Jump to content
Radio Shack Killa

God save us....

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, NeFrog in the Kitchen Sink said:

I think everyone agrees there is a role for physical barriers in certain spots. Heck we already have 500 miles of wall. But a sea to sea wall?  Seems like a folly. I’d like to see a study about how effectively to use border funds before committing a bunch of taxpayer dollars to something that may not work efficiently and have unintended consequences. A few opinions of border patrol agents isn’t enough for me to be convinced it is the right direction. Trump needs to back down on this one. 

 

It does seem odd to hold up a $1.3 trillion spending bill for $5 billion...of course, I'm disappointed that the government shutdown is not permanent...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lyle Lanley II said:

 

Any increase in the budget is an issue when you're $21 trillion in debt.  

 

While he was running, Trump said that he'd balance the budget - and that "it will go relatively quickly".  Nearly two years into his term, we've racked up $2 trillion in additional debt.  That's roughly $2.8 billion in new debt every day.  

 

So much for draining the swamp.  This country can't just declare bankruptcy to erase our debt and start over by licensing our name and asshole persona to become a reality TV host.

 

They're. All. Statists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rothbardian said:

 

It does seem odd to hold up a $1.3 trillion spending bill for $5 billion...of course, I'm disappointed that the government shutdown is not permanent...

 

If we’ve only shutdown “non essential” portions of it. Why would we ever open them back up? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NewfoundlandFreeFrog said:

 

Ask yourself that in a while when you're looking for your tax refund???

 

:lol:

 

1) my refund is generally very small every year. F an interest free loan to the government. 

 

2) I’ll gladly miss my “refund” for the abolishment of the IRS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, DirtyThirdFrog said:

 

1) my refund is generally very small every year. F an interest free loan to the government. 

 

2) I’ll gladly miss my “refund” for the abolishment of the IRS

If the government requires revenue, the government is going to need a tax collection and tax enforcement agency.  You can call it a different name, you can change the manner in which the revenue is collected, but the IRS ain't going nowhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Duquesne Frog said:

If the government requires revenue, the government is going to need a tax collection and tax enforcement agency.  You can call it a different name, you can change the manner in which the revenue is collected, but the IRS ain't going nowhere.

 

True, even a consumption based tax, which would be collected at the cash register, would still require agents to audit businesses to ensure that proper rates and remittances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/6/2019 at 9:10 AM, Duquesne Frog said:

If the government requires revenue, the government is going to need a tax collection and tax enforcement agency.  You can call it a different name, you can change the manner in which the revenue is collected, but the IRS ain't going nowhere.

 

Which is why I’m an Ancap fan 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, DirtyThirdFrog said:

 

Which is why I’m an Ancap fan 

 

I guess not surprisingly, I'm not.  I know we all like to bang on government for not being able to do anything well, but I don't think that notion is universally true (see: space, military, long term technology investment) and there are some things that capitalism doesn't do well.  Capitalism (at least in our current corporatist practice, maybe not in theory) sucks at solving long term problems and problems that run counter to short term profitability.  Touchy-feely shit like the environment, systemic socio-economic biases, healthcare and even less touchy-feely things like basic research investment.

 

I know there are those here who will argue that American Capitalism has sucked at solving those problems because the government has not gotten out of the way, but 1) on a sliding scale of capitalism-to-communism, our economy has always tilted heavily toward the capitalism side of that scale, at least in comparison to most other modern "developed" economies, 2) the "golden age" of American Capitalism, at least with respect to lack of government interference, has to be the robber barron era of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, which was replete with all kinds of negative consequences for society and is not a model I think most Americans would like to return to, and 3) while the "invisible hand" might in theory always guide a society toward the best of all possible worlds, it has failed to do so in practice on many occasions. One might argue that Communism has failed for the same reason; that mankind never actually did a very good job of executing the theory in practice.  What Russia and China have done/did with their economic systems bears very little resemblance to what Marx and Engalls wrote.  And American Capitalism has and probably never will live up to the ideals of Smith or Hayek because human foibles (most importantly, greed) will always push the invisible hand out of the way and toward monopolism, corporatism, and oligarchy.

