U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-16-2009, 04:10 PM
 
925 posts, read 2,231,536 times
Reputation: 523

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by RainyRainyDay View Post
LD, I completely support your right to hold and promote your opinion. In my opinion, your second paragraph does not make sense from an international perspective. Most other western countries have far more redistributive income tax regimes than does the US. I quite understand that you and like-minded Americans shudder at this and regard the US's relatively non-redistributive tax regime as a cherished American freedom. In fact, this often seems to be the core of the American concept of freedom - getting to hang on to more of your money - since citizens of other western nations typically have the same or more civil liberties as US citizens.

However, Canada and western Europe seem to have avoided financial collapse so far, and indeed in some cases appear to be in better financial shape than the US. So a redistributive tax regime, although distasteful to you, does not appear to lead to financial collapse.
1) The U.S. Constitution dictates what the government CAN and CAN'T DO. Many of the socialist policies, if they're to be done at all, have to be at the state level, not the federal level.

2) Western Europe and Canada are becoming weaker, much like the U.S. They simply haven't completely collapsed at this point. However, if the U.S. falls, as socialism and demographic transition guarantees, then Europe will fall right alongside the U.S., considering the tying of the economies to the U.S.

3) The Regressive Tax situation, as found in Europe, stifles innovation, places undo burdens on the middle class, and increases unemployment. I hope that such isn't what you're advocating for?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-16-2009, 04:16 PM
 
925 posts, read 2,231,536 times
Reputation: 523
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattie View Post
Of course you want good schools and clean neighborhoods. In No. Fulton, we already have those. And, I have no problem with students from less advantaged areas being bused in while we have the room to accommodate them.
Students = Quality of School. That's pretty much it, by and large, in this day of equality of education, considering that most expenditures, over 85%, are at the state level.

Invite problematic students from a ghetto school = Ghetto school #2 It's not like the inattentiveness, the bad behavior, the lack of respect, or the IQ of the students are going to improve, simply because they're going to another school.

Quote:
Do you think the government is responsible for keeping your neighborhoods clean? Do you think any amount of tax money will make up for lack of parental involvement in the schools or lack of supervision by parents?
Parental Involvement is a must. A parent who is involved in their child's education is much more likely to have better grades, be better behaved, etc.

Local Governments can be involved in keeping neighborhoods clean, via the ballot box and local special option sales taxes, etc.

Quote:
What my area of No. Fulton needs is roads (specifically traffic lights) that can deal with the building boom around here. According to surveys taken by Milton, the #1 concern of the residents is traffic. It can take 15 minutes to make a left onto Arnold Mill Rd at certain times of the day. But, it's a county road, and there are no funds to do a study and add a signal to the intersection.
The budget would need to be adjusted. Planning and Zoning could conduct their own study. I don't see the point of allocating a huge sum of funds. It seems like a waste.

Quote:
I don't need a flashy park, I just want A park. That is also years away, because there are no county funds available.
Are you telling me there aren't any parks nearby?
There's plenty near you in North Fulton. Or, take 140 up to Hickory Flat, and there are several there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 04:26 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
3,463 posts, read 4,117,786 times
Reputation: 2162
Quote:
Originally Posted by City Fanatic View Post
Churches and non-profits are for charity, not the government. You honestly are unfamiliar with the U.S. Constitution.
I'm very familiar with the U.S. Constitution and the separation of powers, limited government, Libertarianism, minarchism, Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations" and all of that stuff.

I just don't buy into the southern concept and probably YOUR CONCEPT of "limited government" because it's a bad interpretation, and all too often individual freedoms are trampled upon and historical wrongs are ignored in the process.

Just my humble opinion, of course.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 04:31 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
3,463 posts, read 4,117,786 times
Reputation: 2162
Quote:
Originally Posted by City Fanatic View Post
Children should attend local schools, not be bussed across county lines to fulfill a quota. I hope that bussing isn't related to your comment of "go to the best schools".
No, bussing isn't related to my comment. I wasn't bused, because my mother believed that a person should have a good education regardless of where they live. But I sense a certain mean-spiritedness to your comments... but nonetheless this is a very interesting conversation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 04:44 PM
 
925 posts, read 2,231,536 times
Reputation: 523
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcidSnake View Post
I'm very familiar with the U.S. Constitution and the separation of powers, limited government, Libertarianism, minarchism, Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations" and all of that stuff.

I just don't buy into the southern concept and probably YOUR CONCEPT of "limited government" because it's a bad interpretation, and all too often individual freedoms are trampled upon and historical wrongs are ignored in the process.

Just my humble opinion, of course.
The Tenth Amendment

The Powers Not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Hence, anything not delegated to the federal government is delegated to the states.

