[BartSimpson]

herbie herbie:

And change the name to United States of Assholes while you do that.
Cut Grampa's pension. Let people starve on the streets. Give them a Constitutional right to own guns and find out like the Czar did what happens.
Or pay some goddam taxes. If any country REALLY NEEDS TO HAVE GST, it's the US. Then everyone will get dinged.

You and Brenda have an acute aversion to reading before typing a bunch of verbal diarrhea, don't you?

I'm not proposing to cut Grampa's pension. I said nothing about his pension. In the matter of Supplemental Social Security I said that I want it to be reserved to only the workers who pay into it - the same as the liberal Democrats in the FDR Administration designed it to be. Right now Social Security is funded by payroll taxes and it's being bankrupted to provide welfare to people who have never paid a dime into it and that is NOT what it was supposed to do.

I'm not proposing to let people starve on the streets. But if we don't stop borrowing money then we're going to go broke when debt service payments eventually make it mathematically impossible to continue funding social programs. At which point people WILL be starving in the streets.

Americans reserve the right to have a revolution and if you don't like that then you can go f*ck the hell off. That's what our 2nd Amendment is about at it's core. And you picked a piss poor example with the Czar because if the Czar had imposed a ban on guns like you seem to want in the USA then the Bolsheviks would never have been able to have their revolution.

Pay taxes? How about you PAY ATTENTION because that's exactly what I proposed.

The USA does not need a GST because if we did have one right now then all of that money would be squandered, too. Our problem is not a revenue problem. We've now managed to end up with the highest taxes in the G20 and we're spending about twice what we take in. We've got a SPENDING PROBLEM and all the taxes in the world are not going to fix that.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

So does anyone still think the Tea Party is crazy for wanting to end the government's spending spree?

Never did. I always thought they didn't go far enough though.

We did that dance in Alberta in the 1990s. It sucked. We cut government spending, then everyone in government took a 5% pay cut.

BOOM!!! Right there. Now THAT'S showing a committment. Cuts to spending and services are easier to stomache when you see that the ones making the cuts are sharing the "pain".

[Proculation]

Brenda Brenda:

Proculation Proculation:

Why ?

I certainly not 'profit' from government as I pay much more than I receive while I have to put money aside for my 'old days' since there won't be any left. So I pay for myself and for the others who made bad choices. And I am obligated by law to do that.

Well, maybe you want to maintain your own little road (and the road I drive on while you are at it, in case you come visit), pay the doctors you are going to need one day already so they will be there when you need them, pay for private education for your kids because no one ever paid for public schools. Oh wait, you don't have kids? Well, MINE will be the ones that wipe your ass when you can't do it yourself anymore, they are the ones that will drive the bus because you are not allowed to drive anymore, they are the ones that will maintain your house for the elderly.

I think you represent exactly the ideology that broke us. You expect others to pay for your needs and you seem to expect that it's the right ideology and that should apply to me also.

I don't expect others to pay for my needs. Yes I will pay for the school of my children, while I will still pay for yours. Yes I'm putting money aside for my old days, while I will also pay for yours.

What will happen to you if the productive ones, the ones who pay for your needs, decide not to pay anymore ? They can't. They will go to jail. Violence of the state: what a nice ideology you have !

[Psudo]

In Brenda's defense, what she's talking about is social coming-together, closer to teamwork than to universal slavery to others' needs. Her point is not "government should force you" so much as "you should be willing."

Admittedly, there's a blurry line between the two and government is often power-hungry enough to forget the distinction, but she's talking about what citizens do rather than what government does. There is a certain level of concession to authority inherent to being a citizen. It shouldn't be overdone, but it shouldn't be ignored either.

[Brenda]

Psudo Psudo:

In Brenda's defense, what she's talking about is social coming-together, closer to teamwork than to universal slavery to others' needs. Her point is not "government should force you" so much as "you should be willing."

Admittedly, there's a blurry line between the two and government is often power-hungry enough to forget the distinction, but she's talking about what citizens do rather than what government does. There is a certain level of concession to authority inherent to being a citizen. It shouldn't be overdone, but it shouldn't be ignored either.

Thank you.
It is pretty simple. There is a reason why big companies can offer their products cheaper than mom&pop stores. Because they buy in bulk.

But hey, if Proc rather buys one item at a time, instead of in bulk, whatever.

[andyt]

Brenda needs no defense. She represents exactly what built us, not what broke us. People co-operating and pulling together. We beat out the Neanderthals that way, and continue to advance because of it. And in a democracy, the government is us - or should be. If we give away our votes to the power brokers, well shame on us. Procs delusion about the few productive ones paying for the rest of us is bullshit. We're all productive, we all help to make up this country and further it's goals. Very few people are just sitting around and taking in money, and of those the worst are the money people who just make money off money without building anything. The ones that 'broke' is, or are the bankers and wall street boys. How much money dissappeard into that maw?

[Psudo]

Brenda Brenda:

There is a reason why big companies can offer their products cheaper than mom&pop stores. Because they buy in bulk.

Buy what? By that I mean, what should be bought in bulk for everyone, what should be an opt-in program for whoever wants it, what should be bought individually for individual needs, and what should not be bought at all? Government should sometimes make those decisions for us, but not always.

Which times are which? Should military defense be purchased for everyone by government? Health care? Education? Electricity? Transportation? Housing? Food? I donno. I have opinions (yes, sometimes, usually, no, no, no, no), but I don't have a standard by which to decide. It shouldn't be everything or nothing, but I can't be any more specific.

andyt andyt:

People co-operating and pulling together. We beat out the Neanderthals that way

Or did our internal competition empower us faster than their cooperation did them? Or did we interbreed with them? You don't know, because humanity doesn't know. Don't use open scientific questions as evidence.

andyt andyt:

Procs delusion about the few productive ones paying for the rest of us is bullshit.

The top 10% of wage earners in the USA pay about 70% of the taxes, and the top half of tax returns cover 97%. That seems like the productive paying for everyone's services to me.

I think progressive taxation is good and appropriate, but how steep is fair? I'm pretty content with the current tax rates, but you seem to think the rich (collectively) aren't paying their fair share. How much is their fair share?

andyt andyt:

the worst are the money people who just make money off money without building anything

"Making money off money" means giving other people the money to try out their production plans. "Making money off money" promotes productivity by making the attempt possible. I don't see what's so terrible about that.

Maybe you need an example. Say I want to write a computer game (because I do). There are a few ways I can go about it. 1) I can work on it in my spare time for years and sell it myself, all while working a crappy day job to pay for food and shelter. 2) I can save my crappy day-job income for years or decades and hire people to help me do it in a couple months, or 3) I can take investment money now, hire people now, and have it done in months. If I started now, 1) would be done by about 2015, 2) by about 2025, and 3) by about 2012. Which plan is the most productive? Now tell me, are investors productive?