the IRS agent.

Every agent recovers MUCH more in otherwise lost revenue to the Treasury than his salary. So why do conservatives want them gone? Because conservatives encourage deadbeat taxpayers in their ranks.

Second, another target of the GOP, the illegal alien. (Notice how they're willing to give people breaking the law by not paying their taxes a full pass, but are willing to spend huge amounts chasing down poor Mexicans.)

Illegal aliens are lowering your expenses across the board from cheaper produce to cheaper lawn care. Many pay Social Security that they will never collect on. Tax dodgers, on the other hand, are costing you, if you're one of us who pay their taxes.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Yea I heard their is a grass crisis in mexico........ no one there to cut the grass.

 

[CodeBreaker]

The Republican gave the homeless person his business card and told him to come to his business for a job.
The Democrat ... walked over to the homeless person and gave him directions to the welfare office. He then reached into the Republican's pocket and gave the homeless person fifty dollars.

You forgot to mention the guy was homeless because the Republican had moved his company to China, putting the homeless guy out of a job. And since the Republican was shorting the government its taxes by using an account in the Cayman Islands, the Republican was happy it was only $50, a tiny fraction of what he should have paid.

As to welfare it ought to be a last resort but never will be as long as we keep letting the top 10% scoop up all the income and wealth. If you insist on getting rich no matter who has to go hungry as a result, get used to paying for welfare.

 

[NightFox]

Every agent recovers MUCH more in otherwise lost revenue to the Treasury than his salary.

So do Mafia soldiers, how come you're not worshiping them?

 

[eflatminor]

Every agent recovers MUCH more in otherwise lost revenue to the Treasury than his salary. So why do conservatives want them gone?

From this libertarians POV (can't speak for modern 'conservatives'), that would be because the point isn't to increase revenue to the government, but to get the government to operate within the confines of the enumerated powers of the Constitution, which requires far less revenue than we're currently collecting. Further, many, including the founding fathers, find the idea of taxing man's labor immoral.

Illegal aliens are lowering your expenses across the board from cheaper produce to cheaper lawn care.

Again, can't speak for the GOP, but libertarians would argue in favor of anyone seeking labor. Of course, if we weren't drowning in debt due to all these entitlement/social programs, nobody would care about "illegal" aliens. Cheap labor is good. Forcing others to pick up the tab for the education, healthcare, food, housing, etc of any worker, illegal or otherwise, is not.

p.s. You're new here. That's great, but please, lay off the color. We can see you just fine.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Reads like an rDean sock.

 

[CodeBreaker]

From this libertarians POV ...the point isn't to increase revenue to the government, but to get the government to operate within the confines of the enumerated powers of the Constitution, which requires far less revenue than we're currently collecting.

...if we weren't drowning in debt due to all these entitlement/social programs, nobody would care about "illegal" aliens. Cheap labor is good. Forcing others to pick up the tab for the education, healthcare, food, housing, etc of any worker, illegal or otherwise, is not.

I'd be in favor of shutting down 3/4s of our overseas military installations if that's what you mean. And I'd love to review each and every subsidy and tax break out there for corporations and private companies too. But I don't buy your claim that no one would care about illegal aliens if we weren't so heavily burdened with so-called entitlements. We could finance Social Security with the flick of a pen, for example, just eliminate the cap on the FICA tax and problem solved.

But greed knows no boundaries. And in any case, if we merely stopped all the tax evasion out there, we'd be swimming in dough. Hard to do while conservatives insist on decimating the IRS. These people are destroying America far more decisively than that weasel Obama. (Voted for the guy the first time, then quickly realized he was a fraud.)

 

[CodeBreaker]

Every agent recovers MUCH more in otherwise lost revenue to the Treasury than his salary.

So do Mafia soldiers, how come you're not worshiping them?

Thanks for the giggle.

Well, let's see, the Mafia imposes itself on its victims... and so does Congress, but with input from the rabble.

The Mafia has a strict hierarchy where the top guy takes the biggest draw... and so do we, the rich just keep getting richer.

It seems you have a point, except... the IRS is collecting on OUR behalf, not the bosses. So I'm afraid it's exactly the opposite.

Mafia soldiers are more like bankers and most judges. Both can squeeze you mercilessly unless you pay. Both deserve harsh treatment in my opinion.

So, no, I don't equate Mafia soldiers with IRS agents. Nor should you unless your some Godfather.

