Well that isn't true either Michael. First the issue was "taxes", all taxes and not a specific tax. Taxes are not nor have they ever constituted theft. Now you are limiting it to a specific type of tax. But even so, the income tax isn't theft, nor has it ever been theft. I suggest you look up the definition of theft. It doesn't apply to taxation. Income taxes were legal before the the Sixteenth Amendment and were at times used. The Sixteenth Amendment just eliminates the need for apportionment of income tax revenues. "The Sixteenth Amendment (Amendment XVI) to the United States Constitution allows the Congress to levy an income tax without apportioning it among the states or basing it on the United States Census" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution You should heed your advice and check out the history books. Then you should be able to prove it with hard and credible data - not all this Joe or Jane says so, so it is true crap you are so fond of.
They worked. That's a matter of historical record - prosperity and sound money and decades of calm increase in everyone's standard of living. Decades. Consecutive. Right through WWII, even. The trains in the US are not "perfectly functional infrastructure". And most of them are older than anything in bombed and rebuilt Germany and Japan. And you are of course being silly about Sanders proposing "make work" expenditures. Not if the trains in Europe are perfectly functional. I recall a hearing on highway funding in my town where the lifespan of German freeways was pointed at - it was over 12 years - as a goal we should aspire to. The roads around here are in increasingly rough shape - not approaching their alleged lifespan of eight years - and the passenger trains hardly exist. It's not up 71% under Obama. It's up about 6 trillion, or less than 50%. Obama himself is responsible for about 1 trillion of that. You should post some of it, then. All I see is this: I agree. But I've been pointing out that Clinton is a standard issue moderate rightwing authoritarian, an Eisenhower Republican, all along. That doesn't lead to WWIII in some way more dangerous than, say, the truculence of any of the Republican candidates (except maybe Kasich). All the tough guy rhetoric is not just for show - as we saw with W, those guys will actually do that stuff.
LOL..... What a joke. I really find it amazing people actually wave flags and stand in line to meet these Political Clowns. Anyway, here's a desperate Bill Clinton trying to defend a lying, cheating, crony capitalist Hillary against a bumbling Bernie Sanders' 'democratic' socialist. "Vicious trolling," Clinton dubbed apparent Sanders' comments made towards female Clinton supporters, "that are literally too profane often - not to mention sexist - to repeat." Psychopathic Clowns. It's reassuring to know one of these clowns will have another monkey withing arms reach of a football sized box that contains the codes required to initiate Armageddon? Oh, but you're right. We need Nanny to protect us - with the ability to blowup the world several times. Yeah, THAT makes sense (not). I mean, IMAGINE if that weenie Marco Rubio had access to that much power??? Who in their right mind would support such a thing? Oh, that's right, State-worshiping Authoritarians, that's who. People talk about The Church and abuse of power. Give me a break. Sky Daddy worship (even in the ME) is NOTHING compared to State-worship. I mean nothing. At least idiocracy has it's limits with the Theists. For Statists, there is NO limit. So long as they're rewarded well, many very intelligent Statists are happy to do the bidding of whomever is in Authority over them. Numerous experiments have shown this to be the case since the 1950s. Oh well, let's hope technology outpaces these psychopaths. It's, possibly, our only hope as a species. Luckily, Japan is technologically advanced. Structural problems, due to so many old people, but that won't always be the case.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! My guess is, disgust with the status quo / O-blah-blah stems from the The Great Recovery from The Great Recession caused by the Great Central Bankers and the Great Federal Teet that everyone is enjoying. * if by everyone, we mean banksters and ex-banksters.
Politico: What Clinton said in her paid speeches LOL IMO, B.Sanders was right to get secret service. I know I wouldn't want to be winning against someone in the pocket of these Banking criminals. No, way.
