-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
Tax the Rich!
- Thread starter Gipper
- Start date
Werbung:
GenSeneca
Well-Known Member
I shall never be ashamed of citing a bad author if the line is good. - Seneca (5 BC - 65 AD)
TruthSeeker
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2011
- Messages
- 836
BigRob, compared to many other forums, this forum is GREAT. Do you have ANY idea how bad most other forums are, as far as personal attacks and threats and other nonsense?
This forum is a true "breath of fresh air". Be proud of what this forum is, BigRob.
There isn't ONE person in here that I WOULD'NT sit down and have a cup of coffee with. Yes, even PFOS and Stalin!
clarkatticus
Well-Known Member
Therein lies the disagreement, what is redistribution of wealth and what is doing what is "collectively" good for the whole nation. Same arguement they had at the convention in 1779. The defination depends on which forefather you want to quote. The fact is, in 1779, 90% of America was rural as opposed to 90% urban now. We are the largest economy the world has ever seen with the greatest military. We were none of these in 1779. The paradym changes, so do we. I wish there were a time machine to send you guys back to the paradise you seem to think it was, the irony would be transcendant.
A repost ..I thought I would get 100 responses to this one...
The Problem: Gov spending has created a huge amount of debt. This has resulted in a giant invasive repressive Gov with associated loss of personal rights by citizens.
The Gov Solution: Supposedly to cut spending and raise taxes forcing the brunt of the irresponsible conduct on the tax payers... again. But according to the Constitution, Gov debt is not transferable to the citizens. Citizens are not liable for Gov debt, the Gov is liable.
Here is the real solution: The Federal Gov has lots and lots of assets. They have oil lands, timber, and tons of acreage. They own mortgages, and treasuries, and oil reserves and gold reserves. ITS TIME TO LIQUIDATE SOME ASSETS!
Oddly this solution has never been suggested by any politicians. But if you got into debt, you would have to sell off your assets. But the Federal Gov claims to be in debt but they don't want to touch their assets and that is exactly what they should do. It would be painless. Gov could continue its liberal bloat, they could spend like there is no tomorrow and they have plenty of assets to back up every dime of debt. This would put land and assets into the private sector and the economy would grow.
Instead of oil leases which return nothing, sell those oil lands to speculators at auction. Sell Yellowstone to companies that could run it for a profit. Sell the Cape Canaveral space center. Sell the Indian's their own reservations.
They could knock down 4 trillion of debt a year without raising taxes, without cutting their reckless spending. Gov would shrink and overhead would be reduced.
This whole idea that the Gov has a lot of debt is a lot of trash. They come running to the taxpayer when they have plenty of assets to cover all of their reckless years of conduct.
As dumb as I am..I know this won't ever happen..
rergards
doug
The Problem: Gov spending has created a huge amount of debt. This has resulted in a giant invasive repressive Gov with associated loss of personal rights by citizens.
The Gov Solution: Supposedly to cut spending and raise taxes forcing the brunt of the irresponsible conduct on the tax payers... again. But according to the Constitution, Gov debt is not transferable to the citizens. Citizens are not liable for Gov debt, the Gov is liable.
Here is the real solution: The Federal Gov has lots and lots of assets. They have oil lands, timber, and tons of acreage. They own mortgages, and treasuries, and oil reserves and gold reserves. ITS TIME TO LIQUIDATE SOME ASSETS!
Oddly this solution has never been suggested by any politicians. But if you got into debt, you would have to sell off your assets. But the Federal Gov claims to be in debt but they don't want to touch their assets and that is exactly what they should do. It would be painless. Gov could continue its liberal bloat, they could spend like there is no tomorrow and they have plenty of assets to back up every dime of debt. This would put land and assets into the private sector and the economy would grow.
Instead of oil leases which return nothing, sell those oil lands to speculators at auction. Sell Yellowstone to companies that could run it for a profit. Sell the Cape Canaveral space center. Sell the Indian's their own reservations.
They could knock down 4 trillion of debt a year without raising taxes, without cutting their reckless spending. Gov would shrink and overhead would be reduced.
This whole idea that the Gov has a lot of debt is a lot of trash. They come running to the taxpayer when they have plenty of assets to cover all of their reckless years of conduct.
As dumb as I am..I know this won't ever happen..
rergards
doug
GenSeneca
Well-Known Member
Who decides what is "collectively" good?
May I see your source on that?
Which founder is quoted as saying, "It is the moral purpose of government to take from the few to provide for the many!"?
Why is that an important fact?
Why do you think that is important?
Why do you think that is important?
Sounds very Progressive.
I would go... I would make it clear how the phrase, "provide for the general welfare" was interpreted to green light a welfare state that's now drowning in debt and threatening to bankrupt the US government. In fact, I think they'd be quite curious to hear about modern day America while I explain how the constitution has been interpreted, and re-interpreted, to mean various things in various times.
