your thoughts on the direction government is headed

Discussion in 'The Refreshment Lounge' started by Belcher, Mar 7, 2013.

  1. jwhoff

    jwhoff Premium Member

    2,582
    144
    83
    Capitialism fixes nothing if it precludes anyone from getting their fair share of the produced wealth. Witness the wealth distribution of Venezuela. Woe the pattern of wealth distribution developing in this nation.

    Capitialism works when each man is paid his fair share of production of wealth.

    That has ONLY to do with the percentage of that wealth he produces.

    It has nothing to do with one percent of the population stacking the cards in its favor until the eventual meltdown begins.


    When the wealth is not distributed in this manner, inequities ensue and the system begins to unravel. History verifies this statement.

    Ones' fears of the evils of socialism and communism will not erase the issues we now face. No one is looking to move to either as a substitute.

    But, as RedTemplar says, temperance is in order. Tempering the excesses of Capitalism does, in no way, reject Capitalism.

    This wealth distribution issue will destablize this country if it continues. Teddy Roosevelt fought off the Robber Barons and the Tea Pot Dome scandel with success. It can be done again. It must be done again.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2013
  2. KO2134

    KO2134 Registered User

    58
    1
    0
    The great inequalities that jwoff is speaking of is only possible when the rich lobby the federal government for loopholes in the tax code. Now don't assume that i'm saying we should raise taxes to make the inequality curve shift I'm most definitely not but the best way for this great disparity to be solved is through a complete capitalistic system. Throw out the current tax code for a flat tax of 17% or 15% and close all loopholes so all Americans pay that rate. Get rid of FICA and phase out Social Security and Medicare by guaranteeing all individuals who have paid into to these programs to receive what their owed and for those who have are still working stop them immediately from paying in and when they hit the retirement age give them their money under this plan current seniors will not be affected at all and everyone is paid. No more capital gains tax or death tax because we shouldn't punish individuals for success. Legalize marijuana and tax it for more revenue. Cut government spending in all areas and eliminate the department of education, energy, and HUD. Audit the Fed PLEASE!!! Repeal obamacare and let the marketplace decide prices. Everything mentioned on here can be solved if we simply remove government from the economy and reduce it to it's constitutional bounds.
     
  3. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    751
    26
    48
    So you are saying that someone who is call rich can only use those socalled loopholes. I think everyone can take their charitable controubutions off there taxes, I think everyone can take intrest paid for a home off there taxes. These are the socalled loopholes the Dems. want to remove. I agree a flat tax is right it is not the Captlist that want the tax system the way it is now it is in the communist manifesto that discribes a prgressive tax system. Before 1929 taxes only paied for what the constitution allowed the Fed. to do.

    I was going to answer each thing you have said but after rereading it you mostley have it right execept for the words "rich lobist" If a pregressive tax had not ever been put in there would have been taxes the way you say. Government is using taxes to modifiy your behaviour not do good for others. and that is not what I read into what jwhuff said. Again it is not the rich it is the progressive's.


    Look at tax history from the founding to 1929 and then 1929 to now and you will see what and how this has happened.
     
  4. KO2134

    KO2134 Registered User

    58
    1
    0
    When i talked about tax loopholes i didn't mean that only rich people can take advantage of them i am well aware that we all can take advantage of them. All i'm saying is is that there should be a minimum tax everyone should have to pay no one or corporation should pay no taxes
     
  5. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    751
    26
    48
    Wealth distribution issue is a envy issue. Some one seeing that someone else has something they don't have with out seeing where they were and what hardwork they did to get there. The socalled robber bairons are names progressives gave to some others to use as a tool to get what they had without the work just like the progressives are doing now with the socalled 1%er of wealth.
     
  6. Brent Heilman

    Brent Heilman Premium Member

    1,206
    45
    68
    As far as jealousy of rich people go Jim Carrey said it best: "I hope everybody could get rich and famous and will have everything they ever dreamed of, so they will know that its not the answer"
     
  7. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    751
    26
    48

    Yes but it wasn't the rich lobby that had those things put in the tax code it was the socalled progressives that wanted home ownership for people that could not aford it. When you buy a home you can aford about 25% of your take home monthly income for housing. If you add the taxdeduction of intrest you can afford about 29.89% for housing. If you reduce tax rate so someone can have more of there own money for housing you would have to reduce taxes for everybody by 4.89%. The Dems. said we just want to get more lower income people into houses so they did the loophole which only helps a small % of people. Also in this way the Dems. could by the vote of everybody that is using this deduction. But there is another problem if you are using a monthly income to figure out what kind of house you are going to buy you will use right at the max 29.89%. If someone has a problem just one moth they will lose it and be behind and won't catch up till there income goes up 4.89%.

    There is a lot to think about on all these isues if the government was not trying to influance the way we do thing through taxes none of this would happen.
     
  8. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    751
    26
    48
    Yes that is right.
     
  9. KO2134

    KO2134 Registered User

    58
    1
    0
    jvarnell can you provide a link to the information you speak of because i believe it's completely wrong because tax reform was implemented by Bush during the whole housing fiasco
     
  10. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    751
    26
    48
    Yes Give me a day to pull it together it will be more than one link.
     
  11. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    751
    26
    48
    I thought it take longer but these links have other stuff that the point to so I thought this was enough to start. You said the name Bush in your response and I don’t point a one person’s policies to say my policy are right, I point out what in my policies is right. I do point out what is wrong in progressivism no matter who does it.

    Liberal views but talks about where the beginnings were.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/07/business/07view.html?_r=0

    A view that is closer to my own.
    http://www.freedomworks.org/crisis

    This one has a whole lot of foot notes and will take you days to fallow them all.

