Democrats' Secret Plan for America

How about we just get rid of the entire income tax problem completely. Then there won't be any debate over who pays what. Seriously, go to the fairtax website, read it over and tell me what you think of it.

dave654

A fine idea but tell me, how would you then pay for the military? I can't see the chickenhawks going for that, they'd have no one to hide behind.

[Kyran]

Originally posted by PeterWolf,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (PeterWolf,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Kyran, Um, I'm sorry but all Boortz does is offer opinion, not a single refernce to anything, just his opinion. And bluntly, I've read a few of his opinions and I have little time for the man.[/b]

Oh please spare me your bull. Instead of making baseless assertions, why don't you address the points brought up on his website? Is that too much for you to do? Yeah it is. Here, I'll toss you one of the FACTS from his page, the Fairness Doctrine.

Originally posted by Bob_Dobbs,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Bob_Dobbs,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>i quite agree. he is extremely classist and believes america is a meritocracy. classic examples of republican elitism and oppression[/b]

Ah yes, let's attack the character of the person rather than discuss the points of the topic. He's a libertarian, btw, not a repub.

Originally posted by PeterWolf, Basically, you don't seem to get it, just because Boortz says it, doesn't make it fact. Bluntly, you are trying to convince people that opinions prove this secret plan. Unlikely

Hey, big mouth! What you don't seem to understand is that it is already established that these items are part of the democrat agenda. From socialized medicine to tax shifts to "equalized radio" (fairness doctrine). These ideas did not come from the GOP, the LP, the GP, the CP, or the PP. Any research into these legislative bills proves Democrats originated them.

Bluntly, you are trying to convince people that facts are opinions, and that we must focus on a non-issue instead of dealing with the meat of the subject.

You represent your hive perfectly. No other people will demand you acknowledge their "care for the poor" before they are willing to discuss issues with you.

<!--QuoteBegin-Bob_Dobbs,@
the democrats are trying to increase quality of life and relieve suffering of poverty stricken people. and they try again if it doesn't work or if the gop thwarts them[/quote]

Like I just finished saying in my last post, Bob attempts to correct our interpretations of their underlying motivation. Why don't you prove the Democrats care for the poor?

Bob, did you pass Economics 101 in college?

<!--QuoteBegin-Bob_Dobbs,
the republicans stand for stark capitalism, which invariably leaves a multitude of common citizens in poverty and a small rich elite. what kind of democracy is that?[/quote]

#1. The republicans do not stand for stark capitalism. Baseless assertion.
#2. Capitalism "freedom to own a business" does not cause people to be poor.

If people are not free to create businesses, none will exist. So instead of blaming Liberty for the failures of individuals, you should be thanking Liberty for the successes of the individuals who learn how to make it. Of course, if you actually respected yourself for the choices you made, and received a rewarding outcome, then you might not show such utter disregard for freedom (economic freedom).

Where the hell is the "multitude" of poor anyway? I don't see anyone in picketing lines for food or water. Oh wait, all OUR poor have electricity, air conditioning, and medical insurance.

Bob, do you think everyone is capable of creating a multi-billion dollar business? No you do not. So don't expect everyone to come out equal during life. We're born equal but from there we go our own way.

Here's another one you won't answer: where do people get their money? From their jobs. Who produces 100% of the jobs in America? The private sector. Who's money does the private sector use to create jobs? The money in their bank accounts that derives from profits. Now, if you go and take away half of all the money that the private sector has...how many jobs will exist?

Thank you in advance for avoiding the content of my posts folks. I don't care to argue with a bunch of know-nothing left-wing kooks anyway. As long as you people are allowed to lie over and over again, there is no arguing with you. I have addressed these "big evil republican" and "capitalism causes poverty" ideas enough times that I could write a best-seller.

Poverty and wealth are two eternal conditions that do not exist apart from one another. We would not understand wealth if we did not see poverty somewhere. Not one "caring democrat" on this forum or any other in my 5 years of forum pwnage has bothered to listen to a single idea I've had about eliminating poverty altogether as a part of individual growth. You won't listen because you don't care; you just wanna say you do.

[PatrickHenry]

Kyran, dude you got an attitude...
Hey that rhymes...

Kyran

Um, feel free to prove what you claim is fact, by sources other than Boortz, by credible sources from both sides. I'm really quite tired of rants that do little but offer *interpretations* or *opinion*. How about some facts, some figures, some dates and times and places, references and so on. So far, all I hear is "Boortz".

