State assistance to low income families reduced to one year (Mesa: rent, crime)

[FirebirdCamaro1220]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

Monarchy??? This is getting too hilarious. A monarchy is defined as:
1. a state or nation in which the supreme power is actually or nominally lodged in a monarch.
2. supreme power or sovereignty held by a single person.

Maybe you meant to say anarchy, as many anti Libertarian types seem to describe it. In reality, Libertarianism is regarded as much more American, freedom loving, and sane than all the socialism from the liberals/progressives, or the social conservatism from the far right. Take a look at what Gary Johnson stands for, then compare it to the direction that both Hillary and Trump want to take this country. You'll soon see why so many people are not only unhappy, but pretty frightened over the kind of Presidential candidates which the two major parties are offering.

No, I meant monarchy, because in a true libertarian society, the person with the most money would have the most power and protections, VERY SIMILAR TO A KING! So, no, I did mean monarchy

[SageCats]

Originally Posted by FirebirdCamaro1220

Most people who are poor and have kids didn't PLAN to have kids, it is usually an accidental conception. Unless you are just going to say that poor people shouldn't legally be allowed to even have sex, that gets into a very dark, government intrusive environment.

What about people who physically or because of mental issues CAN'T work? Should they just starve to death because of your beliefs?

I lived in the city of Newark for many years. No where in AZ is like Newark. The place I can compare it to is Compton.
People who lived in the projects drove cars (Escalades) that were more than my annual salary.
I worked a lot with the community and there were a whole lot of people who abused the crap out of the system and screwed honest working folks.
Stop pretending it's not true and get off your SJW high horse already.

[SageCats]

Originally Posted by FirebirdCamaro1220

No, I meant monarchy, because in a true libertarian society, the person with the most money would have the most power and protections, VERY SIMILAR TO A KING! So, no, I did mean monarchy

I think you have a very failed understanding of what Libertarianism is.

You are definitely out of place in Arizona.

California can't welcome you soon enough.

[William Gordon]

[quote=Valley Native;44642621]
A lot of that is lifestyle choice. I've learned throughout the years that even a person who makes a rather meager salary can still live comfortably if he/she adheres to something called a BUDGET. Many of the so called "working poor" have certain spending habits, and/or have children which they can't afford. These things can easily be controlled with a little self control. Even having one child can be a financial strain, but again, nobody forced anybody to procreate ... it's a personal choice, and none of us should have to be paying taxes to support other people's lifestyle choices.

Goodness gracious; won't it be great once the Donald gets in and we won't have to couch what we want to say in euphemisms and this silly political correctness? I can only imagine how liberating that will be.

No more of this hiding behind phrases like "lifestyle choices" eh? You'll just be able to come out and say those blacks and wetbacks (at least some sense of propriety) are out there screwing, smoking and drinking their lives away and we shouldn't give a good damn about them.

Perhaps we can start something like the "budget police" to insure those working poor aren't out there taking advantage of the system. Life would be so much better for them if you could help them control their urges.

I think I'm on to something...could be a whole new division under the TSA.

[FirebirdCamaro1220]

Originally Posted by SageCats

I think you have a very failed understanding of what Libertarianism is.

You are definitely out of place in Arizona.

California can't welcome you soon enough.

No, I have a perfect understanding of libertarianism, I have struggled through countless videos of Mises Institute seminars and speeches, just to get an idea of the lunacy, and the one that took the cake was "private law enforcement".

[FirebirdCamaro1220]

Originally Posted by SageCats

I lived in the city of Newark for many years. No where in AZ is like Newark. The place I can compare it to is Compton.
People who lived in the projects drove cars (Escalades) that were more than my annual salary.
I worked a lot with the community and there were a whole lot of people who abused the crap out of the system and screwed honest working folks.
Stop pretending it's not true and get off your SJW high horse already.

I'm not a Social Justice Warrior, there is a difference between caring about people other than yourself and being an SJW!

