It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Are tax cuts necessary in every speech all of the time?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 05:32 PM
link   
There was once a group of people, a tribe if you like in Britain, a little over two thousand years ago. They had money, but also gave some to their tribal system for armour, weapons, collective food rot containers. They worked together.
They had two modes:

1. Individual, get cash, spend your own cash.
2. Group, pool and spend cash.

This group of people died about two thousand years ago, and now we have the Roman Empirial 'one or the other.' But that is not how it was.

Cut to now, and in the face of any political questions and just saying tax cuts. Well, the rich always get the biggest ones, and hoard, not spend. But the poor spend on products, and these are then seen as good, we've supported McDonald's, Microsoft, Hoover (and his villes), anything in mode 1. As individuals. Is this necessarily the best? McDonald's is appalling, Microsoft strangled out anything that worked, Hoover froze people to death. The wisdom of the tax cut.

My question to 'true anti tax' people is, do you think a country that cannot think in mode 2, group, pool, has any hope?




posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Short answer is
the less the Gov't. has , is less "they" will have to suppress you with.



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by LAUGHING-CAT
Short answer is
the less the Gov't. has , is less "they" will have to suppress you with.


And the long answer is: The less that the government invest in the people, the less that the people have.



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by redled
My question to 'true anti tax' people is, do you think a country that cannot think in mode 2, group, pool, has any hope?


Yes.

I don't think there's anything wrong with pooling a portion of funds for a group. The problem is that when the federal government has control of that pool, it's a disaster. A prime example is social security. The federal government had control of that pool and look what happened. They spent every penny of it.



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 10:03 PM
link   
Agreed, my group or tribe was a thousand or two at most. They were all accountable because they all saw each other and heard each other's words face to face, not like some operaesque television screen. They didn't spend social, they shared food. But Bush's inability to get benefits past his cronies is not their fault. Mode 2 still has some validity......



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join