You are quite welcome to keep Boortz as your oracle, your prophet, your divine guidance but, there is not a single thing says that I should or must. And equally, I don't have to believe Boortz. And all you people seem to keep doing is quoting Boortz and claiming Boortz proves Boortz.

Sigh.

[Kyran]

Peter, let me repeat the same phrase several times so that you understand one of Boortz's facts:

Fairness doctrine = control over radio content
Fairness doctrine = control over radio content
Fairness doctrine = control over radio content
Fairness doctrine = control over radio content
Fairness doctrine = control over radio content
Fairness doctrine = control over radio content
Fairness doctrine = control over radio content
Fairness doctrine = control over radio content
Fairness doctrine = control over radio content

Feel free to dive into the issue any time now. I'm not going to give you dates or times or tell you who passed it or tell you what it did to talk radio. That's YOUR homework. You go look up the bill and read it yourself. Then, you come back here and talk to me about it. If you're going to act like a know-it-all, I will make you argue like one.

----------------------------------------------------

Patrick, just because I win every argument doesn't mean I enjoy it. I'll tell you what I enjoy. I love opening people's minds to the truth. I like it when someone with bad preconceived notions actually realizes they were wrong and changes.

And I see none of that on this forum. I see stubborn children stuck in their beliefs and in their ways. Why would they change though? They don't have to convince people they are right to continue pushing this country down the toilet. All they have to do is throw turds at anyone who wants out of the whirlpool...which is all they do.

Regardless, I am satisfied having made progress in the areas that actually matter. One day freedom-minded individuals will take back this country.

Enjoy the ride while you can, commies.

[dotcoma]

Originally posted by Kyran, I love opening people's minds to the truth.

Whatever, Neo. Tell Morpheus I said hello. Boortz is a f#cking moron. He's a shill for the phony conservatives currently shredding the constitution. He tries to call himself a "Libertarian". He obviously doesn't understand the meaning of the word.

[dotcoma]

Funny you haven't mentioned Michael Powell...

Well I guess I've learned what I wanted to know. The Antis are primarily Anti-consrvatives, Anti-libertarians, Anti-Bush etc. On those subjects they have detailed responses ready to go. Nobody has bothered to actually disagree with any of the points set forth in my original post. All the contrary opinions call the messenger an idiot, abfuscate, use switch and bait tactics, or ridicule and call that debate.

"Oh wait, all OUR poor have electricity, air conditioning, and medical insurance."

i suppose the 50 million or so americans who don't have medical insurance and have trouble paying bills don't count in your book. how about the average credit card debt of circa 20G per person leaving college? how about the millions of unemployed? they're in no danger of being poor. you're living in a shielded fantasy land if you think no one is poor or suffering, even in america.

"Bob, do you think everyone is capable of creating a multi-billion dollar business? No you do not. So don't expect everyone to come out equal during life. We're born equal but from there we go our own way."

no, the market could not support such a ridiculous ratio. i'd like to see a multi-billion dollar company split half it's profits among its employees every year. or turn that profit into payroll and hire more employees to expand their production. that'd make me smile.

"Here's another one you won't answer: where do people get their money? From their jobs. Who produces 100% of the jobs in America? The private sector."

usgov also employs millions of americans and technically is the largest corporation in the world.

"Who's money does the private sector use to create jobs? The money in their bank accounts that derives from profits. Now, if you go and take away half of all the money that the private sector has...how many jobs will exist?"

if you take that money and give it to consumers, or rather, do not tax it away from them, or give it to them in salary, and if the business is any good at all, it will definately continue to prosper with new sales and revenues. people buy things. the cycle of money.

furthermore, taxation of the rich and taxation of corporations are seperate things. i love companies. i love jobs and industry, and production. i love high salaries and good education and skill and using all resources and labor with efficiency.

but laissez faire doesn't work. as libertarian as i may be for private individuals, i do not believe corporations should be let off of the necessary economic regulations.

[Osborn F Enready]

Dave, if you read my "Lengthy Factual Opinion on Problems in the U.S." you probably know how I feel.

The Democrats have been conspiring with the Republicans jointly for over 154 years to monopolize the White House. The Democrats are definitely more socialist oriented openly, though they BOTH have supported too many corrupting policies, pork barrel and open legislation.

You make a definite stance saying the "democrats", whereas I accuse BOTH major parties. It is simply a matter of good cop, bad cop. Each election primary shows which one gets to be which for that election, though they both serve the same masters.

