dragional


Here is a question for you that no Bushie has had the guts to answer.

In 2001 Bush justified his tax cuts by telling us we were overtaxing the American taxpayers and the proof of that was this $5.7 Trillion dollar Surplus over the next ten years. There was NO Surplus. NOT ONE DOLLAR! WHY are we continuing tax cuts to return a Surplus that does not exist?

Greenspan and O’Neil advised Bush to tie the tax cuts to the available Surplus. I doubt that either of them believed we had the $5.7 Trillion Dollar Surplus but as good Republicans they did not want to tell Bush he was full of BS! Bush cleverly did not accept their advice and got his tax cuts through Congress regardless of the fact there is no Surplus to return to anyone.

Still no answer to my question!

I'm pretty sure we were both referring to police.

You can't just state that social security "helps" the economy and leave it at that. How does it help the economy more than what the producers could do with the capital? 

Giving money to people who haven't earned it who simply turn around and purchase consumables is no better than the argument that taxes are good because the government employs tax collectors who need jobs.

You have no evidence to support your assertion that a 1% of GDP per year deficit is going to undermine the economy.

But you have very tangible evidence that reducing the amount of capital me and people like me have to invest will damage the economy because I am telling you it will cost jobs based on my personal experience. This site exists because of the tax cuts.

The majority doesn't "need" the government to steal what I make to hand to them. When obesity is a major problem for the poor in this country, I would say that material wealth is not something that is in short supply by any demographic.

Ultimately, I'm done here because you're hopeless. Anyone who thinks that tax money is an "investment" and that the "guvment" redistribution of wealth is a more effective way of strengthening the economy than how the actual proven producers of wealth doing the same is just too ignorant of basic economics to reason with.

I guess I can rest easy knowing that ultimately, and I mean this with no offense, people like you have no power. You rely on people like me to produce. You post your drivel not on a goverment provided site but one created by the private sector despite government confiscation.

Perhaps you should find a blog site started with funds taken in by a welfare recipient.

Dragional

"You can't just state that social security "helps" the economy and leave it at that. How does it help the economy more than what the producers could do with the capital?"

Good Question. Demand that results from spending is the driving economic force. Most economists state that at least 70% of economic activity is a direct result of spending and this creates demand. Lower income people spend all of their disposable income which creates demand. Supply caused by investment does produce growth but is not as effectively as demand and spending by consumers. Thus to trade dollars, that would reduce spending as cutting Social Security would do, for the LESS effective economic stimulus does not make economic sense. In addition, cutting Social Security so we could maintain or increase tax cuts to the wealthy to boost investment would create major social issues. Finally, for investment to produce increased economic activity there must be increased spending. If the new investment causes one company to increase sales while another company experiences a corresponding drop in sales is no solution. There must be MORE available dollars to be spent. If the dollars remain the same or drop from a cut or the elimination of Social Security, spending will be reduced and the economy will suffer!

Dragional

"You have no evidence to support your assertion that a 1% of GDP per year deficit is going to undermine the economy.

But you have very tangible evidence that reducing the amount of capital me and people like me have to invest will damage the economy because I am telling you it will cost jobs based on my personal experience. This site exists because of the tax cuts."

First, the Comptroller General has documented that the ADDED revenue from the growth produced by added investment is returning only $1 for every $2 dollars in tax cuts. We have the empirical data from the 1981 tax cuts that were to BALANCE the budget caused by economic growth from the Reagan tax Cuts. Problem was that the GDP Growth Reagan said would result from his tax cuts was 6%. We got only 3% GDP Growth and we went from a National debt of $930 Billion to $4 Trillion in the 8 years of Reagan. Bush did the very same thing in 2001 with the same results. We got GDP Growth but not enough to offset the loss in revenue from the tax cuts and to pay for higher spending. Before you tell me we need to cut spending please read my Blog today:


Every politician that says we must CUT SPENDING to solve the fiscal problems of the U.S. should be required to list their top 10 spending cuts with the amounts they would propose to cut.

