Lessons to be learned from the

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

In case someone would want to learn from history:

http://www.dancarlin.com//disp.php/hharchive

You could star with death throes of the republic I and work your way up.

Yes, Marius saved the republic, but he also forged the weapon to destroy it.

Yes, Sulla tried to turn back the clock, but he also demonstrated that power is gained with swords, not ideas.

Enter Caesar, who combined their lessons, seducing a population which was used to “unconstitutional measures” by then and pretty much broke the bank of a system that was designed to keep people like him away from power.

22

Question: We are paying our taxes in full to the govt., yet the govt. is shutdown. Will we get reimbursed for this on our tax return? Should we?

23

[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Question: We are paying our taxes in full to the govt., yet the govt. is shutdown. Will we get reimbursed for this on our tax return? Should we?[/quote]

It’s interesting to note that the reason for the hated Stamp Act (which was nothing more sinister than a sales tax–and a ridiculously low one in comparison with state sales taxes today) was the completely fair assumption on the part of the British Crown that the American Colonists should bear some of the financial responsibility for the expense of the French and Indian war. The colonists didn’t see it that way, and revolted against their legal government over a tax which amounted to about a shilling per year ($7.50 by present values), and a sales tax of perhaps 3 per cent. These are the taxes which Jefferson bitched about in the Declaration of Independence, which were supposedly “eating out the substance” of him and his countrymen.

Today our tax burden is several orders of magnitude higher than that, the laws and regulations exponentially more pervasive and invasive than any enacted by Mad King George, and the officers of the federal government more numerous than the population of many small countries in Europe.

And yet, not a peep from the sheep.

What the fuck have we become?

24

Varquanir, repeat after me:

I pledge Allegiance to the flag
of the United States of America
and to the Republic for which it stands,
one nation under God, indivisible,
with Liberty and Justice for all.

Don’t you feel better?

25

No.

26

Also, there is no U in Varqanir.

27

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Question: We are paying our taxes in full to the govt., yet the govt. is shutdown. Will we get reimbursed for this on our tax return? Should we?[/quote]

It’s interesting to note that the reason for the hated Stamp Act (which was nothing more sinister than a sales tax–and a ridiculously low one in comparison with state sales taxes today) was the completely fair assumption on the part of the British Crown that the American Colonists should bear some of the financial responsibility for the expense of the French and Indian war. The colonists didn’t see it that way, and revolted against their legal government over a tax which amounted to about a shilling per year ($7.50 by present values), and a sales tax of perhaps 3 per cent. These are the taxes which Jefferson bitched about in the Declaration of Independence, which were supposedly “eating out the substance” of him and his countrymen.

Today our tax burden is several orders of magnitude higher than that, the laws and regulations exponentially more pervasive and invasive than any enacted by Mad King George, and the officers of the federal government more numerous than the population of many small countries in Europe.

And yet, not a peep from the sheep.

What the fuck have we become?[/quote]

From the way I understand England ran everything from America through England and everything that came from some where else through England before it came to America , taking away America’s ability to compete or buy in the free market .

The tea party was about America having to send it’s own tea to England before they could buy it in America. At least that is the way I got it :slight_smile:

28

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Question: We are paying our taxes in full to the govt., yet the govt. is shutdown. Will we get reimbursed for this on our tax return? Should we?[/quote]

It’s interesting to note that the reason for the hated Stamp Act (which was nothing more sinister than a sales tax–and a ridiculously low one in comparison with state sales taxes today) was the completely fair assumption on the part of the British Crown that the American Colonists should bear some of the financial responsibility for the expense of the French and Indian war. The colonists didn’t see it that way, and revolted against their legal government over a tax which amounted to about a shilling per year ($7.50 by present values), and a sales tax of perhaps 3 per cent. These are the taxes which Jefferson bitched about in the Declaration of Independence, which were supposedly “eating out the substance” of him and his countrymen.

Today our tax burden is several orders of magnitude higher than that, the laws and regulations exponentially more pervasive and invasive than any enacted by Mad King George, and the officers of the federal government more numerous than the population of many small countries in Europe.

