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.
Pre-1913 roads were not modern, paved roads. They were either dirt or cobblestone, not suitable to modern transportation needs.
Schools prior to nationwide public school were only for the wealthy. The working class couldn't afford tuition before public school.
Taxation is not theft. Taxation gives currency it's value (hence you can't pay taxes or settle debts with Bitcoin or Gold Bars), and creates a better society.
Taxes used for legitimate functions of government are not theft.
Taxation for purposes that lay outside the constitutionally enumerated powers of government is tantamount to theft.
When I was getting my mortgage loans, the bank manager came over and congratulated me and said, "Don't pay off your loan too fast. You want to keep the mortgage as long as possible so that you can get the benefit of tax deduction on the interest."
I was like ... :m ad:
Looking back, I should have strike a deal with her so that she gives me $100 and I'll refund her $70, but I was too shocked at the time. I was not sure whether she was trying to trick me or genuinely believed what she said. Now, I think she actually believed it.
Sadly, so do I.
As if saving $14 (or so, using the average effective federal income tax rate of all filed tax returns) out of each $100 in interest one pays somehow ends in a net plus. What the hell are people thinking?
Pre-1913 roads were not modern, paved roads. They were either dirt or cobblestone, not suitable to modern transportation needs.
Schools prior to nationwide public school were only for the wealthy. The working class couldn't afford tuition before public school.
Taxation is not theft. Taxation gives currency it's value (hence you can't pay taxes or settle debts with Bitcoin or Gold Bars), and creates a better society.
Exactly, we don't live in a volunteer society. Billionaires would pay nothing if they had a choice.
This is what I don't understand about American conservatives. They're all for socialism for the rich: but God-forbid some kid in East L.A. gets a free lunch at his elementary school.
Trump often takes more in corporate welfare than he pays in taxes.
Corporate welfare? Does the Corp get Medicaid? Food Stamps? Section 8 Housing? Free School Lunch? Utilities Subsidies? An Obamaphone?What welfare programs are you talking about?
A really good question you need to ask the parents of the have-not. Why did they bring them to this world knowing that they would be exploited?
Let me get this straight. Assuming that I don't have any capital, but you do. Because I don't want to be "exploited," I decide it's a good idea to gang up on you with like minded people and take your money at gun point. That's what you are saying here.
We need to make sure we understand how things work in the real world. Especially, how we got to where we are today.
Look at it like this, why is it that the countryside is almost entirely white people? Why do the vast-majority of black people live in cities? Was this always the case?
Just to make my point, back in the days of slavery, it was the reverse. The countryside was almost-entirely black, and the cities were almost-entirely white. Why did a switch take place?
In simplest terms, black slaves were replaced with tractors and other machines. The people who owned the land, kept the land, and the people who worked the land, who were no longer needed, were thrown off. And where did they go? To the cities of course.
This has been the history of capitalism, going back to the English enclosure acts. Not just with slaves, but with serfs, and other people(you can see the same thing happening in third-world countries right now).
If we return to how the countryside became the way it is. We also need to understand that, before tractors, most farms were small farms, which required a lot of labor. As machines allowed for greater productivity of each laborer, the farms began to grow in size. But in order to buy enough land to remain competitive, you needed money. And to buy the machines to remain competitive, you needed money.
And if your farm didn't earn enough money, not only would you be poor, but you wouldn't be able to pay your taxes. If you don't pay your taxes, your land gets foreclosed by the government, and then sold at auction. And guess who comes in and buys your land? The people with money.
Thus, even if we could pretend that everyone started on an equal footing, we need to understand that, as time progressed, whoever had greater access to capital, and at more-competitive rates(IE low-interest rates), had a huge advantage over those who did not have access to capital, or had to payer higher rates for it.
Now, lets pretend you were an institution, like a bank, who had control over interest rates, and lets even pretend you were in control of a Fiat currency, where you could literally create new capital out of thin air. How might that distort the market in your favor? Or in the favor of those whom you favored?
Thus, we now arrive in a world today, where those who have the capital, control the creation of capital, and use it to their advantage. While pretending that they have the right to that capital in the first place.
Which brings us finally to how this country even became this country in the first place. Who is the rightful owner of this land? The United States? What is the United States? And how did it gain control of this land? Didn't we steal it from the native-inhabitants?
If you steal your neighbors car, and then sell it to me, who owns the car?
The truth is, the entire history of Capitalism, has been a story of a band of thieves, selling their plunder. And your reference to "money" is laughable. The very existence of the Federal Reserve, creates one of the greatest plunders of all. It is theft on a massive scale.
Now, if what I said is true, it leaves us with a problem, "What do you do about it?"
As I've said countless times, I am no communist. In fact, I hate communists. I believe them to be a bunch of degenerates and materialists, who obsess about money. Not for the sake of justice, but for the sake of hedonism and envy.
I really like this picture. I think it sums up the hypocrisy of the left. A bunch of spoiled brats, who want to sip on their Starbucks coffee, sitting on their Iphones, while complaining about the injustices of the world.
Corporate welfare? Does the Corp get Medicaid? Food Stamps? Section 8 Housing? Free School Lunch? Utilities Subsidies? An Obamaphone?What welfare programs are you talking about?
Exactly.
