Which is why, if you continue to vote for either of the two incumbent parties, you're part of the problem. And why I am a Libertarian. I'm sure the Libertarian party will have similar issues at some point, if they get stronger, however the Libertarian are the best guidelines for why this stuff matters more than most people care about. So I am not worried about Libertarian party getting corrupt any time soon.
"The "Fair" in fair taxes comes into play in that ALL NEW goods and services are taxed at the exact same rate"
This is hardly fair. The premise of the fair tax is that government has a right to take money from people. It doesn't. I would consider taxes to be violation of the Fourth Amendment, of unreasonable seizure.
Besides, I'm not buying used underwear. Nope not gonna do it.
In case you don't realize... ALL TAXES are regressive. The fact that people think they are "progressive" is simply the result of not understanding the nature of taxes and legal tax avoidance. You see, while the poor STILL won't pay taxes, the middle class will STILL have the burden of taxes, and the rich will simply avoid taxes.
Taxes are a necessary evil, but that doesn't make them less evil if one tries (noisy way of doing nothing) make them "more fair". The best taxes are those that are voluntary, like Cigarette taxes. I can simply avoid taxes by NOT smoking. However, taxing things that everyone needs, like income, food, housing.... is pure evil, because one cannot avoid it, except to become a complete leech upon society.
I dare say that something like taxing soda at a rate that compensated society for the ills created by soda, would make our society healthier, as people would choose to avoid soda. This would suck for Pepsi and Coke, but it would reduce obesity voluntarily. You can go down the list of non-necessity items and tax them, letting people to Opt Out of taxes responsibly.
If you did this, you could fund every Social Program you wanted, while reducing the need for many of them by creating incentives to avoid taxes. Legalize pot, prostitution etc, and tax the crap out of them, and regulating them to death (legitimately). We would reduce our prison population dramatically while also being a benefit to society.
The problem isn't fair vs unfair taxes, it is taxes. Period. Make taxes voluntary.
The sad thing is, they used to be decent. Good Service at affordable pricing for domains. They tried to expand into other areas that others were better at, and they basically sucked at it. They stopped being what made them successful in the first place. This is why they are bleeding money fast.
And the people that started the downward curve were paid stupid huge bonuses, and now are suffering from long term shortsightedness.
Reading further, you almost sound Libertarian. However, I don't know a single libertarian that is opposed to people who "print pamphlets, create a video, or publish a book about politics".
print pamphlets, create a video, or publish a book about politics is free speech
Is it not free speech to do these things? Or you're just opposed to people doing these things for a cause you do not support? You are part of the problem because you think the problem is free speech for causes you don't support. I'll be dollars to doughnuts that you support your side (I don't know if you're (D) or (R)) having the right to "print pamphlets, create a video, or publish a book about politics". My guess, is you're a liberal though because liberals are well known for their hypocrisy regarding free speech.
I am for reform. I'm just not for the reform leftists want. I want to reform the system towards liberty, and away from accumulated power. I doubt that if I were a candidate, the MAYDAY PAC would support me, because I am not "liberal" enough in some areas. I really doubt that I would garner much of their attention. Yeah, they may be for reform, just one sided reform.
Democracy is inherently problematic, and subject to hysteria mob rule. Two Wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner. Remember, Hitler was elected by popular support.
Tyranny arises when the "group" has more power and more rights than the individual. It is able to take from one to give to the group. Our society has long passed the line towards tyranny, and that is the problem. The group has more meaning and power than the individual. Thus the rise of the PACs and SuperPacs and all the other forms of Group Politics.
Want to fix the problem, fix the group politics. Only Citizens can donate only to candidates they can actually vote for. Otherwise they can form a group and run their own campaigns. That way, unions have to run their own campaigns for candidates, directly, as would the Koch Brothers and Soros would be prohibited (being a convicted felon) of donating to anyone.
This would drive the politics back locally, and away from accumulated power at the Federal and State levels. Problem is, this is inherently anti (D) and (R) proposal, and party politics in general.
Money isn't the problem, it is simply a tool. Accumulated power is the problem. Money exposes and is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. I don't care about money in politics, I care about power. As long as power accumulates power, the system will become more dysfunctional.
