| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Epignosis 
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32553
|
 Posted: August 11 2010 at 22:05 |
 Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Atavachron wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
You brought PBS into the discussion, and .0001% would be too much money. The amount doesn't make it any better really. |
well then you need to change the whole allotment system, including that
of any other important publicly funded thing like the military; in
other words, the money is there and is set aside automatically for a
given service, and therefore must be used for said service-- but I
know you realize that, just wanted to point it out
|
The military is intrinsically different because it serves everybody and supposedly cannot be provided on the free market. I don't support any form of taxation though so there would be no money to set aside in my government. |
This is a point where I disagree. If the military indeed serves everybody, then everybody should pay for it. I have no problem paying a few bucks a year to finance the fine men and women who protect this country from hideous foes.
Of course, I think they should be financed through a consumption tax rather than an income tax, but I've spoken on that before.
|
Yes everyone should pay for it. Most people would, they have a very strong incentive to do so. However, it should still be done so voluntarily. Taxes, no matter how noble the cause, are still theft. Plus I kind of like the idea of abjectly poor people spending their money on other things and not having to worry about donating to their defense.
Plus, this provides a very natural and powerful check on governmental misuse of military might. Hard to fund an unpopular war when its done so via donations. |
Pat, I regard you as an intelligent human being, but that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard you say.
A military funded by donations providing a check on governmental misuse of military might? 
First off, most people know diddly about foreign affairs, much less military tactics. Most folks are at home watching American Idol or Wheel of Fortune. They are in no position to judge what is and what isn't a "misuse of military might." And frankly, a lot of liberals would just as soon have us bombed to death thinking that "love is all you need."
Second, how many people do you think would donate to our defense? Not many, I bet you that. Without proper funding, a military can't stand up to the other world powers of the country. Technology is moving too fast and we have to stay on top of it. Yes, I'm sure you will say, "Well it's their fault for not donating and that's why the commies took over their house." Not quite. If everyone doesn't pitch in in this regard, then a select few will be forced to foot the bill or have to suffer the consequences of a poorer military- along with everybody who didn't contribute.
Third, I believe military service is a noble cause. No one forced them into it and they sacrifice time with their families and in some cases their lives. Why? So we can sleep at night. I do not might paying a crumb of the pie for that. They deserve it. It isn't theft. It's paying for a necessary service- we would be robbed if we didn't pay it.
If there's anything I do support a government-run anything of, it's our military. Do you honestly think we'd be where we are right now with generals sitting outside of shopping malls on Christmas ringing a bell beside a big red can?
|
|
|
 |
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 21:16 |
Epignosis wrote:
Here's a question for everyone:
How should society handle disabled people who cannot work and have no family willing to help them?
|
Society should help them.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 21:15 |
Epignosis wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Atavachron wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
You brought PBS into the discussion, and .0001% would be too much money. The amount doesn't make it any better really. |
well then you need to change the whole allotment system, including that
of any other important publicly funded thing like the military; in
other words, the money is there and is set aside automatically for a
given service, and therefore must be used for said service-- but I
know you realize that, just wanted to point it out
|
The military is intrinsically different because it serves everybody and supposedly cannot be provided on the free market. I don't support any form of taxation though so there would be no money to set aside in my government. |
This is a point where I disagree. If the military indeed serves everybody, then everybody should pay for it. I have no problem paying a few bucks a year to finance the fine men and women who protect this country from hideous foes.
Of course, I think they should be financed through a consumption tax rather than an income tax, but I've spoken on that before.
|
Yes everyone should pay for it. Most people would, they have a very strong incentive to do so. However, it should still be done so voluntarily. Taxes, no matter how noble the cause, are still theft. Plus I kind of like the idea of abjectly poor people spending their money on other things and not having to worry about donating to their defense.
Plus, this provides a very natural and powerful check on governmental misuse of military might. Hard to fund an unpopular war when its done so via donations.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65613
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 21:14 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Who did the poll?
My list would probably go:
1) Libraries 2) PBS . . . n) the military n+1) TSA |
 undoubtedly
|
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32553
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 21:12 |
|
Here's a question for everyone:
How should society handle disabled people who cannot work and have no family willing to help them?
|
|
|
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32553
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 21:09 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Atavachron wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
You brought PBS into the discussion, and .0001% would be too much money. The amount doesn't make it any better really. |
well then you need to change the whole allotment system, including that
of any other important publicly funded thing like the military; in
other words, the money is there and is set aside automatically for a
given service, and therefore must be used for said service-- but I
know you realize that, just wanted to point it out
|
The military is intrinsically different because it serves everybody and supposedly cannot be provided on the free market. I don't support any form of taxation though so there would be no money to set aside in my government. |
This is a point where I disagree. If the military indeed serves everybody, then everybody should pay for it. I have no problem paying a few bucks a year to finance the fine men and women who protect this country from hideous foes.
Of course, I think they should be financed through a consumption tax rather than an income tax, but I've spoken on that before.
|
|
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 21:07 |
Who did the poll?
My list would probably go:
1) Libraries 2) PBS . . . n) the military n+1) TSA
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65613
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 21:05 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
The military is intrinsically different because it serves everybody and supposedly cannot be provided on the free market. I don't support any form of taxation though so there would be no money to set aside in my government. |
gotcha
BTW- interestingly, some polls shows PBS as #2 after the military in
what taxpayers believe is the best bang for their buck. I don't put
much stock in polls, but it would be useful to know if that is accurate.
