American Doom!

reply to post by BingeBob


THAT WAS THE CREEPIEST THING I HAVE EVER SEEN!!!!! be one of us, be one of us!

Solutions:

Corporations to begin to stop outsourcing American Jobs.

Regulate Wall Street

Return the Glass-Steagall act
en.wikipedia.org...

Genuine campaign finance reform

Slowly phase out the power of the Military Industrial Complex by severely cutting over time the defense budget

Return to the constitutional edict THAT ONLY CONGRESS CAN START WARS!

Phase in over time green energy solutions

Raise taxes on the rich to where they were during the Clinton administration

Leave the tax cuts for the lower and middle class where they are

Return to the war on poverty in the US and Internationally

Have a massive investment in the infrastructure; including a national jobs program

Have a real health Care program gearing towards a single-payer or Medicare for all or similar to some European plans that take the profit motive out of Health Care

Decriminalize drugs

Overhaul and streamline the justice system

Emphasizing fighting crime against woman and children

Have a national spotlight on education reform that emphasizes parental input

Have Americans and the media allow for other parties, such as the Libertarian and Green party to be more involved in the national debate

Any other ideas are welcome

Originally posted by inforeal


Leave the tax cuts for the lower and middle class where they are

How can the lower class receive a tax cut when they dont pay any income taxes anyways?

In fact, they get more than was withheld. You cannot give someone a cut when they dont pay it in the first place.

reply to post by BigTimeCheater


The problem with the American people is that they think they are middle class, but in actuality the vast majority of the American people are: LOWER MIDDLE-CLASS.

And many who think they are middle or lower middle class are actually lower class.

That’s anyone who depends on a 9 to 5 job to survive: 20 thousand to 60,000 is lower to lower middle class.

In other words a lot of people who make 30 and 40 grand ARE LOWER CLASS! But don’t know it.

That’s how they keep Americans ignorant, and believing that they aren’t as poor as they really are.

70 thousand to 150 thousand can be called Middle class. Doctors, Engineers, Lawyers, It network engineers, actors, etc

Now the upper class goes into 200 thou and up all the way to the millions a year people the ones the Republicans want to cut taxes for.

reply to post by inforeal


Properly protect the mexican border, deport illegals, severe penalties for employers employing illegals.

reply to post by inforeal


Really?

You really want to come on here and spout tired and nonsensical cliches?

Try coming up with an independent thought, and not what your professor spoon feeds you.

Solution:

1. Force everyone who is against the free market to read the studies pitting free-market ideas against restricted market ideas so that they can find out that in nearly 100% of cases the free market produces the best economic situation every time. Ideas like forcing companies to hire from specific geographies are gross discrimination toward that region in addition to destroying the economy.

2. End government monpolies like the federal reserve's money monopoly that are the root cause of this recession. Campaign financing has nothing to do with it as any voter can look up on OpenSecrets.org that their current politician is a corrupt monster and yet get voted for any way.

3. Phase out all federal laws and federal departments over ten years. That way people no longer have to throw away 1/3 of their money down the toilet and we'll all have 1/3 more money we can help people out with in the correct way, by using charity rather than the force of the law.

4. End criminal activity by the federal, state, and local governments by making all laws apply to everyone equally, meaning government groups will no longer have the right to take other people's property without permission.

5. Reduce the federal government budget to $10 billion per year by 2020, after which the government can figure out how to subsist on a voluntary basis on whatever budget people voluntarily pay them. If there are any major wars in that time frame they can take special-purpose donations.

6. Reduce overseas military bases from about 700 bases to about zero bases.

7. Decriminalize all drugs including crack coc aine as its effective harm to society is actually less than alcohol, the most hard drug there is based on total harm done. This will save thousands of lives each year because the drug wars will stop.

8. Make all taxes voluntary. This way taxes can be as high or low as each individual chooses and they don't have to support immoral wars and destruction or support putting peaceful people in cages. There is no reason to believe people using roads and schools will wish to suddenly stop paying for them and therefore the roads and schools continue to be used and supported (this is super obvious just as if we all got our food from government farms and the farms were then all privatized... we'd all still continue to eat).

9. De-emphasize fighting crime, and emphasize first of all restitution for crime, and secondly rehabilitation. Jail people only when they prove an actual real violent threat toward others.

10. Stop fighting all wars including the war on poverty. Allow people to voluntarily help each other since they'll now have 35% more money since they don't have to pay for government waste. This will give the average person thousands of dollars each year to give to charity.

reply to post by inforeal


Not sure what that has to do with my post, but you still avoided answering my question.

