Duke Daniel Milutin
Banned
Today I even saw a occupy wall street demonstration on someones camera on chatroulette.
That's exactly how it is (although I don't think I mentioned "less government")maw said:Prove how less government and less taxes increases crime, and how it is not the choices of people who choose to do evil. Your financial status hardly commits you to hurting someone through murder, rape, or theft.
Yeah, I guess I was a bit too adversarial. I do think you're a bit too hung up on these mysterious liberals though.maw said:Thanks for commenting, Papa. But I did put foward ideas, and observations, in my prior posts.
Erm, again this is a factor of any government.maw said:if someone wishes to subordinate their dreams, goals, and life to someone or something else, with the power of life and death over them, they've picked their 'god'
How? Unless you're suggesting reforming the entire system then in both cases the only redress the electorate has is the election. You're still just checking a box on a piece of paper, I'm not sure how whether the guy lives inside or outside of the state would alter anything there.I do believe that, yes, local government can be as corrupt as anything else. Difference is, it's closer to the electorate, and can be addressed very incisively if the electorate chooses. As opposed to several layers away in DC.
Precisely. So much for fixed morality.And we are arguing over 'how long the miniskirt should be allowed' by any other name
He could be right for all I know. From here in Europe even the US liberals are dangerously right wingPapa Lazarou said:Yeah, I guess I was a bit too adversarial. I do think you're a bit too hung up on these mysterious liberals though.
maw said:Show me how the government and taxes increase success - a least in the last 45 years, my lifetime.
MrNomNom said:maw said:Show me how the government and taxes increase success - a least in the last 45 years, my lifetime.
Just a few thoughts. Pardon their randomness.
Bill Clinton raised taxes, leading to an actual surplus (after Reagan tripled the national debt by raising military spending, and cutting taxes). Bush proceeded to cut taxes, and waste billions on two unwinnable wars, leading to the situation the government is in now. And when Obama tries to to raise taxes on the rich (Which was what Clinton did), the Republicans become absolutely rabid, and start saying that cutting taxes is the way to go.
Seems kind of screwy, in my opinion. Eager to see your response. nom
Good point. To some extent Clinton managed to level the debt out a bit,MrNomNom said:Just a few thoughts. Pardon their randomness.
Bill Clinton raised taxes, leading to an actual surplus (after Reagan tripled the national debt by raising military spending, and cutting taxes). Bush proceeded to cut taxes, and waste billions on two unwinnable wars, leading to the situation the government is in now. And when Obama tries to to raise taxes on the rich (Which was what Clinton did), the Republicans become absolutely rabid, and start saying that cutting taxes is the way to go.
Seems kind of screwy, in my opinion. Eager to see your response. nom
The problem isn't so much the size of the debt as it is US politics. They're far too polarised at the moment, the feeling being that the US is putting party politics ahead of actual effective governance. The markets fear instability far more than debt, and when you have a situation where one party will happily act against the common interest simply to score political points against their opponents it creates that instability. And that's before you start to worry about what happens when the platform of both parties essentially becomes "undo everything the previous government did".rebelsquirrell said:At some point in the future, be it 10 or a million years away, the debt will be so high that investors will lose hope in that the debt will be repayable.(at least that is the feeling that people seem to have because of the stagnant actions of Washington) There are two mindsets to consider.