And I am very familiar with east coast "hoods", I was from NY after all. Most of the people in those hoods with nice cars were usually selling drugs, they weren't buying them with government money. No one in those neighborhoods would own cars like that unless people knew and feared them and wouldn't rip them off/try to steal them.

[ABQConvict]

Originally Posted by Bummer

HALLELUJAH, Valley Native . . .

There is a huge difference between HELPING vs ENABLING when the taxpayers continue to pay welfare benefits to the lazy and unproductive until it becomes a lifestyle.

Next our leaders need to explore mandatory Drug Testing prior to receiving any form of welfare.

So you want to spend more taxpayer money on drug testing than they would have shelled out in welfare?

Are you for less government spending and waste or against it?

"The [drug] testing is meant to assure taxpayers their money isn’t being “wasted” on the less desirable, those who would somehow manage to buy drugs with the assistance. But in Tennessee, where drug testing was enacted for welfare recipients last month, only one person in the 800 who applied for help tested positive. In Florida, during the four months the state tested for drug use, only 2.6% of applicants tested positive. Meanwhile, Florida has an illegal drug use rate of 8%, meaning far fewer people on services are using drugs than their better-off counterparts. The drug testing cost taxpayers more money than it saved, and was ruled unconstitutional last year."

[Three Wolves In Snow]

Is "cash assistance" in Arizona different than other states? In CA, for example, the people have to WORK for their "cash assistance", it's not actually a hand out.

[SageCats]

Originally Posted by FirebirdCamaro1220

No, I have a perfect understanding of libertarianism, I have struggled through countless videos of Mises Institute seminars and speeches, just to get an idea of the lunacy, and the one that took the cake was "private law enforcement".

Private law enforcement is not libertarianism. That's more of a conservative idea. Libertarianism is about the lack of big nannies / big government and police states (military-like police). Private law enforcement (and private jails) are not libertarian ideas. It's about not having the government decide what's best for you. You get to choose what's best for you.

Freedom and following the constitution are. Paying taxes that go to wasteful social ideas and unnecessary spending are also are libertarian ideas. Fiscally conservative and Socially liberal.

[Akonyo]

Originally Posted by :-D

It's this ignorant mentality why so many people, usually homeless and/or on welfare, why so many people won't seek help. Obviously you know nothing about mental health disorders and/or the people who have them.

I actually know a lot about them and I deal with them daily.

Homeless people on the street tend to have severe mental disorders, such as schizophrenia. Don't get me wrong: that is absolutely legitimate. They need to be treated and taken care of.

I'm talking about people with things like depression, anxiety, ADHD, etc. These diagnoses are significantly overused in our society and are basically excuses to adopt a victim mentality. ("I'm depressed so I can't find work today. My boss was mean to me and it caused me anxiety so I can't work.")

PTSD, which is the example that I used, can only be diagnosed if someone suffers a severe trauma (war, sexual abuse, etc). Child neglect (as that other poster referenced) cannot be a cause for PTSD.

It would be like going to someone who just had their hand cut off and say, "Hey, you just need to stop bleeding. Why haven't you stopped bleeding yet?"

Totally different things. You can die from having your hand chopped off if it isn't treated. You won't die directly from a mental disorder (maybe indirectly, but not directly).

Nothing is ever that simple, ever.

This outlook might actually be your problem. Just about everything in life is simple. Most people overcomplicate things.

Originally Posted by FirebirdCamaro1220

I think Akonyo would like one of those "libertarian compounds" that have been set up in Honduras better than he likes the United States lol

Nope. The Phoenix metro area is just perfect for me. I was just telling my friend the other day: I love this place so much. I feel like it's a state that was created just for me.

Originally Posted by William Gordon

Hey Gene, hope the new home is suiting you. Still think Sun City was a better fit though.

This thread sent me scurrying through dozens of sites regarding corporate tax rates. FB is right, there is way more to the rate than just the percentages. My recollection was the corporate rate was way higher in the 50's and 60's and the sites i read supported that position. They also went on to explain why and that's where it gets convoluted. The change is primarily related to the changes from "C" corporation filing. to "S" corporation filing.