How can there be tax cuts for the lower class, and lower middle class when they dont pay any tax at all?

You cannot give cuts to someone who doesnt pay in the first place.

Now the upper class goes into 200 thou and up all the way to the millions a year people the ones the Republicans want to cut taxes for.

Considering that group pays a very large portion of the taxes, of course they should be the first to realize cuts.

reply to post by inforeal

Problems with your solution:
Corporations will not stop outsourcing jobs to overseas companies as it is neither economically viable and there are way too many regulations for a company to set up shop in the United States, combined with that some products that are produced in another country tends to be lower in cost and most people will purchase them. So here is the problem with your solution, Product A made in the USA costs 10 dollars to buy on the open market and Item be, made in China, costs 5. What do you think the public is going to purchase? Item B. If you tax the product from China, then they will put a tax on goods from the US, starting a trade war, that is a lose/lose situation for everyone around.
Regulating Wall Street is not a solution, rather it starts to become a problem, as no one really wants to risk anything of their own value. Ask yourself this, when it was a partnership that runs a company, who do you think the liability falls on if something goes wrong, as compared to that of a publicly traded company? The main difference is that in a partnership, if something goes wrong, it is the partners that cover the issue, not the stock holders or the general public.
Um, no, that is a very bad idea, the last thing we need is the FED, which is at the core of all of the banking reform act, to have more control over the money that the public has. How about reabsorbing the FED back into the US government and making it a separate branch and accountable to the people for its actions? After all the FED is the only part that answers to no one, not even to congress, think that is correct?
And what would those reforms look like? Need to know, cause for every reform, there is a good 20 lawyers who will study it and find the loop holes. Better make sure it is iron tight and can survive the challenges up to the Supreme Court. Course if it has any means of discrimination where someone could be affected, well sorry that reform law will get struck down.
So, you want to go back to the days before WWII, where our military equipment was so far behind the times, we were lucky that we were able to pull together the technical know how to do the job? No afraid not, R&D requires money, and big money to get the most out of the technology that will keep us ahead of the game.
What War are you referring to? Last time I checked there was no war declared, congress did not make a declaration and approve any sort of war. So that just does not pan out.
Phase in green energy solutions? Nope, not going to happen, not now, cause what will you do, when you yourself have to give up 90% of the products in your home. And please, since you want this green energy, tell us all do you have the 30 to 40 thousand dollars for the problems that happen if one of the products breaks, and then the land fill, talk about pollution as such can not break down so easily and well, lets just say the energy savings green, means more green coming out of your wallet.
Congratulations, you have raised taxes on the rich, oh were sorry, you just caused a spike in unemployment as they decided to close a few more jobs, and guess what, half of the rich decided to move to another country, so there went that tax base, and are you ready to take the majority of the members and in DC to court and ensure they are going to prison for tax fraud and evasion? After all some of the richest people in the world are: Government workers, who are in DC and who happen to be: Democrats.
Lets think about that, those who are at the very bottom pay no taxes, and the rest is in accordance to what they make. That does not pan out.
Have you been following the money of all of these bailouts and stimulus packages, where do you think the money is going to? Ain’t here, going overseas, so we are fighting the war on poverty in Africa?
National Jobs programs? That sounds very similar to the, oh yes, the New Deal, signed into law by FDR, that was very close to controlling the population and socialism. FDR who promised not to get us into World War II, but aggravated the situation and got us into a long war. FDR who started the entitlement programs that are now going broke, that new deal. I would think more accountability and fairer practices in the way that the contract out these jobs would be more in line.
And we are to go the way of Massassachutes, with a budget problem in all states that can barely keep their heads above water? No, that is not the way, how about more like we open up the markets to real competition for the insurance companies, (that are in certain states alone and have a monopoly like grip on certain states) so that way the cost for insurance goes down, every one gets good healthcare and we keep what we have? Works in the states that have that, where even those without insurance gets preminium health care and those who can not afford it do not rely on the federal government for that. Like Texas.
Why not, after all we have nor really looked into doing something effective like drug treatment for those who are hooked on it that helps them out and away from the drugs. No, the only solution the government has tried is imprisonment.
No, the justice system is good and ideal, how about looking and removing antiquated laws, and take a look at what the sentences are. The last thing you mess with is the justice system, tear it down and can you say Sharia anyone?
Really, last time I checked, there were laws on such, wait a minute, that darn social program ate up too much money and there is not enough in the budget to hire good cops, so we will cut that departments budget down to fund the entitlement programs.
Well that is good, but I would say get rid of the Teachers Union and the federal standards, get tough teachers in who are not afraid to fail a student for not doing his homework or misbehaving in the class room, use red ink and bring back spanking and make the punishments really hurt. Put the fear back into the child.
How about the libertarian and green parties actually appeal to the general public and pay the fees to get into those debates, instead of trying to get something for nothing.