And yet, not a peep from the sheep.

What the fuck have we become?[/quote]

Rather, they were protesting the fact that they had no representative in Parliament, and as such the tax was levied on them without representation.

And, since they had no representative in Parliament, Parliament had no right to levy any taxes on them. At all.

29

We have now been indoctrinated to believe that if 50.00000001% of the country votes for something, then we are ALL being represented. Brilliant.

30

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

The tea party was about America having to send it’s own tea to England before they could buy it in America. At least that is the way I got it :slight_smile:
[/quote]

Then you didn’t get it.

The British East India Company monopolized the tea trade, being the major buyer from the only commercial source of production, which was China. The tea was bought at ridiculous expense, and the Chinese wouldn’t trade for it: it was silver billion or nothing. So the British sold opium to the Chinese, illegally of course, then turned around and used the proceeds of the sale to pay for the tea. The tea was then transported, again at ridiculous expense, in square-rigged sailing ships, around the Cape of Africa and on to England, where it was processed and resold domestically and throughout the British Empire.

The Sons of Liberty, a group of rabble rousers and thugs who bear as much resemblance to the Tea Party Patriots as Al-Qaeda resembles Greenpeace, threw a few crates of tea into Boston Harbor to protest having to pay taxes provided for by the Townshend Act, the Tea Act, and the Stamp Act. They were protesting a tax, which amounted to a few pennies extra on each pound of tea, which was enacted so that the financially troubled British East India Company could remain afloat, literally and figuratively, and keep providing tea to the colonists in the first place.

31

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Question: We are paying our taxes in full to the govt., yet the govt. is shutdown. Will we get reimbursed for this on our tax return? Should we?[/quote]

It’s interesting to note that the reason for the hated Stamp Act (which was nothing more sinister than a sales tax–and a ridiculously low one in comparison with state sales taxes today) was the completely fair assumption on the part of the British Crown that the American Colonists should bear some of the financial responsibility for the expense of the French and Indian war. The colonists didn’t see it that way, and revolted against their legal government over a tax which amounted to about a shilling per year ($7.50 by present values), and a sales tax of perhaps 3 per cent. These are the taxes which Jefferson bitched about in the Declaration of Independence, which were supposedly “eating out the substance” of him and his countrymen.

Today our tax burden is several orders of magnitude higher than that, the laws and regulations exponentially more pervasive and invasive than any enacted by Mad King George, and the officers of the federal government more numerous than the population of many small countries in Europe.

And yet, not a peep from the sheep.

What the fuck have we become?[/quote]

Rather, they were protesting the fact that they had no representative in Parliament, and as such the tax was levied on them without representation.

And, since they had no representative in Parliament, Parliament had no right to levy any taxes on them. At all.
[/quote]

Whereas now we dutifully pay our taxes in exchange for the illusion of representation.

"Thomas Jefferson complained, in the Declaration of Independence, that Britain had ‘erected a multitude of New Offices, and set hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.’ Yet the swarms of officers sent by George III would have barely filled a mid-sized regional office of the IRS or city zoning department today.

“Likewise, the Founding Fathers kvetched about taxation without representation. But history has shown that representation only makes taxation worse. Kings, emperors and tyrants must keep tax rates low–otherwise, the people rise in rebellion. It is democrats that really eat out the substance of the people: the illusion of self-government lets them get away with it. Tax rates were only an average of 3% under the tyranny of King George III. One of the blessings of democracy is average tax rates that are ten times as high.”

Bill Bonner, The Idea of America

32

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Then you didn’t get it.

The British East India Company monopolized the tea trade, being the major buyer from the only commercial source of production, which was China. The tea was bought at ridiculous expense, and the Chinese wouldn’t trade for it: it was silver billion or nothing. So the British sold opium to the Chinese, illegally of course, then turned around and used the proceeds of the sale to pay for the tea. The tea was then transported, again at ridiculous expense, in square-rigged sailing ships, around the Cape of Africa and on to England, where it was processed and resold domestically and throughout the British Empire.