Now, if the state wants to be a nanny-state, depending on its constitution, then it may do so. However, each state is different, and I believe that the government should not be used as a charity mechanism. Involuntary servitude is what it is, by and large, when you're forced to provide a portion of your income to someone against your will.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 04:46 PM
 
925 posts, read 2,231,536 times
Reputation: 523
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcidSnake View Post
No, bussing isn't related to my comment. I wasn't bused, because my mother believed that a person should have a good education regardless of where they live. But I sense a certain mean-spiritedness to your comments... but nonetheless this is a very interesting conversation.
"Mean-spiritedness"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 04:46 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
3,463 posts, read 4,117,786 times
Reputation: 2162
Quote:
Originally Posted by LovinDecatur View Post
I'm afraid that your generalizations about the attitudes of the top wage earners paying taxes are missing my points by a mile. Do I infer that you think we are against having to pay taxes at all? That is certainly not true. I believe in a fair and equitable tax system, however...and the current system, IMHO, isn't that.
And as far as I'm concerned, the massive and unbridled redistribution of hard-earned wealth is a MAJOR "evil indiscretion of the government" that can only result in our financial collapse.
I get all of your points. I am simply giving my opinion on why I vastly disagree with them. Here is my question: When was this "system" as you put it, ever "fair"? As in fair to everybody? Fair in the sense that everyone had a right to spend their taxes as they see fit and had their property rights recognized equally across the board?

To me, these questions that I ask gets to heart of the matter on why people like me will never buy into the "tax protests" of today. It smacks too much of partisanship given the fact that there are many events that have happened in history that many like Ron Paul have claimed could inevitably lead to the U.S. "collapse" and yet you and many others like you gloss over these past events.

It was devaluing the dollar by removing it from the gold standard that has made it so easy to spend and waste on wars that destroys lives, waste productivity, and bankrupt national treasuries. Yet, rather than speak on that, or speak on the crooked adoption of a national bank system in the 1900's, southerners like yourself chose to harp on Obama like he's the heir apparent to the coming apocalypse.

To that end, people like me would have to roll our eyes. Why now? Why not long ago? Hmm...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 05:04 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
3,463 posts, read 4,117,786 times
Reputation: 2162
Quote:
Originally Posted by City Fanatic View Post
The Tenth Amendment

The Powers Not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Hence, anything not delegated to the federal government is delegated to the states.
Yeah, and we saw how THAT turned out. Big government is big government, whether its utilized at the national level or at the state level. The individual should reign supreme above all else, and this point is where I quibble with the southern "states rights" crowd.

All too often you guys simply want to enforce the tyranny at the state level that you couldn't enforce at the national level. For my ancestors, it might as well be a choice between Nazi Germany or Warlord operated Somalia. Either way there is d--nation for all involved.

In my opinion if the states are not willing to enforce individual freedoms then let the federal goverment do it. That's MY interpretation of the Constitution and one that by far has proven to be the most just, equitable, and HUMANE.

Quote:
Originally Posted by City Fanatic View Post
Now, if the state wants to be a nanny-state, depending on its constitution, then it may do so. However, each state is different, and I believe that the government should not be used as a charity mechanism. Involuntary servitude is what it is, by and large, when you're forced to provide a portion of your income to someone against your will.
Your opinion. Mine's is somewhat different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 05:04 PM
 
Location: Atlanta and St Simons Island, GA
20,962 posts, read 32,955,214 times
Reputation: 12629
I'm done with this, because:

It's going nowhere. You believe what you do. Same here.
It's gotten way too off-topic. Start it up in the Politics section.
The elections of 2010 and 2012 will ultimately resolve these arguments.

An old friend of mine put it so eloquently..."I may not know everything, but I know the difference between chicken salad and chicken s**t."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 05:10 PM
 
Location: East Cobb
2,206 posts, read 5,951,462 times
Reputation: 906
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcidSnake View Post
When was this "system" as you put it, ever "fair"? As in fair to everybody? Fair in the sense that everyone had a right to spend their taxes as they see fit and had their property rights recognized equally across the board?
There's no absolute standard of fairness with which all would agree. Some argue that a flat percentage income tax is fair, others that a flat levy per person or family would be more fair. The thinking behind progressive taxation schemes is along the lines of Jesus' words that from those to whom much has been given, more will be expected. In this line of thinking, rich people have benefited from combinations of innate qualities, upbringing and opportunities that the poor lack, and it is not therefore "fair" for them to keep all their wealth, even if they have worked for it.

I'm not trying to change any minds here, just pointing out that in my opinion, arguments along the lines of "it's just not fair" are not very useful. All that kind of statement says is "it doesn't agree with my standard of fairness". However, it's quite obvious that we don't all have the same standards.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top