The Guardian: Donald Trump quotes his supporter who calls Ted Cruz 'a pussy' Amoorika, The Greatest-est Planet on Earth Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! You know what the funnest thing is? One of these Political Hacks will end up POTUS. Imagine, a Clown with the ability to start WWIII and wipe a billion people off the planet. Only Religious kooks would support such an asinine, insane, proposition. Now that the State is in charge of Redistributing money from the working-class, to bailing out the bankstering and slumlording-classes, this is what you end up with as an option: Clowns. Imagine what the functional illiterates will puke up in 2020!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! LOL Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
From RealClear Politics Trump: Don't Believe Unemployment Is 5%, As High As 35, 42% Donald Trump calls out "phony" unemployment numbers at his victory speech after winning the New Hampshire Republican primary. "Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5% unemployment. The number's probably 28%, 29%, as high as 35%, in fact, I even heard recently 42%," Trump stated. "If we had 5% unemployment, do you think we'd have these gatherings?" Trump asked. --O-- It's probably safe to say that 8 years of a bullshitter Bush Jr. and a phony Never-Ending-War followed by 8 more years of O-blah-blah bullshitting about Change while bailing out the criminal bankers and top 1% - who've never been richer IN HISTORY, we've FINALLY reached a point where the overwhelming vast majority of Americans / Tax Chattel no longer trust their Public "Servants" / Tax Farmers. Good! Sadly, their solution to corrupt crony Government is - moar corrupt crony Government. Which is to say, more initiation of legal violence against morally innocent citizens. Kind of reminds me of how people worship a Sky Daddy whom they think is going to send (morally innocent) non-believers to burn in hell fire for all of eternity. Seriously, an obese American was standing in a 1000+ year old Shinto Shrine taking pictures when she turned to me and, in a Southern hick accent, said: "It's a shame all these people is going to hell" and then waddled away. LOL Oh Evolution! You prankster you!
Ron Paul in The Austrian comments on the State of the Union: Overall, he's quite positive Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The reason why? We're going to get that Change We Can Believe In. Change Will Come Whether We Like It or Not But the reason we see more success for these ideas is not just because it’s easier to find them and read them. We’re living in a time when people — especially young people — can see that the old ideas aren’t working any more. The young generation has inherited a mess from the older generations, and the young can see that what they’ve been told isn’t true. It’s not true that you can just go to college, run up a bunch of student debt, and then get a good job. The young can see that the middle class is being destroyed by our current economic system. And they can see that our foreign policy is failing. Whether we like it or not, change will come. The troops will come home. They probably won’t come home for ideological reasons, but simply because the United States is broke and can’t afford all its wars anymore. We’re also living in a time when the economic system is going to come unglued. The old Keynesian economic system isn’t working and young people can see it. If it is true that we’re in the midst of an end of an era, though, the question remains as to what’s going to replace the system we have now. There are still plenty of socialists — popular ones — who are out there saying that what we need is more government control and more war to fix the economy and the world. So, we still have a lot of work to do, but I think we’re in a better place now than we’ve been in a long time. --o-- I'd also note, Paul makes the case there's no need to wait for a Majority. That's simply a waste of time. I'd suggest, putting your energy where it will matter. Raise your family peacefully. Ensure your kids understand basic reasoning - which is also good for computer programming, so that's a bonus. Support and work with like minded people on making the chance within your community. You don't have to change more than that.
It's still working to the extent that it's still somewhat Keynesian, despite thirty+ years of Reaganomics. Meanwhile, no socialists are thinking or saying that war fixes the economy, and no socialists have had any popularity or power in the US for a very long time. So lord knows what Paul is talking about - but apparently he isn't taking any responsibility for his Party's role in this mess. Covering ass, as is usual among the Ayn Rand crowd.
If by 'working' you mean funneling money from the bottom 90% to the top 10%, bailing criminal bankers and incompetently run overly unionized automotive plants, paying for never ending war and destroying education - sure, I suppose it is 'working'. Which was also Keynesian. Paul Krugman: An Alien Invasion Could Fix the Economy (Time) Paul Krugman: Oh! What a Lovely War (New York Times) I'd expect nothing less from a Statist. Violence against The People, for the Good of the People. I had to hit her, for her own good. Children just need a good slap, it instills discipline. Since this is the Trump Thread, it should be noted, Donald Trump never spanked his kids. He's against using violence towards children and thinks the best parenting technique is to sit down and calmly speak to your children reasonably. Trump was against the War by the way. Which makes sense. He's probably a strong atheist. LOL No true Scotsman. Riiight. Yeah, I know. That f*cking retard. Oh, I mean Pual-Tard Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
That's the Reaganomics part - the general opposite of Keynesian (it cuts taxes for the rich when the economy is growing, for example, and attempts to stimulate the economy via tax cuts for the rich, and other stupidities). The Keynesian remnants are still holding things together, barely. And Donald is a Progressive, and fascism is leftwing, and bank bailouts are socialism. The wingnut dictionary is quite an invention. Apparently you think Krugman is socialist, and you can't read English prose with comprehension. Those are probably related circumstances. There are lots of socialists around, on the margins. Sanders is one - not an extremely leftwing one, but still in the category. None of them have had any power or popularity in the US for a very long time. Somebody like you, who gets your info from the Rupert sludgepipe, can't name any off hand, for example. (Krugman? giggle).