Here's a couple of stats that are interesting:

• Claims that the United States’ corporate tax rate is uniquely burdensome to U.S. business when compared with the corporate tax rates of its industrial peers are incorrect. While the United States has one of the highest statutory corporate income-tax rates among advanced countries, the effective corporate income-tax rate (27.7 percent) is quite close to the average of rich countries (27.2 percent, weighted by GDP).
• The U.S. corporate income-tax rate is also not high by historic standards. The statutory corporate tax rate has gradually been reduced from over 50 percent in the 1950s to its current 35 percent.
• The current U.S. corporate tax rate does not appear to be impeding corporate profits. Both before-tax and after-tax corporate profits as a percentage of national income are at post–World War II highs; they were 13.6 percent and 11.4 percent, respectively, in 2012.

Beyond that is the whole question of corporate taxes paid when doing business out of the country. There's all kinds of information out there for anyone who cares about how it works. My point is; celebrating cutting benefits on folks struggling to get by while we don't give a whit about corporations getting massive handouts seems a bit disingenuous.



By the way, i don't care how they spend their money Gene. I care they are able to write those excesses off so as not to pay their fair share of taxes. But then i guess if you can afford to buy enough politicians to write the laws to favor you, they should get their monies worth eh?

Opportunities are everywhere, my friend. If you feel like money is being take from you by corporations, then create a corporation yourself and be on the other side of that. You do have that ability.

It will require work though, which is a dirty word for some.

Originally Posted by Valley Native

Much of what you described (neglected children with no self control, etc.) is already happening now, even with all the public assistance we give to the breeders and their offspring. I think it's high time that the breeders show some restraint and responsibility on their part! Nobody forced anybody to procreate. It's not mandatory, and it's not a right. For that matter, it's not a right to keep expecting handouts from the government ... although the government has somehow made it an obligation for everybody to subsidize everybody else's reproductive habits.

Yup. If you think child neglect isn't already happening, just go to a fast food restaurant (or the DMV). You will see a ton of kids running around like wild animals without parental supervision at all.

I'm a millennial and most of my friends from high school either died from drug overdoses or are well on their way.

This is the type of parenting we have today. And why is it happening? Well, they live in a world without discipline and consequences. So they keep touching the stove because they aren't getting burnt.

A lot of that is lifestyle choice. I've learned throughout the years that even a person who makes a rather meager salary can still live comfortably if he/she adheres to something called a BUDGET. Many of the so called "working poor" have certain spending habits, and/or have children which they can't afford. These things can easily be controlled with a little self control. Even having one child can be a financial strain, but again, nobody forced anybody to procreate ... it's a personal choice, and none of us should have to be paying taxes to support other people's lifestyle choices.

Yup. When I was poor, that's exactly what I did: strict budgeting. It has led me to a point where I no longer need to do that, but, honestly, once you get used to budgeting, it's a difficult habit to break.

I'm currently in the process of replacing my 12 year old broken down Honda. It's causing me a lot of anxiety because I will add more spending to my budget (even though my budget is much larger now). I tend to forget that sometimes.

I think you would like Europe better than the U.S. Even your dream state of California still has quite a few conservative areas (some not too far from L.A.) that don't really fit your viewpoints. By the way, on this Independence Day, maybe you should learn a little about the Constitution, and how this country was founded on what we now call Libertarian ideas. Just a thought.

If he lives in the metro areas (LA or SF), it's heavily liberal. He could spend all of his time giving money to the homeless drug addicts and hiring illegal immigrants for fair wages. Something tells me he won't though.

Originally Posted by FirebirdCamaro1220

Don't get me started on libertarians, if this were YouTube with no censorship, I would speak my mind, but so that I don't get in trouble here, I will just say that libertarianism is stupid, unrealistic and leads to monarchy when put in practice

I'm starting to think that you're just throwing random words together and don't really know what they mean.

So you think that holding people fiscally responsible for themselves will result in the creation of a dynasty with a king and a queen.

Well, okay then.