Hitler's Speeches. See especially the Proclamation of Feb 1st, 1933.
As for the other arguments, when a disaster such as Katrina happens, why is it so hard to ASK the american people to help, rather than just TAKE? Doesn’t that imply that the government regards us as brutes, that would not give to help the unfortunates? Wouldn’t you rather be asked to help out, rather than be TOLD that you are?
Many of you have expressed disgust and dislike for the war. You don’t like being forced to fund such a venture. I heartily agree with you – you shouldn’t be forced. But in the same way, what if someone doesn’t wish to help with Katrina? Should they be forced to help? Don’t you see how the government regards us all as cattle, waiting to be milked? And what allows this to take place is a philosophy which says that someone else’s need trumps everything else. The people of NO need help, therefore what YOU want to do with your money is irrelevent. You have no choice in the matter. Is this a philosophy of Justice? We want to show mercy to the unfortunates of NO. But no mercy (or justice) is to be shown to those who would make this largesse possible?
What sort of system is that? Is it one becoming like what you can read about in the link at the top?
BTW: I hope each person will find time to read the Crockett link. A town near DC burns down and he votes government funds to help the unfortunates. A constituent then points out: “Congressman, it wasn’t yours to give.” Great stuff!
[quote]RHINO928 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
I’m amazed how many guys come on here, don’t do their homework (aka read the thread) and then spout at me.
Then please explain how YOU are the REAL victim of Katrina.
[/quote]
A precedent is set: that I can be forced to contribute to something that I don’t want to. I can be forced to fund a war that I disagree with. I can be forced to contribute funds to huge corporations that are milking a system. I can be forced to follow rules created by mindless jackasses that outlaw prohormones, such as MAG-10. I can be forced to fund art displays with the Cross of our Lord sitting in a vat of urine.
Need more? The list is long.
Victim of Katrina (and the precedent it sets)? You betcha!!
[quote]AZMojo wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
If a disaster strikes the east coast of the United States, why doesn’t our wonderful federal government call on all americans and ASK (repeat that word several times, until it sinks in: ASK, ASK, ASK,…) the rest of the country to donate to recovery? Why use tax dollars, which people are FORCED to pay for this effort?
There is a difference in treating people with respect and ASKING, rather than simply forcing them to pay someone else’s bills. Isn’t it better to treat people as beings worthy of freedom and respect, instead of as cattle to be milked?
Goddamnit, I’m simply saying people should be free to make choices and you guys use the vilest insults on me.
Here, Prof, use this post of why I should be in your 'Troll Hall of Fame."
Can we at least agree on the fact that taxes are here to stay? I hope so.
Can we agree that the entire nation cannot be run on VOLUNTARY donations? I hope so.
Is your issue that you want the government to ASK you every time they spend some money? Does that seem rational? Again, that’s what our voted representatives are there for.
So, pretty please with sugar on top, explain coherently what your vision of the country is regarding how our tax money is spent.
Would you like somebody to give you a phone call and say “Mr. Headhunter, we were thinking about spending on this, what do you think?”?
I mean, really, we understand your problem. What’s your SOLUTION?
/quote]
Are you really defending a system that treats you as mindless brute, from whom funding must be extorted? Do you know where the idea of taxes comes from? Some gang decided long ago to settle in with the victims and force them to pay some % of their wealth per year. Are you claiming that we can’t do better than that?
Please google Milton Freidman and you’ll get answer to all your questions.
[quote]harris447 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
AZMojo wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Race Fan wrote:
Headhunter, Where are you from?
I’m from New Jersey – and let me tell you: if disaster strikes one of our jewels, like Camden or Newark, you will not see any of us marching through the streets, bitching and whining for other people to come and save us. We raise REAL men here. We would rebuild Camden, for example, brick by brick and stone by stone, by our own efforts. And if there is some reason to not rebuild, like being under sea level in a hurricane zone, we don’t care. After all, we are REAL men and we’re more powerful than any hurricane or ocean. Let it come, heh, heh!!! We’re ready!
Have you even been to your precious Camden lately? It does need to be rebuilt. It has the highest murder rate in the U.S., and is filled with one condemed tenament after another. If a natural disaster did strike, I bet the social conditions would very much mirror NOLA. They already do. Where are all the great NJ men rolling up their sleaves to help?