 

[DiamondDave]

Every agent recovers MUCH more in otherwise lost revenue to the Treasury than his salary.

So do Mafia soldiers, how come you're not worshiping them?

Thanks for the giggle.

Well, let's see, the Mafia imposes itself on its victims... and so does Congress, but with input from the rabble.

The Mafia has a strict hierarchy where the top guy takes the biggest draw... and so do we, the rich just keep getting richer.

It seems you have a point, except... the IRS is collecting on OUR behalf, not the bosses. So I'm afraid it's exactly the opposite.

Mafia soldiers are more like bankers and most judges. Both can squeeze you mercilessly unless you pay. Both deserve harsh treatment in my opinion.

So, no, I don't equate Mafia soldiers with IRS agents. Nor should you unless your some Godfather.

Wrong.. the IRS is not collecting 'on your behalf'... and the government are indeed the syndicate bosses

 

[NightFox]

It seems you have a point, except... the IRS is collecting on OUR behalf, not the bosses.

ROFLMAO!!!!!! thanks for the laugh, that was good.

 

[Contumacious]

First, that mortal enemy of Republicans, the IRS agent.

Every agent recovers MUCH more in otherwise lost revenue to the Treasury than his salary. So why do conservatives want them gone? Because conservatives encourage deadbeat taxpayers in their ranks.

From a Libertarian Standpoint

1- The Federal government should only collect that amount authorized by the FOREGOING POWERS clause

2- Prior to 1965 we had open borders with Mexico and Canada, there was NEVER a problem - the Mexicans are NOT the problem , the welfare state is

.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Every agent recovers MUCH more in otherwise lost revenue to the Treasury than his salary.

So do Mafia soldiers, how come you're not worshiping them?

Thanks for the giggle.

Well, let's see, the Mafia imposes itself on its victims... and so does Congress, but with input from the rabble.

The Mafia has a strict hierarchy where the top guy takes the biggest draw... and so do we, the rich just keep getting richer.

It seems you have a point, except... the IRS is collecting on OUR behalf, not the bosses. So I'm afraid it's exactly the opposite.

Mafia soldiers are more like bankers and most judges. Both can squeeze you mercilessly unless you pay. Both deserve harsh treatment in my opinion.

So, no, I don't equate Mafia soldiers with IRS agents. Nor should you unless your some Godfather.

Good Lord.. .how old are you?

 

[eflatminor]

From this libertarians POV ...the point isn't to increase revenue to the government, but to get the government to operate within the confines of the enumerated powers of the Constitution, which requires far less revenue than we're currently collecting.

...if we weren't drowning in debt due to all these entitlement/social programs, nobody would care about "illegal" aliens. Cheap labor is good. Forcing others to pick up the tab for the education, healthcare, food, housing, etc of any worker, illegal or otherwise, is not.

I'd be in favor of shutting down 3/4s of our overseas military installations if that's what you mean.

As would many libertarians. We stand for a strong military, just not one that meddles in the affairs of other nations to the extent we do.

Of course, we spend more on entitlements than the military, which is what your original post was about.

And I'd love to review each and every subsidy and tax break out there for corporations and private companies too.

Libertarians stand for NO loopholes for any person or company. Again, if we lived within the confines of the Constitution, there'd be no need for a federal income tax...and no ability to even consider subsidies and tax breaks...for anyone.

But I don't buy your claim that no one would care about illegal aliens if we weren't so heavily burdened with so-called entitlements. We could finance Social Security with the flick of a pen, for example, just eliminate the cap on the FICA tax and problem solved.

Social Security is one of those entitlements that is not authorized under the Constitution. Further, it's a Ponzi scheme that is destined to fail. With that said, further burdening taxpayers by increasing FICA taxes will only render America less competitive in world markets. That means more outsourcing of jobs overseas and a less capital for growth. Bad idea. Really bad.

But that's beside the point. Illegal aliens have nothing to do with SS. Americans benefit from low wage migrant workers in the form of lower prices. Nobody would care about Mexicans picking strawberries if they didn't also add to the cost of entitlements and other social programs. Rid ourselves of these socialistic endeavors from the central planners, and nobody is going to bitch about a guy earning a few bucks doing menial labor.

But greed knows no boundaries.

Who's being greedy? The people expecting to keep what they've earned or the statists that believe it is acceptable to force some to labor on behalf of others?

And in any case, if we merely stopped all the tax evasion out there, we'd be swimming in dough.