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 20:54 |
Atavachron wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
You brought PBS into the discussion, and .0001% would be too much money. The amount doesn't make it any better really. |
well then you need to change the whole allotment system, including that
of any other important publicly funded thing like the military; in
other words, the money is there and is set aside automatically for a
given service, and therefore must be used for said service-- but I
know you realize that, just wanted to point it out
|
The military is intrinsically different because it serves everybody and supposedly cannot be provided on the free market. I don't support any form of taxation though so there would be no money to set aside in my government.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65613
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 20:50 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
You brought PBS into the discussion, and .0001% would be too much money. The amount doesn't make it any better really. |
well then you need to change the whole allotment system, including that
of any other important publicly funded thing like the military; in
other words, the money is there and is set aside automatically for a
given service, and therefore must be used for said service-- but I
know you realize that, just wanted to point it out
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 20:40 |
Atavachron wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Also as much as I like PBS, a majority of people shouldn't have to pay for TV shows that a small minority of people want to watch. If people want PBS they fund it completely via donations. |
I believe PBS gets about 10% from the Gov, the rest is private, whether from viewers or foundations
|
You brought PBS into the discussion, and .0001% would be too much money. The amount doesn't make it any better really.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65613
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 20:33 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Also as much as I like PBS, a majority of people shouldn't have to pay for TV shows that a small minority of people want to watch. If people want PBS they fund it completely via donations. |
I believe PBS gets about 10% from the Gov, the rest is private, whether from viewers or foundations
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 20:22 |
Atavachron wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
I can complain about it on principle without any reference to other countries.
Further the issue isn't what it is compared to other countries, but how efficient it is compared to the alternative we would have i.e. private companies like FedEx and UPS providing mail service.
Anyway, you didn't even give me a chance to complain about it. All I did was ask a question. Maybe I <3 the post office. |
maybe you do like the PO, I used the word "you" to mean
all-- as for the alternative world, well sure you can go that way
too, it's like saying PBS shouldn't be funded by public money because
we can just watch Discovery or The Learning Channel or something.
But if you're a viewer who likes real quality, cutting edge film
making/production, you see the huge difference between public
television and the average cable channel
|
Not quite the same thing because the same service is really completely replicated in the free market except it would be at a lower cost (except possibly for rural areas, but I would still wager cheaper for them).
Also as much as I like PBS, a majority of people shouldn't have to pay for TV shows that a small minority of people want to watch. If people want PBS they fund it completely via donations.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 20:19 |
|
|
|
|
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32553
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 20:17 |
thellama73 wrote:
The Post Office does a decent job most of the time, but I still would like to see the whole thing privatized.
|
f**k that, they cost us over $100 last year by destroying a large collection of items we were selling.  On this topic, a private company would be subject to a grievance or even a lawsuit if this happens.
You know what the US Postal Service does?
"Would you like to buy insurance?"
What the hell? I am paying you to perform a service. If you fail to perform that service, I should at least get my damn money back- you should pay for the items that were placed in your car for transport.
So if a valet goes to park my car, right...do I have to buy valet insurance in case the young man wraps my vehicle around a lamppost? No. People should either do things satisfactorily or pay for any damage they cause.
The Post Office (and many other government fixtures) get a free pass simply because they are the government. Private businesses will be scrutinized to a greater extent and held responsible.
Edited by Epignosis - August 11 2010 at 20:21
|
|
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 20:13 |
|
The Post Office does a decent job most of the time, but I still would like to see the whole thing privatized.
|
|
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65613
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 20:13 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
I can complain about it on principle without any reference to other countries.
Further the issue isn't what it is compared to other countries, but how efficient it is compared to the alternative we would have i.e. private companies like FedEx and UPS providing mail service.
Anyway, you didn't even give me a chance to complain about it. All I did was ask a question. Maybe I <3 the post office. |
maybe you do like the PO, I used the word "you" to mean
all-- as for the alternative world, well sure you can go that way
too, it's like saying PBS shouldn't be funded by public money because
we can just watch Discovery or The Learning Channel or something.
But if you're a viewer who likes real quality, cutting edge film
making/production, you see the huge difference between public
television and the average cable channel
|
|
Finnforest
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 03 2007
Location: The Heartland
Status: Offline
Points: 17309
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 20:07 |
Atavachron wrote:
I think the Post Office's "monopoly" is one of those institutions most Americans still, believe it or not, kinda like and appreciate; with the now endless assortment of media & telecom companies that may or may not still exist in 5 years, it seems to be a comforting constant. As for its service, until you've been overseas you don't realize how efficient the mail service here is, and can't complain about the USPS with much authority or perspective.
|
Good points David. I have had problems with foreign post services. Some costly ones. I think the PO is necessary for the time being, but I think it can and will need to streamline and modernize like everyone else. I also think they need more management of certain clerks that I mentioned. These people need to move their ass and earn their good wages. Christ some of these ladies have no idea what its like to work private sector, they'd be out on their ass for their slowness and crabbiness. But again, as far as what happens to your letter once it enters the "machinery" they seem pretty damn efficient to me.
|
|
...that moment you realize you like "Mob Rules" better than "Heaven and Hell"
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 20:05 |
I can complain about it on principle without any reference to other countries.
Further the issue isn't what it is compared to other countries, but how efficient it is compared to the alternative we would have i.e. private companies like FedEx and UPS providing mail service.
Anyway, you didn't even give me a chance to complain about it. All I did was ask a question. Maybe I <3 the post office.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65613
|
Posted: August 11 2010 at 20:00 |
|
I think the Post Office's "monopoly" is one of those institutions most Americans still, believe it or not, kinda like and appreciate; with the now endless assortment of media & telecom companies that may or may not still exist in 5 years, it seems to be a comforting constant. As for its service, until you've been overseas you don't realize how efficient the mail service here is, and can't complain about the USPS with much authority or perspective.
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
For my Libertarian friends