I am very tired of listening to the meaningless statement that we hear from most GOP candidates and some Democrats that we are spending TOO MUCH. Fine then tell us just WHAT and HOW MUCH you propose to CUT to solve our fiscal problems!!!

Sorry Brad but that is partly incorrect. State does "not" provide security at "any" international border. IE: Canada or Mexico. Those are taken care of by "Federal" Border Patrol Agents. Which is the security that col is talking about. And if the "state" provides security they were doing a poor job on 9/11. I'm pretty sure we were both referring to police.

"You" may have been. But I'm "relatively" sure the col wasn't. He specifically said "national" defense. National defense usually doesn't include police. Since police do not defend the country as a whole. Now internal security is different. And "you" were correct about the other things that the state supplies.

Draginol Individuals do not provide things like national defense. They do not provide roads, internal security. They do not provide Social Security and Medicare. The services provided by the Federal Government allow people like you to be in business.

Although this statement is obviously wrong.

The services provided by the Federal Government allow people like you to be in business

Perhaps the col would care to explain just "what" services the Feds supply that "allow" people to run a business?

Drmiler

"Perhaps the col would care to explain just "what" services the Feds supply that "allow" people to run a business?:

Here are a few:

Security- national defense and homeland security
Interstate Commerce
Coast Guard and Border security
Treasury and banking
FBI, CIA
Interstate transportation
Airline security
Social Security
Medicare
FCC
Immigration
IRS

These are just a sample of the services that make our free society possible and enable business to operate.

Yes, and every one except social secureity and medicare are required by the consititution. The last two were temproary helps that were supposed to go private within ten years of them starting.

Security- national defense and homeland security Interstate Commerce Coast Guard and Border security Treasury and banking FBI, CIA Interstate transportation Airline security Social Security Medicare FCC Immigration IRS

NONE of these "services" are required for someone to run a business. Although they "do" make life easier.

The "only" one that comes close is banking. And just how did they run a business before banking came along? Ever heard the word "barter"?

And just what the h*ll does immagration have to do with "allowing" someone to run a business. Or for that matter the FBI/CIA? Coast Guard and Border security? Social Security? Medicare? Not a one of these "allow" someone to run a business. Best you rethink those comments of yours before you get torn to shreds on it.

And just an FYI for you old clueless one. The Feds DO NOT provide Interstate transportation! That is provided by shipping companies.

drmiler

All these are needed for our country to exist. Without security provided by the military, coast Guard, FBI Etc we would not be able to do anything. All these services create the system that is essential for our society to exist. They are NOT as you state nice to have. You are such a FOOL. GO LIVE ON AN ISLAND and provide everything for yourself!

drmiler All these are needed for our country to exist. Without security provided by the military, coast Guard, FBI Etc we would not be able to do anything. All these services create the system that is essential for our society to exist. They are NOT as you state nice to have. You are such a FOOL. GO LIVE ON AN ISLAND and provide everything for yourself

You're the fool, moron you were asked "what services the Feds supply that "allow" people to run a business?". The answer is none of the above! Although "some" of them might be required to run a country, none of them is required to "allow" someone to own/operate a business. Four of them do not/should not be on either list, such as the IRS? FCC? Social security (this one was NEVER meant to last in the first place)? Medicare? Why are these required to run a country? The rest of the world does fine without them.

Although you're so dense that the nuances of the difference in the meaning of the wording, might slip by you unnoticed. And you're such a moron that lives in la-la land.

col political hack is correct here. Yes, I am agreeing with the political hack, because he is correct here and when he is right I will agree with the hack. The agencies the hack listed are required by the constitution because no naton can work with without them. They are and at the same time not required for commerce. They keep the system fair for all allowwing anyone to become a success.



Again the hack is correct. Look at other countries like France where they don't have a fair playing field. The rich get richer and the contry takes the money from the rich and give less than a third to the poor. The government keeps the rest meanign that the nation stagnates with High unemployment. So the Socialism that the Hack wants for our nation is what ruined the French and other nations that like taking money from those that earn it to give it those that don't.

