Tactics and making progress.

[Endo]

Well, I DO think that (most) taxes are bad, by definition. I don't see how it's moral for a group to have the power to force a person to give up SIGNIFICANT portions of their income.

Once someone says stupid shit like this, there is no point in going any further. But I'll try anyway.

PAY GAP, it is that simple. And if you would look at what caused the great depression and our great recession it was because of no rules no regulations and tax breaks for the rich. You look at what built the middle class it was high taxes and investment If you continually cut taxes everyone else has to compensate for what you do not pay. That means companies like EXXON AND GE who pay no taxes the rest of us have to pay, and when we cannot pay, they gut programs the rest of us use. It funnels the money upwards.

Now it would be immoral if we did not have elections, but since we have elections that means every class has the right to compete to write laws, not one class.

I think what would be easy on those with wealth if they do not want government on their backs is to give directly to workers livable wages. But it is our government, not just theirs.

Bolded, italicized, underlines mine.

Okay, see, THAT RIGHT THERE, that's you attempting to dismiss me or any argument I make as just "stupid" or "moronic". You're not even giving my viewpoint, my political opinions the respect they deserve by addressing them fairly when you do this.

And you haven't addressed my question: Why does government HAVE TO assume the role of "Every-Service-Imaginable Provider"? If they were to ELIMINATE extraneous programs, then they wouldn't NEED to tax us out the ass. Take for example the Post Office: A stamp is a tax. Why should we PAY to send a message to someone and wait several days for it to arrive when we have Email Providers who can send mail INSTANTLY and FOR FREE? Money in the mail? PayPal. Electronic Money Transfer. Packages? Well, we've got businesses that CAN BE HELD FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR A PACKAGE LOSS, and they can move packages just as cheaply and quickly as the Post Office does. IN FACT, these companies COMPETE for your business, so they do it cheaper, faster, safer, and more reliably than the last guy. So why is the government raping us over a barrel for our money to pay for an outdated service?

[Brian37]

Once someone says stupid shit like this, there is no point in going any further. But I'll try anyway.

PAY GAP, it is that simple. And if you would look at what caused the great depression and our great recession it was because of no rules no regulations and tax breaks for the rich. You look at what built the middle class it was high taxes and investment If you continually cut taxes everyone else has to compensate for what you do not pay. That means companies like EXXON AND GE who pay no taxes the rest of us have to pay, and when we cannot pay, they gut programs the rest of us use. It funnels the money upwards.

Now it would be immoral if we did not have elections, but since we have elections that means every class has the right to compete to write laws, not one class.

I think what would be easy on those with wealth if they do not want government on their backs is to give directly to workers livable wages. But it is our government, not just theirs.

Bolded, italicized, underlines mine.

Okay, see, THAT RIGHT THERE, that's you attempting to dismiss me or any argument I make as just "stupid" or "moronic". You're not even giving my viewpoint, my political opinions the respect they deserve by addressing them fairly when you do this.

And you haven't addressed my question: Why does government HAVE TO assume the role of "Every-Service-Imaginable Provider"? If they were to ELIMINATE extraneous programs, then they wouldn't NEED to tax us out the ass. Take for example the Post Office: A stamp is a tax. Why should we PAY to send a message to someone and wait several days for it to arrive when we have Email Providers who can send mail INSTANTLY and FOR FREE? Money in the mail? PayPal. Electronic Money Transfer. Packages? Well, we've got businesses that CAN BE HELD FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR A PACKAGE LOSS, and they can move packages just as cheaply and quickly as the Post Office does. IN FACT, these companies COMPETE for your business, so they do it cheaper, faster, safer, and more reliably than the last guy. So why is the government raping us over a barrel for our money to pay for an outdated service?

Yes of course I dismissed it. If you cannot see in our current state how the pay gap is affecting us, and you think it is immoral for other voters to vote to try to change laws to do things differently then all you are saying is that you know what is best for everyone else. All that advocates is "It is right when I get what I want, but theft when other people vote".

[Endo]

Bolded, italicized, underlines mine.

Okay, see, THAT RIGHT THERE, that's you attempting to dismiss me or any argument I make as just "stupid" or "moronic". You're not even giving my viewpoint, my political opinions the respect they deserve by addressing them fairly when you do this.

And you haven't addressed my question: Why does government HAVE TO assume the role of "Every-Service-Imaginable Provider"? If they were to ELIMINATE extraneous programs, then they wouldn't NEED to tax us out the ass. Take for example the Post Office: A stamp is a tax. Why should we PAY to send a message to someone and wait several days for it to arrive when we have Email Providers who can send mail INSTANTLY and FOR FREE? Money in the mail? PayPal. Electronic Money Transfer. Packages? Well, we've got businesses that CAN BE HELD FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR A PACKAGE LOSS, and they can move packages just as cheaply and quickly as the Post Office does. IN FACT, these companies COMPETE for your business, so they do it cheaper, faster, safer, and more reliably than the last guy. So why is the government raping us over a barrel for our money to pay for an outdated service?

