Selfish ideology aside...

[Jurginvoncelle]

When the poor go to emergency rooms; then, as of current; we collectively ALL pay for them anyway. (Is that Socialized, or Communistic?)

So put away that argument that “I shouldn’t have to pay for anyone else” You already do. You can pay more, or you can pay less, but you will pay.

 

[California Girl]

When the poor go to emergency rooms; then, as of current; we collectively ALL pay for them anyway. (Is that Socialized, or Communistic?)

So put away that argument that “I shouldn’t have to pay for anyone else” You already do. You can pay more, or you can pay less, but you will pay.

True. But no government has the right to force anyone to buy a product. End of debate.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

When the poor go to emergency rooms; then, as of current; we collectively ALL pay for them anyway. (Is that Socialized, or Communistic?)

So put away that argument that “I shouldn’t have to pay for anyone else” You already do. You can pay more, or you can pay less, but you will pay.

True. But no government has the right to force anyone to buy a product. End of debate.

So you oppose all taxation, yes?

 

[California Girl]

When the poor go to emergency rooms; then, as of current; we collectively ALL pay for them anyway. (Is that Socialized, or Communistic?)

So put away that argument that “I shouldn’t have to pay for anyone else” You already do. You can pay more, or you can pay less, but you will pay.

True. But no government has the right to force anyone to buy a product. End of debate.

So you oppose all taxation, yes?

No, taxes are constitutional.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

True. But no government has the right to force anyone to buy a product. End of debate.

So you oppose all taxation, yes?

No, taxes are constitutional.

Interesting...

So 'no government has the right to force anyone to buy a product. End of debate'- unless they add it to the Constitution?

Then you're not really standing on any principles at all, are you? It's purely a procedural objection.

 

[boedicca]

Taxes are not products or services. They are not the government mandating us to give money to a corporation to purchase a product or a services. The Cronyism and Moral Hazard of the government forcing individuals to funnel their private resources to select companies is far beyond collecting taxes for the proper functions of government (i.e., national defense, the court system - the things necessary to ensure our Constitutionally protected rights).

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Taxes are not products or services. They are not the government mandating us to give money to a corporation to purchase a product or a services.

No? If you don't want to pay for Blackwater's contract or a new bridge in Alaska or some piece of pork, and you don't pay taxes because you shouldn't be forced to buy Blackwater's services or that bridge, what happens?

The Fed doesn't have money. It makes you buy what it wants by making you pay taxes to pay for it. Not to mention the whole 'you are the government' concept.

The Cronyism and Moral Hazard of the government forcing individuals to funnel their private resources to select companies is far beyond collecting taxes for the proper functions of government (i.e., national defense, the court system - the things necessary to ensure our Constitutionally protected rights).

Like no-bid contracts and thousand-dollar toilet seats that you either pay for or get go to prison for not paying your taxes?

The only difference is the procedure.

 

[California Girl]

Taxes are not products or services. They are not the government mandating us to give money to a corporation to purchase a product or a services. The Cronyism and Moral Hazard of the government forcing individuals to funnel their private resources to select companies is far beyond collecting taxes for the proper functions of government (i.e., national defense, the court system - the things necessary to ensure our Constitutionally protected rights).

Thanks for saving me the bother of explaining the glaringly obvious to the terminally stupid.

 

[boedicca]

Taxes are not products or services. They are not the government mandating us to give money to a corporation to purchase a product or a services.

No? If you don't want to pay for Blackwater's contract or a new bridge in Alaska or some piece of pork, and you don't pay taxes because you shouldn't be forced to buy Blackwater's services or that bridge, what happens?

The Fed doesn't have money. It makes you buy what it wants by making you pay taxes to pay for it. Not to mention the whole 'you are the government' concept.

The Cronyism and Moral Hazard of the government forcing individuals to funnel their private resources to select companies is far beyond collecting taxes for the proper functions of government (i.e., national defense, the court system - the things necessary to ensure our Constitutionally protected rights).

Like no-bid contracts and thousand-dollar toilet seats that you either pay for or get go to prison for not paying your taxes?

The only difference is the procedure.

I believe I said Proper Functions of Government.

You won't find me defending Cronyism in any form. Your attacks on Blackwater type no bids and Alaskan bridge style earmarks while at the same time using them as a pretext for Even More Abuses is pretty typical of Progressive Politics.

 

[Jurginvoncelle]

Taxes are not products or services. They are not the government mandating us to give money to a corporation to purchase a product or a services.

No? If you don't want to pay for Blackwater's contract or a new bridge in Alaska or some piece of pork, and you don't pay taxes because you shouldn't be forced to buy Blackwater's services or that bridge, what happens?

The Fed doesn't have money. It makes you buy what it wants by making you pay taxes to pay for it. Not to mention the whole 'you are the government' concept.

The Cronyism and Moral Hazard of the government forcing individuals to funnel their private resources to select companies is far beyond collecting taxes for the proper functions of government (i.e., national defense, the court system - the things necessary to ensure our Constitutionally protected rights).

Like no-bid contracts and thousand-dollar toilet seats that you either pay for or get go to prison for not paying your taxes?

The only difference is the procedure.

I believe I said Proper Functions of Government.

You won't find me defending Cronyism in any form. Your attacks on Blackwater type no bids and Alaskan bridge style earmarks while at the same time using them as a pretext for Even More Abuses is pretty typical of Progressive Politics.