 

So, I don't agree that unregulated anarchism is the way to go.  But if that ideal could be somehow achieved, then sure, you might get rid of the IRS ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Duquesne Frog said:

 

I guess not surprisingly, I'm not.  I know we all like to bang on government for not being able to do anything well, but I don't think that notion is universally true (see: space, military, long term technology investment) and there are some things that capitalism doesn't do well.  Capitalism (at least in our current corporatist practice, maybe not in theory) sucks at solving long term problems and problems that run counter to short term profitability.  Touchy-feely shit like the environment, systemic socio-economic biases, healthcare and even less touchy-feely things like basic research investment.

 

I know there are those here who will argue that American Capitalism has sucked at solving those problems because the government has not gotten out of the way, but 1) on a sliding scale of capitalism-to-communism, our economy has always tilted heavily toward the capitalism side of that scale, at least in comparison to most other modern "developed" economies, 2) the "golden age" of American Capitalism, at least with respect to lack of government interference, has to be the robber barron era of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, which was replete with all kinds of negative consequences for society and is not a model I think most Americans would like to return to, and 3) while the "invisible hand" might in theory always guide a society toward the best of all possible worlds, it has failed to do so in practice on many occasions. One might argue that Communism has failed for the same reason; that mankind never actually did a very good job of executing the theory in practice.  What Russia and China have done/did with their economic systems bears very little resemblance to what Marx and Engalls wrote.  And American Capitalism has and probably never will live up to the ideals of Smith or Hayek because human foibles (most importantly, greed) will always push the invisible hand out of the way and toward monopolism, corporatism, and oligarchy.

 

So, I don't agree that unregulated anarchism is the way to go.  But if that ideal could be somehow achieved, then sure, you might get rid of the IRS ...

 

Yeah, capitalism has a long term perspective blind spot that we haven't been able to figure out how to deal with. Sometimes it can't see the forest through the trees. Worse  yet, it ends up burning all the trees down.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NeFrog in the Kitchen Sink said:

 

Yeah, capitalism has a long term perspective blind spot that we haven't been able to figure out how to deal with. Sometimes it can't see the forest through the trees. Worse  yet, it ends up burning all the trees down.

 

 

 

 

 Many blind spots, really. Especially as we practice it: Of import: Primus: The tragedy of the commons. Secundus: The tendency for concentrations/monopolies to form that tilt the formerly free market (that Duq alludes to above). Tertius: The rise of mercantilism/other corporate-government mutualism/parasitism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/5/2019 at 5:03 PM, NewfoundlandFreeFrog said:

 

Ask yourself that in a while when you're looking for your tax refund???

 

:lol:

 

Cue my rant in favor of a progressive consumption tax in lieu of a federal income tax.  (no more tax returns, no more tax loopholes, no more tax refunds, no more bitching about those who can afford CPAs get better rates, no more lower tax rates between two individuals doing the same job because one is a married homeowner when the other is not...etc....etc....etc....)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Army Frog Fan said:

Has a freshman Congressman, who has not previous accomplishments to rely on, ever been given so much publicity?  I mean, she's everywhere.

 

In part the media, but also in part Republicans, who seem to be particularly obsessed with her.  The whole stupid dancing meme was started by a conservative who thought unearthing that would embarrass her ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Duquesne Frog said:

 

In part the media, but also in part Republicans, who seem to be particularly obsessed with her.  The whole stupid dancing meme was started by a conservative who thought unearthing that would embarrass her ...

 

Umm, no. Her popularity derives straight from the democrat party hoisting her up as the "future of the party". Conservatives mocking her is a result of herself and her own party putting her in the spotlight. More conservatives mocked her for saying "feelings over facts" than they did for that stupid dance thing (which, who really cares). She's a progressive socialist ideologue who doesn't know a damn thing about how the economy works, wants to tax citizens 70% of their income for her fantasy "green new deal", and install a government run healthcare system (and free college) that would put us 30-40 trillion dollars further into debt with no way  of even coming close to paying for it. So no, conservatives aren't obsessed with her simply because she's a liberal who posts instagram videos. It's because she says really dumb statements and extreme ideals, a lot of the time with no factual basis in reality. There's a reason even the Washington Post and CNN call her out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×