Tax breaks are not "corporate welfare".
Welfare is money taken from one person who earned it and giveng it to another who did not.
"Letting" a person or a business keep more of their own money is not "welfare".
To evolve with some idea, that they are the True American, and want to turn it to some "all white nations"
I think you are wrongly associating "White Nationalism" with "White American Nationalism". Of course, as I told the White Nationalists, there is no such thing as white culture. Thus there is no such thing as a White nation. And any attempts at White Nationalism, will be as it is in Europe, with each entity feeling itself to be under attack, and again wanting separation for its own protection.
Basically, White Nationalism manifests itself only in the presence of non-Whites. Much like a Christian identity only manifests itself in the presence of Muslims, atheists, etc. Without the "outsider", Christians revert back into being Catholics and protestants. Or even Lutherans, Baptists, Methodists, Mormons, etc.
There is only Christian solidarity in the face of non-Christians. There is only white solidarity in the face of non-whites. And likewise, there is only black solidarity in the face of non-blacks, just as there is no African-solidarity in Africa.
And as we should know, whites were happy to butcher each other by the tens of millions during WWI and WWII. The notion of white solidarity is absurd.
I am not a White Nationalist. I am merely a nationalist, in the truest sense of the word.
To understand what I mean. Imagine it like, the government completely collapsed tomorrow, as in there were no police at all, no Army, no authority. All the shelves of all the stores were empty. What do you do? Where do you go?
In a year's time, what does the world look like?
Or in short, what would the world look like, if government/society were voluntary?
Who are the kinds of people who would voluntarily cooperate with you for a common benefit? Who are the people you can really trust?
We need to make sure we understand how things work in the real world. Especially, how we got to where we are today.
Look at it like this, why is it that the countryside is almost entirely white people? Why do the vast-majority of black people live in cities? Was this always the case?
Just to make my point, back in the days of slavery, it was the reverse. The countryside was almost-entirely black, and the cities were almost-entirely white. Why did a switch take place?
In simplest terms, black slaves were replaced with tractors and other machines. The people who owned the land, kept the land, and the people who worked the land, who were no longer needed, were thrown off. And where did they go? To the cities of course.
This has been the history of capitalism, going back to the English enclosure acts. Not just with slaves, but with serfs, and other people(you can see the same thing happening in third-world countries right now).
If we return to how the countryside became the way it is. We also need to understand that, before tractors, most farms were small farms, which required a lot of labor. As machines allowed for greater productivity of each laborer, the farms began to grow in size. But in order to buy enough land to remain competitive, you needed money. And to buy the machines to remain competitive, you needed money.
And if your farm didn't earn enough money, not only would you be poor, but you wouldn't be able to pay your taxes. If you don't pay your taxes, your land gets foreclosed by the government, and then sold at auction. And guess who comes in and buys your land? The people with money.
Thus, even if we could pretend that everyone started on an equal footing, we need to understand that, as time progressed, whoever had greater access to capital, and at more-competitive rates(IE low-interest rates), had a huge advantage over those who did not have access to capital, or had to payer higher rates for it.
Now, lets pretend you were an institution, like a bank, who had control over interest rates, and lets even pretend you were in control of a Fiat currency, where you could literally create new capital out of thin air. How might that distort the market in your favor? Or in the favor of those whom you favored?
Thus, we now arrive in a world today, where those who have the capital, control the creation of capital, and use it to their advantage. While pretending that they have the right to that capital in the first place.
Which brings us finally to how this country even became this country in the first place. Who is the rightful owner of this land? The United States? What is the United States? And how did it gain control of this land? Didn't we steal it from the native-inhabitants?
If you steal your neighbors car, and then sell it to me, who owns the car?
The truth is, the entire history of Capitalism, has been a story of a band of thieves, selling their plunder. And your reference to "money" is laughable. The very existence of the Federal Reserve, creates one of the greatest plunders of all. It is theft on a massive scale.
Now, if what I said is true, it leaves us with a problem, "What do you do about it?"
As I've said countless times, I am no communist. In fact, I hate communists. I believe them to be a bunch of degenerates and materialists, who obsess about money. Not for the sake of justice, but for the sake of hedonism and envy.
I really like this picture. I think it sums up the hypocrisy of the left. A bunch of spoiled brats, who want to sip on their Starbucks coffee, sitting on their Iphones, while complaining about the injustices of the world.
I think it sums up the hypocrisy of the left. A bunch of spoiled brats, who want to sip on their Starbucks coffee, sitting on their Iphones, while complaining about the injustices of the world
I think you are off point, by 1/2 of the Political Establishment, You said, THE LEFT, you had best Include THE RIGHT.
You should've included the Right, sitting around pondering what angle of bigotry they will present on a daily basis, and how they can support getting benefit and access for themselves while trying to deny it to others. And trying to claim the country as being theirs, while lying about their dependency on grants, government contacts, hoping to maintain a race bias edge in such access and gains, while claiming they did everything, "by themselves". ("what a joke"..)
The Left might use the games such as "City Slicker", but the Right, Tries to play the Country Dumb game, with all the aces from the deck stuffed up their sleeve. ( Same Difference)...LEFT or Right !!! Because Fair Play is down the Middle... if one can maintain it...without going far left or far right.
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.
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.
