If the majority of the populace no longer had to pay taxes, I am sure you would see a huge increase in donations and charity.
Even if that didn't happen people would only allow themselves to not have a retirement plan for one generation, after that everyone would have seen grammy die in the street, and they would make sure they put away money to take care of themselves. Any increase in personal responsibility would make me happy. In order to see the form of government I would like to see, there would need to be a major and very painful adjustment. I don't think I will ever see it, which sucks. Would be nice to go grab a small country somewhere and give it a shot though. > -----Original Message----- > From: Dana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 3:23 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: Next in line to be labelled Dictator by America > > I think there are definitely better uses for our money than > quote bringing democracy unquote to people who would rather > live in their own way. I could see participating in a strike > force in a Rwanda situation but this should be a small and > limited mobilization. I mean, even if you allow that some > people in Iraq are better off now, even those same people no > longer want us there. And it's their country. We should get out. > > "Leave people the hell alone" may be simplistic as a > philosophy but it applies in a lot of situations. > > Gruss and I have disagreed in the past over social services, though. > Personally, I am unwilling to see little old ladies starve, > so you need some sort of mechanism for preventing that. I'd > actually prever that it be non-profit to governmental but I > boggle a bit at how you implement something on this scale > without the government. The essentially unresponsive Red > Cross is an illustration of the dangers of this. > > Dana > > > On 1/10/06, Tim Heald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Inside the minimal government that I would like to see, the > tax burden > > would be negligible. You probably wouldn't have to levy > direct taxes > > at all, rather going to a services based model, or tariffs. > > > > Since I personally would like to see a non-interventionist foreign > > policy, our defense budget could be scaled back greatly as well, > > bringing the actual cost of government down to manageable levels. > > Then you wouldn't have as much of the corruption and lobbying by > > special interests and corporations that ends up creating > the tax loop > > holes and shelters that are so common today. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Dana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 2:07 PM > > > To: CF-Community > > > Subject: Re: Next in line to be labelled Dictator by America > > > > > > Yes. I have disagreed with you and with Gruss on where > such laws are > > > necessary (or preferable) but I'll go for the basic > premise that the > > > number of such laws should be minimized. > > > > > > But I think that the great danger of pure capitalism is that it > > > creates and enables an addiction amongst certain people who want > > > more and more money and more and more power. With > millions at their > > > disposal they lobby to not have to pay taxes. And people > with less > > > money become a mass of wants for material things. Must > have latest > > > software, model year car, newest gadget, whatever. There is great > > > freedom in realizing that you don't need that crap and > that this is > > > one of the ways the world is currently perverted. > > > > > > That said, capitalism does allow for a far greater degree of > > > innovation and personal reinvention that other systems as > far as I > > > can tell, and that can only be good. It is not the > bureaucrats and > > > the functionaries who improve life on this planet. > > > > > > Dana > > > > > > > > > On 1/10/06, Tim Heald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Pollution is an excellent example. > > > > > > > > Pollution is going to hurt individuals. The health risks > > > violate the > > > > rights of the individual. Therefore there should be > > > legislation as to > > > > what/how much pollution is an acceptable trade off. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Dana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 1:51 PM > > > > > To: CF-Community > > > > > Subject: Re: Next in line to be labelled Dictator by America > > > > > > > > > > Actually, not really. It's one of those things undreamt > > > of in your > > > > > philosophy. I want to be comfortable but don't really > care about > > > > > being rich. Just because it can explain most behavior > > > does not mean > > > > > that it always does so accurately. > > > > > > > > > > One flaw in your reasoning - it does not take into account > > > > > improvements that do not generate income, that people > > > make anyway. > > > > > Nor does it take into account situations where someone > > > else pays the > > > > > price for the enrichment of another party, pollution being an > > > > > example of this. > > > > > > > > > > As for the don't tell me what I think comment, Gruss, you > > > are doing > > > > > it to Gel, and to me, as well. > > > > > > > > > > Dana > > > > > > > > > > On 1/9/06, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Dana wrote: > > > > > > > Larry what we have here is the utilitarian philosophy run > > > > > amok. It > > > > > > > is a reasonably valid if somewhat depressing system > > > of thought. > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm not sure what you mean here, but speaking of charity > > > > > that's how I > > > > > > like to think of spending. > > > > > > > > > > > > Like anything, greed run amok is a bad thing. When > > > people steal > > > > > > or kill for stuff, that's not good. But when people > > > endeavor to > > > > > > excel (because of their greed) they create wealth: > > > > > > > > > > > > * A more effective system of teaching. > > > > > > * A new procedure for heart surgery. > > > > > > * A way to grow more nutritious vegetables. > > > > > > > > > > > > Capitalism, when used within an egalitarian legal system, > > > > > turns greed > > > > > > into public works. It allows us to pursue our passions and > > > > > turns our > > > > > > efforts into the input for others passions. > > > > > > > > > > > > So let's be honest: you want that new PS3, to take that new > > > > > > polisci class, or maybe just a beer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:191470 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