So taxation is ok as long as the powers that be spend them correctly?

 

[boedicca]

So taxation is ok as long as the powers that be spend them correctly?

Unless we want to live in absolute anarchy, we have to have some way of paying for the proper and limited functions of government. Taxes are one way; fee for services could be another.

The bigger issue is: what is the proper function of government and how much does it cost. This then begs the questions of how to pay for it and how to ensure proper accountability.

 

[Jurginvoncelle]

Taxes are not products or services. They are not the government mandating us to give money to a corporation to purchase a product or a services. The Cronyism and Moral Hazard of the government forcing individuals to funnel their private resources to select companies is far beyond collecting taxes for the proper functions of government (i.e., national defense, the court system - the things necessary to ensure our Constitutionally protected rights).

Like free air waves for television communication? Now you have to buy cable or satellite?

 

[boedicca]

Like free air waves for television communication? Now you have to buy cable or satellite?

Why is providing entertainment and communication services a proper service of government?

The more you expect the government to provide the goods and services you use as an individual, the more you make yourself a slave-ward of the state.

Personally, I'd rather follow a personal PayAsIGo philosophy.

 

[Jurginvoncelle]

Like free air waves for television communication? Now you have to buy cable or satellite?

Why is providing entertainment and communication services a proper service of government?

The more you expect the government to provide the goods and services you use as an individual, the more you make yourself a slave-ward of the state.

Personally, I'd rather follow a personal PayAsIGo philosophy.

The federal government made free wave broadcasts on open air illegal.
You have to buy television service, because of federal regulation. Although fed’s didn’t make their own TV stations, rather this is provided thru free market.

Congress has mandated that after February 17, 2009, television stations across the country must transmit only in digital signals, and may no longer transmit analog signals. After that date, consumers who rely on antennas (including outside antennas and "rabbit ears") to receive broadcast signals on TV sets having only analog tuners will need to obtain separate digital-to-analog set-top converter boxes to watch over-the-air TV.

No antennas and the government will leave you no choice but to buy from one company or another. The new transmission is digital.

Now I don't care if you watch NEWS or cartoons, the FCC is relevant, but you miss my point altogether. This is the same mandate as forcing of insurance on the masses. Paying for something they mandate. Or is it?

 

[mudwhistle]

So you oppose all taxation, yes?

No, taxes are constitutional.

Interesting...

So 'no government has the right to force anyone to buy a product. End of debate'- unless they add it to the Constitution?

Then you're not really standing on any principles at all, are you? It's purely a procedural objection.

No shit. If they add into the constitution that everyone must have green hair to match the green movement I imagine it will be constitutional.

But it isn't in the constitution so what's your point?

 

[mudwhistle]

Like free air waves for television communication? Now you have to buy cable or satellite?

Why is providing entertainment and communication services a proper service of government?

The more you expect the government to provide the goods and services you use as an individual, the more you make yourself a slave-ward of the state.

Personally, I'd rather follow a personal PayAsIGo philosophy.

This is especially true today.

If you take money from Obama he's gonna want you to grab your ankles.

 

[Jurginvoncelle]

So taxation is ok as long as the powers that be spend them correctly?

The bigger issue is: what is the proper function of government and how much does it cost. This then begs the questions of how to pay for it and how to ensure proper accountability.

The proper function of government?
Somewhere between oppression, and obliviousness.
Insure accountability? HA! See above!
If we could do that none of us would even be here talking.
We don’t have it right yet, and been at it for over 200 years.
We probably won’t have any epiphanies here today.

 

[amrchaos]

This belongs in politics


Either they force you to buy he services from a corporation or use taxation and grant the money to a corporation for their services, you can be forced to buy a good by way of government actions and laws.

The only problem is the method employed.

 

[slackjawed]

When the poor go to emergency rooms; then, as of current; we collectively ALL pay for them anyway. (Is that Socialized, or Communistic?)

So put away that argument that “I shouldn’t have to pay for anyone else” You already do. You can pay more, or you can pay less, but you will pay.

When people open a credit card account and default on it, we all collectively pay for it in the form of higher interest rates, ect.. Following your line of reasoning here the government should take over the credit card industry, force everyone to get credit cards, and pay the credit card bills by collecting taxes to do so. Those that refuse should be fined, pay higher taxes, or be imprisoned.

How about we just allow the hospitals and credit card companies to follow the existing laws on debt collection?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Taxes are not products or services. They are not the government mandating us to give money to a corporation to purchase a product or a services.

No? If you don't want to pay for Blackwater's contract or a new bridge in Alaska or some piece of pork, and you don't pay taxes because you shouldn't be forced to buy Blackwater's services or that bridge, what happens?

The Fed doesn't have money. It makes you buy what it wants by making you pay taxes to pay for it. Not to mention the whole 'you are the government' concept.

The Cronyism and Moral Hazard of the government forcing individuals to funnel their private resources to select companies is far beyond collecting taxes for the proper functions of government (i.e., national defense, the court system - the things necessary to ensure our Constitutionally protected rights).

Like no-bid contracts and thousand-dollar toilet seats that you either pay for or get go to prison for not paying your taxes?

The only difference is the procedure.

I believe I said Proper Functions of Government.

You won't find me defending Cronyism in any form. Your attacks on Blackwater type no bids and Alaskan bridge style earmarks while at the same time using them as a pretext for Even More Abuses is pretty typical of Progressive Politics.

What the blazes are you talking about?