reply to post by inforeal

Yeah, like the congressmen who comitt tax fraud and make a between $165,200 to $183,500 a year and till can't balance either their checkbooks or the countries, I do wonder if there is a connection, what do you think?

reply to post by civilchallenger

1. Force everyone who is against the free market to read the studies pitting free-market ideas against restricted market ideas so that they can find out that in nearly 100% of cases the free market produces the best economic situation every time. Ideas like forcing companies to hire from specific geographies are gross discrimination toward that region in addition to destroying the economy.

I think noone is against free market if all sides are respecting human rights and not using people as slaves, working in horrific conditions 12 hours a day for a grain of rice. Because I am sure you, as an apparent expert on free market, know what happens when one side on the market keeps work price artifically low by not respecting workers rights. Others will eventually have to do the same, or face bankruptcy. Do you want all western factories to become another Foxconn in China, or disappear?
If countries dont respect human and workers rights, there should be restrictions and import/export taxes to restore the balance.

3. Phase out all federal laws and federal departments over ten years. That way people no longer have to throw away 1/3 of their money down the toilet and we'll all have 1/3 more money we can help people out with in the correct way, by using charity rather than the force of the law.

People would give some money voluntarily to charity, of course. But would it be enough to pay for all current essential services payed by the government for all? Of course not. Therefore you cannot rely only on the charity, unless you want to significantly increase povetry and bad conditions of the lowest classes, and further divide rich from the poor.

7. Decriminalize all drugs including crack coc aine as its effective harm to society is actually less than alcohol, the most hard drug there is based on total harm done. This will save thousands of lives each year because the drug wars will stop.

Total harm to society NOW, when it is illegal. Do you really think if heroin or crack was legally sold in every bar like alcohol is, the total harm would not skyrocket? Of course it would, definately even higher than alcohol - compare addictive potentials of crack/heroin vs. that of alcohol.
To put it another way - alcohol scored the most in total harm, even if biochemically it shouldnt. Why? Because its legal, and therefore widespread. Other drugs scored much lower, even if they are at least that toxic and far more addictive. Why? Because they are illegal, and therefore not as widespread.

8. Make all taxes voluntary. This way taxes can be as high or low as each individual chooses and they don't have to support immoral wars and destruction or support putting peaceful people in cages. There is no reason to believe people using roads and schools will wish to suddenly stop paying for them and therefore the roads and schools continue to be used and supported (this is super obvious just as if we all got our food from government farms and the farms were then all privatized... we'd all still continue to eat).

So if all basic services like schools, garbage collection, healthcare were on a pay-per-use basis, all poor people would be uneducated and ill, because they would not have access to them? (some of them would get occasional handouts from the charity, but that would not be enough) Behold, society of the future.
And what about government funding for things like basic science and research etc. Government funds most of the basic research and universities now.

I'm not going to say the study can be perfect as patent applications may not be the best measure of innovations but none the less it is a decent measure and I will accept the results.

That is the problem. Patent applications are really BAD measurement of BASIC research, not to mention that many government funded and developed innovations (like internet) are not patented, because they are released into public domain.

10. Stop fighting all wars including the war on poverty. Allow people to voluntarily help each other since they'll now have 35% more money since they don't have to pay for government waste. This will give the average person thousands of dollars each year to give to charity.

And do you really think majority of people would do it? Because I dont. That 35% would have to be paid on private schools, hospitals, protection against crime and all services that government provides now, so real increase which would stem only from the abolition of social system would be much lower. And people would probably keep it.

reply to post by Darkrunner


I am afraid I know no professors, I like Malcom X, am self taught, and by profession am a IT professional.
Why dont you contribute some thoughts to the thread rather than personal insults

reply to post by BigTimeCheater


Youre statements, as usual, are just not true. I have been in the lower class and have payed taxes.

reply to post by sdcigarpig




The criminal justice system in America is GOOD! I dont think so.

Many Black American males are either in jail or on payroll because of the draconian drug laws that they enforce in the black community, and don’t in the white community.