Reagan was a command and control Statist Authoritarian. This is all Central Planning of the economy / Keynsianism. Some of his positions are "Progressive" / Regressive Authoritarianism. As exemplified by his support for State-mandated Universal Healthcare. Therefor, like Bernie, he's also an Statist Authoritarian and this policy stance would be 'Progressive'. Fascism is another form of Authoritarianism, it can align with either Left or Right Statists. Yes of course. Socialism is only possible via State Authoritarianism. If not, and it were voluntary, then it'd be called 'free-market' Capitalism and those banks would have gone out of business. Bailing out the banks is no different than Universal Healthcare in the sense that they both rely on the State to initiate violence against innocent people to achieve their end results. Either redistribution of resources to crooked banks or poorly run public hospitals. LOL If you say so. What? Are you white knighting for Bernie now? LOL Krugman is the one who said an Alien Invasion would be good for the economy, not me. He's also a big cheerleader for WWII style economic planning. You know, where most people go hungry and ration-cards decide who can eat and what. Because that's 'good for the economy'. Anyway, Krugman (like Bernie, Trump and Reagan) is an Statist Authoritarian. The State IS the religion of today and so it's naturally most people would worship it without question. Some lean one way other another. Just like any other religion, there's plenty of crack-pot denominations.
The only remark here is that this is not a coincidental spewing of gibberish from somebody who dropped their Intro To Political Science and Econ 101 texts into a wood chipper and glued them back together without their glasses. That set of quotes is a consequence of an organized media campaign. There exists an entire organization of intellectual resources in the US - think tanks, lobbying firms, media corporations, charitable and grant foundations, etc - who have for a generation now been pressing the meme that all impositions of government authority are ideologically indistinguishable and operationally identical, and that all impositions of governmental authority restrict freedom - the more government, of any kind, the less freedom. Therefore, since governing ideologies are indistinguishable and some are authoritarian they are all authoritarian. Also, since they are indistinguishable and some are leftwing, they are all leftwing - the State itself, as a concept, is leftwing. Government is leftwing. By necessity then: Authoritarian government is leftwing government. The two terms, authoritarian and leftwing, are thereby made equivalent. So - this is the key: If it's not leftwing, it's not authoritarian. That's what they are marketing. In other words, and to bring their marketing to bear on the current US situation: fascism as a distinguishable and opposable ideology of government does not exist. All government is equivalently fascistic, equivalently socialistic, equivalently authoritarian. The State itself, with all of its ideologies and so forth, is a leftwing concept. Everyone who opposes any State is thereby opposing fascist/socialist/authoritarian government , and everyone who is rightwing is therefore opposing the State and advocating for greater freedom simultaneously. By definition, in a way (nega-definition? anti-definition? dark power definition?). So there is no such thing as a rightwing corporate authoritarian acquisition of State power and takeover of governance. That's a meaningless string of words - like a square circle - for an entire faction of American voters. I regard that as a dangerous situation.
