Comments on: Where Do We Draw The Line? http://www.secularconservative.net/fiscal-policy/the-fine-line-of-taxe/ Mon, 10 May 2010 01:39:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: David Ross http://www.secularconservative.net/fiscal-policy/the-fine-line-of-taxe/#comment-9062 David Ross Fri, 04 Dec 2009 01:26:16 +0000 http://www.secularconservative.net/?p=760#comment-9062 7 ate 9! Meh. By one I meant th'other. 7 ate 9! Meh. By one I meant th’other.

]]> By: David Ross http://www.secularconservative.net/fiscal-policy/the-fine-line-of-taxe/#comment-9053 David Ross Thu, 03 Dec 2009 18:31:55 +0000 http://www.secularconservative.net/?p=760#comment-9053 If she was concerned about the "unnecessariness" of it all - extra cash which might be spent on stuff of no use to Society - then we could just tax that extra stuff. Call it a luxury tax, consumption tax, or just sales tax. But she's talking about taking the ability to pay for that stuff, or else to save it up for our inheritors. She is saying that if our lives make a profit, then Society takes first dibs on that profit. ("Society" means the State, natch.) Also, when we're dead, we don't need all that stuff either, so her argument applies equally to estate taxes. Forget about managing your finances to leave an inheritance to the next generation; Society will make up the shortfall. She assumes that we are serfs who owe labour to our lord. Which means this debate is a negotiation about our terms of servitude. That discussion we had on proposition #7 - which "I voted for before I [posted] against it" :^) - convinced me that the proper definition of a sovereign government is "the entity which owns the land". Since the government inherently must accept the right to take the land we live on: it also has the right to charge us for the privilege, to restrict what we do on it etc. Right now we are both serfs and tenants. I think that tenancy is an inevitable state of mankind's relationship to the land. I dispute that we must remain serfs as well. If she was concerned about the “unnecessariness” of it all – extra cash which might be spent on stuff of no use to Society – then we could just tax that extra stuff. Call it a luxury tax, consumption tax, or just sales tax.

But she’s talking about taking the ability to pay for that stuff, or else to save it up for our inheritors. She is saying that if our lives make a profit, then Society takes first dibs on that profit. (“Society” means the State, natch.) Also, when we’re dead, we don’t need all that stuff either, so her argument applies equally to estate taxes. Forget about managing your finances to leave an inheritance to the next generation; Society will make up the shortfall.

She assumes that we are serfs who owe labour to our lord. Which means this debate is a negotiation about our terms of servitude.

That discussion we had on proposition #7 – which “I voted for before I [posted] against it” :^) – convinced me that the proper definition of a sovereign government is “the entity which owns the land”. Since the government inherently must accept the right to take the land we live on: it also has the right to charge us for the privilege, to restrict what we do on it etc.

Right now we are both serfs and tenants. I think that tenancy is an inevitable state of mankind’s relationship to the land. I dispute that we must remain serfs as well.

]]> By: Cephus http://www.secularconservative.net/fiscal-policy/the-fine-line-of-taxe/#comment-8968 Cephus Sat, 28 Nov 2009 03:35:51 +0000 http://www.secularconservative.net/?p=760#comment-8968 Unfortunately, due to the liberalization of America that has gone on for the past 40 years, the majority of the population has an entitlement fantasy, they think they DESERVE all of these freebie handouts from the government, they don't believe they ought to have to work for anything, they should be rewarded for waking up in the morning. Even so-called conservatives in the Republican party act the same. They're out to buy votes, not hold true to their supposed ideology. Unfortunately, due to the liberalization of America that has gone on for the past 40 years, the majority of the population has an entitlement fantasy, they think they DESERVE all of these freebie handouts from the government, they don’t believe they ought to have to work for anything, they should be rewarded for waking up in the morning. Even so-called conservatives in the Republican party act the same. They’re out to buy votes, not hold true to their supposed ideology.

]]> By: Janus http://www.secularconservative.net/fiscal-policy/the-fine-line-of-taxe/#comment-8966 Janus Sat, 28 Nov 2009 01:33:59 +0000 http://www.secularconservative.net/?p=760#comment-8966 Glad to be posting Andrew ;) I'm really trying to get posts up, but work and real life have just been hitting me hard lately. I think part of the problem is that "we should DO something about that!" is, in all honesty, a great idea. The other side to that, however, is that DOING something costs money, and that money has to COME from somewhere. There are a lot of people who either don't realize this or don't seem to bothered by taking that money from other people. Wanting to help other people is noble, it really is. Stealing from people and either being too stupid to realize it or so immoral that you don't care is blatantly wrong. And that's all part of the battle we as conservatives are going to have to fight. People who are twisted enough to not care are beyond help, but we really need to do a better job of educating those who don't seem to get it. Spread the word. Glad to be posting Andrew ;) I’m really trying to get posts up, but work and real life have just been hitting me hard lately.

I think part of the problem is that “we should DO something about that!” is, in all honesty, a great idea. The other side to that, however, is that DOING something costs money, and that money has to COME from somewhere. There are a lot of people who either don’t realize this or don’t seem to bothered by taking that money from other people. Wanting to help other people is noble, it really is. Stealing from people and either being too stupid to realize it or so immoral that you don’t care is blatantly wrong.

And that’s all part of the battle we as conservatives are going to have to fight. People who are twisted enough to not care are beyond help, but we really need to do a better job of educating those who don’t seem to get it.

Spread the word.

]]> By: Cephus http://www.secularconservative.net/fiscal-policy/the-fine-line-of-taxe/#comment-8964 Cephus Fri, 27 Nov 2009 21:26:21 +0000 http://www.secularconservative.net/?p=760#comment-8964 The problem is, we don't have a government that knows the meaning of fiscal conservatism. They want to spend money. Lots of money. More money than they have so they can make people think they're actually doing something and get re-elected. So they take our money to throw at programs that neither benefit the majority nor improve the economy. It seems that the more they spend, the more they have to talk about on the campaign trail and the more likely they are to get votes. Something has to be done about this. The problem is, we don’t have a government that knows the meaning of fiscal conservatism. They want to spend money. Lots of money. More money than they have so they can make people think they’re actually doing something and get re-elected. So they take our money to throw at programs that neither benefit the majority nor improve the economy. It seems that the more they spend, the more they have to talk about on the campaign trail and the more likely they are to get votes.

Something has to be done about this.

]]> By: Andrew Clunn http://www.secularconservative.net/fiscal-policy/the-fine-line-of-taxe/#comment-8960 Andrew Clunn Fri, 27 Nov 2009 14:50:17 +0000 http://www.secularconservative.net/?p=760#comment-8960 Glad to see you're posting again. I think the issue here is the issue of unintended consequences and individuals believing that economic policies exist in a vacuum when they don't. Here, this is a great video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpUuM8KoHds Glad to see you’re posting again. I think the issue here is the issue of unintended consequences and individuals believing that economic policies exist in a vacuum when they don’t. Here, this is a great video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpUuM8KoHds

]]>