And the economy would suffer, jobs would sink and we'd be less competitive against foreign operations. How about this: If we merely stopped all the social programs (and military interventionism), we'd be swimming in dough...WITHOUT the need to tax a man's labor. Hey...now there's an idea!

Hard to do while conservatives insist on decimating the IRS.

Hard to do while progressives insist that they know what's best for everyone else.

These people are destroying America far more decisively than that weasel Obama. (Voted for the guy the first time, then quickly realized he was a fraud.)

Of course, I'm no fan of Obama, nor was I of Bush. But they're only figureheads in a 100 year long progressive nightmare.

Return to the idea of a federal government with specifically enumerated powers that can meddle in nothing else. Then you'd see the resurgence of the American dream.

 

[eflatminor]

the Mexicans are NOT the problem , the welfare state is.

 

[CodeBreaker]

First, that mortal enemy of Republicans, the IRS agent.

Every agent recovers MUCH more in otherwise lost revenue to the Treasury than his salary. So why do conservatives want them gone? Because conservatives encourage deadbeat taxpayers in their ranks.

From a Libertarian Standpoint

1- The Federal government should only collect that amount authorized by the FOREGOING POWERS clause

2- Prior to 1965 we had open borders with Mexico and Canada, there was NEVER a problem - the Mexicans are NOT the problem , the welfare state is

.

1 How do you read this?

Section. 8.

Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States...

2 And where do you stand on corporate welfare? Careful now, some of your biggest benefactors have had their hands out, begging, since day one.

 

[CodeBreaker]

Return to the idea of a federal government with specifically enumerated powers that can meddle in nothing else. Then you'd see the resurgence of the American dream.

I've yet to hear a libertarian get anything totally right. If you really believe in freedom and self-reliance, why are you so willing to live under a banker's thumb, for example? Money gets its value from ALL OF US, not just the banksters, no matter what they've told you. I have a lot of problems with the government, including their dimwit foreign policies, so maybe we could find something to agree on, but we should fix it, if possible, not kill it. You keep withholding your taxes, you risk toppling the whole thing.

Anyway, I'm here to tangle with idiot conservatives. I do like this phrase in your screed though: "...Ponzi scheme that is destined to fail." That's exactly right, only you're applying it way too narrowly, the bank run economy is the real Ponzi scheme destined to fail. That's why the economy occasionally stalls out. Keep working that angle and you might get it, eventually.

Welfare is me taking care of my sick kid, writ large, to include EVERYONE'S kid. People with your revulsion for 'welfare' just don't care whether people need help or not. You're not a part of the team, you're a scavenger raiding the garbage bin late in the night. And, besides, this country is already one of the stingiest on the planet by almost every measure.

Before you get on your high horse, no, I don't think much of lazy bastards unwilling to do their part. But I don't count those willing to keep people poor, so that they'll be available to work cheap, as any kind of hero either. They're just as much crooks as the guys in Congress no matter how rich they get.

 

[CodeBreaker]

Good Lord.. .how old are you?

I don't know, Soggy, how old do I have to be to know better than you? 10 maybe?

 

[CodeBreaker]

It seems you have a point, except... the IRS is collecting on OUR behalf, not the bosses.

ROFLMAO!!!!!! thanks for the laugh, that was good.

That was the idea, Kimosabe, collecting for all of us. I thought you loony conservatives liked going back to original intent? Have you decided that tends to bite you in the ass?

 

[CodeBreaker]

There's got to be a better way to engage in an argument on this forum than this messy, hard to follow result. I'm spending most of my time trying to find the replies.

 

[eflatminor]

Return to the idea of a federal government with specifically enumerated powers that can meddle in nothing else. Then you'd see the resurgence of the American dream.

I've yet to hear a libertarian get anything totally right.

But you're "totally right"? You'll have to back up with logic, reason and specificity.

If you really believe in freedom and self-reliance, why are you so willing to live under a banker's thumb, for example?

I'm not 'willing' to do any such thing. The power banks hold has nothing to do with free markets and everything to do with central planner meddling. In this case, the Federal Reserve. Libertarians have long called for ending the Fed. The Federal Reserve enacts central price controls, which are never a good idea. They control the price of money (the interest rate), while suggesting they're goal is to 'control' inflation. That's bullshit. They don't control inflation, they cause it. For example, a widget that cost $1 in 1780 cost $1 in 1913, before the Fed was created. In other words, the market saw some products and services rise in price, others decreased. Overall, inflation was flat.

