Who's starving?!?! We have, simultaneously, more people on the planet and less hunger than ever before. The only way this happens is by creating wealth. Also, not wealthy here. I'm lower middle class and I get by perfectly well by providing services to the wealthy Redistributing wealth from the wealthy to the indolent? that takes money that the wealthy might otherwise have spent employing my services.
When greedy thieves speak of "soaking the rich" the middle class says "but those are our employers". We don't feel oppressed by the people who we sell our labor and services to. More, the single largest potential pool of taxable income, and single least politically influential group, is the middle class. Inflation will push our incomes into the "rich" tax brackets soon enough.
For some people, the notion that 'all men are created equal' indicates that government should dictate equal outcomes, regardless of individual skill and effort. For those, government must oppress the skillful, the disciplined and the fortunate for the purpose of equalizing the lazy, the undisciplined and the inept. In doing so, they punish those who create wealth and reward those who do not.
Car makers. And they will find a way to provide their customers with what their customers want. That's what happens when you have a free society, people don't bow down and lick your... er, boots, on command.
If the government increases the tax on gasoline but not on diesel in the hope of taxing those eeeeevil American SUV drivers, those eeeevil American SUV drivers will notice and reconsider their opinion of diesel. And just like when CAFE standards killed the passenger station wagon, car makers will look for a way to meet the needs of their customers.
[sigh] I'd have thought that would be a reasonable assumption in their shoes too. Assuming I didn't already have such a blatant counterexample being shoved down my pants.
Actually, if a TSA official observes a person committing an illegal act, they have the same right to detain that individual pending the arrival of police (citizens arrest) as any other citizen. What they don't have is the power to arrest on suspicion of wrongdoing. That's for police officers and federal officers who have the appropriate training.
Mind you, the TSA would like to have that authority, but don't particularly want to provide their agents with the appropriate training (thank god. They're bad enough without that authority)
So it's the eeeeeevil Republicans (bwhahahahahaaaa) who are responsible for increases in TSA activity since the last presidential election in 2008? How?
Incorrect. When less fuel goes the same distance, people don't drive the same distance that they used to, They drive further and spend more money on gas because they're getting better value for money. The gas companies end up making more money.
There would be no "need to go to war in oil rich areas" if development of local oil rich areas was not so heavily regulated. Perhaps the externalities of the "need to go to war in oil rich areas" should be borne by the environmental lobby.
According to the Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, "Over the first 70 years of the twentieth century the US incarceration rate was characterized by a relative stability, with approximately 100 per 100,000 citizens suffering imprisonment at a given moment. The following 35 year period has seen a steep rise in this rate, with the figure reaching 491 per 100,000 in 2005. (US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2005). More recent data suggests that this has risen still further since then". See the wikipedia article on incareration in the United States. Despite the catastrophic effect of the war on drugs, particularly on minority communities such as blacks and hispanics, America still has an ever increasing drug problem.
How's that war on drugs working out then? Seems to me that not ignoring the problem doesn't make it go away either. You just get the problems associated with drugs added to the problems associated with the war on drugs.
Because it's the government's job to strive for the betterment of the country as a whole, not just the individual
That depends on what country you are in. The US for example, has as one of its founding documents, a description of what government is for: "...all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men". Clearly, the US government exists to protect the rights of individuals, not to oppress individuals "for the greater good"
So, only raise the gas tax for passenger vehicles. It's not that hard
[snort] How do you think the SUV became popular? CAFE standards, intended to reduce Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency of car makers made station wagons, passenger vehicles which many consumers wanted, economically disastrous for car makers. Car makers therefore stopped making them. Mission accomplished, right? Wrong. Consumers still wanted vehicles which did the same job. So they started buying non passenger vehicles which could do the job (hello SUV) instead.
Slashdot Mirror
Now that's a boarding procedure I can get down with.
Who's starving?!?! We have, simultaneously, more people on the planet and less hunger than ever before. The only way this happens is by creating wealth. Also, not wealthy here. I'm lower middle class and I get by perfectly well by providing services to the wealthy Redistributing wealth from the wealthy to the indolent? that takes money that the wealthy might otherwise have spent employing my services.
