NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #19/NN_1992_19.iso/spool/comp/org/eff/talk/5643

Text File | 1992-09-02 | 9.5 KB | 220 lines

Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Path: sparky!uunet!sun-barr!ames!pacbell.com!network.ucsd.edu!qualcom.qualcomm.com!cancun!rdippold
From: [e-mail] (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Want _Your_ Blood to Boil too?
Message-ID: <rdippold.715476611@cancun>
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: cancun.qualcomm.com
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
References: <rdippold.714770758@cancun> <[e-mail]> <rdippold.715024124@cancun> <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 23:30:11 GMT
Lines: 207

[e-mail] (Gary Weiner) writes:
>[e-mail] (Ron Dippold) writes:
>> poverty level doesn't take under the table dealings into account either.

>Of course not, how can you take into account money made "off the books"?
>That's what it means. Are you saying that all these poor people are
>making big bucks under the table?

All of them?  No.  Many of them?  I know quite a few of them.  The
"poverty" definition, as I said, is incomplete because it doesn't take
into account holdings and income.  It can't.  As always, government
doesn't have enough information to make the correct decision.


>>>This sounds much like the "Trickle Down" theory and "1000 points of
>>>light", and we all know how well that works.
>>
>>Reagan cut taxes, charitable donations increased.  George Bush talks
>>like a Republican but taxes like a Democrat.

>Well, with all the tax breaks that the wealthiest Americans got, it
>was the least they could do.  After they spent it investing in foreign
>contries, that is.

If you don't want them investing in foreign countries, stop making it
such a pain in the ass to do business here.  If they can get lower
taxes and wages and regulation and bureaucratic red tape elsewhere,
they should go elsewhere.


>>>God, you "taxes are theft" people are so thick it's just incredible.

>Maybe I was a little out of line with this one but...

>>Strange, we feel the same way about you "baa baa" government
>>asslicking sheep.

>Marvel as we bring the discourse to loftier peaks...

It was never at a peak to begin with.  I didn't insult till insulted,
and at that time the gloves are off.


>>And you proceeed to reveal all the things we've "missed" that....
>>we've seen a thousand times before.  Roads, food, etc.  You people
>>have absolutely no capability whatsoever for independent thought.  All
>>you can think of for funding is theft, you can't even concieve of
>>any of the myriad methods of alternative funding.

>Damn! you found me out dude, I've been typing verbatum from the
>"Liberal Goverment Ass-Licking Handbook: Vol. 8". Believe it or not,
>I've thought of all these things on my own.

You couldn't have.  You said it couldn't be done without the
government doing it, which is total bullshit.


>What roads were there before governments? I can't for the life of me think
>of who was building roads before the rise of governments. Band societys
>didn't build roads and bridges and once people evolved beyond that, you
>could properly call them governments.

Anyone who needed them.  You don't even need to look before government
- just look at before government decided to make itself the sole
roadbuilder.  J.J. Hill is the first example I can think of off the
top of my head.


>>>Why can't I just walk into your house, put a gun in your face, and take what
>>>I like with impunity, because tax dollars pay for police to protect you.
>>
>>Law enforcement!  One of the few legitimate functions of government,
>>but nothing that needs income tax for funding.

>So how do we fund it? Bake sales? Raffle tickets? Obviously we can't have
>ANY sort of taxation because that would be theft. How 'bout we'll just
>ask evryone to kick in what they think is fair? Great job being a cop
>then, huh?

Certainly not.  Taxation is not the only way government has to
generate income, nor is it currently the major source of government
income.


>>>Why is there even money for you to buy things with, because there is
>>>a government to stand behind  the money so you don't have to lug a bushel
>>>of wheat around to barter to get shoes for your kids.
>>
>>How stupid can you get?  You believe there was no trade and no
>>agriculture and no standardized forms of exchange before governments?

>Actually...no there wasn't. Take an anthropology course before you
>call somebody stupid.

Sheesh...


>>>As a matter of fact, without government funded schools and universitys, we
>>>would still be a backward agrarian people.
>>
>>Bullshit.  Look at private education before government started public
>>schools to "re-educate" the immigrants of the time and their nasty
>>religions.  You didn't get that in California till 1911, and they got
>>along just fine before then.  Once again, education is something
>>people want.  If there is a demand, it will be filled, although not by
>>you sheep.