Since 1913, that widget that cost $1 in 1913 now costs nearly $24! The Fed caused that...and that kind of inflation is the most regressive tax of all.

End the Fed.

Money gets its value from ALL OF US, not just the banksters, no matter what they've told you

In the sense that the price of money "should" be determined by free market supply and demand, yes.

I have a lot of problems with the government, including their dimwit foreign policies, so maybe we could find something to agree on, but we should fix it, if possible, not kill it. You keep withholding your taxes, you risk toppling the whole thing.

No libertarian wants to "kill" the government. That's anarchism. We simply want the government to restrict it's power to the specifically enumerated powers in the Constitution.

If you think giving even more money to a government that long ago exceeded its powers is the answer, I'm not sure I can help you.

Anyway, I'm here to tangle with idiot conservatives. I do like this phrase in your screed though: "...Ponzi scheme that is destined to fail." That's exactly right, only you're applying it way too narrowly, the bank run economy is the real Ponzi scheme destined to fail. That's why the economy occasionally stalls out. Keep working that angle and you might get it, eventually.

I've already addressed libertarian's position on the 'bank run economy'. However, that does not change the fact that SS is a Ponzi scheme that, like all Ponzi schemes, is destined to fail. Ponzi schemes only work as long as more and more people contribute money into the program, so that early investors can get paid. The problem with foisting such a plan on an entire country is that the citizens would have to produce increasing numbers of taxpayers over time. That never happens in a society that is advancing in modernity and economic success. Such societies have FEWER offspring, not more. Look to failing, third world nations for families that have lots and lots of children.

However you look at it, SS has failed. It's broke, and the idea of taxing us even more to resurrect a bad idea.

Welfare is me taking care of my sick kid, writ large, to include EVERYONE'S kid.

Now you're spewing Marxist nonsense. There is no Constitutional mandate, nor moral justification, to force some citizens to labor on the behalf of others. That kind of economic slavery must end. If you wish to assist someone else's family, write a check, start a charity or lend a hand. Forcing others to do so, with the threat of incarceration, is immoral.

Further, you must look at the actual results of welfare, which began in earnest in the late 1960s with the so called 'great society', the goal of which was to end poverty. In the decades prior, the rate of poverty was dropping precipitously, with no federal spending on welfare. Since then, after spending trillions of dollars, the decline in poverty ceased and has in fact increased! The fed's attempts to end poverty have actually made the problem worse!!

People with your revulsion for 'welfare' just don't care whether people need help or not. You're not a part of the team, you're a scavenger raiding the garbage bin late in the night. And, besides, this country is already one of the stingiest on the planet by almost every measure.

Bullshit. As I've proven, when charity was a voluntary choice, poverty declined. When the central planners mandated it, poverty increased. Libertarians care deeply about those that are having a tough time. We simply believe VOLUNTARY actions produce superior results than force. And you're wrong about American stinginess. Whatever socialist garbage has influenced you, I strongly suggest you find other sources of information and economic thought. Try Mises, Hayek or Friedman to start.

Before you get on your high horse, no, I don't think much of lazy bastards unwilling to do their part. But I don't count those willing to keep people poor, so that they'll be available to work cheap, as any kind of hero either. They're just as much crooks as the guys in Congress no matter how rich they get.

First, you should understand what it means to be poor in America. Our poorest citizens rank in the 84th percentile of world wealth. That's right, our poor are comparably rich! So much for stingy Americans. Further, no libertarian is "willing to keep people poor". We believe free markets and voluntary choice produce superior wealth for EVERYONE. Just look at America before the Progressive era began 100 years ago when more poor became middle class and more middle class became rich than at any time in history. The central planners were just sure they knew better. 100 years later, we can see just how wrong they were.

If you're truly interested in understanding just how detrimental are the ideas of central planning, more taxes, and entitlement programs, you might consider these works:

The Road to Serfdom: Text and Documents, The Definitive Edition by F. A. Hayek | 9780226320557 | Paperback | Barnes & Noble

Liberalism / Edition 1 by von Mises | 9780865975866 | Paperback | Barnes & Noble

A Monetary History of the United States, 1867-1960 / Edition 1 by Milton Friedman | 9780691003542 | Paperback | Barnes & Noble

End The Fed by Ron Paul | 9780446549172 | Paperback | Barnes & Noble

No, They Can't: Why Government Fails-But Individuals Succeed by John Stossel | 9781451640953 | Paperback | Barnes & Noble