The average trial takes far too long to adjudicate and often plea bargains forestall justice, and either real criminals get off scott free or innocent people go to jail

Corporations will not stop outsourcing.

They will if you make it bad for their business, or give them incentives to stay in America.
But the problem is not economics but greed. And also that the corporations bribe the politicians NOT to make laws protecting the American worker, but to allow greedy corporations to outsource at will to the detriment to the American work force.

I said that the constitution gives the congress the right to declare war not the president. That should be abided by. The last few wars in this country the constitution was bypassed.

Indeed Wall Street needs to be controlled or soon we will have another fake recession.

People at the bottom indeed pay taxes. What are yopu talking about, I am not talking about people making 2000 a year.

What social programs. Clinton because he wanted to look like a Republican did welfare reform. The social programs are just about gone in America.

And for your education notions. I wonder do you know anything about American schools? I doubt it.

I do . . . I have worked there and know for one thing YOU CANT JUST ABOLISH THE TEACHERS UNION. Also know that it isn’t the teachers only but the parents lack of involvement

What makes me laugh is that UNEMPLOYED people likely voted Republican in droves thinking that they were going to run the economy better.

The only thing Republican controlled Congress will do for the unemployed is to deny an extension of unemployment benefits.

American Sheeple have to realize, that it doesn't matter who's in charge, they will still get the same result.

Boehner and other Republicans are already saying they will launch an investigation of the Obama administration. Just what the country doesn't need right now, a side show distraction of so called investigation into false accusations, when the overwhelming majority of Americans want them to focus on nothing but the economy and job creation.

Same Circus, Different Clowns, Resulting in the Same Lunacy !

The Republicans want to, as Fareed Zakariah eloquently put it on Bill Maher last night, have a "magic jar" that lets them cut taxes and cut the deficit, all without cutting Military Spending, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, or Education.

The politicians in the USA need to take a good hard look at the sorts of cuts that just happened in the UK and Ireland, combined with not only letting Bush era tax cuts expire but also possibly increasing either income tax or adding a sales tax.

It's the only way out of this mess. Drastic cut in spending, drastic increase in incoming Tax Receipts.