The solution to power accumulation by sending power back to the people themselves. The solution is to take power and responsibility and put it back on the people, not the politicians. However too many people are willing to trade Liberty for Security, and we are seeing that this results in gaining us neither Liberty nor Security.
It is hard for power to accumulate power if we are inoculated against power accumulation. Politicians without power would not gain any money to wield to gain more power.
You aren't adding one puddle (unit) to another, you're combining, which is different. If I combine two properties (puddle is a property, not a measurement) your result is a different property. Like adding Yellow and Blue making Green. The problem becomes language of definitions. Which is ruled by some logic, with is in turn, math.
What is obvious about 1+1 = 2 is that is simply a construct of what was seen in nature. Having an apple, and having another apple, gave a person 2 apples, every time it happens. While not "proof" in and of itself, it is obvious that from it never failing. Ever. In the billions and billions of times it was attempted 1+1 = 2, in every counting system ever devised. (Binary, 1+1 = 10). Of course, Time proved men and women are different! Something we all knew.
Simplified Version: Not having Gay Sex during the height of the AIDS spread pandemic, would have reduced the amount of AIDS spreading, but that is "suboptimal" for promiscuous gay men. But how many of them would have given up gay sex if it afforded them to live a long and prosperous life knowing the results of their action would keep themselves from getting AIDS and keep it from spreading after they did get it?
Then you realize that in certain circles of gay men, they would tempt fate by having unprotected sex with infected people, on purpose (sought out). I would consider that "non-optimal" but what do I know about being gay?
All of that being said, what is "optimal" and "sub-optimal" are completely subjective.
No, I'm making no such assumption about the "Ruse" about anything. The ruse I'm falling for, is liberty, defined in such a way that it values INDIVIDUAL rights above that of the group. The moment the group has more and better protected "rights" than an individual is the point where we can start locking up or killing people because they are an inconvenience or worse, a scapegoat. The DoI and the Constitution are outlines for this line of thinking, and the goal of both (D) and (R) parties ever since was to limit the liberties of the people.
Race, Ethnicity, Sexual Orientation, Religion or any other "classification" is, by definition, the attempt to create groups (artificial) that divide people and start creating preferences of groups over the individual. We call these groups "Minority", "disadvantaged", and "protected", and that is the moment it fucks with Liberty. Guess what, I am a member of a disadvantaged group of one, ME. The smallest group is that of one.
As for the DoI and Constitution, they are the best we have. That is my opinion. However, if you have a better set of documents defining what is Liberty, by all means break it out. Until then simply saying we can do better, or there are better is not good enough. Trying to fix these documents is impossible, for we have failed to live up to even THESE ideals. What makes anyone, especially you, think we can do better? THAT is the Ruse of the tyrants, that create laws under the guise of "do it for the children" and "people will starve", and "pushing grandma over the cliff" that sell out liberty for security.
Actually, I just read a study that suggests that it isn't actually gluten people suffer from It is "Poorly Absorbed Short Chained Carbohydrates"(FODMAPs). The problem is, gluten is often associated with these short chain carbohydrates and removing gluten from your diet, actually removes most of the real irritant. See the link below for the study.
OF all the countries in the world, the US should be #1, because of things like the DoI, and Constitution. Our history and the stories we tell, are all about "Give me Liberty or Give Me Death" type liberty, and yet, here we are talking about how corrupt our government is and how it acts illegally, from Snowden to Dotcom..
The problem is that we have too much power accumulated in too few hands, because we don't like the decentralized form of government because it doesn't offer the support for Government Criminality that we desire.
Remember, we keep voting for the same set of people expecting different results. IF you vote (D) or (R), you ARE the problem you hate.
Nobody has a fully-resolved cause-and-effect engine in his head.
This is true to and extent. We do know that our actions have consequences, even if unknown and rippling consequences that extend far beyond our intended realm. The fact that we have dozens of movies(Groundhog Day) and TV shows (Voyager - "Year from Hell") dealing with the unintended consequences of actions proves we understand that while we don't fully know the consequences, we do understand that there are consequences.