The Sons of Liberty, a group of rabble rousers and thugs who bear as much resemblance to the Tea Party Patriots as Al-Qaeda resembles Greenpeace, threw a few crates of tea into Boston Harbor to protest having to pay taxes provided for by the Townshend Act, the Tea Act, and the Stamp Act. They were protesting a tax, which amounted to a few pennies extra on each pound of tea, which was enacted so that the financially troubled British East India Company could remain afloat, literally and figuratively, and keep providing tea to the colonists in the first place.

[/quote]

But that was in response to ENGLAND-the government of the United States can’t be bad both because WE ARE the government, and democracy, right?

33

[quote]NickViar wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Then you didn’t get it.

The British East India Company monopolized the tea trade, being the major buyer from the only commercial source of production, which was China. The tea was bought at ridiculous expense, and the Chinese wouldn’t trade for it: it was silver billion or nothing. So the British sold opium to the Chinese, illegally of course, then turned around and used the proceeds of the sale to pay for the tea. The tea was then transported, again at ridiculous expense, in square-rigged sailing ships, around the Cape of Africa and on to England, where it was processed and resold domestically and throughout the British Empire.

The Sons of Liberty, a group of rabble rousers and thugs who bear as much resemblance to the Tea Party Patriots as Al-Qaeda resembles Greenpeace, threw a few crates of tea into Boston Harbor to protest having to pay taxes provided for by the Townshend Act, the Tea Act, and the Stamp Act. They were protesting a tax, which amounted to a few pennies extra on each pound of tea, which was enacted so that the financially troubled British East India Company could remain afloat, literally and figuratively, and keep providing tea to the colonists in the first place.

[/quote]

But that was in response to ENGLAND-the government of the United States can’t be bad both because WE ARE the government, and democracy, right?[/quote]

The Sarcasm is strong in this one.

34

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
The Sarcasm is strong in this one. [/quote]

But America?

35

[quote]NickViar wrote:
Varquanir, repeat after me:

I pledge Allegiance to the flag
of the United States of America
and to the Republic for which it stands,
one nation under God, indivisible,
with Liberty and Justice for all.

Don’t you feel better? [/quote]

I pledge allegiance to the mind
Of the Sovereign Republic of Varqanir
And to the philosophy for which it stands,
One Idea, indomitable,
With Liberty and Justice for ever.

Now I feel better.

36

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
I pledge allegiance to the mind
Of the Sovereign Republic of Varqanir
And to the philosophy for which it stands,
One Idea, indomitable,
With Liberty and Justice for ever.

Now I feel better. [/quote]

That’s nice, but if you’re sovereign, then how will I force you to do what I think is right? I mean, I guess if you’re on my property, then I might be able to tell you what to do; but what if you’re on your own property? You could be drinking alcohol that you bought without paying tax. That violates my rights.

37

[quote]NickViar wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
The Sarcasm is strong in this one. [/quote]

But America?[/quote]

Nice place. I remember it well. Hopefully we’ll see it again someday.

38

[quote]NickViar wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
I pledge allegiance to the mind
Of the Sovereign Republic of Varqanir
And to the philosophy for which it stands,
One Idea, indomitable,
With Liberty and Justice for ever.

Now I feel better. [/quote]

That’s nice, but if you’re sovereign, then how will I force you to do what I think is right?[/quote]

You can either attempt to coerce me through force, or convince me through reason. In either case, I have the option of conceding or resisting, same as any other sovereign entity.

39

[quote]NickViar wrote:
You could be drinking alcohol that you bought without paying tax. That violates my rights.[/quote]

Please specify which of your rights I would be violating by drinking, on my own property, alcohol which I either made myself or bought from a home brewer or distiller.

40

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
You can either attempt to coerce me through force, or convince me through reason. In either case, I have the option of conceding or resisting, same as any other sovereign entity. [/quote]

What if you accept $5 in exchange for a gallon of unpasteurized milk? Surely I would then HAVE to step in to protect others from you, right?