Work for Food, Shelter and Life

[fightingquaker13]

As usual you are half right. Wall Street got us here WITH government collusion, from both sides of the aisle. On the left, it was Fannie May and subsidizing unqualified borrowers. On the right, it was lax regulation. They allowed "mortgage brokers" (banks that weren't regulated as banks, like the S@Ls in the 80s) to write paper and sell bundled mortgage securities without full disclosure of risks. Worse, they let them advertise these as "insured" by firms like AIG that weren't regulated as insurance companies, so when the bottom dropped out, there was no capital to offset losses, so the bottom fell out hard. Its the same story with the S@L crisis and the market/banking crisis in the thirties. Government regulation to make tranactions transparent to investors is necessary to a free market. If you know what you're buying, buy it or not, but the states role is to keep business honest.
As far as the tax issue, the GOP has adopted it as an article of religion, not an instrument of fiscal policy. Only a fool argues for tax cuts in the abstract. A smart person looks at what government should or shouldn't be doing, and first cuts services, THEN cuts taxes. The great flaw of Reagan was that he put tax cuts ahead of spending cuts. As in my earlier post, this is justified in hard times (such as the early 80s and it would be justified now even if it did run up the deficeit in the short term). It does stimulate the  economy. Reagan failed to explain that though. He gave people the idea that they could have tax cuts, the new deal programs (albeit by cutting "waste and fraud"), a huge and necessary military buildup and deficiets were ok. Every president since has followed suit, D or R. Look at W. Great on a $10 trillion dollar tax cut, but where was the $10 trillion spending off set even with a GOP Congress? Oh yeah, a medicare drug benefit and two wars. BO is worse, more spending, not going into the private sector via a temporary jobs progam, but just in a redistributionist plan that creates no real jobs but just taxes Peter to pay Paul.  I haven't sacrificed my principles Eric, but I do wonder whether the Kool-ad is effecting your view a little here. Spend, cut taxes, or borrow in hard times. Save for a rainy and scrimp in good times. As a for instance, if W had for gone half the tax cut and bought back $5 trillon in T bills, our indebtedness to china would have fallen by 1/2. Wasted money? I think not.
FQ13

[fightingquaker13]

As usual you are half right. Wall Street got us here WITH government collusion, from both sides of the aisle. On the left, it was Fannie May and subsidizing unqualified borrowers. On the right, it was lax regulation. They allowed "mortgage brokers" (banks that weren't regulated as banks, like the S@Ls in the 80s) to write paper and sell bundled mortgage securities without full disclosure of risks. Worse, they let them advertise these as "insured" by firms like AIG that weren't regulated as insurance companies, so when the bottom dropped out, there was no capital to offset losses, so the bottom fell out hard. Its the same story with the S@L crisis and the market/banking crisis in the thirties. Government regulation to make tranactions transparent to investors is necessary to a free market. If you know what you're buying, buy it or not, but the states role is to keep business honest.
As far as the tax issue, the GOP has adopted it as an article of religion, not an instrument of fiscal policy. Only a fool argues for tax cuts in the abstract. A smart person looks at what government should or shouldn't be doing, and first cuts services, THEN cuts taxes. The great flaw of Reagan was that he put tax cuts ahead of spending cuts. As in my earlier post, this is justified in hard times (such as the early 80s and it would be justified now even if it did run up the deficeit in the short term). It does stimulate the  economy. Reagan failed to explain that though. He gave people the idea that they could have tax cuts, the new deal programs (albeit by cutting "waste and fraud"), a huge and necessary military buildup and deficiets were ok. Every president since has followed suit, D or R. Look at W. Great on a $10 trillion dollar tax cut, but where was the $10 trillion spending off set even with a GOP Congress? Oh yeah, a medicare drug benefit and two wars. BO is worse, more spending, not going into the private sector via a temporary jobs progam, but just in a redistributionist plan that creates no real jobs but just taxes Peter to pay Paul.  I haven't sacrificed my principles Eric, but I do wonder whether the Kool-ad is effecting your view a little here. Spend, cut taxes, or borrow in hard times. Save for a rainy and scrimp in good times. As a for instance, if W had for gone half the tax cut and bought back $5 trillon in T bills, our indebtedness to china would have fallen by 1/2. Wasted money? I think not.
FQ13

[crusader rabbit]

Ericire12 hit it right on the mark, FQ: "You really need to stop calling yourself a Libertarian if you are going to keep giving these speeches....."


