Thomas Jefferson repealed all internal taxes

[Rokerijdude11]

So far, in this one short post, you have exhibited them all.




Care to philosophically defend libertarianism from any charge that I have made? You either embrace the philosophy and the paradox within it, or you don't. If you don't then you prove my point about picking and choosing and further reinforce my assesment of libertarians.

your amusing pal

 

[vyo476]

Man arent you the pillar of pleasentness so far every post ive read of yours you seem to think your so much more intelligent and better than the people responding.At least there are some in this country who accept whats happening and are trying to raise the awareness of others despite people like you



Um your assesment of what Libretarian's are is simply childish, and one dimensional,and frankly WRONG. Nothing like pigeonholing everybody into one demographic
problem being that is how we got racism ....


sorry bud Im a Libretarian and i do not exhibit any of the tendancies you have spewed from your pie hole..dont want to accept persoanal responsibility ......your rich pal ....and so far off the mark its incredulous


Do YOU have nothing better to do than Flit around the internet and spew trash out of your finger tips as i say every post of yours ive read degenerates to the same thing

been a pleasure reading your tripe it has amused me this morning

Do you have anything useful to contribute...? Ah, you don't fit palerider's demographic generalization about Libertarians. Good for you. You've just joined an elite club that includes African Nazis and Christian communists.

I'm not sure what you're saying half the time. Perhaps you'd like to enlighten us as to the ways in which palerider's assessment of Libertarianism are wrong. Perhaps you'd like to enter into debate with Truth-Bringer about some of the finer points of your philosophy which you, Rokerijdude, have yet to even touch on, casting into some doubt whether you are really a Libertarian or just an angry little man who likes to post in forums. Perhaps you don't feel that any of that is necessary and you'd like to continue with your vague, undefined statements that lack credibility and evidence (not to mention grammar).

Please. If you have something constructive to contribute, do so, and do so in a way that we can look at it as constructive. Truth has been more or less carrying the Libertarian flag alone here and if you could actually provide some backup, I'm sure it would be appreciated. As such, though, all you're doing is making the Libertarian argument look worse.

 

[Rokerijdude11]

Do you have anything useful to contribute...? Ah, you don't fit palerider's demographic generalization about Libertarians. Good for you. You've just joined an elite club that includes African Nazis and Christian communists.
so NOW i am a Nazi and a Communist? Superb debate tactics. way to troll for new members ,the team should be PROUD of your percieved accomplishment.

rich
I'm not sure what you're saying half the time. Perhaps you'd like to enlighten us as to the ways in which palerider's assessment of Libertarianism are wrong. Perhaps you'd like to enter into debate with Truth-Bringer about some of the finer points of your philosophy which you, Rokerijdude, have yet to even touch on,

considering I only have 6 posts thats quite a mis-represented statement huh? are you the official backup batter on this one? sure has that feel to me .I have no need to Debate with truth bringer at all I know why shes here .it quite obvious to any thinking individuals.Im a Libreatarian ..does that mean i automatically fall in line with EVERY point in its philosophy? based on that are you a Dem or Pub? do you Blindly automatically fall in line with EVERYTHING your parties philosophy stands for? Honestly? I highly doubt it......


casting into some doubt whether you are really a Libertarian or just an angry little man who likes to post in forums. Perhaps you don't feel that any of that is necessary and you'd like to continue with your vague, undefined statements that lack credibility and evidence (not to mention grammar).


Casting some doubt? what do i really care if YOU of all people believe I am a Libretarian or not? I know what i have voted the last 4 elections.thats all that counts really.I have No need or desire to "prove" anything to you or anyone else....My statements lack credibility? hahahahaha your a funny child.ohhh i see we are again to deal with the "Grammar" police!!! thats always best to throw out when your at a loss for anything else.its the same at all internet sites isnt it? you demonstrate very well how it works..


if your looking for grammar perhaps you should be at a grammatically inclined webpage huh? whatever thats a compliment your just too shallow to see it .Thank You


Please. If you have something constructive to contribute, do so, and do so in a way that we can look at it as constructive. Truth has been more or less carrying the Libertarian flag alone here and if you could actually provide some backup, I'm sure it would be appreciated. As such, though, all you're doing is making the Libertarian argument look worse.

I didnt say anything about the Libretarian party or its principles..........I was commenting on the Rude childish manner in which pale rider was treating a Friend of mine.
And i told him that i felt he has a one dimensional Viewpoint of Liretarians he Has decided that we must all be robotic and accepting of the entire Libretarian philsophy
whic is simply a childish View of how it really works
Im 100% Behind T-B......you really just dont know

 

[vyo476]

I did not say you were a Nazi or a communist. The statement was meant to mean that you have a joined a demographic group that includes people who join groups that go against their interests, ie. Christians who become involved in communism (which is by definition atheistic). I'm sorry if that wasn't clear.

When I suggested you enter into debate with Truth-Bringer I was suggesting that the two of you discuss how your views on Libertarianism are similar or different. I was in no way suggesting that you were a puppet of a stringent philosophy. I was merely thinking that two Libertarians discussing the tenets of your philosophy would enhance how those of us who do not follow it view it. You are correct that I do not blindly follow my party's policies. It would be rather tough to as I consider myself an independent.

If you don't care whether or not people can tell what you stand for, why are you here?

By the laws of the United States of America I have not been a child for more than a year now. As such, at nineteen, those of a more advanced age probably still consider me a child and I myself do consider myself to be a child in some regards. I am also a humorist. I like making people laugh. That said, I'm not sure how either of those two things pertains to your lack of evidential support for your statements.

