|
|
Post by TNRighty on Mar 15, 2005 22:08:26 GMT -5
With little discussion going on tonite I just want to toss out some things that don't make sense to me. Perhaps someone out there can help me out.
Why do the same people who support a woman's right to kill her unborn child also lay down in front of bulldozers to protect spotted owls and pear trees?
Did the woman in Florida who said it was against her Muslim heritage to remove her veil for her driver's license photo know that it is also against the Muslim religion for women to drive?
If Michael Moore hates rich people so much, why does he charge $35,000 a pop to speak on college campuses?
When I file my taxes next month can I claim as dependents the near 50% of American wage earners who pay no taxes? Talk about one hell of a deduction!!!
Will the same idiots who have quit their jobs to go support Michael Jackson blame Bush for the fact that they can't afford their own health care?
Why do the same people who support affirmative action also call Condoleeze Rice a "token"?
Why do many of the same people who say we should decrease our dependence on foreign oil oppose every single action we take to drill and refine oil here at home?
If the push toward hybrid cars is all about protecting the environment and decreasing our dependence on foreign oil, why is California punishing its environmentally conscious people by proposing a "tax by the mile" after gas tax revenues dropped due to the new hybrid technology?
Anyways, if anyone can answer these questions for me, please do. Actually I think I know the answers, I'm just trying to toss out some topics for debate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Patriot on Mar 15, 2005 22:31:09 GMT -5
TN Righty,
Although I don't know the answers to your questions I am certainly capable of pretending I do. Thus, I shall offer the most cogent explanations I can think of.
Why do the same people who support a woman's right to kill her unborn child also lay down in front of bulldozers to protect spotted owls and pear trees?
Well, if you want to get technical about it, the real answer is because they value the environment more than human life, which they view as posing an ever-increasing threat to the natural habitat. That, combined with an all-encompassing devotion to individual freedom, which allows for a mother to rid herself of an unwanted pregnancy.
Did the woman in Florida who said it was against her Muslim heritage to remove her veil for her driver's license photo know that it is also against the Muslim religion for women to drive?
Like most Muslims in America who refuse to assimilate, this woman was probably struggling with the upkeep of her dualistic identity: that of Muslim handmaiden, and American woman.
If Michael Moore hates rich people so much, why does he charge $35,000 a pop to speak on college campuses?
Michael Moore, with his beer belly, has certain addictions to feed. His rants against the rich are really nothing more than a desire to be a cultural icon in 21st century America.
When I file my taxes next month can I claim as dependents the near 50% of American wage earners who pay no taxes? Talk about one hell of a deduction!!!
I'm afraid not. My granddad, a lifelong Navy Seabea, got so fed up with the IRS he packed up and left my grandma all alone. No joke. He drove to Mexico where he spent his last days living cheaply in a little cottage on the beach, scuba diving and playing cards, ignoring everyone from his past. He sent me a jacket from Mexico when I was 5 years old; two years later we heard he died from intoxication at age 79.
All that to say, even the best and most hard core Americans get fed up with the system. We should all do out duty for this country, but someone needs to put their foot down on the bums who refuse to contribute.
Will the same idiots who have quit their jobs to go support Michael Jackson blame Bush for the fact that they can't afford their own health care?
Probably.
Why do the same people who support affirmative action also call Condoleeze Rice a "token"?
Because she made it, and they didn't. Everybody's a fan of equality until they get left in the dust.
Why do many of the same people who say we should decrease our dependence on foreign oil oppose every single action we take to drill and refine oil here at home?
Because they'd rather be dependent on sun-cars and wind energy, apparently.
If the push toward hybrid cars is all about protecting the environment and decreasing our dependence on foreign oil, why is California punishing its environmentally conscious people by proposing a "tax by the mile" after gas tax revenues dropped due to the new hybrid technology?
Ah, California. Probably to rake in more revenue for the state to solve its budget deficit.
