OK.
Posted on 06/22/2003 11:46:04 AM PDT by The Old Hoosier
Yeah, you might call it that.
But if we wanted someone that is out Democrating the Democrats, we should have voted for one.
Why do y'all give Bush a pass on his spending?
OK.
The good thing about fads and fetishes is that they eventually fade.
The bad thing is the damage caused while they last.
Though drug companies whine on about the high costs of research and production, they happily sell their products at low prices to countries like Mexico, where the price level is low, and to socialized countries like Canada, where price controls keep the price down. Allowing Americans to buy online from any country in the world would do a lot to bring down the high price of prescriptions.
That has got to be the stupidest damn thing I've ever heard in my entire life. Why do these people keep insisting that the "crack whore" level of spending, the creation of all of these giant new bureaucracies and the out of control growth of government initiated by this admin is all some brilliant plan by the secretly conservative Bush to cut government? It's uncanny.
I think we need to understand that anyone can be a Republican. All you do is register and if you want to run for public officer, you register for the primary and pay a fee and that's it. There's no means testing for Republicans, and yet we're surprised that they're just like Democrats. The truth is that political opportunists will gather to whichever party appears to be the most in fashion.
The solution is to watch your congresscritters closely, and see who votes conservative and who votes liberal. This requires actually paying attention to voting records, and not just going off the party labels you see in the polling booth, so I doubt the fad of Attentive Voting will ever catch on.
Not everyone would agree with that statement.
Suit yourself, but when the likes of FDR becomes President again you will soon find yourself lamenting the "Dubya' Years".
Oh? And just when in our history was this period?
Your negativity is disconcerting, Montag.
Did you mean SO and Ma Bell excluded? Because prices rose for kerosene after the trust was broken up. Not exactly in tune to the phone prices though, seems most of the bill is a bunch of made up BS alleged to be taxes and fees (wife attached the lamprey of NOS to us a while back and we just finished removing it...)
Yes, and the lament will go something like this...
"What were we thinking, to install an expensive new bureacracy that the Democrats were certain to exapand once they regained power? Why didn't anyone warn us?"
That last sentence is the ironic coda which is obligatory in all laments. You are free to ignore it, of course, since no one is warning you.
The purpose of government is to protect life and rights. The purpose of government is not to act as distributor of goods it pilages from the rest of society at gunpoint. So no matter what the people think and conjure up as justification, they are still stealing and it is wrong.
The public servant idea goes out the window when the rulers aquire office though such bribery as this. It is a fact that if these voter folks really were concerned about prescription drugs for others, they would have formed and org, or business to serve the need. They never did, because they don't really want to pay for it. They want someone else to, they are coveting their neibors goods and are selfish to the core. That's why the con artists that utilize and pander to these bozos are not public servants, they are rulers.
Government was instituted to protect folks from criminals, not pander to their desires to aquire the seat of power.
Unfortunately, the gains are rapidly being outweighed by the losses - personal freedom, what WILL be higher taxes (despite the supposed "tax-cuts" many of us will actually be paying higher taxes over the next few years - thanks a lot GW).
Lest we also forget that we are loosing ground to armies of illegal aliens who come across the boards basically un-impeded (other than by natural elements - and even that is going to change when we start putting water and food outposts so these lawbreakers can make it - ugh)
Here's my plan - based on one of the few things the governor of Arkansas has said or done that makes sense in the last few years: Now - as I said all social programs should be funded EXCLUSIVELY by VOLUNTARY taxes. Each year when you file your taxes, you have a box to check if you want $1 to go towards the presidential election fund. Well have another box with a specific tax already entered (total program costs divided by the average number of taxpayers filing). If you choose to pay the voluntary tax, you add this total to your regular tax total and pay the sum (or the difference if you are getting a refund).
With a VOLUNTARY tax to subsidize the social spending, taxpayers will see the true cost of these handouts. If the left feels so strongly about providing these giveaways, let them pay for them themselves.
Furthermore, if the taxpayers decide to not pay the voluntary tax, then whatever is collected is used to provide the handouts to the extent that collected funds last. Once the funds run out - goodbye.
If a social program fails to meet at least 50% of it's budget in voluntary collections, the program is eliminated.
The problem with American people is that they have a big heart - they want to do what's right for people who are not able to take care of themselves, the poor, the elderly - unfortunatley the majority of Americans have absolutely NO CLUE what the REAL cost of these programs adds up to. By adopting my proposal, every American Taxpayer would know exactly what the cost to them is - and I don't think they would settle for it.
We have a representative democracy, where politicians have to weigh importance of issues to thier constituents. The idea is that voters then express how important an issue is to them, not just yea/nea. The end result is a small motivated group (as much as we hate some of them) can overpower a larger majority. I like to call this "tyrany of the special interest groups".
Theoreticaly, if the system measured exactly how bad people wanted things, it could optimise utility for people. Government pork wouldn't even be much of a problem and you could run some fairy tail socialist state. But, It doesn't.
Personally I think if there were more than 2 real parties things would work better. We'd probably need something like IRV or proportional representation, both pretty radical ideas though.
I have my doubts about that.
Alas, it is just an effort to convey the good Dubya' has bestowed. I remain optimistic that our collective concerns in our great country will keep us great for decades to come.
I enjoyed the thread ya'll but my "John Deere" rider awaits me! :)
They wouldn't like to have to give up their big 4 bedroom homes even though their children are gone or the big luxury RV's for when they travel. They as a group are taking more medicine by far than they actually need. We'll end up having to go the do-it-yourself way because the money will soon be gone.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.