View Full Version : taxes
the bib
12-09-2002, 09:10 PM
NJ is a high tax state. In the past 3 years, my real estate taxes have risen from 4200 to over 5600. ... with another rise coming this year.
The tolls, fines, even dog and cat (can you BELIEVE we have to kisence our CATS!) licenses are up about 30%.
Hidden taxes such as those on the phone bill are up. My second phone line costs $18.00 more a month than the first, MOST of it state taxes. Add to that every out of state call subject to an "intrastate" tax, TOILET paper is considered a "luxury and subject to 6% tax. Half the price I pay for oil is federal, state tax, cigarettes now carry about $3.00 a pack in taxes, on it goes ad infinitum ad naseum.
The federal government now takes over 35% of my income AFTER deductions ... and I figure that overall, between the obvious and hidden taxes, the gov't is taking 50 - 60% of my income.
The first thing the newly elected govenor of my state did was raise taxes. The second is spend over $200,000 in "fact finding" trips, including one to Ireland, all on the public dole. ... aka MY niclle.
Anyone else feeling the squeeze and feeling like putting on some war paint and having another Boston type tea party?
The tax squeeze is buckling.
If you start the revolution I will be right there with you. It is going to come sooner or later. It always has and it always will. The rulers squeeze the populace little by little until it becomes too much and then there is revolution and civil war. We're headed for it and there is no intelligence within the higher ranks of government that can see it coming. Their greed for our hard earned money will eventually outweigh their better judgement against squeezing us too hard. In the mean time those most interested in sqeezing us harder are going to need to disarm us because they know damn well that they can sqeeze an unarmed population far more than they can an armed one.
Meshuga Mikey
12-11-2002, 02:04 PM
NJ is a high tax state. In the past 3 years, my real estate taxes have risen from 4200 to over 5600. ... with another rise coming this year.
The tolls, fines, even dog and cat (can you BELIEVE we have to kisence our CATS!) licenses are up about 30%.
Hidden taxes such as those on the phone bill are up. My second phone line costs $18.00 more a month than the first, MOST of it state taxes. Add to that every out of state call subject to an "intrastate" tax, TOILET paper is considered a "luxury and subject to 6% tax. Half the price I pay for oil is federal, state tax, cigarettes now carry about $3.00 a pack in taxes, on it goes ad infinitum ad naseum.
The federal government now takes over 35% of my income AFTER deductions ... and I figure that overall, between the obvious and hidden taxes, the gov't is taking 50 - 60% of my income.
The first thing the newly elected govenor of my state did was raise taxes. The second is spend over $200,000 in "fact finding" trips, including one to Ireland, all on the public dole. ... aka MY niclle.
Anyone else feeling the squeeze and feeling like putting on some war paint and having another Boston type tea party?
The tax squeeze is buckling.
MY GRANDSON's GANDSON will be paying the Electrical Bills that Gray-Out Davis,..the Electric Governor of California encumbered US with~!!
From the Trailing Edge of the New Republican Revolution here in Ca,
MM~!!!!
truelies
12-11-2002, 04:10 PM
Have you thought of leaving NJ?????????
buzaw
12-14-2002, 05:03 PM
If you start the revolution I will be right there with you. It is going to come sooner or later. It always has and it always will. The rulers squeeze the populace little by little until it becomes too much and then there is revolution and civil war. We're headed for it and there is no intelligence within the higher ranks of government that can see it coming. Their greed for our hard earned money will eventually outweigh their better judgement against squeezing us too hard. In the mean time those most interested in sqeezing us harder are going to need to disarm us because they know damn well that they can sqeeze an unarmed population far more than they can an armed one.
I'm not so sure there'l be a revolution. The minority who pay most all the taxes are a diminishing minority, the vastly growing majority being the nonpayers or those paying little so as to not be concerned, all the whilst calling for and supporting more from government.
Moonchild
12-15-2002, 04:17 AM
If you start the revolution I will be right there with you. It is going to come sooner or later. It always has and it always will. The rulers squeeze the populace little by little until it becomes too much and then there is revolution and civil war. We're headed for it and there is no intelligence within the higher ranks of government that can see it coming. Their greed for our hard earned money will eventually outweigh their better judgement against squeezing us too hard. In the mean time those most interested in sqeezing us harder are going to need to disarm us because they know damn well that they can sqeeze an unarmed population far more than they can an armed one.