I am a conspiracy theorist, with a lot of proof.
When does it transcend theory?

[dotcoma]

Dave, Boortz is a moron. He offers false solutions. The dems want to tell us what to do with our money so they can spend it on, well, everything really (you know, there are a lot of homeless puppies out there. Lets throw some cash at them!) I agree with a lot of the rhetoric. But what's the solution? Invest in the bloated stock market. I know, lets do like Boortz would do and invest our social security in great companies like Enron, Worldcom, and Tyco!

Osborn I have not read your post, but will do so now. I'm not a fan of the other party either. I'll add more comentary after I read your post, on your thread.

[Leopard]

Originally posted by Bob_Dobbs, the government employs millions of americans, or at least it used to. it uses tax money to pay worker salaries and hire contractors and their employees to get jobs done. however, i'm certain that at least some of the govt money is misspent.

'some' of the money? ALL of the money, save that which is perhaps spent on defense, is 'misspent'! Bob, why doesn't the government employ everyone? Tax money is NOT freely given, it is coerced and demanded under threat of force. This means tat it is inherently going to a use which the actual 'owner' would not have choosen - this is 'misspent'.

you seem to believe that everyone in america who is rich deserves that money and earned it by the sweat of their brow. you also seem to believe that everyone who is poor is that way because they are inferior people, and deserve it.

first, the 'labor theory of money' has been ground into the dustbin of history - labor does not equal value: try making mudpes all day and see if you can sell them. Only labor which is directed in a productive (as determined by others) direction has any value (to those same others). Re: poor people... why do you deny people the RIGHT to be poor? Being poor has alot of negative connotations but the truth is that people do choose to be poor simply because they do not value the things that 'money' brings them as much as others and therefore do not put in the efforts required to earn such money. When did you become the official 'knower of the hearts and minds' of all the poor?

---do you believe that the rich should be given enormous tax breaks at the expense of the general budget and economy?

I believe that no one should pay taxes period - rich or poor. The only truly ethical 'tax' to support the government would be a head tax: determine the government budget, divide this by the number of citizens, present a bill for government services rendered equal across the board to every citizen. Those that do not value the services and do not wish to pay are free to leave or o without benefit of those same services in the future. We are all human, we are entitled only to equivalent rights in the eyes of our government.

---do you believe that if someone cannot afford proper health care it should be denied to them?

'denied'? If someone does not wish to purchase healthcare they shouldn't be forced to. If someone wishes to purchase healthcare but does not have sufficient funds, then they are free to apply their talents and skills in efforts to earn more money. BUT, if someone wishes healthcare and then uses government to stick their hands into my wallet - that is theft and is immoral and violates my rights. Same goes for if someone wants to purchase a car, or a house, or food.

---do you believe that the waltons should be allowed to undermine the economy of a community with anti-competetive practices and sabotage its workers' livelihoods by undercompensating and dividing them? do you believe that because these practices make them wealthy it should be accepted?

undermine the economy of a community? are you crazy? it is because of Walmart (and other superchains) that we have such a high standard of living in this country! Just because folks other than you appreciate their services, YOU decide that your opinions matter more? Should we go back to horse and buggy days if you were to decide that method of transportation was 'better'? You tout 'democracy' yet you deny that the market is the freest and fullest democracy there is... amazing!

---do you believe a company should give its CEO and board executives large multimillion dollar bonus packages while simultaneously laying off workers?

lets see here - you are asking an outside person to comment on a contract between rational, uncoerced folks. Of course people are free to pay each other whatever they agree upon! If I offer to pay the neighbor kid $10 o mow my lawn for me, would you come swooping down, chastizing me for not paying him $20 and therefore taking advantage of him? Do you not think that the neighbor kid would laugh in my face and go on his merry way if he thought that $10 was not worth the effort to do the job asked? Same for CEO's - there is a board of directors which determine the amount of money to pay the CEO's. There are shareholders which can vote in new board of directors should they not agree with their salary ideas. Tell you what, once you are on a board, you can then determine what to pay the CEO - until that time... its none of your business!

these are examples of how society and business work every day, and i think they are driven by greed and that they have tangable negative impact on the lives of ordinary americans.

As human beings, we are ALL driven by self-interest. You use a very subjective term, 'greed', to define this. Self-interest is not a 'bad' thing - it is simply a 'human' thing. Capitalism uses this inherent self-interest and directs it in the most efficient manner for the betterment of all involved.