|
|
|
|
Post by GregoryA on Mar 16, 2005 12:40:15 GMT -5
With little discussion going on tonite I just want to toss out some things that don't make sense to me. Perhaps someone out there can help me out. "Why do the same people who support a woman's right to kill her unborn child also lay down in front of bulldozers to protect spotted owls and pear trees?" These people have the erroneous knowtion that animals and plants are not only equal to but are more important than humans. Perhaps this view has come through decades of indoctrination which emphasized the environmental movement so strongly and made people ( especially white males ) the enemies of nature. Of course we are part of nature, not separate from it. And as conservatives we are indeed interested, greatly interested in preserving the environment, but we have the proper perspective in that we value human life first and the life of other animals second and plants third. However we know the close link of all living things with each other and try to strike a reasonable balance. "Did the woman in Florida who said it was against her Muslim heritage to remove her veil for her driver's license photo know that it is also against the Muslim religion for women to drive?" Probably. However my guess is her protestations against removing her veil for a license photo, even though she is prohibited by her faith to actually drive, are more about an attempt to show how insentive American are to Muslims. "If Michael Moore hates rich people so much, why does he charge $35,000 a pop to speak on college campuses?" He only hates rich people who do not share his ideology. It's not about the money, it's about ideology. "When I file my taxes next month can I claim as dependents the near 50% of American wage earners who pay no taxes? Talk about one hell of a deduction!!!" My question is what gives the government the right to confiscate my earnings and give them to anyone? "Will the same idiots who have quit their jobs to go support Michael Jackson blame Bush for the fact that they can't afford their own health care?" They are following a higher calling...they are defending the King of Pop. It's evidently worth the monetary sacrifice. "Why do the same people who support affirmative action also call Condoleeze Rice a "token"?" Well if a token is a type of symbol then she is a symbol of how hard work and education bring success and race doesn't matter. (I am not her biggest fan, but I respect her achievements.) "Why do many of the same people who say we should decrease our dependence on foreign oil oppose every single action we take to drill and refine oil here at home?" They are unable to look at a problem and make a firm and logical decision. It's called liberalism. "If the push toward hybrid cars is all about protecting the environment and decreasing our dependence on foreign oil, why is California punishing its environmentally conscious people by proposing a "tax by the mile" after gas tax revenues dropped due to the new hybrid technology?" Because the leviathan called big government must continually feast upon tax dollars and it cares not how it gets its' meal. "Anyways, if anyone can answer these questions for me, please do. Actually I think I know the answers, I'm just trying to toss out some topics for debate." I tried my best. |
|
|
|
Post by midcan5 on Mar 29, 2005 19:44:31 GMT -5
Is it the same people? And if it is can one not respect the right of the individual to decide to control their lives, and also respect the environment? Not much of a stretch I think.
Why do religious people sin and steal and fornicate and murder and .... You got me. Let me know when you have an answer.
Not sure Michael Moore hates rich people ? Did he tell you that?
And the many corporations who pay nothing, and guess who gets most of the contributions from these corporations? Yep, you guessed it your party and president.
Not sure.
I support AA and don't think Condi is a token.
Because some people love beautiful things and don't want to see them ruined because every tom dick and harriet drives a gas guzzler.
Ah, because taxes keep the world going round maybe. They support the infrastructure that supports all of us.
Need tougher questions these are too easy.
|
|
|
|
Post by TNRighty on Mar 30, 2005 21:58:50 GMT -5
Why do religious people cheat, steal, fornicate, and murder?
For the same reason non-religious people do. They're people, and people can do bad things. The law will punish a Christian just the same as it punishes an athiest. If that ever changes I'll be the first one to raise hell about it. Being a Christian does not make you immune to the temptations and emotions of any other person. Don't try to blast away at the mythical self proclaimed perfectionism of Christians because there is no such thing. Christians are not perfect nor have they ever professed to be. Actually, Christianity is based on the belief that we are all sinners. The left has created the myth of Christian self rightousness for no other reason than to tear it down, just as you did with that backhanded question.
Do you honestly believe taxes make the world go round? By default I'm left with no other recourse than to opine that you also believe governement makes the world go round. If so, I feel very sorry for you. I happen to think I make my world go round, not the government. It sounds to me like you've given up your personal sovreignty and surrendered your well being to the whims of politicians. I'm glad I'm not you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Patriot on Mar 30, 2005 22:59:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by MO on Mar 31, 2005 4:12:04 GMT -5
If the governor of a state decides to give pardons to some of the guilty, it doesn't make the pardoned any less guilty, or create unfair situation for the un-pardoned, as they are still guilty too.