Please. ::)
Democracy makes sure that taxes goes in ebbs and flows. It's a different kind of [uprising] war than what we saw at the Boston tea party.
Nice to se that the NRA is successful with their propaganda though.
Personally I pay 30 % income tax , some tax on the house/water etc, and 24/12 VAT on goods and cervices/agriculture. I’m fine with it as long as it’s used to secure some _ chosen _ human rights like the right to medical care, school etc, and to benefit the needy.
truelies
12-15-2002, 05:28 AM
[quote author=Moonchild
Personally I pay 30 % income tax , some tax on the house/water etc, and 24/12 VAT on goods and cervices/agriculture. I’m fine with it as long as it’s used to secure some _ chosen _ human rights like the right to medical care, school etc, and to benefit the needy.
[/quote]
Certainly, if YOU are fine with forking over for that sort of thing, thats your business. However those who disagree that medical, schools and welfare are 'human' rights should NOT receive a visit from the State's jackbooted thugs to part them from their Income/Property. Forcing one person to labor for the convience/comfort of another is known as Slavery.
buzaw
12-15-2002, 06:24 AM
Personally I pay 30 % income tax , some tax on the house/water etc, and 24/12 VAT on goods and cervices/agriculture. I’m fine with it as long as it’s used to secure some _ chosen _ human rights like the right to medical care, school etc, and to benefit the needy.
Likely if you were to add up every jot n tittle of these other besides the income tax, you're paying about 50%. Don't forget SS, which you may or may not end up receiving benefits for. In most states your sales tax alone will add up to a lot more than you realize in a year. It's a tax too, you know.
Moonchild
12-15-2002, 02:30 PM
[quote author=Moonchild
Personally I pay 30 % income tax , some tax on the house/water etc, and 24/12 VAT on goods and cervices/agriculture. I’m fine with it as long as it’s used to secure some _ chosen _ human rights like the right to medical care, school etc, and to benefit the needy.
Certainly, if YOU are fine with forking over for that sort of thing, thats your business. However those who disagree that medical, schools and welfare are 'human' rights should NOT receive a visit from the State's jackbooted thugs to part them from their Income/Property. Forcing one person to labor for the convience/comfort of another is known as Slavery.
[/quote]
For a society to work there need to be some common rules, that in a democracy, and please spare me the tedious task of defining what kind of democracy we are talking about, is made by a social contract, which is binding for everyone.
I don’t think that every individual should count more than the whole of society. If the society chooses your way, then fine, but I would still think it had made the wrong choice.
Moonchild
12-15-2002, 02:34 PM
Personally I pay 30 % income tax , some tax on the house/water etc, and 24/12 VAT on goods and cervices/agriculture. I’m fine with it as long as it’s used to secure some _ chosen _ human rights like the right to medical care, school etc, and to benefit the needy.
Likely if you were to add up every jot n tittle of these other besides the income tax, you're paying about 50%. Don't forget SS, which you may or may not end up receiving benefits for. In most states your sales tax alone will add up to a lot more than you realize in a year. It's a tax too, you know.
I’m from Norway, so it’ not quite comparable, but yes with the VAT I’m sure that 50% + is redistributed through the government in some form. I’m satisfied with what the state does with the money it collects; for the most part that is.
PS is not VAT the same as sales tax?
truelies
12-15-2002, 03:49 PM
[quote author=Moonchild
For a society to work there need to be some common rules, that in a democracy, and please spare me the tedious task of defining what kind of democracy we are talking about, is made by a social contract, which is binding for everyone.
I don’t think that every individual should count more than the whole of society. If the society chooses your way, then fine, but I would still think it had made the wrong choice.
[/quote]
Ah yes democracy- 3 wolves and a sheep voting on "whats for dinner".
buzaw
12-15-2002, 05:03 PM
Ah yes democracy- 3 wolves and a sheep voting on "whats for dinner".
Let's face it if three outa every 4 are wolves, bye bye bye sheep nomatter what setup you've got. Neither a republic nor a democracy work when the majority of the electorate become corrupt. The judges are corrupt. The juries are rigged. So on n so forth.