Most Religions deal with this by having the Deity know all the consequences of our actions, and explaining morality in this context. My question is, if you know all the consequences for every single one of your actions, even the ones you thought didn't hurt anyone except yourself, would you change any of them? Most people would not, and that is why we suffer more than we ought to.
THIS is why we should always strive to be the best we can, all the time. Our actions have longer lasting consequences than we can even imagine.
Why Academia is stupid in a nutshell. It takes a couple volumes of work to prove what everyone already knows. And while I know that proof is different from "common knowledge" especially in Academia, it is about as hilarious as Time Magazine declaring "men and women are different".
Google Now Launcher is almost perfect. Putting into a "car dock" mode would be even better, where it is always on. Allowing me to change the default "wakeup" from Okay Google to Okay KITT would be over the top cool for me.
If you want to blame congress, then blame the people who keep electing the same two corrupt parties (that would be "we the people") We get what we deserve. I don't trust the government, because I don't trust the people voting for government. I trust myself to do what is right for me and mine, and I'm willing to accept that risk.
The SEC isn't underfunded, it cannot perform its basic duties at any funding level, simply because the rest of the system doesn't want it to. And since we the people keep voting for the same corrupt system, we get what we deserve. Which is why I am a Libertarian.
So, which is it? Are you saying the 5 Taliban leaders, a couple who are accused of War Crimes, aren't terrorists? Or are you saying someone who by all accounts walked away from his post, after ranting about how evil America is and voicing support for Taliban and then converting to Islam... is not a deserter and traitor?
Curious, exactly how would you portray it? Moral victory for Obama and "world peace" ??? --REAL sarcasm
Slashdot Mirror
Which is why, if you continue to vote for either of the two incumbent parties, you're part of the problem. And why I am a Libertarian. I'm sure the Libertarian party will have similar issues at some point, if they get stronger, however the Libertarian are the best guidelines for why this stuff matters more than most people care about. So I am not worried about Libertarian party getting corrupt any time soon.
"The "Fair" in fair taxes comes into play in that ALL NEW goods and services are taxed at the exact same rate"
This is hardly fair. The premise of the fair tax is that government has a right to take money from people. It doesn't. I would consider taxes to be violation of the Fourth Amendment, of unreasonable seizure.
Besides, I'm not buying used underwear. Nope not gonna do it.
In case you don't realize ... ALL TAXES are regressive. The fact that people think they are "progressive" is simply the result of not understanding the nature of taxes and legal tax avoidance. You see, while the poor STILL won't pay taxes, the middle class will STILL have the burden of taxes, and the rich will simply avoid taxes.
Taxes are a necessary evil, but that doesn't make them less evil if one tries (noisy way of doing nothing) make them "more fair". The best taxes are those that are voluntary, like Cigarette taxes. I can simply avoid taxes by NOT smoking. However, taxing things that everyone needs, like income, food, housing .... is pure evil, because one cannot avoid it, except to become a complete leech upon society.
I dare say that something like taxing soda at a rate that compensated society for the ills created by soda, would make our society healthier, as people would choose to avoid soda. This would suck for Pepsi and Coke, but it would reduce obesity voluntarily. You can go down the list of non-necessity items and tax them, letting people to Opt Out of taxes responsibly.
If you did this, you could fund every Social Program you wanted, while reducing the need for many of them by creating incentives to avoid taxes. Legalize pot, prostitution etc, and tax the crap out of them, and regulating them to death (legitimately). We would reduce our prison population dramatically while also being a benefit to society.
The problem isn't fair vs unfair taxes, it is taxes. Period. Make taxes voluntary.
Turns out, Common Sense isn't that common after all.
The sad thing is, they used to be decent. Good Service at affordable pricing for domains. They tried to expand into other areas that others were better at, and they basically sucked at it. They stopped being what made them successful in the first place. This is why they are bleeding money fast.
And the people that started the downward curve were paid stupid huge bonuses, and now are suffering from long term shortsightedness.
"Yes We Can" - shouts the loudest
Until we realize that all taxes are regressive, the problem will remain.
