- Joined
- Jul 27, 2014
- Messages
- 17,226
- Reaction score
- 6,895
- Location
- Mountains
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
To the bolded, all taxes meet that definition. I'm certain what really bothers you is what the taken money is used for. Feeding children at school, HELL NO, welfare for Israel, how much do you want. Food stamps for the impoverished, HELL NO, money for the Pentagon, how much do you need. R&D for aids, HELL NO, money to militarize our police forces, how much do you need. Both parties favor big government, big spending, they only differ in where and how.
Everyone participates in living and because the living does not respond to ordinary market forces. Everyone has a need to live at some point in their life and the overwhelming majority of individuals can not afford the actual cost associated with most living. It requires an odd interpretation for someone to try and claim that "being alive" or "a beating heart" is the sole responsibility of the individual when the society also faces tremendous costs when that individual can not afford to live and is necessary to deal with their issue.
Clearly your logic also applies to food, water, living quarters, entertainment, transportation, a wage, retirement, and burial.
Do you want to count how many from this list are regulated to some degree by the Federal Government? Or would you like me to count for you?
I believe the Chief Justice doesn't want the legacy - the Roberts Court shot down Obamacare. He saved it once and he'll do it again, IMHO.
Greetings, Erik. :2wave:
I don't understand why Obama would publically question what cases the Supreme Court should hear in the first place. They don't report to him. Things are getting stranger by the day in DC! :shock:
I think it's totally appropriate. President George W. Bush, for instance, did not hesitate to criticize a 2008 ruling recognizing the rights of prisoners held at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. But I suspect it only bothers you if it's a democrat doing it.
I don't mind helping people with a hand up. I do mind supporting someone that makes a career out of gaming the system. I do mind a govt that spends money had over fist on negative productive programs, contracts or research grants. I don't trust the govt not to squander the hard earned money I am charged for taxes. I agree that politicians on both sides want to increase taxes, regardless of what they say. If they take a dollar out of my pocket then give it to someone that needs it and not to research how many times a mosquito beats it's wing a second or to figure out how to use bumble bees as chemical weapons, or to try to control the weather or create "midnight basketball" programs. All of the aforementioned were actual cases of squandered money with absolutely zero results.
I have an Ex-wife that was a welfare queen. She figured out that she would get a raise every time she popped out another kid. Thank God only the first two of them were mine. She finally was convicted of welfare fraud by claiming that I was not paying child support. I produced all of the receipts and checks that proved she was lying. I still payed more than 20k in debt that she owed to the state for money she received fraudulently. She voted for Obama. Wonder why that is.
I think most people are willing to help out folks that need a hand but I don't think everyone just endorses total trust to the govt to weed out the fraud. It is their job to do that but they fall so far short, as do most govt agencies. Hell, just look at the VA. Talk about a waste of money with less than minimal results. I think some agencies actually promote fraud. I do not think it is a person's right to sit on their butt for their whole life and sponge off the govt.
I agree mostly agree with you but I am a stickler with fraud. When it comes to any program, whether it involves govt contractors, politicians or individuals, if they steal the taxes I paid then they need to go to jail. I just think a lot of people need to go to jail. It isn't "their" money they are wasting. It is MY money, it is OUR money, it isn't THEIR money. We entrust them to safeguard our taxes and most of them think it's a game.
Do you think criticizing a decision has the same quality as allowing a case to be made?
Since who doesn't control the congress? Democrats are working with republicans in that effort. So do you like that, or is that somehow different because you don't give a **** about Medicare anyway?
Does that mean that you question the sense of all presidents that have criticized SCOTUS's? I just don't understand why a president can't do this. He's an American citizen before he's president. I criticize SCOTUS rulings I disagree with. Bush did as president, it just seems so natural and unimportant.
I will never agree that being POTUS is secondary to being a citizen, mainly because the POTUS has a job unlike anyone else in the country, with a bully pulpit that goes with it.When his term of office is over, then he becomes "just a citizen" like everyone else, and we see every day just how much anyone cares about what "used-to-be's" think about anything. :yawn: Plus, the POTUS is supposed to represent We the People, not just those that agree with him, and the SCOTUS has their job to do the same as he does, which means there is going to be a winner AND a loser - that's what they're there to determine! That's my opinion, Monte, and it's not likely to change, so I'll say no more. :rantoff:When was the last time you got on TV and told millions of people what you thought about anything?
You forgot internet, electricity, phone, flat screens, hookers, recreational drugs, hot cars with stupid looking wheels and massive sound systems.
Regulation does not make those items a right.
Who controlled the Congress from 2007-2011? Democrats created Obamacare behind closed doors. show me the Republican bill that took 700 billion from Medicare?
I will never agree that being POTUS is secondary to being a citizen, mainly because the POTUS has a job unlike anyone else in the country, with a bully pulpit that goes with it. When was the last time you got on TV and told millions of people what you thought about anything? When his term of office is over, then he becomes "just a citizen" like everyone else, and we see every day just how much anyone cares about what "used-to-be's" think about anything. :yawn: Plus, the POTUS is supposed to represent We the People, not just those that agree with him, and the SCOTUS has their job to do the same as he does, which means there is going to be a winner AND a loser - that's what they're there to determine! That's my opinion, Monte, and it's not likely to change, so I'll say no more. :rantoff:
Why don't you try paying attention? I said that democrats are working with republicans to do this!
Ok, what does that have to do with the thread topic or the comments made about taxes and their use?
Do you want to count how many from this list are regulated to some degree by the Federal Government? Or would you like me to count for you?
Your logic stated that because you have to have it and not everyone can pay for it, the government must be involved. That isn't regulation.
Stop trying to change the meaning of your rant, own it, and start calling for a set of freebies that everyone should get.
Medicare money IS tax money, and you likely won't be opposing using it to pay for retraining all those Americans that will be loosing their jobs due to that pos TPP. it's the hypocrisy which is relevant.
Strawman. A bit ironic given your profile name and picture.
I said that healthcare does not respond to normal market forces. Everyone needs health care and very few can pay for the full cost and society bears a great deal of burden to compensate for those individuals who still obtain the healthcare, but can not afford the costs, and society also bears a great deal of burden to compensate for those individuals who do not obtain the healthcare. Those are very valid reasons for the need to regulate.
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?