This was a parody and was for Harris to chew on. I am from Ohio. If you read any of the thread prior to this, you’d know all of this.
I’m amazed how many guys come on here, don’t do their homework (aka read the thread) and then spout at me.
I’ve noticed this phenomenon in some of my students as well. Making connections seems to be a talent that many lack; they do not connect the previous material to what we are doing that day.
I don’t think you quite have the concept of “parody” under your belt.
For one, they should be funny…
[/quote]
It was to me. Remember, I’m a selfish asshole, so I don’t care if you found it funny or not.
Can we at least agree on the fact that taxes are here to stay? I hope so.
Can we agree that the entire nation cannot be run on VOLUNTARY donations? I hope so.
Is your issue that you want the government to ASK you every time they spend some money? Does that seem rational? Again, that’s what our voted representatives are there for.
So, pretty please with sugar on top, explain coherently what your vision of the country is regarding how our tax money is spent.
Would you like somebody to give you a phone call and say “Mr. Headhunter, we were thinking about spending on this, what do you think?”?
I mean, really, we understand your problem. What’s your SOLUTION?
Are you really defending a system that treats you as mindless brute, from whom funding must be extorted? Do you know where the idea of taxes comes from? Some gang decided long ago to settle in with the victims and force them to pay some % of their wealth per year. Are you claiming that we can’t do better than that?
Please google Milton Freidman and you’ll get answer to all your questions.
[/quote]
I’m not defending anything. I’m asking a question.
I want an answer from YOU, not Milton Freidman. What’s YOUR solution? You are capable of independant thought, correct? Or, do you just regurgitate the opinions of others?
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Professor, I am not making this up and it is not meant to insult you at all: What you just said is almost verbatim from a speech by Adolph Hitler (especially your first sentence). I’m not kidding and I’m not out to insult you at all. I’ve read quite a bit of history and the roots of the Third Reich is a big interest. I will search and find a link. You will be shocked.
[/quote]
Hitler most likely liked keilbasa and saurkraut as well, and even though i enjoy eating these, im not a nazi.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
AZMojo wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Race Fan wrote:
Headhunter, Where are you from?
I’m from New Jersey – and let me tell you: if disaster strikes one of our jewels, like Camden or Newark, you will not see any of us marching through the streets, bitching and whining for other people to come and save us. We raise REAL men here. We would rebuild Camden, for example, brick by brick and stone by stone, by our own efforts. And if there is some reason to not rebuild, like being under sea level in a hurricane zone, we don’t care. After all, we are REAL men and we’re more powerful than any hurricane or ocean. Let it come, heh, heh!!! We’re ready!
Have you even been to your precious Camden lately? It does need to be rebuilt. It has the highest murder rate in the U.S., and is filled with one condemed tenament after another. If a natural disaster did strike, I bet the social conditions would very much mirror NOLA. They already do. Where are all the great NJ men rolling up their sleaves to help?
This was a parody and was for Harris to chew on. I am from Ohio. If you read any of the thread prior to this, you’d know all of this.
I’m amazed how many guys come on here, don’t do their homework (aka read the thread) and then spout at me.
I’ve noticed this phenomenon in some of my students as well. Making connections seems to be a talent that many lack; they do not connect the previous material to what we are doing that day.
[/quote]
You know, I did find way back in the thread where you mentioned that you were a teacher in Ohio.
To answer your question, No. I do not believe that I need to determine directly where my tax money goes. That is a job for the politicians I vote for.
I have no idea what’s going on in detail in other parts of the country that require federal aid/ funding. If there is a need for federal dollars I just hope it is spent wisely.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Isn’t it better to treat people as beings worthy of freedom and respect, instead of as cattle to be milked?
Isn’t better for all to realize that as a country, we work better in unity towards the common good of society rather than acting as if life is some free for all “get yours and screw everyone else” act of simply hoarding for personal gain?
Professor X,
I am ready to answer you.
You wish to suppress this American ‘free for all’ to work for ‘unity’. This means that you wish to supptess individual rights for some grand national purpose. These rights are not yours to suppress: “…, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are the rights of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.”
Like all leftists, you wish to channel humans into what you deem good. Like all leftists, you regard men as unthinking brutes, incapable of deciding for themselves what they want. Like all leftists, you vote into power mindless jackasses who implement your agenda (since men are stupid, outlaw those prohormones!).