Reading further, you almost sound Libertarian. However, I don't know a single libertarian that is opposed to people who "print pamphlets, create a video, or publish a book about politics".
print pamphlets, create a video, or publish a book about politics is free speech
Is it not free speech to do these things? Or you're just opposed to people doing these things for a cause you do not support? You are part of the problem because you think the problem is free speech for causes you don't support. I'll be dollars to doughnuts that you support your side (I don't know if you're (D) or (R)) having the right to "print pamphlets, create a video, or publish a book about politics". My guess, is you're a liberal though because liberals are well known for their hypocrisy regarding free speech.
I am for reform. I'm just not for the reform leftists want. I want to reform the system towards liberty, and away from accumulated power. I doubt that if I were a candidate, the MAYDAY PAC would support me, because I am not "liberal" enough in some areas. I really doubt that I would garner much of their attention. Yeah, they may be for reform, just one sided reform.
Democracy is inherently problematic, and subject to hysteria mob rule. Two Wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner. Remember, Hitler was elected by popular support.
Tyranny arises when the "group" has more power and more rights than the individual. It is able to take from one to give to the group. Our society has long passed the line towards tyranny, and that is the problem. The group has more meaning and power than the individual. Thus the rise of the PACs and SuperPacs and all the other forms of Group Politics.
Want to fix the problem, fix the group politics. Only Citizens can donate only to candidates they can actually vote for. Otherwise they can form a group and run their own campaigns. That way, unions have to run their own campaigns for candidates, directly, as would the Koch Brothers and Soros would be prohibited (being a convicted felon) of donating to anyone.
This would drive the politics back locally, and away from accumulated power at the Federal and State levels. Problem is, this is inherently anti (D) and (R) proposal, and party politics in general.
Money isn't the problem, it is simply a tool. Accumulated power is the problem. Money exposes and is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. I don't care about money in politics, I care about power. As long as power accumulates power, the system will become more dysfunctional.
The solution to power accumulation by sending power back to the people themselves. The solution is to take power and responsibility and put it back on the people, not the politicians. However too many people are willing to trade Liberty for Security, and we are seeing that this results in gaining us neither Liberty nor Security.
It is hard for power to accumulate power if we are inoculated against power accumulation. Politicians without power would not gain any money to wield to gain more power.
Of course, you missed my point. Insults are the last bastion of people without significant reasoning. Nice chatting with you.
Two Puddles of water become a pond.
You aren't adding one puddle (unit) to another, you're combining, which is different. If I combine two properties (puddle is a property, not a measurement) your result is a different property. Like adding Yellow and Blue making Green. The problem becomes language of definitions. Which is ruled by some logic, with is in turn, math.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
Change your perspective, change how you see things. Math and Philosophy are related and depend upon each other.
What is obvious about 1+1 = 2 is that is simply a construct of what was seen in nature. Having an apple, and having another apple, gave a person 2 apples, every time it happens. While not "proof" in and of itself, it is obvious that from it never failing. Ever. In the billions and billions of times it was attempted 1+1 = 2, in every counting system ever devised. (Binary, 1+1 = 10). Of course, Time proved men and women are different! Something we all knew.
"sub-optimal" is subjective. Care to try again?
Simplified Version: Not having Gay Sex during the height of the AIDS spread pandemic, would have reduced the amount of AIDS spreading, but that is "suboptimal" for promiscuous gay men. But how many of them would have given up gay sex if it afforded them to live a long and prosperous life knowing the results of their action would keep themselves from getting AIDS and keep it from spreading after they did get it?
Then you realize that in certain circles of gay men, they would tempt fate by having unprotected sex with infected people, on purpose (sought out). I would consider that "non-optimal" but what do I know about being gay?
All of that being said, what is "optimal" and "sub-optimal" are completely subjective.
No, I'm making no such assumption about the "Ruse" about anything. The ruse I'm falling for, is liberty, defined in such a way that it values INDIVIDUAL rights above that of the group. The moment the group has more and better protected "rights" than an individual is the point where we can start locking up or killing people because they are an inconvenience or worse, a scapegoat. The DoI and the Constitution are outlines for this line of thinking, and the goal of both (D) and (R) parties ever since was to limit the liberties of the people.