Please understand that the government does nothing for business other than provide a fair playing field for all nothing more. The government is not in the business of business.

drmiler

Without the society that the government makes possible from security to transportation business can not operate.

You have that backwaards. We the people in order to form a more perfect union. Does this sound familure? We the people set up the government to see to our needs not the other way around. The purpose of our government is to provide for the nation things that individuals can not do on our own. Security, such as the military to protect the nation and the national interest. Police, such as the FBI, US Marshals, and so on to enforce the laws providing a level playing field for all to have a fair chance and equal protection. Our forefathers saw what we needed and created a constitution to protect us from all the problems that other countries had. We prospered faster than any other nation because we allowed our people to do what they felt was best instead of the government making those choices for us.

All these are needed for our country to exist. Without security provided by the military, coast Guard, FBI Etc we would not be able to do anything. col political hack is correct here. Yes, I am agreeing with the political hack, because he is correct here and when he is right I will agree with the hack. The agencies the hack listed are required by the constitution because no naton can work with without them. They are and at the same time not required for commerce. They keep the system fair for all allowwing anyone to become a success. They are NOT as you state nice to have.

Sorry Paladin77, but you're as wrong as he is. and to prove my point answer this simple question. Just "how" many of those agencies were around when this country was founded?

Security- national defense and homeland security, Yep standing army and navy
Interstate Commerce, Nope
Coast Guard and Border security, Nope, left to local law enforcement
Treasury and banking, Yes
FBI, CIA, Nope
Interstate transportation, Nope
Airline security, Nope
Social Security, Nope
Medicare, Nope
FCC, BIG Nope
Immigration, Another BIG Nope!
IRS Nope!!

So you see not "all" of these services are "required" to "allow" someone to own or operate a business.

drmiler Without the society that the government makes possible from security to transportation business can not operate.

Same to you col...most of these were not around when this country was founded. You think there were no businesses running back then? Guess again

col political hack is correct here. Yes, I am agreeing with the political hack, because he is correct here and when he is right I will agree with the hack. The agencies the hack listed are required by the constitution because no naton can work with without them. They are and at the same time not required for commerce. They keep the system fair for all allowwing anyone to become a success.

Big time wrong answer. Show me in the constitution where the IRS, FCC, FBI, CIA, social security, medicare, immigration, airline security, Interstate transportation/commerce that these are "required" to run the country. And again, an FYI....interstate transportation is NOT provided by the government. Most of these agencies came about due to a set of circumstances that showed a need for the agency. SS itself was a feel good, good for re-election done by FDR in 1935 (and it worked too, since he was re-elected) and was never meant to stay a government agency. And Medicare not until 1965, How in the world did a business survive "before" these agencies came about? The same can be said about "most" of these agencies!

FCC 1934
Immigration 1891
FBI 1908
CIA 1947
IRS 1862
I could go on and on with this, but I'm sure you get my drift.

We used to say that all regulations in the Marines were written in blood. Someone had to die or get seriously injured before someone made a rule saying don't do that.

I see your point but it is still wrong. Allow me to show you what I mean. 1862 the IRS was born to collect money from businesses that failed to live up to their civic obligations. Businesses were the only ones that were required to pay taxes. Some businesses became rich because they did not pay the taxes due. The government needed the money from taxes to pay for the government to do its business. To pay the military to keep us safe and so on. It leveled the playing field. Ensuring that all companies paid their fair share to support the building of the nation and pay for the war.

1891 Immigration to keep track of and regulate the number of people entering the nation to insure we don’t have too many immigrants causing us to loose our national identity. Again it levels the playing field and keeps the people that are on top on top.