    The percent of income it takes on a monthly basis for a bank to feel that the note will be paid off is done in a normal income risk calculation that has been historical vetted and that is where the word subprime loan came from the senate banking committee when the government made it a bad word to say someone could not qualify for a loan because they did not have enough income.

    Just on taxes:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_history_of_the_United_States
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2013
  12. KO2134

    KO2134 Registered User

    58
    1
    0
    great links i love the freedomworks link that is on par with my constitutional conservative aka Goldwater Republican Aka Ron Paul Conservative AKA Libertarian viewpoints
     
  13. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    751
    26
    48
    There is nothing 100% and I am glad I help you understand. I do wish you would look at some of the people you have in your list because Ron Paul is no constitutionalist he happens to pick and choose which parts he likes. One is he would cut all military and that is one of the things in the constatution for the Fedral Goverment to do. You can not protect US citisions just at the bodards of the US but have to stop it before it gets here.
     
  14. KO2134

    KO2134 Registered User

    58
    1
    0
    Ron Paul doesn't advocate getting rid of the military all together he actually believes in a strong defense http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOKAdFzioZc i personally being a conservative libertarian wouldn't cut as much as he would
     
  15. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    751
    26
    48

    This is what I was talking about haveing bases overseas is natinal defence not just our borders. I don't want the bad guys to ever get to our borders because if they do it is to late. That is why we need military all over stoping them before they get here. Ron did say one thing right is the defence is not the milary but but the military can and should us where ever we are as citisions of the USA.
     
  16. JJones

    JJones Moderator Staff Member

    1,144
    622
    113
    We can cut a lot from our defense budget and still be just fine. Look at how much we spend on defense as opposed to China, which has the biggest standing army in the world.

    120912075814-chart-military-spending-monster.jpg

    Respectfully, I have to disagree. Policing the world isn't national defense in my opinion.
     
  17. Brent Heilman

    Brent Heilman Premium Member

    1,206
    45
    68
    We didn't police the world until WWII. Before we were drawn into that war we had a policy of isolationism. As a former member of the armed services I have seen some of the other side that a lot of people don't see and it is my feelings that we need to get completely out of some of the places we are. They don't want us there so we should leave them to their own ways and watch the demise from afar. Trying to be the guy that always looks out for the little man has not done us much good as a country and has created a lot of resentment from others. The Middle East has been fighting with each other for centuries and nothing we do is going to change that. We try to change the way some of these countries operate and in the end it bites us in the butt. We empowered Bin Laden. It was us that provided him weapons and training to fight the Soviets and that worked out really well for us didn't it? We have put Karzhai into power in Afghanistan and look at the rhetoric that comes from him towards us. We need to draw down our troops world wide. Once we step out of some of these places and their own self-destruction starts and things start falling apart across the globe those that have taken us for granted all these years will change their tune about us.

    While I may not have agreed with Ron Paul on some things (drugs) I am with him on foreign policy. At first I wasn't real keen on him but the more I listened to him the more sense he made. Of course at this point anything is better than what we have right now. Clinton did us no favors as Secretary of State and Kerry is going to pay the price for it. Watch and see he will start getting blamed for things that he had no control over. It has already started with the Russians. She ticked them off but I saw a report the other day where Kerry got the blame for it.
     
  18. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    751
    26
    48

    Yes we can cut defence and yes China spendes less on there defence. Do you want to have a policy where every person at age 17 is a part of the army and only given the food the gov. wants you to have? We pay for collage, off base food and housing and medical. In china if you get hurt in the army they send you home untill you are well enough to come back and finish your time. I know the pure number look good for china but but we have a deferent life style for all our people. Even if we are in the army we are free to decide alot of thing that makes it cost more money they are not. They call it Policing but I would rather take a fight the evel of the world that would be here if we did not take it to them.

    the best defense is a good offense
     
  19. JJones

    JJones Moderator Staff Member

    1,144
    622
    113
    That's the thing. I may not have agreed with him 100% on everything but at least with Ron Paul I knew what I was going to get if he won because he's a true statesman IMO. With these other guys, the politicians, they'll tell everyone in the room whatever they want to hear to get their vote.

    I have high hopes for Rand Paul.

    If we weren't policing the world? I'd have no problem with it. I know lots of peaceful countries have programs like this and I think it would do a lot of these kids some good. It straightened me out. I'm sure many would disagree with me though.

    What's good and evil are relative to one's point of view. In some countries we are viewed as the evil ones and our presence there usually only makes the sentiments stronger.

    It's really kind of a big (and costly) assumption that they would be here causing us trouble if we weren't there causing them trouble. In fact, some of the countries that dislike us might be a little more indifferent if we hadn't been meddling in their affairs to start with.

    Keep in mind that I'm just here because I enjoy a good debate with intelligent people, so please don't feel my differing opinions personally or anything. I don't think anyone has yet but I'm just adding this as a disclaimer. :)
     
  20. KO2134

    KO2134 Registered User

    58
    1
    0
    Why do y'all disagree with ron paul on drugs? JJones i have to say i disagree with you i don't believe we should force individuals to join the military i personally believe being that i am 18 and under your policy i would be forced to join the military (Side Note: i'm joining the air force right now) that this would be a violation of my rights to force me to do something to me that's the same thing in principle as obamacare. Jvarnell i believe your defense policy is a little off because i believe evil only exist when citizens refuse to do anything so allow those people to fight their own battles and let us mind our own business.
     

Share My Freemasonry