Yes of course I dismissed it. If you cannot see in our current state how the pay gap is affecting us, and you think it is immoral for other voters to vote to try to change laws to do things differently then all you are saying is that you know what is best for everyone else. All that advocates is "It is right when I get what I want, but theft when other people vote".

Wow, that strawman burned brightly and beautifully.

Try again. Libertarians are generally against a classed society. The community makes the rules as a whole in a Free Market Society. TAXES are a different thing from LAWS, I'm not sure whose ass you had to fist to get that shit. Taxes is the ruling body stealing your labor for services you don't want. Now try to tell me how crazy I am for only wanting to buy stuff I want.

I can certainly see how you think the pay gap is affecting society, but quite frankly, IT'S NOT A PAY GAP ISSUE. It's a CORRUPTION issue. Corporations sponsor politicians, and those politicians attempt to make the economy friendlier for their financial backers. If you think "The People" even have a voice in government anymore, you've deluded yourself. The ones controlling the government are the corporations who can afford to field a politician. This has nothing to do with "pay gap". But hey, if you want to keep worshiping your god, The State, go right on ahead.

AND FOR FUCK'S SAKE, ANSWER MY GODDAMN QUESTION!

---

Why does government HAVE TO assume the role of "Every-Service-Imaginable Provider"? If they were to ELIMINATE extraneous programs, then they wouldn't NEED to tax us out the ass. Take for example the Post Office: A stamp is a tax. Why should we PAY to send a message to someone and wait several days for it to arrive when we have Email Providers who can send mail INSTANTLY and FOR FREE? Money in the mail? PayPal. Electronic Money Transfer. Packages? Well, we've got businesses that CAN BE HELD FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR A PACKAGE LOSS, and they can move packages just as cheaply and quickly as the Post Office does. IN FACT, these companies COMPETE for your business, so they do it cheaper, faster, safer, and more reliably than the last guy. So why is the government raping us over a barrel for our money to pay for an outdated service?

---

[Brian37]

Yes of course I dismissed it. If you cannot see in our current state how the pay gap is affecting us, and you think it is immoral for other voters to vote to try to change laws to do things differently then all you are saying is that you know what is best for everyone else. All that advocates is "It is right when I get what I want, but theft when other people vote".

Wow, that strawman burned brightly and beautifully.

Try again. Libertarians are generally against a classed society. The community makes the rules as a whole in a Free Market Society. TAXES are a different thing from LAWS, I'm not sure whose ass you had to fist to get that shit. Taxes is the ruling body stealing your labor for services you don't want. Now try to tell me how crazy I am for only wanting to buy stuff I want.

I can certainly see how you think the pay gap is affecting society, but quite frankly, IT'S NOT A PAY GAP ISSUE. It's a CORRUPTION issue. Corporations sponsor politicians, and those politicians attempt to make the economy friendlier for their financial backers. If you think "The People" even have a voice in government anymore, you've deluded yourself. The ones controlling the government are the corporations who can afford to field a politician. This has nothing to do with "pay gap". But hey, if you want to keep worshiping your god, The State, go right on ahead.

AND FOR FUCK'S SAKE, ANSWER MY GODDAMN QUESTION!

---

Why does government HAVE TO assume the role of "Every-Service-Imaginable Provider"? If they were to ELIMINATE extraneous programs, then they wouldn't NEED to tax us out the ass. Take for example the Post Office: A stamp is a tax. Why should we PAY to send a message to someone and wait several days for it to arrive when we have Email Providers who can send mail INSTANTLY and FOR FREE? Money in the mail? PayPal. Electronic Money Transfer. Packages? Well, we've got businesses that CAN BE HELD FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR A PACKAGE LOSS, and they can move packages just as cheaply and quickly as the Post Office does. IN FACT, these companies COMPETE for your business, so they do it cheaper, faster, safer, and more reliably than the last guy. So why is the government raping us over a barrel for our money to pay for an outdated service?

---

No idiot it IS BOTH A PAY GAP ISSUE AND A CORRUPTION ISSUE.

Libertarians are nothing more than republicans on steroids. You think the private sector will do everything right on it's own without government intervention. BULL FUCKING SHIT!

You think after 30 years of deregulation, constant tax cuts for the rich, jobs being shipped over seas, pay not keeping up with the cost of living for more and more people, you'd have me believe that even more deregulation and less government will fix what the rich set up for themselves?

Oh and NO companies DO NOT compete for my business, they compete against each other. It is a dick measuring contest for profits for CEOs and share holders. Our current market has NOTHING to do with improving the lives of society. It is about exploitation without regards of the living conditions of those who work for them. Our economy has become a giant ponzy scheme and casino where the private sector privatizes the profits and socializes the losses.

You are a classest you may not think you are, but you are.

---

Why does government HAVE TO assume the role of "Every-Service-Imaginable Provider"?

BECAUSE FUCKWADS LIKE YOU INSIST EVERYTHING IS FINE.

Now for the last FUCKING TIME, IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF you want that less government, then the private sector has to PAY A LIVABLE WAGE and self police. BUT if you think that is what they are doing currently and not simply exploiting us, you are a fucking idiot.