Moonchild
12-16-2002, 10:24 AM
[quote author=Moonchild
For a society to work there need to be some common rules, that in a democracy, and please spare me the tedious task of defining what kind of democracy we are talking about, is made by a social contract, which is binding for everyone.
I don’t think that every individual should count more than the whole of society. If the society chooses your way, then fine, but I would still think it had made the wrong choice.
Ah yes democracy- 3 wolves and a sheep voting on "whats for dinner".
[/quote]
Newsflash; that democracy did not last. In Norway we have 4,5 million human beings that that when turned 18, get to vote in a constitutional representative democracy. It works much better than the one with the wolfs. ;)
truelies
12-18-2002, 05:21 AM
Doubtful. Norway like every other West European State is on its way to economic/demographic collapse because of the dead weight of an electorate that has taken the lies of Socialism seriously
I'm not so sure there'l be a revolution. The minority who pay most all the taxes are a diminishing minority, the vastly growing majority being the nonpayers or those paying little so as to not be concerned, all the whilst calling for and supporting more from government.
Minority and majority have nothing to do with it. Once the people who ARE paying the taxes have been squeezed to the breaking point and no more blood can be extracted the revolution will come. The people expecting the handouts won't get them because the source will have been bled dry. Your minority will resent the government for confiscating their wages and your majority will resent the government for not redistributing the wealth in their favor.
No matter how you slice it overtaxation has historically led to revolution and I have no reason to believe America will be any different. It is virtually a mathematical certainty. Our economy and our populace cannot sustain the current trend indefinitely. A breaking point will be reached and the bleeding heart liberals with their socialist agendas seem to have no clue about the science of mathematical probablility or supply and demand and what happens when demand exceeds supply. Neither do they seem aware of how history repeats itself.
wendy
12-21-2002, 10:32 AM
[Personally I pay 30 % income tax , some tax on the house/water etc, and 24/12 VAT on goods and cervices/agriculture. I’m fine with it as long as it’s used to secure some _ chosen _ human rights like the right to medical care, school etc, and to benefit the needy.
Medical care and school are rights?
If your "right" involves taking something by FORCE from another individual is is really a "right"?
Moonchild
12-21-2002, 12:15 PM
[Personally I pay 30 % income tax , some tax on the house/water etc, and 24/12 VAT on goods and cervices/agriculture. I’m fine with it as long as it’s used to secure some _ chosen _ human rights like the right to medical care, school etc, and to benefit the needy.
Medical care and school are rights?
If your "right" involves taking something by FORCE from another individual is is really a "right"?
I don't believe in inherent rights. Rights are given and taken in complex social contracts.
[Personally I pay 30 % income tax , some tax on the house/water etc, and 24/12 VAT on goods and cervices/agriculture. I’m fine with it as long as it’s used to secure some _ chosen _ human rights like the right to medical care, school etc, and to benefit the needy.
Medical care and school are rights?
If your "right" involves taking something by FORCE from another individual is is really a "right"?
I don't believe in inherent rights. Rights are given and taken in complex social contracts.
I'm sorry Moonchild, but that is such crap. Why is it when discussing taxes and economics and social programs, this is the liberal stance, but when it comes to things like capturing and putting terrorists in prison, they have "inherent" rights?
I don't believe in inherent rights. Rights are given and taken in complex social contracts.
Yeah, well... while you're waiting around for someone to give you some rights, I have a few guns here saying mine aren't gonna be taken away anytime soon.
sodaknomad
12-21-2002, 01:34 PM
Please. ::)
Democracy makes sure that taxes goes in ebbs and flows. It's a different kind of [uprising] war than what we saw at the Boston tea party.
Nice to se that the NRA is successful with their propaganda though.
Personally I pay 30 % income tax , some tax on the house/water etc, and 24/12 VAT on goods and cervices/agriculture. I’m fine with it as long as it’s used to secure some _ chosen _ human rights like the right to medical care, school etc, and to benefit the needy.
With all that money confiscated, you must be too poor to get out of the house often.
wendy
12-21-2002, 03:32 PM
I don't believe in inherent rights. Rights are given and taken in complex social contracts.