Seeing as 250 years or so after my death you'd be right here complaining about the rigid and unmistakable wording of the Constitution forbidding every Progressive policy you favor... The irony would be transcendent.
clarkatticus
Well-Known Member
They are important facts because they changed the paradym of what our nation is and what it's needs are in a changing world. You sound like that old neighbor yelling "them damn kids always talkin' on their cell phones, when I was young I had to..."
Who decides what is collectively good for the nation and what wealth redistribution? We do, by voting. It goes to the heart of the question, what is good government, how should the power be distributed-what actually is Federalism? The Constitution is vague and the Federalist papers sometimes seem to contradict itself. You, for the most part, agree with Madison and Jefferson with some distinctions. I am squarely on the side of Hamilton , Washington and Adams-with some distinctions. The proponents of the Articles of Confederation feared just what you do now, you might say they were tricked (I would) Since there were no minutes made at the Convention, my source would be the whole of the Federalists Papers, I prefer the Bantam version edited by Garry Wills.
Openmind
Well-Known Member
Gen complained about being dirt poor, and about being forced to participate in "collectivist policies" because the government had the sole legal use of force.
Maybe my family's story will be instructive. My father was drafted to serve in WWII [which any good libertarian will see for the impressive use of government force that it is]. He came back to the Oklahoma panhandle to a series of low-wage, dead-end jobs. Including one job where he was held up and robbed at gunpoint.
He decided to take advantage of the GI Bill, a GOVERNMENT funded program. He went to trade school and got a job in the defense industry. He married my mother, and without any help from anyone, they were able to
build a nice home on a large lot
keep themselves and two kids clothed, fed, sheltered, and entertained
send their kids to school after graduation without taking out a single loan
pursue their own interests, including my father's interest in becoming a pilot and owning a plane, and owning a boat so that they could fish as often as they liked
weather two catastrophic illnesses without going bankrupt, thanks to care from Medicare, the VA, and privately paid Medicare supplemental insurance.
The government's GI Bill expenditure was paid back in short order through the higher income taxes my father paid once he had a decent job.
Their kids-my brother and I- now have good incomes, spouses with good incomes, nice homes, can pursue their hobbies, sent their kids to school, and now a third generation of taxpayers is out in the world.
I can say anything I like short of threatening violence to others. I can pursue my dreams. I can make my own way. No government official is holding a gun to my head.
All countries, all societies, are "collectivist". You have more political and personal FREEDOM AND POWER than average person in the history of this planet has ever had.
If you don't realize this, and you're deeply unhappy in this country, then maybe you're just a misfit and you need to work on yourself.
I do love your style! In clear, no fuss post, you have expressed exactly what government can do for you, and what you can do for your government.
Too many people do not even realize that they are making a living because of the government. That they are keeping their country safe because of the government. That they are able to go to school because of their government, and that about 1/2 of the INSURED people are already covered by some sort of government health care!
And all that without EVER feeling despondent or given up their own personal ambitions, their potential, or their freedom!
Glad to know you, Pepper, I hope you come back and post again soon!
Dr.Who
Well-Known Member
The paradigm may change but what you are talking about are not examples of a paradigm change.
Those changes mentioned are merely changes in circumstances. I believe the libertarian understanding of the founders is more correct than you give them credit for. If people want changes in the fundamental constitutional way we run the country then the solution is to write amendments regardless of whether paradigms have changed or not.
I would add that regardless of population changes I know of no constitutional principle that is obsolete.
Dr.Who
Well-Known Member
We don't need to make that definition because the constitution defines the power of government and limits it. The fed can only do acts that are collectively good for the nation when it has specifically been given that power. Is it collectivistic to draft people and wage a war to protect all collectively? Yes and congress has that power. Is it collectivistic to tax and and give money to those with less? Yes but congress has not been given that power.
ProudLefty
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2011
- Messages
- 585
I would make a few of points.
- A case can be made that those with the most in fact receive the most government services if for no other reason than they have the most to lose.
- A case can be made that the wealthy use their wealth to bend the benefits in their direction. The poor have no need for depreciation allowances for instance.
- A case can be made that the one thing the wealthy need, above all else, is a strong, well educated, healthy, and vibrant middle class or there are no workers and no customers for the wealthy.
- A case can be made that wealth redistribution has already been done - the strong and wealthy have already confiscated the wealth created by the working class. Taxes are just a tool to redress that original wrong.
- A case can be made that wealth does not remain concentrated with the wealthy. The only valid question is: Does the redistribution get done peacefully through taxes or violently through revolution?
In other words, it is not a slam dunk case that taxing the rich is in someway an illegitimate confiscation of their "rightfully stolen" wealth.
ProudLefty
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2011
- Messages
- 585
Yes, exactly! So then, just because someone makes an assertion of opinion as if it is fact does not make it so. One would normally expect a case to be made for a position. "Because it's so" is not a convincer, in my opinion.
Openmind
Well-Known Member
Excellent! Thanks
Werbung:
Mr. Shaman
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2007
- Messages
- 7,829