Professor, you have been exposed for what you are. Those who seek to impose some grand scheme on humanity really want humanity in chains. And like I said before, you will not be forgiven.
“One only need expose it to light, to make the cockroach run.”
— Anonymous
Can we at least agree on the fact that taxes are here to stay? I hope so.
Can we agree that the entire nation cannot be run on VOLUNTARY donations? I hope so.
Is your issue that you want the government to ASK you every time they spend some money? Does that seem rational? Again, that’s what our voted representatives are there for.
So, pretty please with sugar on top, explain coherently what your vision of the country is regarding how our tax money is spent.
Would you like somebody to give you a phone call and say “Mr. Headhunter, we were thinking about spending on this, what do you think?”?
I mean, really, we understand your problem. What’s your SOLUTION?
Are you really defending a system that treats you as mindless brute, from whom funding must be extorted? Do you know where the idea of taxes comes from? Some gang decided long ago to settle in with the victims and force them to pay some % of their wealth per year. Are you claiming that we can’t do better than that?
Please google Milton Freidman and you’ll get answer to all your questions.
I’m not defending anything. I’m asking a question.
I want an answer from YOU, not Milton Freidman. What’s YOUR solution? You are capable of independant thought, correct? Or, do you just regurgitate the opinions of others?[/quote]
My textbook on an economic plan for America comes out next month! Be sure to watch fot it!
But seriously, is it really my place to decide how you live your life? Ah well, I will provide some fodder for your obviously fertile mind…
Suppose that each person receives a form and on that, they can choose to dedicate a particular percentage of their income, from 0% (if they choose) on up to government. It is carefully explained that these funds are for police, schools, national defense and so forth. It is explained that lack of funding will reduce these services but if people wish to live with no police, firemen, schools, and so forth, that is THEIR CHOICE. Hello, we’re actually relying on humans to be rational – what an earthshaking idea!
Of course, there will be scumbags who don’t contribute. That’s their choice. So, we have to decide to either to tolerate the slackers, or a system that pursues you as if you were a criminal and confiscates your property.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Professor X,
I am ready to answer you.
You wish to suppress this American ‘free for all’ to work for ‘unity’. This means that you wish to supptess individual rights for some grand national purpose. These rights are not yours to suppress: “…, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are the rights of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.”[/quote]
What rights of yours are being suppressed?
Do you know where every cent of your tax money already goes?
I am truly interested. Please inform of us where your tax money went last month and the months previous. Unless you can answer this question with extreme detail, you are a fool making way too much noise for something that you really don’t have the heart to truly stand up for.
If you are so against your taxes being used for Katrina victims without your consent, then why pay taxes? Take a stand. Risk going to jail for what you believe in. Otherwise, shut the hell up because you aren’t putting any action behind your words.
[quote]
Like all leftists, you wish to channel humans into what you deem good. [/quote]
I thought the “Religious RIGHT” was doing that? Isn’t that what the whole “morals” angle is about? You can’t even figure out who to blame for what.
[quote]
Like all leftists, you regard men as unthinking brutes, incapable of deciding for themselves what they want.[/quote]
Again, where has your money gone over the last two months? Why bring this issue up as it only concerns Katrina victims? Someone true in their motivation would hold this position about EVERYWHERE their tax money goes.
[quote]
Like all leftists, you vote into power mindless jackasses who implement your agenda (since men are stupid, outlaw those prohormones!).[/quote]
I won’t even go there because I know enough people see the joke on this one.
[quote]
Professor, you have been exposed for what you are. Those who seek to impose some grand scheme on humanity really want humanity in chains. And like I said before, you will not be forgiven.[/quote]
Some grand scheme…like the Patriot Act?
[quote]
“One only need expose it to light, to make the cockroach run.”
— Anonymous[/quote]
It must suck for you that no one is running away from you. I hate to break this to you, but you aren’t exactly a force to be feared.
You been exposed. Your own words have defeated you. You want rights suppressed for the purpose of ‘unity’, some national plan. Before that, I told you where you got your words, from who’s playbook your quoting.
Very well said. Coerced charity has another name: Communism.
Actually, communism refers to an economic system, in which the working class owns the means of production…[/quote]
I am well aware of what it is. It is an economic system that has been proven over and over again to be a failure in practice, no matter how wonderful it looks on paper.