That's interesting. It's also pretty much the ideal in a "democracy". There are NO individuals, just collective body parts. You are given any rights you have and they may be taken away by the "state" (via majority opinion) at any time.
Kind of like a slave on the master's plantation. What a sad, sad way to view your life.
Moonchild
12-22-2002, 02:39 AM
Jeny
I'm sorry Moonchild, but that is such crap. Why is it when discussing taxes and economics and social programs, this is the liberal stance, but when it comes to things like capturing and putting terrorists in prison, they have "inherent" rights?
First of all, I speak for my self not for all liberals.
I said that I believe in _ giving _ people certain rights. I think both the right to go to school; the right to medical treatment and rights not to be thrown in jail without due process are sensible rights.
Perfectly consistent.
Remember that feeling strongly about certain rights do not make them inherent. One make some choices, and the choices have consequences.
Moonchild
12-22-2002, 02:42 AM
Yeah, well... while you're waiting around for someone to give you some rights, I have a few guns here saying mine aren't gonna be taken away anytime soon.
Be careful that you not labeled as a terrorist then, because then you would have lost the right to due process in the US. Yes... _ lost _ it. Do you work to claim the right back again or do you like the safety it is supposed to provide?
Moonchild
12-22-2002, 02:50 AM
Wendya :
I’m not sure where to start.
That's interesting. It's also pretty much the ideal in a "democracy".
The ideal of democracy? The main principle of democracy is one man one vote. As simple as that. I don’t know of any major society exciting today or at any time in history that have been a democracy.
Then there are different forms of democracy, from the old Greeks that just gave the right to vote to some people, to the US witch is a constitutional democratic republic.
There are NO individuals, just collective body parts. You are given any rights you have and they may be taken away by the "state" (via majority opinion) at any time.
That is a fact, it does not say anything about to what degree the rights are preferable or not. Even the right not to be governed is something that is to be taken and given, and no major society have wanted or been able to make it happen.
Kind of like a slave on the master's plantation. What a sad, sad way to view your life.
It depends on what rights that have been agreed upon. You might think your life is sad to live because you have to pay some taxes that are not used the way you like. I don’t.
Be careful that you not labeled as a terrorist then,
Why would I be labelled as a terrorist? Guns are perfectly legal here.
because then you would have lost the right to due process in the US. Yes... _ lost _ it.
Nonsense. I haven't lost anything.
Do you work to claim the right back again or do you like the safety it is supposed to provide?
What are you talking about?
Moonchild
12-23-2002, 04:12 AM
That is what I thought OEJ.
Why would I be labelled as a terrorist? Guns are perfectly legal here.
All they got to do is to claim that you are a terrorist. They do not have to prove it.
Nonsense. I haven't lost anything.
Well once it was a protected right, now it is not. Call it what you want.
What are you talking about?
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/23/national/23PATR.html?todaysheadlines
But as long as you have your guns ….
truelies
12-23-2002, 06:13 AM
Is everybody in Norway a Statist fool?
Moonchild
12-23-2002, 06:42 AM
Is everybody in Norway a Statist fool?
What a stupid question. Why don't you just call me a statist fool, instead of implying so in a question you know have a negative answer? :o ;D
truelies
12-23-2002, 06:57 AM
Because I KNOW you are a Statist fool. I was curious if that is the norm in Norway. So I asked.
Moonchild
12-23-2002, 09:37 AM
Norway as every other country consists of people with various opinions. Communists, anarchists, capitalists.. you name it. You know that. The question is unnecessary. Have no purpose.
As for the norm, which is not what you asked the first time, I think Norwegian to a larger degree accepts and desire a safety net to pick up the ones in need, and are in favor of equal rights to medical treatment and quality schools. However it seems that some sort of government financed healthcare system is in the cards in some US states, and some privatization is desired in Norway, so I guess we will be getting closer to each other in a while. At least it’s true for some states.
That is what I thought OEJ.
Why would I be labelled as a terrorist? Guns are perfectly legal here.
All they got to do is to claim that you are a terrorist. They do not have to prove it.
Uh... I hate to break this to you, but they can't prosecute me without some kind of proof that I've committed a crime. They can't even indict me, much less put me on trial, without something. That's the way the law works here in America.
Well once it was a protected right, now it is not.