Every time the government has lowered taxes, the economy has grown.  Will Rogers (who was probably even to the left of FQ) noted that "No man is safe when Congress is in session."  But, it all harkens back to one of the original precepts of the Founding Fathers (note that I use the term Founding Fathers not some other PC b/s.  That precept:  The government is best that governs least.  And, it is not just the government's money that comes from the people, FQ.  The very authority it claims is only what we the people allow.  Unfortunately, when a majority who would rather do less learn that they can vote themselves largess from the minority who have committed to doing more, the result is what we are seeing now.

Finally, FQ, when have you ever got a job from someone on the government dole?

[fightingquaker13]

Ericire12 hit it right on the mark, FQ: "You really need to stop calling yourself a Libertarian if you are going to keep giving these speeches....."


Every time the government has lowered taxes, the economy has grown.  Will Rogers (who was probably even to the left of FQ) noted that "No man is safe when Congress is in session."  But, it all harkens back to one of the original precepts of the Founding Fathers (note that I use the term Founding Fathers not some other PC b/s.  That precept:  The government is best that governs least.  And, it is not just the government's money that comes from the people, FQ.  The very authority it claims is only what we the people allow.  Unfortunately, when a majority who would rather do less learn that they can vote themselves largess from the minority who have committed to doing more, the result is what we are seeing now.

Finally, FQ, when have you ever got a job from someone on the government dole?

Thats all well and good crusader, but ONLY if you cut spending before cutting taxes, not just putting it on the visa. Now we have been trained to think we can have high spending and low taxes. It don't work that way. A budget is a list of priorities. What you want? How will you pay for it? And THEN make your call. I hate comparing running a government to running a business, but in this case its apt. Don't tell me about how you'll cut my taxes. Tell me what you'll cut and how much I (or we) will save. Don't promise me a new program. Tell me what I'll (or we) will pay for it. Anything else is BS.
FQ13

[ericire12]

Quaker, I am glad you never graded my papers because you really have a hard time reading for content.

There is no Kool-aid drinking going on here, I firmly believe in less taxation AND less spending.... Thats what I meant by "take only the money they need to function year to year".... Some years taxes will be higher, some years taxes will be lower. Its the eternal growing of Govt and the tax and spend mentality that pisses me off. I recognize that the GOP is nothing but RINOs, and thats why I have often preached for term limits in congress. When anyone spends too much time in Washington, they end up turning into mindless zombies.

But back to this Libertarian thing here.... I'm sorry, but you can not advocate for redistribution of wealth, Govt stimulus plans, Govt stock piling of OUR money, and call ANY tax cut "unnecessary" all the while calling yourself a Libertarian. Thats not how it works..... (and thats just the big govt, left wing lunacy that you have put forth in this thread)

[Sponsor]

[fightingquaker13]

Quaker, I am glad you never graded my papers because you really have a hard time reading for content.

There is no Kool-aid drinking going on here, I firmly believe in less taxation AND less spending.... Thats what I meant by "take only the money they need to function year to year".... Some years taxes will be higher, some years taxes will be lower. Its the eternal growing of Govt and the tax and spend mentality that pisses me off. I recognize that the GOP is nothing but RINOs, and thats why I have often preached for term limits in congress. When anyone spends too much time in Washington, they end up turning into mindless zombies.

But back to this Libertarian thing here.... I'm sorry, but you can not advocate for redistribution of wealth, Govt stimulus plans, Govt stock piling of OUR money, and call ANY tax cut "unnecessary" all the while calling yourself a Libertarian. Thats not how it works..... (and thats just the big govt, left wing lunacy that you have put forth in this thread)

I can't call a tax cut uneccesary? I could save a lot of money by following Ron Paul's advice and withdrawing all US troops to the CONUS. I could save more by following my own and legalizing drugs (but you don't like that). I could save still more by abandoning public education and letting parents educate their child or not. The thing is, there is a cost to all of that all taxes aren't all bad because some government is necessary and it costs money. Its like paying dues in a club or tithing at church. The debate should be about what you should be doing in the first place.
FQ13

[tt11758]

I can't call a tax cut uneccesary? I could save a lot of money by following Ron Paul's advice and withdrawing all US troops to the CONUS. I could save more by following my own and legalizing drugs (but you don't like that). I could save still more by abandoning public education and letting parents educate their child or not. The thing is, there is a cost to all of that all taxes aren't all bad because some government is necessary and it costs money. Its like paying dues in a club or tithing at church. The debate should be about what you should be doing in the first place.
FQ13

Either you're not listening or your arrogance won't allow your elitist brain to process what Eric is saying.  Bring home the troops?  Fine.  Abandon public education?  More people are doing that every year.  The bottom line is, cut the waste.  If it's a project that is a waste of money, close it down.  If it's something that can be run more efficiently, run it more efficiently.  I just want the government to stop picking MY pocket because they're too corrupt or too lazy to only do what they should be doing.