Maybe you could explain to the unwashed among us why it ALWAYS involves a coercive, tyrannical, and most often murderous central government, because as you have clearly shown, I have no idea what I am talking about.
I fail to see the wonders of this grand utopian system. Do enlighten me. Thanks.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Professor X,
I am ready to answer you.
You wish to suppress this American ‘free for all’ to work for ‘unity’. This means that you wish to supptess individual rights for some grand national purpose. These rights are not yours to suppress: “…, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are the rights of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.”
What rights of yours are being suppressed?
Wait, don’t you attack me later down below, pretending I’m in favor of the Patriot Act?
Do you know where every cent of your tax money already goes?
I am truly interested. Please inform of us where your tax money went last month and the months previous. Unless you can answer this question with extreme detail, you are a fool making way too much noise for something that you really don’t have the heart to truly stand up for.
Who knows? You libs created the tax code. You guys created the idea of taxing money away from some victim so the Holy Cross can sit in piss. Who knows what the fuck guys like you would do with tax money?
If you are so against your taxes being used for Katrina victims without your consent, then why pay taxes? Take a stand. Risk going to jail for what you believe in. Otherwise, shut the hell up because you aren’t putting any action behind your words.
Don’t see you demonstrating for ‘unity’ out in front of your building. Or was that on the evening news? And besides, why should I invite the thugs you voted for to attack me? Sure, I’m paying the blackmail. Blaming the victim, Prof?
Like all leftists, you wish to channel humans into what you deem good.
I thought the “Religious RIGHT” was doing that? Isn’t that what the whole “morals” angle is about? You can’t even figure out who to blame for what.
I don’t like extremists of any kind. Have I tried to force my views on anyone? Do my posts suggest anything like that?
Like all leftists, you regard men as unthinking brutes, incapable of deciding for themselves what they want.
Again, where has your money gone over the last two months? Why bring this issue up as it only concerns Katrina victims? Someone true in their motivation would hold this position about EVERYWHERE their tax money goes.
It’s throughout this thread, Doc. Frickin’ read already.
Like all leftists, you vote into power mindless jackasses who implement your agenda (since men are stupid, outlaw those prohormones!).
I won’t even go there because I know enough people see the joke on this one.
Professor, you have been exposed for what you are. Those who seek to impose some grand scheme on humanity really want humanity in chains. And like I said before, you will not be forgiven.
Some grand scheme…like the Patriot Act?
No, like funding Katrina victims against my will. Read, Doc.
“One only need expose it to light, to make the cockroach run.”
— Anonymous
It must suck for you that no one is running away from you. I hate to break this to you, but you aren’t exactly a force to be feared.[/quote]
You been exposed. Your own words have defeated you. You want rights suppressed for the purpose of ‘unity’, some national plan. Before that, I told you where you got your words, from who’s playbook your quoting.
Hang it up, Guy! Game over.[/quote]
You teach children. Is anyone else worried about this?
[quote]AZMojo wrote:
Why won’t you see the problem with your arguement here? The insurance correlation is a good one.[/quote]
No it isn’t. It shows an utter absence of critical thought.
I am not going to respond to this. It is a waste of my time. Maybe you could just explain to me why profits are bad. Really, I would like to hear all about it.
It was a 10-K, but it’s still sweet of you to notice
That’s because both points are irrelevant.
Even if it is the law, a prudent insurance company understands that, if it is going to be in business for more than a year, it needs reserves. Many major insurance firms have been in business for going on 150 years, which suggests to me that they have an idea of how to manage their money. I wonder if our resident insurance expert knows whether this predates the law? You don’t stay in business that long by “screwing your customers”, as you imply above. And isn’t it interesting how the government can’t seem to apply the same fiscal prudence to itself?
How much did the federal government bring in on their expertly-managed investment portfolio? Why, I think it was about $0.
Well, I think they are created out of the prudent management of the Company’s revenues (which, as we have established, includes premium revenues and investment income). The premiums are the price of the service being provided you, the consumer. If you don’t want it, don’t buy it! In the free market, there is a thing called competition. It is the dynamic by which companies in like industries are forced to provide the best possible service to their customers, or lose them. The difference between a consumer and a taxpayer is the consumer has a choice (i.e. can take his golden turds to the company down the street). For an example of how the absence of competition impacts the way business is conducted, go spend a day at your DMV.