Firstly, I already stated quite clearly, a Dictator could ironically return many civil liberties to the citizens of the USA while removing the rights of self determination as it pertains to elected officials. As a matter of fact, a smart Dictator would think to do so, because such a person would implicitly understand that prosperity is created through free trade with a sound money. A Dictator isn't ipso facto a Tyrant. A Dictator may fall on your inane demarcation of 'Left' or 'Right'. A Philosopher King, as proposed in Plato's Republic would fall where iceaura - on the Left or on the Right? How about Thomas Jefferson? George Washington? Augustus Caesar? Mao Zedong? What are they? Right or Left? Labels like Progressive, Left, Right, Environmentally Friendly, Feminist, MRA, whatever.... they don't change the fact that use of the State's legal ability to INITIATE violence against INNOCENT people is Authoritarianism. Sorry iceaura, but Rape by a "Leftwinged" or a "Rightwinged" individual is still Rape. It's still Rape if the person is "Progressive" and just Raping someone for the "Good of Society". It's still Rape. It may be legal (as was the rape of Slaves). It is still Rape. Use of the State's legal ability to INITIATE violence against INNOCENT people is immoral by definition and is a form of Authoritarianism by practice. One more time, because I know this very simple concept is a little difficult to understand when you're brainwashed to think in the Left -vs- Right paradigm. Groups of people in "Government" can legally INITIATE violence against INNOCENT people not in Government. They may fall into your category of "Left", like Bernie Sanders or they may fall into your category of "Right" like Ronald Reagan. See? Not that difficult to understand. YOU think it's okay to use violence against innocent people, I don't. I think we should work toward living in a society where such behavior is reduced. Not increased, but reduced. We can start by Ending The Federal Reserve. Which will eventually happen peacefully one way or another. Either people stop wanting to do business with it's antiquated fiat currency or it implodes. Nice strawman. I had to hit her, for her own good. Oh, that's okay, you're Left. I smack my kids, it instills discipline. Oh, that's okay, you're Right. I will use the State's legal ability to initiate violence against innocent people and enforce Universal Healthcare. Oh, that's okay, sometimes you have to use violence against the people, for the good of the people.
Here's a few more: Tea Party, Libertarian, Conservative, Capitalist, Freedom, American Heritage, Prolife, Christian, Patriot, Anti-Terrorist, Centrist, Moderate, Reactionary, Fascist, Socialist, Muslim, Mormon, Communist. So we'll just mix and match, eh? Because the only good government is the one that doesn't levy taxes, and all of those folks have governments that levy taxes - there's no difference between any of them, in that respect, so we'll just use whatever term is handiest for whomever and whatever. Except the totalitarian communist ones, of course - no taxation involved, in a totalitarian communist State. The innocent are safe. And here I was thinking that feudalism was your shining ideal.
yes micheal we all know libertarians love fascism and monarchies. and sound money is a bullshit phrase used by bullshit artists. no it isn't. lying about the definition of what a word means are trying to redefine it to suit your own purposes doesn't actually change the definition. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism this should be a start to actually educate yourself instead of repeating the propaganda of sociopaths
Islam, Mormonism, Judaism, Catholicism, millions of Protestant Christians sects, and etc... ALL of these 'ideologies' share the belief in a Sky Daddy. Progressive, Conservative, Left and Right share the belief in Statist Authoritarianism. As for Left vs Right. Was Mao left or right? Progressive or Conservative? Lenin? Hitler? Washington? Hamilton? Obama? Sanders? Bush II? Is Income tax left or right? Progressive or Conservative? Federal Reserve? The concept of a State? Hairdresser licences? Florist licences? Doctors licences? Liquor licences? Taxi Medallions? Restrictions on which color you can paint your home? Who you can marry? You could label Stalin as being 'Left' and Hitler as being 'right'. You could label them both Progressive or both Conservative. So what? I stated these people and these policies are Universally categorized within Authoritarianism. We live in States, so ours is Statist Authoritarianism. Just because you like to refer to your particular superstition as Progressive, doesn't change this fact. Yeah, I get it. YOU think when YOUR guy uses the initiation of State violence against INNOCENT people it's 'for the Good of the Society'. Given it's an oxymoron, I simply disagree. Free people (free markets), laws that protect property and uphold contract and sound money derived through free people freely trading is all that is required. And, as an added bonus, we don't NEED a State and we don't NEED to initiate violence against INNOCENT people. What's so hard for you to get? It's pretty straightforward. It works. It produces prosperity. If YOU think YOU have a better way, then there's no NEED to use violence against INNOCENT people. So, YOU go do it.
