Please provide demographics, and a rather comprehensive view of the nature of our society, the % rural vs. % urban, the percent of the GDP that is represented by Agriculture vs. industry, etc.
********************************************************************************************I really do like that sort of retort, but in all honesty, it would be incumbent upon you to use those specifics to refute the claim.
Nonny - I know you're just stirring a bucket of shit with that comment, but I have to say - it's probably the best comment to have appeared in this thread.
As you spoon feed us irony as to be so condescending and smarmy with your assertion.
I do not particularly admire Edmund Burke or the Conservatives - particularly the later versions that think poking their noses into the private lives of citizens is OK.
The formulation in question worked very nicely well into the 20th Century. Its dismemberment began with FDR and has been on a downhill slide since. Collectivism is hardly an example of of modern "progress". You defend a system that is demonstrably a failure. I defend a system that was demonstrably successful.
Right, because in the absence of defensible ideas ... there is silence.
Or it becomes a powerful motivation to become productive again. As others recommended, a 5 year moving average or other mechanisms could address this.
This is rapidly becoming more than an academic exercise. We are coming very close to the point where less than 50% of taxpayers will be paying nearly 100% of income taxes. When we swing past that point, the majority being non-payers will view the minority as their source of funding and government largess. That's going to result in a rapid downward spiral as the dependent class starts voting for those who promise the most and the productive class stops being so productive because the results of their labors are being taken from them to the point it is no longer worth the effort.
... snip
That aside, it didn't matter what answers you gave on the test.
So you're saying that Bill Gates runs the country?
It's not just the Stanford-Binet -- they *all* are. Not as badly now as they used to be, however.
As I suggested yesterday, read "The Mismeasure of Man" by Stephen Jay Gould. It will open your eyes.
Better Bill Gates than the committee of 535 baboons on Capitol Hill...
Eloquent sophistry.
You do nothing but pigeon hole and label.
Your labels are empty, and your arguments are no better, for ... affixing labels IS your basic premise.
You genuinely seem bright and erudite -- TOO bright, methinks to have to resort to such churlish and childish tactics.
I don't know what a "collectivist" is, and I don't care.
I haven't defended any "system."
'Tis a genuine shame that you can't address an actual issue on the merits.
It may well be that I'm the only one that sees you doing this, and recognizes it as what it is: bad form.
But ... that's okay.
I genuinely don't even understand that statement.
Labels and name-calling are a tactic for the ease and convenience -- intellectually -- of those who must oft resort to them.
What's so hard about discussing *ideas*, without the need for chronic labeling of everything and everybody?
I have a lot of respect for those whose ideas vary from mine. Hell, I don't learn a DAMNED THING talking to people who AGREE with me.
But there's nothing to be learned from a fountain of epithets.
Ordered, and ... thanks.
Translation: I don't understand your position but you're wrong anyway.
Sure you have - the system of wealth redistribution in your "Work For The Common Good" scheme earlier articulated.
I've done so throughout this subthread.
Thanks for your approval. One more time: Taxing for the equal benefit of all citizens in defense of their liberty is OK. Taxing some citizens for the exclusive benefit of others is stealing.
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 14:24:17 -0600, the infamous "Leon" scrawled the following:
What, you DON'T want a say in which asshole ruins your life?
Our Oregon Demonrats are trying to ruin our state now, too. Two corporation tax bills are on the special election next month/year. If either is enacted, up to 70,000 jobs could be lost and businesses would be taxed on their GROSS income, not their net. Brilliant, huh?
Why The American Revolution, v2, hasn't started yet, I'll never know. I feel certain that it's coming, and soon. I see too many very, very angry people every day now. Once people see their paychecks diminish and half their neighbors are out of work... Is your house ready to fend off rioters, if and when? Got stocks of food, water, batteries, and ammo? Gotcher BOB (bug-out bag) ready? Even if things don't go as sour as they look to, preparedness is a virtue.
-- Sex is Evil, Evil is Sin, Sin is Forgiven. Gee, ain't religion GREAT?
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 17:57:05 -0500, the infamous "Lee Michaels" scrawled the following:
IF you can find land which isn't saturated with PCBs, poisons, oil, gasoline, or heavy metals. Would _you_ eat their produce? =:-0
-- Sex is Evil, Evil is Sin, Sin is Forgiven. Gee, ain't religion GREAT?
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 14:20:11 -0800, the infamous "DGDevin" scrawled the following:
-- Sex is Evil, Evil is Sin, Sin is Forgiven. Gee, ain't religion GREAT?
Lost track of the chronology, here. WHO, in this case, IS the FT??
Nope. I've worked the polls. Since voting is free, many people want to get their money's worth. They will pull every lever possible, such pull predicated on the name, office, party, or eeny-meeny-miney-moe.
So, then, what's a potential voter to do who knows none of the candidates, none of the issues, none of the promises? Would you FORCE him to vote for SOMEBODY? Those in this category, who stay home thereby leaving the decision up to those who presumably are educated on the concept, are doing the right thing.
Personally, I think TOO MANY people vote. I would limit voting to people:
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.