Are you really too dense to see the difference between a private, mutually agreed-upon contract and coerced taxation, or do you just enjoy playing games?
Sorry, slick, but you are wrong again. Insurance premiums are regulated at the state level (and sometimes even differ within states) based on something called the “claims ratio”. If a company who does business in both Florida and Alaska wants to raise premiums in AK as a result of some disaster in FL, it needs to justify the increase to the AK state insurance commissioner, and this is not easy to do. The increase has to somehow relate to conditions in AK. Otherwise, no dice. And I’ll take the knowledge of my relative with over 20 years in the business over some Internet bozo any day. Thanks Mom!!
Well, that and the piss-poor financial management skills of government (interesting how you didn’t speak to this at all in your response, when it was the core of my post), absence of competition and incentive to provide quality service, and the coercive nature of taxation. Would you like to keep trying?
You been exposed. Your own words have defeated you. You want rights suppressed for the purpose of ‘unity’, some national plan. Before that, I told you where you got your words, from who’s playbook your quoting.
Hang it up, Guy! Game over.
You teach children. Is anyone else worried about this?[/quote]
Here we go again, not answering anything, just assault verbally the other guy. You write prescriptions – anyone worried about that?
You wrote the words that condemned yourself, Doc. Isn’t sanity somehow related to recognizing reality? Hmmm…
[quote]Fonebone wrote:
AZMojo wrote:
Why won’t you see the problem with your arguement here? The insurance correlation is a good one.
No it isn’t. It shows an utter absence of critical thought.
The key difference, in this case, is that business does it for profit. That’s all. The government still provides a service, right? So business really has more incentive to screw you, I mean make more profit. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
I am not going to respond to this. It is a waste of my time. Maybe you could just explain to me why profits are bad. Really, I would like to hear all about it.
It’s nice that you read your prospectus, so few do these days.
It was a 10-K, but it’s still sweet of you to notice
Did they include that the reserves are REQUIRED by the federal government? How much did they bring in in premiums? You left that out?
That’s because both points are irrelevant.
Even if it is the law, a prudent insurance company understands that, if it is going to be in business for more than a year, it needs reserves. Many major insurance firms have been in business for going on 150 years, which suggests to me that they have an idea of how to manage their money. I wonder if our resident insurance expert knows whether this predates the law? You don’t stay in business that long by “screwing your customers”, as you imply above. And isn’t it interesting how the government can’t seem to apply the same fiscal prudence to itself?
How much did the federal government bring in on their expertly-managed investment portfolio? Why, I think it was about $0.
How exactly did you think those insurance reserves are created? You, the consumer, are the Magical Ass that lays the Golden Turds. Now, maybe your tired of being screwed on both ends and that’s understandable, but don’t pretend this is a one-sided thing.
Well, I think they are created out of the prudent management of the Company’s revenues (which, as we have established, includes premium revenues and investment income). The premiums are the price of the service being provided you, the consumer. If you don’t want it, don’t buy it! In the free market, there is a thing called competition. It is the dynamic by which companies in like industries are forced to provide the best possible service to their customers, or lose them. The difference between a consumer and a taxpayer is the consumer has a choice (i.e. can take his golden turds to the company down the street). For an example of how the absence of competition impacts the way business is conducted, go spend a day at your DMV.
Are you really too dense to see the difference between a private, mutually agreed-upon contract and coerced taxation, or do you just enjoy playing games?
You’re out of you element on this one. You’re deluded to think that your premiums are based only on your individual risk factors. Keeping on the subject of homeowner’s insurance, do you think that homeowner’s in Alaska are going to have their premiums affected because of losses incurred from Katrina? They are, count on it. Insurance companies can’t continue to pay claims without adjusting premiums accordingly. Do you think you’ll EVER pay enough in homeowner’s insurance premium to cover the rebuiling of your home? Not likely. You’re paying to rebuild everybody else’s home.
Sorry, slick, but you are wrong again. Insurance premiums are regulated at the state level (and sometimes even differ within states) based on something called the “claims ratio”. If a company who does business in both Florida and Alaska wants to raise premiums in AK as a result of some disaster in FL, it needs to justify the increase to the AK state insurance commissioner, and this is not easy to do. The increase has to somehow relate to conditions in AK. Otherwise, no dice. And I’ll take the knowledge of my relative with over 20 years in the business over some Internet bozo any day. Thanks Mom!!
