Official Slogan Of Government
Official Slogan Of Government
"It may not be working, but that doesn’t mean you should just give up." - Sheriff Gene Ramsey
Republicans in Idaho Say It's Time to Legalize Marijuana
http://reason.com/blog/2013/01/14/repub ... ime-to-leg
Republicans in Idaho Say It's Time to Legalize Marijuana
http://reason.com/blog/2013/01/14/repub ... ime-to-leg
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Re: Official Slogan Of Government
MSimon wrote:"It may not be working, but that doesn’t mean you should just give up." - Sheriff Gene Ramsey
Republicans in Idaho Say It's Time to Legalize Marijuana
http://reason.com/blog/2013/01/14/repub ... ime-to-leg
Yeah, well Republicans thought the 24th amendment was a good idea too. That decision is what is currently killing us. George HW Bush thought making a tax-increase deal with Democrats was a good idea. Cost him the Presidency and gave us the Disasters caused by Clinton.
We see how well both ideas have worked out in practice.
Bah. The only good thing you can say about Republicans is that they are generally less stupid and less evil than Democrats, but of course lately it has been getting harder to tell the difference.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
-
- Posts: 388
- Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 5:22 am
palladin9479 wrote:Siging this. D finally came out and admitted he's not only racist but a plutarch as well. "Poll taxes" were tools used to suppress the voting rights of the population.Yeah, well Republicans thought the 24th amendment was a good idea too. That decision is what is currently killing us.
You have once again demonstrated that you are in a conversation which is way over your head. The issue with the 24th amendment is not the "poll taxes" but the appended last three words of it which have nothing to do with "poll taxes."
Those last three words are a suicide pill to any nation. They are what Destroyed the first democracy, and they will destroy any nation that embraces them.
No nation can survive if it allows representation without taxation. Such a thing is a positive feedback system and inherently unstable, but like I said, you have never demonstrated yourself to have the knowledge base necessary to understand such a concept.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
I thought the theory was that the death of a democratic republic was when the electorate (tax paying or not) realized they could vote loot from the public treasury, thus getting back much more than they put in. After all entitlements are what's ultimately going to bankrupt us more than anything else. Medicare and Social Security are most of the federal budget, along with Defense and interest on the national debt (not counting Obama's many bailouts). Medicare and SS recipients were/are tax payers most of them all of their lives, made no difference, greed, need, or sense of "entitlement" won out in the end. Those public service union employees in Europe and here pay taxes, didn't stop them from voting for much more than what they put in. I am sure you and GIThruster will both forgo your SS and Medicare to save the republic.Diogenes wrote:palladin9479 wrote:Siging this. D finally came out and admitted he's not only racist but a plutarch as well. "Poll taxes" were tools used to suppress the voting rights of the population.Yeah, well Republicans thought the 24th amendment was a good idea too. That decision is what is currently killing us.
You have once again demonstrated that you are in a conversation which is way over your head. The issue with the 24th amendment is not the "poll taxes" but the appended last three words of it which have nothing to do with "poll taxes."
Those last three words are a suicide pill to any nation. They are what Destroyed the first democracy, and they will destroy any nation that embraces them.
No nation can survive if it allows representation without taxation. Such a thing is a positive feedback system and inherently unstable, but like I said, you have never demonstrated yourself to have the knowledge base necessary to understand such a concept.
Something as simple as being a net recipient of tax funds being a disqualification for voting would go a =long= ways towards curbing the excesses that are killing this nation. That would include both welfare recipients and government employees. It would stop dead the Democrat representative -> government employee -> union -> democrat representative money laundering loop.
Stubby wrote:So you want to bring back poll taxes? Why?
I do not want to bring back poll taxes. Had the 24th amendment left it at that, it would have been fine, but it goes way beyond prohibiting poll taxes and on into suicide territory.
The Last three words are "or other tax." THAT is the objectionable part of the 24th amendment. A nation cannot survive if those who do not pay for government can vote for people who will insist on bribing them with government money.
ONLY tax-payers should be allowed to vote. This creates a negative feedback system which adjusts toward financially stability. Without it, any Democracy will follow exactly what happened to the Original Greek Democracy. It will collapse because the financial system will collapse.
I actually think it's too late to stop it now.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
This is what the 24th amendment caused/allowed. Requiring someone to pay taxes before they could vote prevented them from voting for people promising costly programs. Non-taxpayers don't care how much a program costs if it benefits them. They vote for people who promise them goodies.williatw wrote:I thought the theory was that the death of a democratic republic was when the electorate (tax paying or not) realized they could vote loot from the public treasury, thus getting back much more than they put in.Diogenes wrote:
You have once again demonstrated that you are in a conversation which is way over your head. The issue with the 24th amendment is not the "poll taxes" but the appended last three words of it which have nothing to do with "poll taxes."
Those last three words are a suicide pill to any nation. They are what Destroyed the first democracy, and they will destroy any nation that embraces them.
No nation can survive if it allows representation without taxation. Such a thing is a positive feedback system and inherently unstable, but like I said, you have never demonstrated yourself to have the knowledge base necessary to understand such a concept.
williatw wrote:
After all entitlements are what's ultimately going to bankrupt us more than anything else. Medicare and Social Security are most of the federal budget, along with Defense and interest on the national debt (not counting Obama's many bailouts). Medicare and SS recipients were/are tax payers most of them all of their lives, made no difference, greed, need, or sense of "entitlement" won out in the end. Those public service union employees in Europe and here pay taxes, didn't stop them from voting for much more than what they put in.
That's because they directly benefit from government expenditure. Seeing as how the burden of paying their salaries is shared by everyone else, it is in their best interest to vote for an outcome that leaves the major bulk of the population paying into the system from which they benefit.
You are pointing out a good reason why government employees shouldn't be allowed to vote for the people who end up paying them. This is why Unions are killing cities and states all across America. They keep using the massed power of their union votes to select candidates that give them unworkable (for the government) financial packages.
Let me tell you what FDR (Franklin Deleanor Roosevelt) said about Government employees unions.
All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations.
williatw wrote:
I am sure you and GIThruster will both forgo your SS and Medicare to save the republic.
I doubt I shall ever collect a nickle's worth of either SS or Medicare, but to answer your point, I will demand and agitate for every last cent from this program which I was compelled to put money into because idiots in power forced me to do so against my will. What's more, I would collect welfare and foodstamps along with section 8 housing, and any other possible governmental service of which I can conceive, if I were able to get away with it.
I want this f***** system smashed and destroyed, and I can think of no better way to wake up the fools in this nation than byCloward-Pivening it.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
MSimon wrote:We don't need a different government. We need a different people.
The people are malleable, like clay. The current governmental system molds them to exploit the system, and the Media and Education system molds them to be too stupid to realize the governmental system can't last.
Had the same people been exposed to different stimuli, they wouldn't have gone down the path to national destruction.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —