Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
ShumaGorath wrote:I love it when 14 year olds scream about the injustice of redistributed resources. How do you like those roads? All that schooling? That nice military that flies around? Social work? You like social workers? How about the police?
It gets worse than that, because you have to remember that the foundations of society that let people earn their money in the first place are just as government created as the taxes people are complaining about. See, the wealth of society is built on it's resources and the interactions between its citzens. We've found that the best way to maximise the wealth generated from these two things is to craete property laws and have people trade in mostly free markets. So we establish contract laws & property laws and we build legal infrastructure to enforce the laws and adjudicate on them.
The trick of the 'taxation is theft' people is pretend the first part of the system is some inherent thing, so that the money an individual makes is simply his money, and anything government takes away is theft. It doesn't matter that he only earnt what he did because of a government built system of property laws & contract laws.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/08/24 06:16:49
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
I think very few people scream about paying taxes for roads, the post office, military, police etc.
When people scream about redistribution it is in relation to the government taking money from a private entity and handing it directly to another private entity (whether that be a welfare recipient, corporation, or someone buying a car) who the government has determined is more deserving.
halonachos wrote:Yes, yes I have. I call it "Lying with Statistics and Other American Practices.".
Interesting. I would call it "Halonachos enjoys expressing opinions on subjects he knows nothing about"
Yes, and I would call that ad hominem. By laws of debate I strike all of your future, past, present, future perfect, past future present posts as invalid, ranting, and not contributing to this thread.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Military=all
Infrastructure=all
CARS= those who want a new car and wanted Uncle Sam to help them out.
And yes there is a freaking difference when it comes to states using tax dollars compared to when the feds do it.
There are people who are state's rightists who support their state government more than the federal government.
Lets go into this again:
The federal government doesn't pay for local law enforcement, it doesn't pay for local EMT, it doesn't pay for fire fighters. The federal government doesn't pay for schools and it doesn't pay for local infrastructure.
The federal government handles the military and the post office.
The road being built next to my house was paid for through state taxes, the cop that pulled me over was payed with state taxes.
Seeing as though there are less people in my state than in the entirre country, my voice can be heard more.
Cash for clunkers is taking money and using it to "pay" for used cars that are going to be destroyed. Now here's the issue: What if you can't afford a new car? You just buy a used one, oh, there are no more used cars because the feds destroyed them all.
Mechanics lose money because they can't fix the older cars and when the new cars start breaking down, the owners will be shelling out more than usual for high end parts.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/08/24 16:37:32
ShumaGorath wrote:How about the police? It sure is terrible that you're tax dollars are being redistributed into the hands of the police, all they do is pull you over!
Darn police!!! Only because I have a red sports car and a loud exhaust and a spoiler! Man, I hate how the communist/socialist government taxes me so that the cops can have jobs, and then "taxes" me again when they pull me over. Why can't I just drive around like a maniac however I want?
Veriamp wrote:I have emerged from my lurking to say one thing. When Mat taught the Necrons to feel, he taught me to love.
ShumaGorath wrote:I love it when 14 year olds scream about the injustice of redistributed resources. How do you like those roads? All that schooling? That nice military that flies around? Social work? You like social workers? How about the police? It sure is terrible that you're tax dollars are being redistributed into the hands of the police, all they do is pull you over! All governments are social governments. It's a central tenet of the theory of governance. Take a little from each individual to improve the whole in a method the individuals are incapable of doing themselves.
As for the car companies being foreign, that doesn't particularly matter. The cars were already payed for by the dealerships, the money given to them via stimulus rebates goes directly to american businesses.
Ah... more name calling and redirection. How terribly unoriginal.
Since Shuma is clearly challenged with original thought, I will break this down so it's easier for him/her/it to understand:
A: I am not 14. My teenage kids call each other "Baby" and "Idiot" when they disagree but then again... they are kids.
B: Roads are State projects.
C: Ditto Schools.
D: At last! The Military is the first Constitutionally sanctioned expenditure of tax dollars you actually mentioned. Green Git approved.
E: Social Work... no I don't like them so much. The Fed needs to get out of Social Work. Notice how "Social Workers" and "Socialism" share common root words?
F: Police are not Federally funded at their core. State and Local taxes pay for Police. Fed funds might augment but never found. There is a little clause in the Constitution about the Federal Government maintaining a standing force for use against the Citizenry... you might want to read up on that.
G: "All governments are social governments"... So a Dictatorship is the same as a Representative Republic because both entail interaction between the governed and the governing?
H: The way the clunkers program works the dealer takes a vehicle and knocks the CARS amount off the new auto price. That means the consumer is ultimately the greatest benefactor of the program... why not just give them a tax break instead of mandate that the benefit only come from buying a new car? That's just artificially propping up a failing system.
« Health care and... | Main | Military plans for... »
Edmunds.com This SUV was the biggest beneficiary of the Cash for Clunkers program An analysis of purchasing data conducted by Edmunds.com found that the top models purchased under the Cash for Clunkers...
Feds skewed Clunkers results
Feds skewed Clunkers results
Edmunds.com
This SUV was the biggest beneficiary of the Cash for Clunkers program
An analysis of purchasing data conducted by Edmunds.com found that the top models purchased under the Cash for Clunkers program were not small foreign cars as government data suggested, but SUVs.