Sure it is, and my guns insure the protection of my rights. What do you have to insure the protection of your rights -- your fists? How long do you think they'll last against somebody with a gun?
In any case, they can't just round me up, declare me to be a terrorist, and summarily execute me. And until they start doing that to people, I haven't lost anything.
Call it what you want.
I shall.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/23/national/23PATR.html?todaysheadlines
I can't read that link, since I don't subscribe to the New York Times. They're liberal as hell and mostly full of crap anyway.
But as long as you have your guns ….
And I'll keep my guns until someone kills me and takes them from me. I'll not give them up willingly, that's for sure.
"Uh... I hate to break this to you, but they can't prosecute me without some kind of proof that I've committed a crime. They can't even indict me, much less put me on trial, without something. That's the way the law works here in America."
Unfortunately no longer true. Now, thanks to Executive order, anyone can be declared a terrorist by the "federal" (imperial) executive branch at any time and held indefinitely without any charges, trial, lawyers, or communication.
"In any case, they can't just round me up, declare me to be a terrorist, and summarily execute me. And until they start doing that to people, I haven't lost anything."
Yes they can, and they already have. I'm not sure about the excuting part yet, but the rounding up has already started. The Bush regime has claimed that right, openly.
"I can't read that link, since I don't subscribe to the New York Times. They're liberal as hell and mostly full of crap anyway."
Try antiwar.com then, you don't have to subscribe. Alan Bock's last couple of articles describes the same moves on the part of the regime.
"And I'll keep my guns until someone kills me and takes them from me."
*Your* guns haven't been taken yet, but it's not that simple. First, state by state gun owners have to register as such. Certain types of weapons are outlawed because they are "paramilitary". There are limits placed on the number of guns and/or ammunition that may be purchased. Police departments offer people money for voluntarily turning in their weapons.
The number of "paramilitary" weapons is expanded, as is the list of crimes for which the "privelege" of legal gun ownership may be revoked. More and more people have a criminal record due to laws against voluntary activities.
Little by little, you are being disarmed. By the time they come for *your* guns, there will
be too few people left with guns to stand up and do anything about it (except a few here and there that will go out in a blaze of glory and serve as example for the rest).
Moonchild:
Social contract (I have not signed it, have you?)
[feel free to adjust to European version]
We've all heard of the "Social Contract" -- the unwritten agreement between individuals and "society" (i.e. the government.) Rarely do people actually try to write down the exact terms of this social contract. Below is the contract between the individual and the state as it currently exists in the United States. Would you sign this contract? [...]
SOCIAL CONTRACT
between an individual and the United States Government
WHEREAS I wish to reside on the North American continent, and
WHEREAS the United States Government controls the area of the continent on which I wish to reside, and
WHEREAS tacit or implied contracts are vague and therefore unenforceable,
I agree to the following terms:
SECTION 1: I will surrender a percentage of my property to the Government. The actual percentage will be determined by the Government and will be subject to change at any time. The amount to be surrendered may be based on my income, the value of my property, the value of my purchases, or any other criteria the Government chooses. To aid the Government in determining the percentage, I will apply for a Government identification number that I will use in all my major financial transactions.
SECTION 2: Should the Government demand it, I will surrender my liberty for a period of time determined by the government and typically no shorter than two years. During that time, I will serve the Government in any way it chooses, including military service in which I may be called upon to sacrifice my life.
SECTION 3: I will limit my behavior as demanded by the government. I will consume only those drugs permitted by the Government. I will limit my sexual activities to those permitted by the Government. I will forsake religious beliefs that conflict with the Government's determination of propriety. More limits may be imposed at any time.
SECTION 4: In consideration for the above, the Government will permit me to find employment, subject to limits that will be determined by the Government. These limits may restrict my choice of career or the wages I may accept.
SECTION 5: The Government will permit me to reside in the area of North America which it controls. Also, the Government will permit me to speak freely, subject to limits determined by the Government's Congress and Supreme Court.
SECTION 6: The Government will attempt to protect my life and my claim to the property it has allowed me to keep. I agree not to hold the Government liable if it fails to protect me or my property.
SECTION 7: The Government will offer various services to me. The nature and extent of these services will be determined by the Government and are subject to change at any time.