1908 it was called the Bureau of Investigation. It was a useless organization for political pay outs, giving jobs to friends and supporters. In 1922 the Teapot Dome scandal made them look for a professional federal police that did nothing but find criminals. 1924 a 25 year old J. Edgar Hoover was appointed the director of the Bureau. He changed the name to the FBI and made a name for himself and the organization. Not until his death did they start having problems. Again the purpose was to keep the playing field fair and allow mister Hoover to wear dresses without being bothered by people.

1934 the FCC is to ensure people on the radio did not abuse their power.

1947, the national security act of 1947 showed we had a need for an international spy agency. The FBI was responsible for domestic security the CIA was responsible for all American interests outside the US. Before there was a CIA there was the Corps of Intelligence Police started in 1917 which was followed by the Office of Strategic Services or OSS that did the dirty work of the nation during a time of war. Before that it was the DSS or the Diplomatic Security Service that worked with the Corps of Intelligence Police until it was replaced by the Defense Intelligence Agency. We have had spy agencies in this nation since Jefferson, we just did not officially recognize them until 1947. I would agree that some agencies need to go the way of the democrat I mean the dinosaur. But most are created because there was a need of some kind to protect the public.

You ask where in the constitution? Let me answer,
Article One: Legislative power
Main article: Article One of the United States Constitution
Article One establishes the legislative branch of government, U.S. Congress, which includes the House of Representatives and the Senate. The legislative branch makes the laws. The Article establishes the manner of election and qualifications of members of each House. In addition, it provides for free debate in congress and limits self-serving behavior of congressmen, outlines legislative procedure and indicates the powers of the legislative branch.

Article One: Legislative power Main article: Article One of the United States Constitution Article One establishes the legislative branch of government, U.S. Congress, which includes the House of Representatives and the Senate. The legislative branch makes the laws. The Article establishes the manner of election and qualifications of members of each House. In addition, it provides for free debate in congress and limits self-serving behavior of congressmen, outlines legislative procedure and indicates the powers of the legislative branch.

Sorry but this don't cut it! Nothing of what you explained, is "required" to "allow" Brad to own/operate Stardock.

I see your point but it is still wrong. Allow me to show you what I mean. 1862 the IRS was born to collect money from businesses that failed to live up to their civic obligations. Businesses were the only ones that were required to pay taxes. Some businesses became rich because they did not pay the taxes due. The government needed the money from taxes to pay for the government to do its business. To pay the military to keep us safe and so on. It leveled the playing field. Ensuring that all companies paid their fair share to support the building of the nation and pay for the war. 1891 Immigration to keep track of and regulate the number of people entering the nation to insure we don’t have too many immigrants causing us to loose our national identity. Again it levels the playing field and keeps the people that are on top on top. 1908 it was called the Bureau of Investigation. It was a useless organization for political pay outs, giving jobs to friends and supporters. In 1922 the Teapot Dome scandal made them look for a professional federal police that did nothing but find criminals. 1924 a 25 year old J. Edgar Hoover was appointed the director of the Bureau. He changed the name to the FBI and made a name for himself and the organization. Not until his death did they start having problems. Again the purpose was to keep the playing field fair and allow mister Hoover to wear dresses without being bothered by people. 1934 the FCC is to ensure people on the radio did not abuse their power. 1947, the national security act of 1947 showed we had a need for an international spy agency. The FBI was responsible for domestic security the CIA was responsible for all American interests outside the US. Before there was a CIA there was the Corps of Intelligence Police started in 1917 which was followed by the Office of Strategic Services or OSS that did the dirty work of the nation during a time of war. Before that it was the DSS or the Diplomatic Security Service that worked with the Corps of Intelligence Police until it was replaced by the Defense Intelligence Agency. We have had spy agencies in this nation since Jefferson, we just did not officially recognize them until 1947. I would agree that some agencies need to go the way of the democrat I mean the dinosaur. But most are created because there was a need of some kind to protect the public.

Where do "any" of these "allow" Stardock to run? I have already agreed that these agencies might be required to run the country. But "none" of them "allow" Stardock to run. Stardock could run in "any" other country that do not have these agencies!