If Corporate America were spending it's own welfare(tax cuts they do not need) on better worker pay and investing in jobs here, then the rest of us would not have to turn to government. BUT it is our government, not just yours. You do not get to decide what is best for the rest of us.

[Endo]

Libertarians are nothing more than republicans on steroids. You think the private sector will do everything right on it's own without government intervention. BULL FUCKING SHIT!

Haha, not even close. I suggest you take a look at the image on this page.

The front-running candidates of the two primary parties (Barack Obama, Mitt Romney) are A. Suprisingly close together and B. Smack dab in the middle of the authoritarian side of the scale, 6 and 6.5 out of -10 --> 10. And if those are who the Republicans and Democrats threw into the ring, then it's pretty fair to say that while the Libertarian party may be clustered on the right side of the wing, you really can't say that they're "Republicans on steroids" when Republicans voted for someone so flipping Authoritarian!

Not on its own. The Market is never on its own, it is driven and regulated by the people. The people are the government in the Free-Market Society, and if there is a formal "Government Body", then it is truly subject to the people, and there would be many more safeguards against corruption in place than there are now.

You think after 30 years of deregulation, constant tax cuts for the rich, jobs being shipped over seas, pay not keeping up with the cost of living for more and more people, you'd have me believe that even more deregulation and less government will fix what the rich set up for themselves?

From Wikipedia, Taxation in the United States: "Federal taxes were expanded greatly during World War I. In 1921, wealthy industrialist and then Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon engineered a series of significant income tax cuts under three presidents. Mellon argued that tax cuts would spur growth.[105] The last such cut in 1928 was followed by the Great Depression in 1929. Taxes were raised again in the latter part of the Depression, and during World War II. Income tax rates were reduced significantly during the Johnson, Nixon, and Reagan Presidencies. Significant tax cuts for corporations and upper income individuals were enacted during the second Bush Presidency."

You haven't shown that tax cuts are CAUSAL of economic slumping, at best, you've show a correlation. Of course, you'll also notice that I never said anything about tax cuts for the WEALTHY specifically. When I want taxes lowered, I want them lowered for everyone. I want taxes removed from basic necessities (sales tax). Feel free to tax the shit out of that guy's yacht, or encourage fools to dump their money into the lottery.

On the subject of deregulation, please read this.

This group/economist claims that deregulation has HELPED STABILIZE our economy.

And this one claims that welfare reform is our option out of the poverty problem. Laws, set up by fallible politicians, not "rich corporations". Hey, now you know what to change.

So, YEAH, I do think more deregulation, governmental reform, and lowered taxes are going to bolster and heal our economy. You can deal with the social responsibilities of corporations through activism, boycott, and protest.

Oh and NO companies DO NOT compete for my business, they compete against each other. It is a dick measuring contest for profits for CEOs and share holders. Our current market has NOTHING to do with improving the lives of society. It is about exploitation without regards of the living conditions of those who work for them. Our economy has become a giant ponzy scheme and casino where the private sector privatizes the profits and socializes the losses.

Uh huh. And HOW do businesses obtain profit? They don't just turn on some mechanized dildo and aim it at our collective asses, do they? In "competing with each other", they have to take in revenue. Revenue comes in selling higher quantities of more-desired goods than the other guy. That means they want to sell you something. So, they want to meet your needs with their products. "Privatizes the profits"? "Socializes the losses"? I'm going to need you to expand on this soundbite, otherwise I am at risk of strawmanning YOU based on several assumptions.

You are a classest you may not think you are, but you are.

Prove it. All you've got here is a singular statement, with no reasoning backing it up.

BECAUSE FUCKWADS LIKE YOU INSIST EVERYTHING IS FINE.

That's a new low, ad-homing a strawman. I never said "Everything is fine with the world", in fact, the standard Libertarian view is that everything is NOT fine with the world.

Now for the last FUCKING TIME, IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF you want that less government, then the private sector has to PAY A LIVABLE WAGE and self police. BUT if you think that is what they are doing currently and not simply exploiting us, you are a fucking idiot.

Did I EVER say that they CURRENTLY WERE? However, you fail to realize that people CAN earn a living wage in the proper job. Saying that because the burger flipper at Micky Dee's is a bare minimum wage job does not make your generalization true, rather that is the exception to the rule. Anybody with a college degree in Engineering or Science can get a thoroughly-well-paid job. As far as I know, those are the FASTEST growing jobs in the world. No country can currently pump out enough engineers to keep up with the demand. And hell, I trust that so much that I'm staking my future on an Engineering degree.

If Corporate America were spending it's own welfare(tax cuts they do not need) on better worker pay and investing in jobs here, then the rest of us would not have to turn to government. BUT it is our government, not just yours. You do not get to decide what is best for the rest of us.

I'm not sure where you got this idea that I am attempting to dictate laws or control government. In a Free-Market Society, the People as a whole form the Government. There's no ruling body that has to try to judge everyone's opinions and make the best choice in a way to regulate some sort of business, because the business owner will bend to popular opinion to decide his practices. If he doesn't, then he will be very quickly out of business.