What is this 'tangable negative impact' you allude to?

the realities of economics is something you really should consider delving into - alot of your misconceptions would be cleared up.

businesses thrive ONLY when they cater to consumers wishes.

yours in liberty,
michael

Nice Mike. Are you moving to New Hampshire soon, or are your already there?

[Leopard]

Originally posted by dave654, Nice Mike. Are you moving to New Hampshire soon, or are your already there?

ah, soon, friend dave, soon! Are you a porcupine also?

BTW: you have done well defending yourself against this unbelieveable onslaught of authoritarian/socialistic ideology! Keep it up, friend!

see you in the freestate!
michael

Well Mike I was going to move to New Hampshire until I discovered the Western Alliance, WAL. I'm much more of a Western kind of guy. I really love the mountains so I've decided to go west again. I used to live in Denver and consider The Rocky Mountain National Park the closest thing to paradise. I am getting more and more interested in the Libertarian cause. If we can establish a foothold in the 4 targeted states and provide a good example for the rest of the country to follow, we can probably affect real change. Recently I heard Jesse Ventura is thinking about running for president in 08. He has stated that he will make the fairtax, national retail sales tax, a center piece of his campaign. If this can be implimented it would be a HUGE step towards reducing the size and authority of the federal government.

Thanks for the cudos. I really get tired of the endless disregard for the facts and the tenacious grip on inane rhetoric. It's nice to see other take the ball and run with it so I can take a break. I'm trying to tone myself down a notch, but it's difficult to not get sarcastic at some of the lunacy posted here.

[Leopard]

I keep my eyes on the West as well - Wyoming in particular. I have lived a few years in the boulder/denver area, but currently reside in income tax free nevada.

if you do not consider yourself libertarian then what do you label yourself? I am willing to be considered a libertarian by others, but I find that other libertarians often refer to me as an AnCap because I am so hardcore free market/economics. I would possibly subscribe to the whole AnCap thought, but am still having trouble with the whole Private Production of Defense thing. Besides that, government has no useful purpose which cannot be better provided for in the market.

I am sure we will meet up someday, either out West or at a freedom Function of some sort... are you perhaps going to the PorcFest in June in NH or the FreedomFest in Las Vegas?

Do you subscribe to any of the yahoo discussion groups for the West movement besides the WAL? Which is your west state of choice?

oops - guess this is all off topic... see ya in private messages!

michael

[Leopard]

in regards to the FairTax thing:
I really hate it when seeing libertarians start discussing different methods of taxation - they all have the same end result. BUT, since I cannot resist putting my two-cents in.... I do not think the FairTax is viable economically:

a 23% sales tax would provide too great an incentive for a large black market to flourish. Most high ticket items would be purchased out-of-country (imagine being able to save $6600 on your next $30k vehicle purchase... worth a trip/vacation to Canada or Mexico? I think so!) and would then necessitate some large intrusive border enforcement. Gangs and 'others' would have more products to peddle and increase in 'power'. The government would inevitably declare another unending war, probably called the 'War on the Black Market' and this would justify even greater government expansion! So, a diminishing 'tax base' as people make more black market purchases, an expansion of government (increase the need for more taxes) equals an ever increasing consumption tax...

as far as the 'worst' type of taxation, I would say it ranks like this:

(1) income tax
(2) consumption tax
(3) property(land) tax
(4) Head tax

Anyways, although I loath the IRS and the income tax, I do not identify it as the absolute worst method the government practices to receive funding. This title is SOLELY reserved to the Treasury Department and the infamously inflationary Federal Reserve. I call this the 'Sneak Tax' - being able to foist the costs for our extravagent lifestyles upon the unborn is immorality at its worst. To be able to steal money value straight out of my pocket without a vote, without even having me to fill out a form or barely notice the daily devaluation as it occurs, is insidious and too powerful an ability which definitely should NOT be left in the hands of a government which, by nature, selects our most corrupt of people to run things and be influenced by those with wealth.

OOOPS! was that me ranting just then? By God, I think I am a libertarian!

saving you from more of my endless diatribe,
michael

[GreatWyrm of Babylon]

I think roxdog should be fired, he utterly failed to inform me that "Boortz is a moron" on page 3. He should be reminded that his party has a short attention span and needs to be reminded on each and every page that "Boortz is a moron" or they may forget.