If Christians didn't sin, they wouldn't need a savior.
|
|
|
|
Post by midcan5 on Mar 31, 2005 19:22:40 GMT -5
Why the flag - I miss something? The religious question is no more 'backhanded' than yours. Taxes and people and government, yes, they all make the world go round. Find me a society of Robinson Crusoes. Government is not some thing it is all of us working to make a world in which we can live and prosper and help. I have never understood the right wing hatred of government - kinda weird. www.spectacle.org/796/www.spectacle.org/897/trust.html |
|
|
|
Post by midcan5 on Mar 31, 2005 19:25:51 GMT -5
Government Creates an Environment in Which We All Can Thrive by Mike Silverman cubsfan@cjnetworks.com It is difficult for a liberal to neatly describe the 'role of government.' Liberalism, by its intellectual nature and history does not lend itself to easy extremes where the government's role is readily discernable: solely to enforce contracts, or on the other hand to own and distribute all wealth. Unfortunately as a liberal, the answers are never as pat as they are for the conservative or the communist. "No government!" and "Total government!" are easy to chant. But it is difficult for the liberal to chant, "Some government here, a little there,free market here, mild regulation there!" It doesn't quite fit on a bumper sticker. Since it is impossible to neatly describe the liberal role of government, let me do so messily: government exists to maintain an environment where individuals and society as a whole can prosper, all while operating in a legal framework limiting its power and protecting the rights of the individual. These are contradictory goals sometimes; maintaining good government is a delicate balancing act. www.spectacle.org/796/silver.html |
|
|
|
Post by TNRighty on Mar 31, 2005 20:50:05 GMT -5
Thanks Patriot! Back to Medican. Do you hate Cadillacs and Hummers because they guzzle gas, or do you hate the fact that some people can afford Cadillacs and Hummers, and you can't. For what its worth I drive a '95 Buick Regal with 130,000 miles and a 4-cylinder engine. Personally I think anybody who has $750 a month in disposable income and invests it in a car payment is just plain dumb for paying interest on something that depreciates in value. To me they are as economically ignorant as any enviro-weenie. If you want to help the environment you can start by educating these people on economics. Tell them that the minute they finance a "gas guzzler" they can't afford to pay cash for they have essentially thrown thousands of dollars out the door. The minute you drive a financed car of the lot, you owe more money than the car is worth. It is one of the absolute worst financial decisions a person can make. If more young people understood basic economics, there would be more people driving Hondas, and more people would be wealthy. So, corporations pay nothing, huh? Here are the corporate tax rates for 2005. The income figures listed represent net profit. Lower Limit Upper Limit Tax Rate 0 50,000 15% 50,000 75,000 25% 75,000 100,000 34% 100,000 335,000 39% 335,000 10,000,000 34% 10,000,000 15,000,000 35% 15,000,000 18,333,333 38% 18,333,333 and above 35% www.smbiz.com/sbrl001.html#ci |
|
|
|
Post by TNRighty on Apr 2, 2005 18:20:05 GMT -5
In response to your post Medican, I would certainly agree with what Mike Silverman said,
"government exists to maintain an environment where individuals and society as a whole can prosper, all while operating in a legal framework limiting its power and protecting the rights of the individual."
Have you been reading my posts? I've been saying the exact same thing ever since I started posting here, although I would have left out the "society as a whole" part. When individuals prosper, society will also prosper.
If you agree with the excerpt I posted above, then you will really piss off a lot of your liberal friends. Be careful Medican, you're on the verge of becoming a conservative.
And by the way, I do disagree with Silverman when he suggests that conservatives favor "no government". That's not true at all. We just don't like it when government overstepps its constitutional bounds. I would like to define the role of government in our country as representatives and guardians of the constitution.
|
|
A Non Ymous
Beagle
Life is too short to spend it as someone's slave!