So, other than the for-profit vs. not-for-profit thing, if fail to see were the analogy doesn’t hold up.
Well, that and the piss-poor financial management skills of government (interesting how you didn’t speak to this at all in your response, when it was the core of my post), absence of competition and incentive to provide quality service, and the coercive nature of taxation. Would you like to keep trying?[/quote]
Good post, Fonebone. Isn’t it amzing how so many guys regard ‘making a profit’ as somehow being cheated?
Your alternative to rebuilding an entire American city is what, extra wishes?[/quote]
No, extra reserves. There is no reason why a government shouldnt be able to have big reserves of cash for rebuilding.
But, because a president needs to be elected, and needs vast amounts of money to be elected, he’s kinda forced to favor big companies because they fund his presidency.
Say, how much money did the oil companies get? How much for the war in iraq? Oil companies again as it seems, are the extra incentive for the war in iraq. Lets face it, if it was just for the good people or iraq suffering, nothing would be done. After all, the money spent on the iraq war could easily be used to help countless people elsewhere peacefully.
Remember, you vote for this. If a candidate decides he won’t use money from oil companies (and agreeing upon favors and deals very likely) then he will drown in the ad-flood. You vote for giving money to oil companies, who already make a nice living.
[quote]Let me inform you of the Cumbre Vieja Volcano on the Island of La Palma. It is said that future eruption that could happen over the next few generations would send a tsunami towards North America completely destroying every single major city on the Eastern Coast. That includes New York, Miami and everything in between. Here is more info
Geological evidence suggests that during a future
eruption, Cumbre Vieja Volcano on the Island of La Palma
may experience a catastrophic failure of its west flank, dropping
150 to 500 km3 of rock into the sea. Using a geologically
reasonable estimate of landslide motion, we model tsunami
waves produced by such a collapse. Waves generated by the
run-out of a 500 km3 (150 km3) slide block at 100 m/s could
transit the entire Atlantic Basin and arrive on the coasts of the
Americas with 10-25 m (3-8 m) height.
According to you, if someone moved out of New York because of this, they should be excluded from any of the rebuilding that will take place after such a cataclysmic event. What you don’t seem to understand, is that if every major event were actually treated that way, there would eventually be no America. By your own logic, every man and woman living on the East Coast is a dumbass for not moving immediately and keeping that area clear of people until that event takes place.[/quote]
According to me, extra fund raising would not be neccesary because of large reserves. This is never going to happen though. But in the real world, its unlikely that USA could afford such a catastrophy (sp?). Its likely that international help will be required when this happens. Are you then gonna tax the international community? Nope, your gonna ask for it.
Yes, of course, loyalty is an american phenomenon. As are natural disasters. When disaster strikes here, the government supplies money to rebuild towns. But not through extra taxation and very much of the help actually comes from private companies and voluntary donations.
Every year, there is some left-over money from the tax and this is used for emergencies. Its not kept between years unfortunately. For the same reason as the usa doesnt keep money.
A government that spends all of its budget doing something that people will remember helps them get re-elected. Money in a piggybank doesnt please anyone and so doesnt “buy” votes come election time.
Its been proven over and over again that you can expect individuals to be smart and rational, but you can not expect societies to be.
So while everyone can see that a cash reserve and not spending on crazy stuff (which my government seems very fond of doing, unfortunately) is very smart, everyone votes for the crazy stuff.
See above.
[/quote]I just answered them. According to Headhunter, he lives on the East Coast, therefore he is in the exact same boat as the people who lost everything in New Orleans. I would love to see him turn down assistance should that happen in his life time.[/quote]
I disagree. You addressed my questions in much the same way as you address headhunter.
Thats just not the same as answering.
Headhunters idea of a tax system is not too bad.
It will take quite alot of time though before it will work, because everyones gonna under-tax themselves at first. But when people get wounded and go to the hospital and get “sorry, you kinda have to pay us $50.000 for this because everyone paid so little tax” they might donate a bit more next year.
Also, with his system, when you have a rough year and cant afford as much tax, you can just reduce your tax payments for a while until you get back on your feet.
Its not perfect, but the current system actually sucks worldwide, not just usa.
