rhaig

so what you're saying is that it was government interference that killed him. what was your point again? -- Rob

Intentional "misunderstanding" to create a straw man. It lets them rant about how libertarians just want to kill and eat the weak. the weak rarely have enough lean meat on them. -- Rob

I'd like to remind everyone here that it was not Bush's government. It was the government of the american people. It was our government. Naively idealistic perspective. The way it was run, it most certainly was Bush's government. The government of the people in many ways was co-opted to the point that it ceased being the government for the people. ideal perhaps, but what did you do about the situation? If nothing ... so you were OK with it too?? -- Rob

so I see in other posts you seem to acknowledge that the people you're talking about aren't affiliated with or understand the US Libertarian party. So your spray about "Libertarians" is really about anarchists that think they're Libertarians. If you wanted to lambaste them for thinking they're something they're not, fine. If you want to spray about stupid anarchists and their wet dream, go right ahead. But I've voted Libertarian on more than one occasion. I'm not an anarchist, and your continued equating of the two groups shows a lack of understanding, a lack of communication skills, or a combination of the two. -- Rob

well... believing that "Libertarians" and "Anarchists" are one in the same shows a certain level of ignorance. -- Rob

I'd like to remind everyone here that it was not Bush's government. It was the government of the american people. It was our government. -- Rob

2 adults, 2 kids, one still in diapers. I can do it for $400/month, but chicken, pasta, meatloaf, and rice get boring. we average about $520/month. -- Rob

http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/30/pf/taxes/who_pays_taxes/index.htm when you get something for free, you're not that intested in how it runs. If you pay for something, you're more interested in making it work right. With that many people not paying taxes, Someone I used to jump with once told me he'd do free jump seminars, but people don't respect your time if you're giving it away to them. -- Rob

see that little [In relpy to] ?? watch what happens when you click it. Do you want a bailout with your free tech support? -- Rob

states have their own guidelines on what is required in order for an officer to pull over someone. I know officers who have told me that they will ignore those rules if they still believe that the person in the car is a danger to others, but can't show it on the video. Most of the time those people are drunk, get hauled in, and don't fight the charge because they know they were in the wrong. Sometimes those people are fine, and don't get hauled in. Sometimes they fight it and get off for lack of PC for the stop. Does that make those officers bad cops? Depends... but I think mostly no. If someone calls in a drunk driver, that car should be found and observed. if they're drunk, it won't take more than a block or 2 to see PC. -- Rob

yeah. I get it, you must have an MBA or something. Tax base is not like business. you're trying to diversify your revenue streams. Running the IRS like a business. Your sure you're not a republican?? -- Rob

how is a sales tax not diverse? It taxes everything!! -- Rob

And if BO tries that, he won't get re-elected. But his die-hard detractors will bash away no matter the quality or the results; and in fact, they want him to fail. Well, let's call it what it really is: they want him to eat shit and die. so constant blaming someone else for ineffectivity it is then. I'd rather have effective leadership than effective finger pointing. I just want him to do what he said he would, and not do what he said he wouldn't, and along the way, not forget his oath. -- Rob

no it's not. The way I read the GAO's estimates, the 10-year plan puts it at $9T. The question I have for all those on-board with the bailouts is "when do we stop?" We have people saying "look what a great job he's done, things are getting better." So when does "better" turn into good enough to survive without help that creates additional debt? While He may have inherited a load of crap, what is he handing to his successor in another 3 or 7 years? From what I see it's going to be a highly subsidized economy with several $T in debt to recover from. It's time to quit placing blame, and figure out when the problem is fixed. He can't go his whole term blaming bush for problems. -- Rob

ok... personal responsibility to society is what you're trumpeting. I understand what you're saying now. "Each person has a responsibility to help others." (or something along those lines) Which explains the liberal slant in your voting ideals. Interesting... I'd never considered that a liberal might thing that they owe society something. I usually see it the other way around that people feel society owes them something. I'm talking about personal responsibility for one's actions or inactions and the consequences thereof. Like if I choose to give the panhandler (who may not be homeless) $2 on my way home from work, helping him make $30/hr (or more) by standing on a street corner, I'm partly responsible for him not bothering to get a job or even to try. However if I don't give him the money, he might seek help from one of the many local private groups that exist to help homeless people in our area. That $2 isn't removed from the economy by me not giving it to him, I spend it elsewhere. I could also choose to support the local groups that help the homeless by giving them money, or my time (time is more likely). And the Libertarians aren't all about number one. They're about not having the government interfere in our day to day lives. Including the lives of those who are in need of help. It's society's responsibility to help itself. If you had 15% more money coming into your bank account each year because of a change in taxes, would you be more likely to donate some of that to local organizations that help the homeless or other social aid programs? I know I would. Reduce the government's cost of doing business. Enact some tax reforms that reduce the cost of collecting taxes (and maybe even do it constitutionally). -- Rob