I don't see how expecting people to at least attempt to use proper grammar in their posts is incorrect in any way. When I commented on your grammar I had already enumerated several of my points and it was really little more than a footnote, which calls into question why you thought I was "at a loss for anything else" to throw at you. Really, it just makes it easier to read your posts if you made an attempt at proper grammar and sentence structure and would mean that we would have an easier time discussing things with you. I'm going to guess, though, that this doesn't matter in the slightest to you, so we can forget it.

This thread is supposed to be about the repeal of taxes during the Jefferson administration. I suggest we all get back to that topic now.

 

[Rokerijdude11]

The Floor is open

 

[palerider]

Im a Libreatarian ..does that mean i automatically fall in line with EVERY point in its philosophy? based on that are you a Dem or Pub? do you Blindly automatically fall in line with EVERYTHING your parties philosophy stands for? Honestly? I highly doubt it......

Do you recognize the difference between a philosophy and a party line? Being a conservative, I hold to conservative principles. If I didn't, then I couldn't honestly call myself a conservative. Being conservative, doesn't mean being a republican, or following the republican party line.

The same can be said for liberals as well. Their philosophy is liberal and if they don't hold with the tenets of the liberal philosophy, they couldn't honestly call themselves liberals.

Libertarians on the other hand have made their philosophy and their political party one in the same. If you are a libertarian that picks and chooses the parts of your philosophy that you like and disregards those that you don't, then you personify one of the flaws commonly found within libertarian acolytes.

Making a political party of a philosophy is just one more example of the shortsightedness of libertarianism.

 

[Rokerijdude11]

in your opinion that is

well thanks for the opinion

 

[palerider]

in your opinion that is

well thanks for the opinion

You believe that it is only my opinion that there is a difference between a political philosophy and a political party line? Are you arguing that there is no difference?

Or are you just trying substitute a "cute" zinger for an intelligent rebuttal to my point?

 

[Truth-Bringer]

I wouldn't say that tariffs are superior to taxes. They have the same effect. Tariffs tax the citizens directly too since tariffs raise the price of the imported goods.

But what you're missing is that you're free NOT TO BUY THE HIGHER PRICED IMPORTED GOODS in favor and buying products made in the good ole U.S. of A.

 

[Truth-Bringer]

There is no truth that is applicable today to be found within Jefferson's mistake. Had he not convinced congress to repeal taxes and institute tarrifs, the US would have become a world power much earlier.

ROTFL. You like the de facto empire we have, don't you? You're definitely a Neocon sympathizer, if not an outright Neocon yourself. One should not crave "world power" - if you look back at history that has led to the ruin of many nations and empires. The de jure republic should be restored to the original intent of the Constitution with the new protections to outlaw slavery and involuntary servitude and extend civil rights to all races and genders.

If the income tax were repealed tomorrow and neutrality declared, we would instantly become the largest tax haven on the planet. We would be flooded with foreign investment.

Actually, jeffersons policies were responsible for an economic setback. A shrinking of the economy does not constitute prosperity.

ROTFL. You are one serious liar, aren't you? There was no economic setback, as has been already stated:

"By 1808 the national debt had been reduced from $80 million to $57 million, even though the Louisiana purchase had added an $11 million liability. By 1806, duties proved so lucrative that Gallatin and Jefferson fretted about what to do with the surplus above that required for debt retirement. Treasury reserves increased from $3 million to $14 million between 1801 and 1808."

http://www.tax.org/Museum/1777-1815.htm

 

[Truth-Bringer]

Care to philosophically defend libertarianism from any charge that I have made?

That's already been done:

https://www.houseofpolitics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=899

 

[Truth-Bringer]

Do you recognize the difference between a philosophy and a party line? Being a conservative, I hold to conservative principles. If I didn't, then I couldn't honestly call myself a conservative.

And yet you admit Bush is not a conservative, and you still voted to place him in power. So it looks like you will readily compromise your alleged "conservative principles" at will.

That's a negative character trait by the way.

What good are your principles if you knowingly empower people who won't uphold them?

 

[palerider]

And yet you admit Bush is not a conservative, and you still voted to place him in power. So it looks like you will readily compromise your alleged "conservative principles" at will.

Is this the best you can do? Are you saying that you never vote for anyone who isn't a libertarian? Do they have to identify themselves as libertarians for you in order for you to decide whether they are better or worse than the one they are running against? Or do you just sit out of any election in which you can't vote for a libertarian? Honestly, I do hope that is the case because it would mean that you don't get to vote very often.

That's a negative character trait by the way.

Insisting that a candidate agree with you on every issue before you support them is the negative character trait truth bringer. One who thinks that way is spoiled and immature, and selfish. It is a clear indication that you must have things exactly your way, or no way.

What good are your principles if you knowingly empower people who won't uphold them?

By supporting bush, I got a supreme court that has tipped back towards conservativism. Abortion is a big issue with me and I was willing to compromize in some areas in order to gain in others. That, my dear, is called maturity and someday you may grow into it. Or not.

 

[palerider]

That's already been done:

https://www.houseofpolitics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=899

That hardly constitutes a defense. If, in your mind, it does, however, it reveals much about how you think.

 

[Rokerijdude11]

You believe that it is only my opinion that there is a difference between a political philosophy and a political party line? Are you arguing that there is no difference?

Or are you just trying substitute a "cute" zinger for an intelligent rebuttal to my point?

thanks for your opinions