Here is the bottom line! The Voters of this country have elected Congress that over the years has established laws to provide the services of the federal government. The Supreme Court has not struck down those laws. Those agencies and programs cost money and it is our responsibility to pay for those services and programs so long as they remain in existence. Some of you may want things like SS, Medicare, and Medicaid etc. ended. The vast majority want them continued. Until the voters elect a congress that repeals those programs, we have a responsibility to fully pay the cost of the agencies and programs approved by those we have elected! That will require a lot more revenue to fund!!!!!

Here is the bottom line! The Voters of this country have elected Congress that over the years has established laws to provide the services of the federal government. The Supreme Court has not struck down those laws. Those agencies and programs cost money and it is our responsibility to pay for those services and programs so long as they remain in existence. Some of you may want things like SS, Medicare, and Medicaid etc. ended. The vast majority want them continued. Until the voters elect a congress that repeals those programs, we have a responsibility to fully pay the cost of the agencies and programs approved by those we have elected! That will require a lot more revenue to fund!!!!!

YOU STILL DON'T COMPREHEND do you? None of these servives "allow" Brad to operate Stardock! PERIOD! He could run his company from "any" country in the world that did not have these agencies! Why don't you just admit you might have made a mistake and move on. Because you have YET to refute this statement:

He could run his company from "any" country in the world that did not have these agencies!

Sorry but that was not the question asked or answered.



Not all of them have been challenged and taken to the supreme court.

drmiler

Without the system that our government enables to take place, you would not be able to write on this Blog site and no one would be able to operate any business.

Paladin77

The Supreme Court has not struck down those laws.


"Not all of them have been challenged and taken to the supreme court."

Until the court does declare any of the laws you do not like unconstitutional, they are valid.

Sorry but this don't cut it! Nothing of what you explained, is "required" to "allow" Brad to own/operate Stardock. Sorry but that was not the question asked or answered.

Sorry but it most surely was. Go back and read it again. Please....allow me.

#133 by COL Gene Tue, March 06, 2007 1:31 PM Drmiler "Perhaps the col would care to explain just "what" services the Feds supply that "allow" people to run a business?: Here are a few: Security- national defense and homeland security Interstate Commerce Coast Guard and Border security Treasury and banking FBI, CIA Interstate transportation Airline security Social Security Medicare FCC Immigration IRS These are just a sample of the services that make our free society possible and enable business to operate.

That was the "original" question. Was it not?

Draginol Individuals do not provide things like national defense. They do not provide roads, internal security. They do not provide Social Security and Medicare. The services provided by the Federal Government allow people like you to be in business.

And this is what started it all.

To the less than bright person that calls himself a col. Here is a lesson in basic civics. Any law passed is a valid law until it is challenged and run through the court system. It can be struck down anywhere along the way to the Supreme Court. If no one challenges the law the court system can’t rule on it.



Sorry but you never mentioned a specific business. I have no understanding of any laws that regulate an internet operation. I know nothing of that type of business. I have a Property Managenemt business that is regulated by the civil rights acts of 1964 and 1968. I have to report earnings to the IRS. I don't pay social security or medicare and have not paid into them for the last 10 or 12 years. I don't even know if stardock charges a fee or makes any money, so I can't answwer your revised question.

Sorry but you never mentioned a specific business. I have no understanding of any laws that regulate an internet operation. I know nothing of that type of business. I have a Property Management business that is regulated by the civil rights acts of 1964 and 1968. I have to report earnings to the IRS. I don't pay social security or Medicare and have not paid into them for the last 10 or 12 years. I don't even know if stardock charges a fee or makes any money, so I can't answer your revised question.

No I didn't. But by inference the col did.

Draginol Individuals do not provide things like national defense. They do not provide roads, internal security. They do not provide Social Security and Medicare. The services provided by the Federal Government allow people like you to be in business.

He was replying to Brad.

And to the point, do you consider the IRS, "necessary" for you to be in business? I guess the answer would be no on the SS & Medicare.