Dress code issues in schools are justified by saying that varying from the dress code is disruptive to class and the learning environment. I can get behind that to a point. However, a yearbook photo is not disruptive to class. The "naturalist" argument is a typical fringe informatory point. It's hardly worth addressing, but would be covered under the yearbook's standards on what they will allow to be published. They have them. Hell, 25 years ago we had them when I was in high school. And if a high school transvestite wanted his pic taken in a dress, I don't see the problem either. -- Rob

that's the part I don't get. So you're either saying that social programs such as welfare don't reward people for staying unemployed, or you're saying that these social programs are conservative agenda items. Or, when you say "liberal" you're not meaning democrat. (because in the global scheme, the two don't necessarily align) Please clarify. As far as I can see, the only political party with a line anywhere near personal responsibility is the libertarian party. -- Rob

my take on it is that the economy is healthier when people are spending. Lots of people. Not the few rich guys here and there. If $10B gets spent by 100M people, I think it's much better for the economy than if $10B gets spent by 100 people. So what this means is that it's not taxing rich people that helps the economy, but reducing taxes, or getting more money into the pockets of middle & lower class that helps. Now to make such a proposal work, you may have to bump the taxes on upper class a bit in our current system. I still think that once things get a little better, and people start spending more frequently, we should take a more serious look at the FairTax. Most people only see "sales tax" and stop reading. What I really like about it is that monthly there is a "prebate" sent that is meant to offset the sales tax that is going to be paid that month on necessity items. If a family of 4 spending currently $1750 per month on necessity items, they'd end up spending about $2274 (with 23% of that being taxes) under the FairTax plan. They would, however, get a check at the beginning of the month for $524 to offset the taxes they'd pay on those items, making their necessities tax-free for their bottom line. (Yes I picked that number to match up with the 524 allowance for a family of 4.) -- Rob

so they said he got the prize for "what he has done", and they're following the guidelines that say the prize should be awarded to "the person who has contributed most to the development of peace in the previous year" So does "in the previous year" mean in the last calendar year (2008) or in the last 12 months before the award was given? I'm thinking not the latter because 2/3 of that was after the nominations were due. So if it was the former, what happened in 2008 besides the election? -- Rob

wait... so in the same post that lucky agrees that making things like this partisan is stupid, he makes them partisan. I don't see how that goes to Lucky. -- Rob

the balance transfer game is how I got in over my head. at the top end it was more than $60K that I was paying an average of about 15% on. Have since cancelled all those accounts and negotiated the rates down and am 2 years into a 5 year payoff plan. my total payoff is going to be about 90K over 5 years. I didn't have any companies raise my rates without reason. In hindsight I wish they had and I might not have gotten that deep in the hole. In any case, it was my fault, and I was not victimized by the credit card companies. -- Rob

I'll look for the cite, but I read an article a few years ago that cited a survey of TX DPS officers. 60% of them responded that they would refuse orders to go door to door to collect guns in the case of a ban. Not that that's how it would happen anyway, but I thought it was interesting to note. -- Rob

the check I got last year at tax time was for me to spend. And I did. All of it with local businesses. It was not a check written to a company so they could turn around and give it to an exec as a bonus for keeping the company alive even though it lost shit-tons of money. Don't get me wrong. If that company had paid me those bonuses, I'd find some spin to justify it. I'm a greedy fucker. But don't go equating the two. Please read the OP (it's not about corporate bailouts, don't go equating the two). BTW, most of the bank bailout money, and the AIG bailout, which resulted in huge exec bonuses came from Bush/Paulson, not Obama. your words that I quoted were "any and all". so the bailouts I spoke of that were handed out by the Obama administration, were part of that "any and all". I understand what the OP was about. In fact I googled around a bit to read more because I found it humorous that people were standing in line, and many didn't know exactly what they were standing in line for. Reminded me of stories I used to hear about the former soviet union, though I'm not equating the two. -- Rob

the check I got last year at tax time was for me to spend. And I did. All of it with local businesses. It was not a check written to a company so they could turn around and give it to an exec as a bonus for keeping the company alive even though it lost shit-tons of money. Don't get me wrong. If that company had paid me those bonuses, I'd find some spin to justify it. I'm a greedy fucker. But don't go equating the two. -- Rob

dunno, but there must be one as the PA's don't seem to count -- Rob