Race, Ethnicity, Sexual Orientation, Religion or any other "classification" is, by definition, the attempt to create groups (artificial) that divide people and start creating preferences of groups over the individual. We call these groups "Minority", "disadvantaged", and "protected", and that is the moment it fucks with Liberty. Guess what, I am a member of a disadvantaged group of one, ME. The smallest group is that of one.
As for the DoI and Constitution, they are the best we have. That is my opinion. However, if you have a better set of documents defining what is Liberty, by all means break it out. Until then simply saying we can do better, or there are better is not good enough. Trying to fix these documents is impossible, for we have failed to live up to even THESE ideals. What makes anyone, especially you, think we can do better? THAT is the Ruse of the tyrants, that create laws under the guise of "do it for the children" and "people will starve", and "pushing grandma over the cliff" that sell out liberty for security.
To the point we now have neither.
Have a great day!
Actually, I just read a study that suggests that it isn't actually gluten people suffer from It is "Poorly Absorbed Short Chained Carbohydrates"(FODMAPs). The problem is, gluten is often associated with these short chain carbohydrates and removing gluten from your diet, actually removes most of the real irritant. See the link below for the study.
http://www.gastrojournal.org/a...
OF all the countries in the world, the US should be #1, because of things like the DoI, and Constitution. Our history and the stories we tell, are all about "Give me Liberty or Give Me Death" type liberty, and yet, here we are talking about how corrupt our government is and how it acts illegally, from Snowden to Dotcom..
The problem is that we have too much power accumulated in too few hands, because we don't like the decentralized form of government because it doesn't offer the support for Government Criminality that we desire.
Remember, we keep voting for the same set of people expecting different results. IF you vote (D) or (R), you ARE the problem you hate.
Nobody has a fully-resolved cause-and-effect engine in his head.
This is true to and extent. We do know that our actions have consequences, even if unknown and rippling consequences that extend far beyond our intended realm. The fact that we have dozens of movies(Groundhog Day) and TV shows (Voyager - "Year from Hell") dealing with the unintended consequences of actions proves we understand that while we don't fully know the consequences, we do understand that there are consequences.
Most Religions deal with this by having the Deity know all the consequences of our actions, and explaining morality in this context. My question is, if you know all the consequences for every single one of your actions, even the ones you thought didn't hurt anyone except yourself, would you change any of them? Most people would not, and that is why we suffer more than we ought to.
THIS is why we should always strive to be the best we can, all the time. Our actions have longer lasting consequences than we can even imagine.
Why Academia is stupid in a nutshell. It takes a couple volumes of work to prove what everyone already knows. And while I know that proof is different from "common knowledge" especially in Academia, it is about as hilarious as Time Magazine declaring "men and women are different".
Google Now Launcher is almost perfect. Putting into a "car dock" mode would be even better, where it is always on. Allowing me to change the default "wakeup" from Okay Google to Okay KITT would be over the top cool for me.
If you want to blame congress, then blame the people who keep electing the same two corrupt parties (that would be "we the people") We get what we deserve. I don't trust the government, because I don't trust the people voting for government. I trust myself to do what is right for me and mine, and I'm willing to accept that risk.
The SEC isn't underfunded, it cannot perform its basic duties at any funding level, simply because the rest of the system doesn't want it to. And since we the people keep voting for the same corrupt system, we get what we deserve. Which is why I am a Libertarian.
So, which is it? Are you saying the 5 Taliban leaders, a couple who are accused of War Crimes, aren't terrorists? Or are you saying someone who by all accounts walked away from his post, after ranting about how evil America is and voicing support for Taliban and then converting to Islam ... is not a deserter and traitor?
Curious, exactly how would you portray it? Moral victory for Obama and "world peace" ??? --REAL sarcasm
Okay, then your only reply is a series of Straw Man Arguments. Got it.
So you support Tyranny because to oppose it means you're all for Jebus and against Gay sex! YAY! (straw man, meet straw man)