The government data separates models by engine and transmission type; Edmunds does not. Using this method the top 10 models purchased were:
Ford Escape
Ford Focus
Jeep Patriot
Dodge Caliber
Ford F-150
Honda Civic
Chevrolet Silverado
Chevrolet Cobalt
Toyota Corolla
Ford Fusion
In other words, half of the top 10 vehicles purchased were trucks or SUVs. Because the Ford Escape, Honda Civic, Chevrolet Silverado, and Ford Fusion purchases include hybrid electric versions, the Edmunds rankings may slightly obscure hybrid sales. The government method, however, tends to underrate truck and SUV sales because most models come in both 2WD and 4WD versions and, as a result, their sales numbers were split.
Trucks were also subject to lower fuel efficiency standards under the program, and analysts were initially surprised not to find more gas-guzzlers on the top 10 list. Seems the government stacked the deck to make its program look more environmentally sound than it is.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/08/24 19:57:47
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
It may be better to phrase it as "will get something from the redistribution in the end."
One can look at society as being only as strong as its weakest link. Strengthen the weak links and everyone can benefit. There is a good reason for public education: an educated (or at least functionally literate) population tends to earn more, has greater capability, and in turn can consume more.
Public health is an even bigger thing, as I see it. Disease does tend to arise easier in lower-class populations, but once it gets going, well disease doesn't exactly care how much you make or how much you think you're entitled to. Tends to make everyone safer, oh and it helps keep the workforce overall healthier, more productive people. Unfortunately, this requires a longer view, and the information to back up these positions doesn't fit into the 10 second attention span of most sound-bites.
As far as this CARS program has gone, I am pretty sure that the theory behind it was to generate a jolt to get the economy going, and to drive enough sales to get the domestic automakers running in the black, helping to stablize ~10% of the overall US workforce. To that end, it seems to have been successful, given the news from the automakers so far. Once people aren't as worried about job security, a recovery can properly start. For one, I have been pulling for this and other "stimulus" programs to work, regardless of my views on what is and is not a theoretically proper role for the government. My being right isn't more important than the lives and livelihoods of others. A lot of the commentators in the US lately don't seem to share the same sort of prioritization, it seems.
Its simple: overspecialize and you breed in weakness. It's slow death.
BlueGiant wrote:My being right isn't more important than the lives and livelihoods of others. A lot of the commentators in the US lately don't seem to share the same sort of prioritization, it seems.
Speak wisely you do.
Hmmm... that didn't really make sense... oh well, good clip, think of it as a cookie.
Anyway, CARS OF THE FUTURE, future, future... what the hell is that?
And now for the plan we are determined to see put into action for the use of all of these clunkers.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2009/08/25 00:22:58
Quick update from my neck of the woods. Just look at that guys grin, he made big bucks over this . Success indeed, I see the positive in this one, but perspectives on the original goal are (of course) debatable.
This I am watching right now, and have not taken the time to consider. Fox business gets a free pass to go, and I will listen to what they have to say... get out of my face FOX NEWS, I really have nothing to say to you right now.
Political skew aside, Fox business is obviously aware that they are totally showing their balls (in a way that you can kick them... yep) by providing such access on the internet. Not that the information isn't already on the webz, and with a bit of perseverance and a bit of tenacity you can get more information than they choose to provide (or dole out like the banana... not a carrot mind you, because they are low in potassium); they still come at the objective with intention rather than the objective of de-clarification, at least politically... which is not that complicated as to why they would do this.
So the main segment is around 17:30 or so, and they start by talking about the main goal involved in the program. I suppose from the stand point that the program was environmentally friendly it was not a huge success, and at 200-500$ per ton of *insert chemical here* we seem to have wasted a fair bit of cash. I may be mistaken but I am not sure that the primary goal of this plan was ever to cut carbon emission directly, but a secondary goal I know it happens to be on the table.
18:45 to 19:00 or so, there is mention of it being a direct subsidy of an underhanded sort... which is totally plausible, but it still comes back to the point of changes to our approach to the consumption of fossil fuels. The Prius is a fantastic example of this same situation of doubt and internal yet plausibly dysfunctional query into alternatives to our approach to consumption of fossil fuel. The Prius works.. if you deny that you must be annoyed at the Smug that the drivers emit from their ears on occasion.. with the teenager mindset to the problem it addresses. So what, I see a really positive notion here that could be considered no more than a testing of the hot-tub so to speak, and frankly... a luke-warm hot-tub... is no hot-tub at all. So consumer research to put it lightly and a massive response to boot. I wonder why these things take so long, then I look around and see the inherent indecision to these kind of compromises.
I want to save money, but I don't want to spend it either way. Then the business comes along and says we need them to spend because we scared them, and you said we could so it is really all your fault... yeah, your fault not ours, I like the sound of that a lot. Man... totally dysfunctional... anyway though, new directions provide coherent alternatives to a real problem that we face from several facets of our daily lives. In two decades we could have serious change in the way that we approach energy, especially when it comes to our use of it in travel and communication.
At around 38:00 or so there is a lot of farting of rhetoric and extrapolative hyperbolationism (is that even a reasonable statement? These roads are just not working... we need to make them a bit more privatized, I mean FFS!!!)... and stuff. But yes, please continue.
WHOA FREAKING WHOA @ 44:00
Food truck news... GO BURRITOES!!! YES! Super awesome business news in action... wow, I mean the relevance... okay I will listen.
Okey dokey... I won't listen... and I will assume that Fox business is going to whine about small businesses everywhere needing to do their part... and whatever, just put a freaking bag of beans into cups and pour some water into it. Someone will buy it man... come on be reasonable here people.
This message was edited 9 times. Last update was at 2009/08/27 08:08:32
. Success indeed, I see the positive in this one, but perspectives on the original goal are (of course) debatable.