Posts: 9
|
Post by A Non Ymous on Apr 3, 2005 12:02:12 GMT -5
In response to your post Medican, I would certainly agree with what Mike Silverman said, "government exists to maintain an environment where individuals and society as a whole can prosper, all while operating in a legal framework limiting its power and protecting the rights of the individual." Have you been reading my posts? I've been saying the exact same thing ever since I started posting here, although I would have left out the "society as a whole" part. When individuals prosper, society will also prosper. If you agree with the excerpt I posted above, then you will really piss off a lot of your liberal friends. Be careful Medican, you're on the verge of becoming a conservative. And by the way, I do disagree with Silverman when he suggests that conservatives favor "no government". That's not true at all. We just don't like it when government overstepps its constitutional bounds. I would like to define the role of government in our country as representatives and guardians of the constitution. Why is it that our politicians don't respect the constraints of the Constitution? Could it be that our Constitution has been suspended? www.apfn.org/apfn/flag.htmA lot of people argue that we are under Constitutional government, but I disagree. Too many laws have been passed that are patently unconstitutional. |
|
|
|
Post by midcan5 on Apr 3, 2005 15:01:50 GMT -5
TRNightly, Tax rates mean nothing. It what you do (pay) that counts. It is amazing how we live in a society in which the news is Terri Schivo, really a personal and family matter, but corporate news, information that affects our country, is hardly mentioned. Lou Dobbs has been a exception lately. Oh and how do you know I can't afford a Caddy? XLR is a bit steep though - don't want a Hummer not my style, it is a gas waster no question about that. Also have a Buick Regal, 2000 supercharged - fine machine, but I was a little annoyed as it was made in Canada and our Chevies and Pontiacs were made here. Wife want the new sports car from Pontiac when her Bonni bites the dust. No chance I would claim to be a Conservative. Of course we all fall in between somewhere but the basic selfishness and corporate worship of the cons is not me. Actual stats: "By 2003, these 252 companies had slashed their state income tax payments to an average of only 2.3 percent of their U.S. profits. Since the average statutory state corporate tax rate is about 6.8 percent (weighted by gross state product), that means that in 2003, two-thirds of their profits escaped state taxes entirely." "A shocking 71 of the 252 companies managed to pay no state income tax at all in at least one year from 2001 through 2003—despite telling their shareholders they made $86 billion in pretax U.S. profits in those no-tax years. Twenty-five of these companies enjoyed multiple no-tax years." "Some companies, such as Toys “R” Us, AT&T, Boeing, Eli Lilly, Merrill Lynch, and ITT Industries, paid no net state income tax over the full three-year period." "In 2003 alone, 35 companies paid no state income tax. Another 138 of the companies paid less than half the statutory state corporate tax rate that year." www.ctj.org/html/corp0205.htm |
|
|
|
Post by Uncle Sam on Apr 17, 2005 10:03:23 GMT -5
Did the woman in Florida who said it was against her Muslim heritage to remove her veil for her driver's license photo know that it is also against the Muslim religion for women to drive? Boy can I relate to this. I spent 3 years at the American Consulate in Jeddah Saudi Arabia. I have never come across a group of people who are more hypocritical. They leverage their religion anyway they can to their benefit. For example, Saudi men will cross the causeway into Bahrain from Saudi to drink and party on the weekends (Bahrain not being a "Dry" country). Then return home to resume their strick doctrines. I've witnessed this first hand. While I have never witnessed this, I have heard stories that Saudi's who are on airplanes once they leave Saudi airspace will make beelines to the restroom to remove their Gutra's or vails. Uncle |
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Apr 28, 2005 19:07:20 GMT -5
Patriot: Kudos to your granddad. It is terrible, but typical to have to leave the state. The taxes in Calif have completely gotten out of hand. The Calif State government must sort of feel they are giving us a "great concession" by letting us long-time residents be under Prop 13 (Jarvis-Gan). However, I only have a 1400 sq. feet house and small lot and I pay around $ 2,000 a year in property taxes. I just learned if I move to a new county, which I plan to upon retirement, which doesn't "reciprocate" with my present county (and most don't), I will pay the "regular" rate for property taxes. If I sell my house at $500,000 (which I hope to) and by a $500,000 house in the county where I plan on retiring, I will then pay around 2 to 2.25 % in annual proerty taxes... so my property tax will jump to $10,000 to 12,000 a year. That is nearly half my entire yearly pension! It is no wonder people are leaving Calif in droves. TNRighty: You make some excellent points with your initial post. I have a question regarding your "tax by the mile" point. There is a new movement, underway, to replace "diamond" lanes with HOT lanes, in Calif (HOT stands for "High-Occupancy Toll" lanes). Is this what you meant by tax by the mile scheme? I guess there are already 2 of these in Calif. These are special lanes to allow a faster commute but will charge a highway toll, to any user, once he or she applies. I guess they work by having some kind of sensor or transponder, along the road, to record a license plate. The scan would then make an automatic charge to your credit card (simillar to what some bridge tolls are doing). The HOTs program takes certain "pristine" highway lanes and allows a fast compute via a license plate toll. There is a proposal, now, to expand Highway 101, north of the GG Bridge, by setting up a HOT lane to help pay for that expansion. You can, I'm sure, see where this could lead. Any old highway (pot-hole filled road, gravel road, etc) could be labeled a HOT lane. The state could demand, with your car registration, that you submit a credit card for HOT lane billing. Never mind that the lane might already have been payed for by taxpayer money. Can you imagine what kind of revenue this could bring in? I think it would be the best thing since plum pudding for the tax and spend politician. bad.eserver.org/issues/1999/42/bertsch.html Richard |
|