When greedy thieves speak of "soaking the rich" the middle class says "but those are our employers". We don't feel oppressed by the people who we sell our labor and services to. More, the single largest potential pool of taxable income, and single least politically influential group, is the middle class. Inflation will push our incomes into the "rich" tax brackets soon enough.
For some people, the notion that 'all men are created equal' indicates that government should dictate equal outcomes, regardless of individual skill and effort. For those, government must oppress the skillful, the disciplined and the fortunate for the purpose of equalizing the lazy, the undisciplined and the inept. In doing so, they punish those who create wealth and reward those who do not.
yes.
Just tell them you believe in free markets and watch their heads implode.
And who cares what the consumer wanted?
Car makers. And they will find a way to provide their customers with what their customers want. That's what happens when you have a free society, people don't bow down and lick your... er, boots, on command.
If the government increases the tax on gasoline but not on diesel in the hope of taxing those eeeeevil American SUV drivers, those eeeevil American SUV drivers will notice and reconsider their opinion of diesel. And just like when CAFE standards killed the passenger station wagon, car makers will look for a way to meet the needs of their customers.
They searched your SANDWICH!!!!!?!?!? . That's just messed up!
When you get enough of the US military to side with you let us know
which presidential candidate do you suppose gets more donations from active duty military personnel than any other?
[sigh] I'd have thought that would be a reasonable assumption in their shoes too. Assuming I didn't already have such a blatant counterexample being shoved down my pants.
Easy. They guys trying to fight those checks. The guys pretending to try to prevent bombs on public transportation are evil.
Actually, if a TSA official observes a person committing an illegal act, they have the same right to detain that individual pending the arrival of police (citizens arrest) as any other citizen. What they don't have is the power to arrest on suspicion of wrongdoing. That's for police officers and federal officers who have the appropriate training.
Mind you, the TSA would like to have that authority, but don't particularly want to provide their agents with the appropriate training (thank god. They're bad enough without that authority)
So it's the eeeeeevil Republicans (bwhahahahahaaaa) who are responsible for increases in TSA activity since the last presidential election in 2008? How?
Incorrect. When less fuel goes the same distance, people don't drive the same distance that they used to, They drive further and spend more money on gas because they're getting better value for money. The gas companies end up making more money.
...They either think they spend lots of money on gas (the don't)...
They don't spend lots of money on gas compared to what?
And you think, absent the unlikely event of a Ron Paul President, increased funds will be used to pay down the debt?
There would be no "need to go to war in oil rich areas" if development of local oil rich areas was not so heavily regulated. Perhaps the externalities of the "need to go to war in oil rich areas" should be borne by the environmental lobby.
According to the Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, "Over the first 70 years of the twentieth century the US incarceration rate was characterized by a relative stability, with approximately 100 per 100,000 citizens suffering imprisonment at a given moment. The following 35 year period has seen a steep rise in this rate, with the figure reaching 491 per 100,000 in 2005. (US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2005). More recent data suggests that this has risen still further since then". See the wikipedia article on incareration in the United States. Despite the catastrophic effect of the war on drugs, particularly on minority communities such as blacks and hispanics, America still has an ever increasing drug problem.
How's that war on drugs working out then? Seems to me that not ignoring the problem doesn't make it go away either. You just get the problems associated with drugs added to the problems associated with the war on drugs.
Because it's the government's job to strive for the betterment of the country as a whole, not just the individual
That depends on what country you are in. The US for example, has as one of its founding documents, a description of what government is for: "...all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men". Clearly, the US government exists to protect the rights of individuals, not to oppress individuals "for the greater good"
Say hello to the diesel SUV. Also, diesel exhaust is higher in particulates than gasoline; say hello to dirty air.
So, only raise the gas tax for passenger vehicles. It's not that hard
[snort] How do you think the SUV became popular? CAFE standards, intended to reduce Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency of car makers made station wagons, passenger vehicles which many consumers wanted, economically disastrous for car makers. Car makers therefore stopped making them. Mission accomplished, right? Wrong. Consumers still wanted vehicles which did the same job. So they started buying non passenger vehicles which could do the job (hello SUV) instead.
Find out who made it toxic and sue then for the cost of cleanup.
I don't mind fees for services from the government. If you apply for a marriage license...,
Telling you who you may or may not marry is a service?
Once the driverless car is functioning reliably, the campaign to force people to use them will immediately commence.
Because of the car stopped in front of her?