Taxation isn't confiscating money at the point of a gun. What it is is citizen's taking out a contract with the government to give them money in order for them to pay for services.I think you kind of missed the point I was making. Ray objects to paying taxes in order to make education affordable for anybody. My point is that there are plenty of examples of paying taxes for certain services that don't necessarily benefit everybody on an equal bases. Something I don't think you disagree with reading through your post.Not everybody benefits equally on roads. Nobody benefits from having an army if there's no war. Not everybody benefits equally from having a fire department. Some people never experience a fire or are in need of a paramedic. An interstate between Oregon and California does nothing for someone living in the Boondocks in Alabama. You accept that having those things are necessary for the benefit of society as a whole or an insurance policy if necessary. But for some reason giving everybody a chance to get a higher education is unacceptable because you might not personally benefit.Having an army or a fire department or roads for that matter could be considered an investment by your logic. Are you against paying taxes for that?If I work to earn a wage, a wage that allows you tooHow do you make that connection. Wages rose under Obama despite more regulation. We have way more regulations and way higher taxes and people here are capable of taking better care of themselves and their family. I'm not trying to do some gotcha thing but I'd like to know what objective fact you're aware of that leads you to conclude that lower taxes and regulations lead to being better able to take care of yourself?Because we're being terribly fiscally irresponsible. This comes at a cost.Is that supposed to be some kind of answer?Great! Please explain what I mean by "the most active and aggressive Fed in the history of the country". And please break it down to the actions of the central Fed and the NY Fed over the last three years, AND the long term implications of those actions.
Go ahead. Feel free to get as specific as you'd like.
Oh, and then tell us how long we can engage in massive deficit spending increases.
Thanks in advance.
Meaning, you've got NOTHING!
If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull s***!
'
I already asked you to provide details as to why you think the Biden/Harris plan will be successul and how the fed will change their monetary policy under Biden/Harris. Instead of answering, you filabuster.
So his big reason why people doing better financially doesn't matter is the fed, and the fed will do the exact same thing with Harris. Plus, everyone's gains will be removed, and spending will balloon even higher. Mac, why are you not rooting for people to win in any fashion?
It's sad that I even have to say this.
You can see that lower taxes and regulations give people a better chance to take care of themselves? Despite what the fed is doing, I would have to think common sense practices would still allow wages to rise. Are you saying nothing Trump does is good for the country economically because of what the fed is doing? If nothing matters because of the fed, people have pointed out that the fed behavior will likey be the same under a democrat administration.
Note he said taking care of yourself, not being taken care of by the government. Europe has a larger welfare state than the US. Ironically, the US citizens give MUCH more to charity than those in Europe, who rely on government redistribution of wealth. We are much more in control of our personal welfare than those in Europe and I personally like that because I am willing to take on the personal responsibility and the risk that allows me to move up( and down) the economic ladder much more freely than in Europe.
If I work and make a wage. A wage that allows me to pay taxes and buy goods how am I letting the government take care of me? It's a disconnect I feel often occurs when talking to conservatives. For some reason services payed for by taxes are considered "given". They are not I paid for them.How do you make that connection. Wages rose under Obama despite more regulation. We have way more regulations and way higher taxes and people here are capable of taking better care of themselves and their family. I'm not trying to do some gotcha thing but I'd like to know what objective fact you're aware of that leads you to conclude that lower taxes and regulations lead to being better able to take care of yourself?Because we're being terribly fiscally irresponsible. This comes at a cost.Is that supposed to be some kind of answer?Great! Please explain what I mean by "the most active and aggressive Fed in the history of the country". And please break it down to the actions of the central Fed and the NY Fed over the last three years, AND the long term implications of those actions.
Go ahead. Feel free to get as specific as you'd like.
Oh, and then tell us how long we can engage in massive deficit spending increases.
Thanks in advance.
Meaning, you've got NOTHING!
If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull s***!
'
I already asked you to provide details as to why you think the Biden/Harris plan will be successul and how the fed will change their monetary policy under Biden/Harris. Instead of answering, you filabuster.
So his big reason why people doing better financially doesn't matter is the fed, and the fed will do the exact same thing with Harris. Plus, everyone's gains will be removed, and spending will balloon even higher. Mac, why are you not rooting for people to win in any fashion?
It's sad that I even have to say this.
You can see that lower taxes and regulations give people a better chance to take care of themselves? Despite what the fed is doing, I would have to think common sense practices would still allow wages to rise. Are you saying nothing Trump does is good for the country economically because of what the fed is doing? If nothing matters because of the fed, people have pointed out that the fed behavior will likey be the same under a democrat administration.
Note he said taking care of yourself, not being taken care of by the government. Europe has a larger welfare state than the US. Ironically, the US citizens give MUCH more to charity than those in Europe, who rely on government redistribution of wealth. We are much more in control of our personal welfare than those in Europe and I personally like that because I am willing to take on the personal responsibility and the risk that allows me to move up( and down) the economic ladder much more freely than in Europe.
As to social mobility. The whole concept of student debt is alien to people living here. Who do you think is more mobile in society. A person living in a country that allows everyone to have a higher education without accruing debt regardless of who you parents are? Or a person for whom the best universities are unaffordable unless they themselves are exceptional enough to qualify for a sholarship. And other higher education carries considerable financial burdens?
Higher education is an investment just like the stock market or real estate. People who get a higher education on average will earn more money and be out of work less often than others who are not college educated.
Investments should not be funded by the taxpayers. I can't see spending my working life paying taxes so that somebody can go to school to be a lawyer, and then after they become a lawyer and I need their help, charge me 200 bucks an hour for that help.
Not really because everybody benefits equally from those things. A strong military is needed for a world power. It protects our freedoms as well as yours. A fire department usually includes paramedics in case of a medical emergency, and of course a major fire we individuals would not be capable of battling. If one doesn't drive or use the roads we have, their supplies, mail and buses or cabs use those roads to transport them where they need to go.
Advanced education only benefits individuals, not everybody. I don't care if you get a job emptying garbage or become an accountant. It's not an advantage or disadvantage either way for me. However you will make a better living, have a less physical job by becoming an accountant, so only you benefit.
"Not everybody benefits equally on roads."
Equally? An immaterial concept as applied.
"Nobody benefits from having an army if there's no war"
They absolutely do, Militaries are not simply for fighting. They are just as valuable when serving as a deterrent to the fighting, in fact I would say more.
"Not everybody benefits equally from having a fire department"
This obsession with equality as you define it renders your arguments useless as well as biased. Again in this case it is immaterial. In fact since the discussion later on evolves to Insurance every one of these services/entities/objects are just that, forms of insurance (as you said) provided by not the Gov, but by the people who pay the taxes. Governments do not make money, they take it.
"An interstate between Oregon and California does nothing for someone living in the Boondocks in Alabama"
Again, immaterial. People in their respective states pay for those interstates and when the Feds get involved they do so in every state.
"But for some reason giving everybody a chance to get a higher education is unacceptable because you might not personally benefit."
Everybody does have that chance most simply choose not to.
forkup DustyInfinity
Well done, both of you. Best' most civil discussion here I've seen.
Government should never confiscate money at the point of a gun and redistribute it. There's a term for that. Armed robbery