reply to post by inforeal

For starters, I am an American Citizen. To the contrary or popular belief, some of us did not grow up rich, did not eat well, and ultimately had to work for everything that we got and earned. I did not get welfare or any handouts from the government, oh no, I am not entitled to it. I had to work hard, taking any job I could to make ends meet and I did so. I pay my taxes and ultimately have seen what all is going on in this country from the bottom up.
You make the claim that many black American males are either in jail or on payroll that is enforced in the black community. Well lets take a look at the statistics shall we and see what is fact and what is not. The first thing to look at is the choices that many made. You can not blame society for the choices a person makes. We all known, as it has been pushed since the time of Richard Nixon, that drugs are bad, getting caught with drugs send you to jail, don’t do drugs. It is not societies fault that those who end up in jails chose to either get on them or sell them and end up in jail. That is a personal choice and they consequences are theirs and theirs alone. No one forced them into that life, they choose it, and now they have to pay the price for that choice.
The government, since the time of Vietnam, has known where the drugs are coming into the country, they have known where the sources are and the routs and none of the government, not the Republicans, or your hero’s the Democrats have ever lifted a finger to do anything about the problem or even come up with a viable solution to it. Haven’t you figured it out, they will do nothing about it, cause they need a social issue to distract the public with.
And according to all of the trials that I have seen in the past and present, when the system works, it is a trial by jury and the person is tried on the merits of the case, by the people of that community. Are you saying that every one on a jury is biased against one race or another? Last few times I got called to Jury duty, I saw a good mix of every RACE and age there to sit on a jury. So that does not wash either.
Have you any clue as to how business works, cause I sure would like to hear it. From your arguments and the points I have brought up, you still fail to realize that businesses are in it to make MONEY, and the bottom line is what drives a business. They are not in it for the Charity, as you would have them do. It does not work like that nor can they operate like that.
Obviously you fell for it, hook line and Sinker. Name the Wars, and prove that they were declared by congress. If it was not declared by congress, it is not a war. The last official war was World War II. All others are conflicts and policing actions. So according to you, that it has to be a war to do the right thing?
What do you think Wall Street does? It is where businesses sell shares in their companies, to gain capital. It has no control over the money that the FED prints out or the banking industry. By law, the banking industry is forbidden to get involved in the stock market and Wall Street. And what controls are you proposing to put on, restricting business? That would be the worst mistake, as it would mean that people pull their money out and then take the recession one step closer to a depression. The stock market is what is a driving force in keeping the country growing, do you really want to mess with what is working?
You keep stating about the rich not paying taxes, well guess what, the biggest bunch of tax cheats and frauds are in the federal government and they make over 160K a year, oh yeah and the Democrats voted to give themselves a raise, again this year, while the country suffers.
Let me think, what social programs, where to begin? Social Security, unemployment insurance, Medicare, medicade, the numerous drug programs for those who need assistance, and as you keep brining up about race, the one law that legalizes reverse discrimination: Affirmative Action, a program designed to assist people who are not white get a step up into the work force, and pretty much did not help all of the minorities and discriminated against white people. And if you think that is bad, when I tried to go to college, as my parents were not sending me there, the only way I could get any scholarship or grant is if I was either a woman, handicapped or an African American. Guess what I am not, and if I was, I would be sitting here with a degree from Harvard, all expenses paid. That affects every aspect of life and society today. Well now we bring the point to the teachers and the education system. Tell me have you every worked in a school district or system recently? Well I have, and I can tell you that the parents do not think in terms of getting involved with their child’s education, if they did then the entire scandals of children graduating without being able to read would never had happened. Teachers are asked to teach the students, but if the parents find it objectionable, then it is a controversy. Teachers can punish students who misbehave, like the 4’ elderly nun that was bullied by a jock in class, nor are the parents willing to accept that their child may actually be a problem like the group who got busted for drinking while on a trip and then cried foul. The standards of today are to teach children to take a test, not the basics. Schools keep asking to upgrade on equipment, but what does a teacher really need to teach? Pencil, books, black board and chalk. Computers and modern technology are not needed to teach a child to read, write and do math, the basis of all education.
Now the teachers union, think we can’t do away with it, well I think we can. What is the use of it except to try to dictate to the government what it takes to be a teacher, but does a teacher need to be on the payrolls for years and do nothing, or can’t give up a few concessions cause the state is needing to make cutbacks? 2 points, in New York, there is a teacher, who will retire and make a lot of money, who does nothing, he gets up goes to an office and sits there. He is a teacher, and can not be fired, they tried and would have had to pay millions of dollars, so they decided not to. Why is this teacher sitting in an office there, cause he is accused of molesting children, as there were 6 girls in 5 different years that claimed such and so, after the investigation showed there was evidence to suggest it may have happened, and they tried to fire him, guess what, it was the teachers union that prevented them from letting this guy go, and so now a New York school district pays a man, a good large sum of money to just sit around and do nothing all day long. In New Jersey, when Gov. Christi, asked the teachers union to make a few concessions, take a pay cut till the state got back into being in the black, they said no and then proceeded to slander Gov. Christi and act very unprofessionally towards him and the state officials. That is why the teachers unions need to be done away with, cause without the unions, the teachers would have to be like all other employees, perform or get terminated and someone else could be hired to do their job and just maybe, if there was no union, then just maybe, teachers can actually get paid for the job that they do and not end up with a medium salary like they have now.
So now you have seen where your arguments fail in all aspects. What you are suggesting through them is a form of government that none of us wants: Socialism, where the government is involved in the peoples lives and business.

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by civilchallenger

 

I think noone is against free market if all sides are respecting human rights and not using people as slaves, working in horrific conditions 12 hours a day for a grain of rice. Because I am sure you, as an apparent expert on free market, know what happens when one side on the market keeps work price artifically low by not respecting workers rights. Others will eventually have to do the same, or face bankruptcy. Do you want all western factories to become another Foxconn in China, or disappear?
If countries dont respect human and workers rights, there should be restrictions and import/export taxes to restore the balance.

Companies using slave labor or child labor can and will be boycotted. That is why companies like Wal-Mart take some steps (though arguably not enough) to avoid that. Consumer boycotts themselves often don't make a big dent, but the resulting press and often does make a dent in the companies profit, and their image can be irreparably damaged. The market self-regulates against slavery and child labor.

Keeping prices artificially low for the long-term is the best thing that can happen to an economy. You must have never heard about the magical dock analogy. Imagine there is a magical dock that provides an infinite number of free cars. That is, one ship load of cars gets unloaded at the port and they simply keep coming. Is that infinite supply of free cars going to decrease your quality of life? Of course not. Everyone gets a car for free and that is good. Car-makers will go out of business but they'll find something else to do and be better off for it in the long run. Now instead of free cars lets just say they are really cheap and they come from China who's workers very willingly accept $2 a day because it makes their life twice as good as when they were on the family farm making the equivalent of $1 per day. That is almost but not quite as good because the prices are not kept artificially low enough to be entirely free. The more artificially low a price is from overseas the more wealthy the people purchasing that product become. And if they lose their livelyhood in the process they can always do something else.

