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.
Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
So theft is OK, so long as we run the amount of it by you and get that amount approved for the heist?
Originally posted by habitforming
Since you do not understand why past presidents matter I am with you. The moment the next president is a Republican, I am on your side 100%. I am not gonna wanna hear any crap about some past guy named Obama though.
Originally posted by habitforming
You don't mind if the stolen money is used for war.
Id rather it go to medicine.
That is what is great about America in that we both...oh wait no. Apparently only you....
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by Golf66
Do you realize what the amount of money it is that you are bitching and moaning about???
Let's say you can sell your property for 600,000....you would pay 3,800 in tax....that is 1.52% of your yearly income...and it is a one time tax.
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
I love people who try to profile me...it's cute.
Originally posted by habitforming
Originally posted by nenothtu
Governing. That is what is best left to governments. Not running charities, governing. That is why they call them "governments", and not "charities".
I cannot believe you think this passes as an answer.
And just what do you believe "governing" entails?
Originally posted by habitforming
Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
So theft is OK, so long as we run the amount of it by you and get that amount approved for the heist?
You don't mind if the stolen money is used for war.
Id rather it go to medicine.
That is what is great about America in that we both...oh wait no. Apparently only you....
Originally posted by nenothtu
"Governing" is keeping Knothead A from infringing Knothead B's rights, and providing a remedy when they are unsuccessful at that. As an example, they're there to keep you all from murdering one another, and failing that, meting out punishment to the murdering party. They're there to either prevent or remedy assaults, thefts, and the like, things that one person does which infringe on another.
They are NOT there to facilitate the theft. They are NOT there to prop up private businesses artificially when that business will fail under poor management. They are NOT there to operate charities. They are NOT there to be your mommy, wipe your nose, bandage your knee, or hug you when you fall.
Originally posted by macman
Originally posted by habitforming
Since you do not understand why past presidents matter I am with you. The moment the next president is a Republican, I am on your side 100%. I am not gonna wanna hear any crap about some past guy named Obama though.
So long as it is not used as an excuse for one thing or another.
Bush's decision for The Patriot Act and such was deplorable.
But, 0bama has compounded all problems 10 fold.
I do understand, very well why they matter.
I am just tired of hearing excuses from 0bama about how nothing he does works to correct the issue. He takes absolutely no responsibility for his actions. Kind of like how he wants people to act. Just go about, doing things, because it feels good, and then blame others when it goes wrong.
Originally posted by macman
Originally posted by habitforming
You don't mind if the stolen money is used for war.
Id rather it go to medicine.
That is what is great about America in that we both...oh wait no. Apparently only you....
War, in defense of, is what the Fed Govt is supposed to do.
Not provide for every want and whim of the Citizen.
Originally posted by nenothtu
My bad. I keep forgetting that they don't teach civics in school any more, and kids these days don't know what "governing" is any longer.
"Governing" is keeping Knothead A from infringing Knothead B's rights, and providing a remedy when they are unsuccessful at that. As an example, they're there to keep you all from murdering one another, and failing that, meting out punishment to the murdering party. They're there to either prevent or remedy assaults, thefts, and the like, things that one person does which infringe on another.
They are NOT there to facilitate the theft. They are NOT there to prop up private businesses artificially when that business will fail under poor management. They are NOT there to operate charities. They are NOT there to be your mommy, wipe you nose, bandage your knee, or hug you when you fall.
Originally posted by nenothtu
So the answer is to steal MORE?
"We both" and "only I..." WHAT? Lose your train of thought there?
Originally posted by Golf66
Indeed - not one of the enumerated powers includes they right to levy a tax against citizen A so that citizen B could have a safety net. However, levy taxes to raise an Army - yep, it's in there.
Taking money from one citizen because it is determined that he has "too much" to give it to another who is determined to have "not enough" is not one of the roles of the government. People who chose to do so give to charity and they help those who do not have enough.
Also not one of the roles - leveling the perceived playing field through regulation and laws that empower minority groups with extraordinary status under the law.
If a citizen's rights are infringed upon by another there is already remedy allowed under the law we don't need special statuses for groups. All that does is cause division and strife. Everyone should be equal under the law. Murder is murder murdering a minority is a "hate crime"...um is this really necessary?
edit on 12/7/2012 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)
ummmm, NO ... that is why we "raise an army" or did you skip that part on purpose ??
How about defense of the country? Are they there for that?
Originally posted by Honor93
ummmm, NO ... that is why we "raise an army" or did you skip that part on purpose ??
governing has nothing to do with "providing" anything other than a means of negotiation between parties ... always has, always will.
Originally posted by habitforming
No, you do not understand. Go back and read that list again. All you said was you did not like Obama because of items 1-whatever and each of those items was here LOOOOONG before Obama. So all you said is you did not like Obama because you apparently do not like America. Go back and read it again. Try actually answering what I asked. See what logic can do for you.
Originally posted by habitforming
I am and have been paying for war for a long time and yet to see a war that is "in defense of."
But I am paying for it and you are paying for it.
I would rather pay for medicine.
Originally posted by habitforming
Social Security proves all of your points wrong.