>Are you sure about this? Im pretty sure that there were public schools
>in the US in the 19th century.

In the northeast were the earliest public schools.  It wasn't done all
at once, but state by state, and before public education, people got
decent (superior to what we get today in most schools) educations.


>>>Taxes  are the dues you pay to society in return for all the benefits you
>>>recieve.
>>
>>It's protection money.  If taxes were _really_ in return for all the
>>benefits I recieved from it, they wouldn't need to make it
>>involuntary.  I'd gladly pay for what I used.  Nor do I even want 99%
>>of the "benefits" I recieve.

>Yeah, ask shareware authors how much they make from there efforts. Or how
>many people who watch public TV on a regular basis actually support the
>station they watch.  If you rely on people's "goodwill" for a salary then
>eating becomes a chancy business.

Damn right, so you actually have to make an effort to make sure you
produce what people want, so they will support you.  Public TV has
problems because they show (for the most part) worthless programs.
You tell people that if they don't support this program, it goes away.
If they don't care, and if they don't care enough to do the same thing
privately, forget it.  Better we should steal from people then to fund
what nobody wants?


>>> If you don't like the things that your money is spent on, then
>>>elect someone who'll vote the way you want.
>>
>>Sorry, 51% of the people deciding to steal from the other 49% still
>>isn't moral.

>Oh, and you get nothing in return? You alredy said you like roads and
>law enforcement. There must be at least a few more things that you use
>on a daily basis.

Somebody mugging me, then giving me some bandaids and gauze, somehow
doesn't make me happy.  I could get what the government provides for
far less and I don't make a spectacular salary.  The nation as a whole
could get what the government provides for much, much less.


>Basicly what it comes down to is that you've got yours and everyone else
>can go screw themselves.  You've reaped the benefits of a technologicly
>advanced, well educated, wealthy society that was created with tax
>money and you don't want to pay your dues.

Total bullshit.  I give 5% a year to United Way to help out those
people that your 40% of my income is supposed to help but hasn't done
a goddamn thing for.  I'd give more if I had it, but the taxes to
support your "Steamtown USA" eat up most of the money I've earned.
The federal government has hindered the develpment of a
technologically advanced, well educated, wealthy society.  I know I
would be far better off if not for the "help" of government these last
30 years.  For the first time, the standard of living of my generation
may not exceed that of our parents, because we've been shafted by the
government.

I don't want to pay the "dues" so you and other government employees
busy doing nothing can waste money pushing paper and thinking up new
ways to restrict my rights and generate more paperwork.  I am opposed
to theft whether it's done by one person, a dozen, a hundred, or a few
million.  It's extortion, and no amount of claimed benefits ("Look!
Nobody burned down your store while you wuz paying us protection, did
dey?") can change that.


>Government and taxes have been around since the first tribal chieftan
>demanded aportion of all his subjects crops and meat. In those days
>you had the same choice as now, go it on your own or pay your dues.

Go it on my own?  Love to.  Where?  Any unclaimed and livable
territory?

>>>If this still doesn't appeal to you, then you are free to leave, I think
>>>there are still some choice parcels of land in Antarctica that you can
>>>get where no government will steal your money.
>>
>>"America!  Love it or leave it, hippie scum!"

>It's not just America you don't like, it's all the nations of the world.
>Governments are needed in a world of over 4 billion people and somebody
>has to pay for them. The "Payment out of honesty" will havwe 10% of the
>people paying all the bills and government severely underfunded.

"somebody has to pay for them" for what?  There is nothing that a
government has to do that it needs to tax to pay for.  We managed just
fine till 1913 in this country without it, till the bastards in
washington got too greedy.  Government "underfunding" is the best
thing that could possibly happen.  If it's too busy trying to get
money to do the things that it thinks it is supposed to be doing, it
won't begin looking for other ways to expand into other things it
shouldn't be doing and finding other rights it should be restricting.
Government expands to eat all available revenue, and more.
--
He suffers from delusions of adequacy.