So the tax money President used to build the Federal interstate highway system didn't make the U.S. much more properous? The tax money spent on the space programs didn't make the U.S. more prosperous?Wise man, that Winston Churchill - too bad they don't make Churchillian politicians these days.
So the tax money President used to build the Federal interstate highway system didn't make the U.S. much more properous? The tax money spent on the space programs didn't make the U.S. more prosperous?
I think the government can do things to help the nation prosper, but you also have to keep in mind that what the government spent on those things had to first be collected in taxes. So in a way, prosperity comes first. After all, I don't think anyone believes that you can take a Third World nation and make it prosperous through taxation.So the tax money President used to build the Federal interstate highway system didn't make the U.S. much more properous? The tax money spent on the space programs didn't make the U.S. more prosperous?
That's not true at all. It might suprise you that one of our most liberal Senators Bernie Sanders wants to spend money to update our infrastructure, the problem though is that it would create jobs and the GOP is dead set against it. It took JFK to get the space program going, which if you think about it, the result have been millions of jobs.Seriously? That's your angle here? There isn't a conservative around, including Churchill, who's against taxation used to build and maintain infrastructure and on research and development. That's not, however, what liberals have in mind when they talk of raising taxes. With liberals, it's all wealth redistribution and making life easier for the poor and lazy.
Consider the following quote from Winston Churchill:
"We contend that for a nation to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle."
Yes
No
Other
That's not true at all. It might suprise you that one of our most liberal Senators Bernie Sanders wants to spend money to update our infrastructure, the problem though is that it would create jobs and the GOP is dead set against it. It took JFK to get the space program going, which if you think about it, the result have been millions of jobs.
So the tax money President used to build the Federal interstate highway system didn't make the U.S. much more properous? The tax money spent on the space programs didn't make the U.S. more prosperous?
The Logical Fallacies: False DilemmaFalse Dilemma
Definition:
A limited number of options (usually two) is given, while in reality there are more options. A false dilemma is an illegitimate use of the "or" operator.
Putting issues or opinions into "black or white" terms is a common instance of this fallacy.
Good for Bernie Sanders - now, what part of the bloated federal budget does the good Senator want to reduce or displace in order to up the capital improvements he wants to promote?
As for JFK, I would agree - he was instrumental, as was the military. JFK was hardly your typical liberal - in fact, he supported tax cuts along the way. And you fail to note that it was Obama, another liberal, who has basically shuttered the space program - he'd rather spend billions of windmills and solar panels. So much for that argument.
This shell game dates to the compromise in 2011 that was supposed to force lawmakers to negotiate deficit reduction measures by threatening them with draconian across-the-board cuts in military and nonmilitary programs. The cuts were never supposed to take effect, especially in military programs; it was assumed that members of Congress would be forced to negotiate smarter deficit reductions. They never did, so in 2013 a sequester went into effect, with cuts that have taken a toll on programs that assist the most vulnerable Americans, including the elderly, the disabled and impoverished families with children.
The Pentagon says it has been hurt by the sequester, too. But military hawks from both parties did not want to actually cut military spending. And Republicans did not want to invest in domestic programs or consider new taxes to cover costs, so the taxpayers were left with a charade.
They do. They just can't get elected because they don't tell the masses what they want to hear.Wise man, that Winston Churchill - too bad they don't make Churchillian politicians these days.
You cannot tax a nation into prosperity, but neither can you 'not tax' a nation into prosperity. Wealth distribution does not work, and the human species is too selfish to do things voluntarily on a large enough scale. Unfortunately, we seem incapable of finding a happy medium.Consider the following quote from Winston Churchill:
"We contend that for a nation to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle."
Yes
No
Other
I think the space program, while way cool, is questionable.So the tax money President used to build the Federal interstate highway system didn't make the U.S. much more properous? The tax money spent on the space programs didn't make the U.S. more prosperous?
Good for Bernie Sanders - now, what part of the bloated federal budget does the good Senator want to reduce or displace in order to up the capital improvements he wants to promote?...
Consider the following quote from Winston Churchill:
"We contend that for a nation to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle."
Yes
No
Other
Seriously? That's your angle here? There isn't a conservative around, including Churchill, who's against taxation used to build and maintain infrastructure and on research and development. That's not, however, what liberals have in mind when they talk of raising taxes. With liberals, it's all wealth redistribution and making life easier for the poor and lazy.
I think the space program, while way cool, is questionable.
The Interstate Highway System, however, is probably the biggest "bang for the buck" public improvement in the history of mankind.
The space program spun off lots of technology that is now in the public domain, teflon and microwaves come to mind. There is much more and modern life would be much different without space program technologies.
Fair point. Our benefit has been from the advances in technology, not so much from much of anything in space itself... though some of the knowledge we have gained is certainly cool.
He would if he could cut the bloated military budget, but he would borrow the money if he was unable to cut elsewhere.Good for Bernie Sanders - now, what part of the bloated federal budget does the good Senator want to reduce or displace in order to up the capital improvements he wants to promote?
JFK proposal was more a shifting the burdon rather than a tax cut. It wasn't a supply side cut, it was a demand side cut. JFK supported Social Security and proposed Medicare which LBJ implemented. JFK also wanted Civil Rights legislation to include public accomodations.As for JFK, I would agree - he was instrumental, as was the military. JFK was hardly your typical liberal - in fact, he supported tax cuts along the way.
And you fail to note that it was Obama, another liberal, who has basically shuttered the space program - he'd rather spend billions of windmills and solar panels. So much for that argument.
Military spending. The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : Sen. Bernie Sanders Exposes Bloated Military and Intelligence Spending
Regardless, a monetarily sovereign nation doesn't have to cut spending in one area to increase spending in another. The new dollars created for infrastructure are backed by the value of the infrastructure over time. And for every worker we put to work improving our infrastructure, there is one less person on unemployment/welfare or prison, so the cost is fairly negligible.
Do you really believe that the US or Canada would be a richer country if our governments didn't create infrastructure or educate our workforce population?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?