The error of your comparison to club dues and church giving is that they are VOLUNTARY.  Nobody's gonna confiscate your property or toss your ass in jail if you fail to pay them.  You can opt to not join that club or church.  The choice is YOUR'S, as it should be, since it's YOUR money.  Washington seems to forget that the trillions they waste AIN'T THEIR FRIGGING MONEY!!!!

Rant off.

[Pathfinder]

But back to this Libertarian thing here.... I'm sorry, but you can not advocate for redistribution of wealth, Govt stimulus plans, Govt stock piling of OUR money, and call ANY tax cut "unnecessary" all the while calling yourself a Libertarian. Thats not how it works..... (and thats just the big govt, left wing lunacy that you have put forth in this thread)

And that is why I have been referring to him as a faux "libertarian" for - what? - a year now?

[tombogan03884]

 Eric is on the right track The Federal Govt has no right to more money than it actually NEEDS there should be NO surplus, if there is then we are being taxed excessively and they should be lowered.
As some one else posted Government does not create jobs, the best Government simply creates a business climate that allows CAPITALISM to create jobs, not redistribution of wealth which only a poorly educated person would subscribe to. (Get your  money back from that school FQ )
As for unemployment, which I am becoming an expert on, there are over 5 million unemployed Americans, there are about 20 million illegal aliens in the country, Get rid of them, the story that they do jobs Americans won't is BS. Every time Immigration raids a company and rounds up the illegals they are immediately flooded by AMERICANS seeking work.
Not to mention the decrease in "Entitlement" payments, crime, prison population and other benefits . And it CAN be done, it was done by Ike.

FQ is also wrong about Wall St. Lax regulation had nothing to do with it, the problem was that there was ANY regulation (AKA Government meddling ) besides sound business practices and the sink or swim regulation of the Capitalist system.
If FQ doesn't understand these basic realities then Eric, for all his rudeness is correct, he should quit mislabeling himself as a "libertarian" and call himself what his ideas actually make him appear, a moderate socialist.

[fightingquaker13]

Either you're not listening or your arrogance won't allow your elitist brain to process what Eric is saying.  Bring home the troops?  Fine.  Abandon public education?  More people are doing that every year.  The bottom line is, cut the waste.  If it's a project that is a waste of money, close it down.  If it's something that can be run more efficiently, run it more efficiently.  I just want the government to stop picking MY pocket because they're too corrupt or too lazy to only do what they should be doing.

The error of your comparison to club dues and church giving is that they are VOLUNTARY.  Nobody's gonna confiscate your property or toss your ass in jail if you fail to pay them.  You can opt to not join that club or church.  The choice is YOUR'S, as it should be, since it's YOUR money.  Washington seems to forget that the trillions they waste AIN'T THEIR FRIGGING MONEY!!!!

Rant off.

We aren't disagreeing. All I want is for you to tell me what is waste and why. Then we cut it and refund the cash. As far as voluntary. Well, reduce taxes to zero. Then we get zero government. Great, until you want to trade mark something, keep the Chinese tanks out of Omaha, or buy a medication that has been tested. There is a difference between a libertarian and an anarchist. It is this. Lincon said it best. The purpose of Government is do only those things for people they can't do for themselves. I agree. But don't give me the whole government bad/taxes evil schtick without laying out a few principles of what we SHOULDN'T be doing. Odds are, I'll agree. The thing is we need a LIMITED government, and it won't run on charitble contributions, the free rider principle proves this. Maybe it should be voluntary. We can go back to Icelandic law. Pay taxes or don't. But if you don't, no police or fire protection, you can't drive on public roads etc. The point is we do need some public services. Pick them and pay for them. What is your alternative?
FQ13
PS I agree with Tom on illegal thing. I would bet good money TAB would still be working if he didn't have to compete with companies hiring illegals for half the wages and overhead he pays his guys, and a miniscule chance of getting caught.