The State of Socialism in the World

[lawrocket 3]

kallend

Complaining about the quality of teachers, cops etc. while wanting YOUR taxes reduced is disingenuous.

Here's the point. Where do my federal taxes go?

Defense, Veterans and foreign aid get 24% of the taxes.
Social Security, Medicare and other retirement get 38% of the taxes. Welfare gets 21%.
Debt interest is 6%

There's about 90% of the taxes paid. What say we cut defense spending by half. Phase out Medicare and Social Security.
Cut welfare by 25%
Can't do much about debt interest except pay down the principal. Let's do that.

Then we'll have more money to spend on roads and such even if taxes are cut. And it would be amazing what opportunities would be available to people when there's all that money out there that isn't subject to being dished out to whomever bribes the government official the most.

I guess what I'm saying is this: when talking about federal tax load, let's not discuss teachers and cops. Relevant? Yes. But is so minimal as to be like discussing a mosquito bite on the gunshot victim.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 3,132]

>What say we cut defense spending by half. Phase out Medicare and Social Security.
>Cut welfare by 25%

OK. Does this mean you are abandoning your libertarian leanings? You recently defined it as "Libertarian - help most without hurting the others."

[lawrocket 3]

billvon

>What say we cut defense spending by half. Phase out Medicare and Social Security.
>Cut welfare by 25%

OK. Does this mean you are abandoning your libertarian leanings? You recently defined it as "Libertarian - help most without hurting the others."

There are right now between 2 and 3 payers for every SS or Medicare recipient. Help the most.

It's why I said to phase out. OR are you saying that the majority of people are either on Medicare, SS or Welfare? If that is the case then the problem is bigger than I suspected.

Are you saying it would hurt you, bill? I can see that. It's true that hundreds of thousands of federal employees might be laid off. Short term pain long term gain.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 3,132]

>It's why I said to phase out.

That's a good idea - but it just hurts people less each year, rather than all at once.

>OR are you saying that the majority of people are either on Medicare, SS or Welfare?
>If that is the case then the problem is bigger than I suspected.

From what I have read, most people will use one of those services at some time in their lives. Thus you'd be hurting most people.

Note that we may indeed have to make decisions that hurt people; it's effectively inevitable for any change in government. I suspect that most libertarians would not say that they define libertarianism as "not hurting others" but rather as "reducing/eliminating government's interference with individual choice."

Whenever anyone says "I have this new law/reform/program and it helps people and doesn't hurt ANYONE!" I pretty much assume they are either unable to see the whole picture (best case) or are lying (more typical.) (Note that on each California ballot measure there is a statement from the measure's supporters that says just that.)

>Are you saying it would hurt you, bill?

No, I don't think it would hurt me directly. It might help or hurt me indirectly; not sure.