If low prices from cheap overseas goods were a problem then it would be the absolute worst thing in the world for China to offer everyone in America free food, shelter, clothing, medical supplies, gasoline, etc. for the rest of their lives. That would be just terrible for our economy if low cost goods from overseas hurt us like you say. But its not true. Lower cost goods from overseas help our economy nearly 100% of the time.

People would give some money voluntarily to charity, of course. But would it be enough to pay for all current essential services payed by the government for all? Of course not. Therefore you cannot rely only on the charity, unless you want to significantly increase povetry and bad conditions of the lowest classes, and further divide rich from the poor.

In 2009 Americans donated about 300 Billion to charity according to the Google search I just did. That alone is enough to provide $6,000 worth of care to 50 million people. I believe that number would easily double or more without government taking away everyone's money. So after that point, everyone in America would get all their basic needs (food, shelter, clothing, basic medical care) and even some advanced medical care provided to them.

Total harm to society NOW, when it is illegal. Do you really think if heroin or crack was legally sold in every bar like alcohol is, the total harm would not skyrocket? Of course it would, definately even higher than alcohol - compare addictive potentials of crack/heroin vs. that of alcohol.
To put it another way - alcohol scored the most in total harm, even if biochemically it shouldnt. Why? Because its legal, and therefore widespread. Other drugs scored much lower, even if they are at least that toxic and far more addictive. Why? Because they are illegal, and therefore not as widespread.

Being illegal makes things more widespread and more in demand. Look at alcohol prohibition during the 20's. Prohibition is what popularizes alcohol, not ending prohibition. I don't have reason to believe heroin or crack coc aine are going to be either more or less widespread after legalization. Any time a government ban on anything is announced you can bet whatever it is gets instant popularity and widespread consumption. Its a tradition around the world for people to ignore both stupid and logical rules and that is true in the US. For example, after texting while driving was banned accidents due to texting increased. Why? People texted lower in their lap so cops couldn't see them doing it. And that was a law that actually made sense. So you can imagine what people think of laws they don't agree with at all.

So if all basic services like schools, garbage collection, healthcare were on a pay-per-use basis, all poor people would be uneducated and ill, because they would not have access to them? (some of them would get occasional handouts from the charity, but that would not be enough) Behold, society of the future.

And what about government funding for things like basic science and research etc. Government funds most of the basic research and universities now.

I can't claim to know exactly which government services would be supported by charity under voluntary taxes but neither can you. Leaning liberal, your guess is low. Leaning conservative, my guess is high. There is only one way to find out what would happen: try and see what happens if you apply the law to everyone equally and therefore send IRS agents to jail if they try to take people's property without permission.

I can't claim to know what the increase in charity would be after an elimination of involuntary taxation. The worst case scenario is they keep all of it, and "only" donate a "selfish" total of $300 billion as with 2009. The best case is they donate something like $1.5 Trillion more money and meet all the needs of the poor in the US. So while we don't know for sure if people would be very charitable if given a chance we do know for sure that stealing is wrong.

You focus too much on fear of the unknown (how generous people will be) when you should focus on what we do know which is that theft is wrong, everyone should be subject to the same set of rules, and human beings just may be generous as a whole and capable of a real civilization.

The way I see it, if people as a whole are not generous, then a fitting "punishment" would be for some of us to suffer the natural consequences. Your options are either:

1. Collectively punish everyone using taxation for their lack of generosity on average, which of course punishes generous people and drains their resources who would spend them better than the government.

2. Collectively "punish" just poor people by allowing them to suffer the natural consequences of the lack of generosity of others.

So its okay for the left to hate the whites with all their so called positive discrimination but the right gets labeled racist and treated as virtual nazis everytime they point out the problems inherent with the left wing agenda

www.atlah.org... this black man will open your eyes

Originally posted by inforeal
reply to post by BigTimeCheater

 

Youre statements, as usual, are just not true. I have been in the lower class and have payed taxes.

Wrong. The lower class pays zero income tax.

You may have it withheld, but you receive all of it, and most likely more (through the EITC) back in the form of your tax refund.

You are either lying, or wrong. I will let you decide which one.

Ever happen to ask yourself why you are in the lower class? Spelling it "payed" could be a reason.