SECTION 8: The Government will determine whether I may vote for certain Government officials. The influence of my vote will vary inversely with the number of voters, and I understand that it typically will be miniscule. I agree not to hold any elected Government officials liable for acting against my best interests or for breaking promises, even if those promises motivated me to vote for them.
SECTION 9: I agree that the Government may hold me fully liable if I fail to abide by the above terms. In that event, the Government may confiscate any property that I have not previously surrendered to it, and may imprison me for a period of time to be determined by the Government. I also agree that the Government may alter the terms of this contract at any time without my permission.
---------------------------------- ---------------
signature date
Copyright 1989 by Robert E. Alexander.
May be distributed freely.
"Uh... I hate to break this to you, but they can't prosecute me without some kind of proof that I've committed a crime. They can't even indict me, much less put me on trial, without something. That's the way the law works here in America."
Unfortunately no longer true. Now, thanks to Executive order, anyone can be declared a terrorist by the "federal" (imperial) executive branch at any time and held indefinitely without any charges, trial, lawyers, or communication.
Really? What Executive order was that?
"In any case, they can't just round me up, declare me to be a terrorist, and summarily execute me. And until they start doing that to people, I haven't lost anything."
Yes they can, and they already have. I'm not sure about the excuting part yet, but the rounding up has already started. The Bush regime has claimed that right, openly.
Okay. Who all have they rounded up exactly?
"I can't read that link, since I don't subscribe to the New York Times. They're liberal as hell and mostly full of crap anyway."
Try antiwar.com then, you don't have to subscribe. Alan Bock's last couple of articles describes the same moves on the part of the regime.
No thanks -- I'm not much on propaganda sites.
"And I'll keep my guns until someone kills me and takes them from me."
*Your* guns haven't been taken yet, but it's not that simple. First, state by state gun owners have to register as such.
Bullshit. My guns aren't registered, and they never will be. The government doesn't even know I own them. But it's perfectly legal to own an unregistered rifle, so it doesn't matter.
Certain types of weapons are outlawed because they are "paramilitary".
Then I can't legally obtain them in the first place. So what? The gun store has plenty of other models.
There are limits placed on the number of guns and/or ammunition that may be purchased. Police departments offer people money for voluntarily turning in their weapons.
That's just stupid. What incentive would law-abiding citizens have to turn in their weapons, when they're not even breaking the law by having them?
The number of "paramilitary" weapons is expanded, as is the list of crimes for which the "privelege" of legal gun ownership may be revoked. More and more people have a criminal record due to laws against voluntary activities.
That's why I don't live in a state like California. I hear you can't even carry a knife there.
Little by little, you are being disarmed. By the time they come for *your* guns, there will
be too few people left with guns to stand up and do anything about it (except a few here and there that will go out in a blaze of glory and serve as example for the rest).
You ever been to North Carolina? You have any idea how many of us have guns?
"Really?"
Really. I don't feel like looking up the number for you. I already provided you with a reference that discusses it. You can also find numerous articles on the matter in the recent archives of lewrockwell.com and freedom news daily from free-market.net.
antiwar.com isn't a propaganda site. Just read Alan Bock's columns, you can learn the facts about the roundups. No registration required. You can find these same facts in other publications. Your stubborn refusal to learn the facts is galling. How
would you possibly be harmed by reading a contravening point of view?
"But it's perfectly legal to own an unregistered rifle, so it doesn't matter."
For how long?
"Then I can't legally obtain them in the first place. So what? The gun store has plenty of other models."
The list of "paramiltary" models is growing. Remember, this is only one of several methods going on at the same time I discuss in conjunction.
"That's just stupid. What incentive would law-abiding citizens have to turn in their weapons, when they're not even breaking the law by having them?"
Money, in this case.
"You ever been to North Carolina? You have any idea how many of us have guns?"
Yes, I've been there. So what? By all of these means, and others, it is fewer and fewer all the time. And, illegally more and more among the ones that do. With "Total Information Awareness" how long do you think it will be that government will not know exactly who has guns? (But, you probably don't know about Total Information Awareness, because you don't read "propaganda sites" - only the regime approved propaganda).
I repeat: Little by little, you are being disarmed. By the time they come for *your* guns, there will
be too few people left with guns to stand up and do anything about it (except a few here and there that will go out in a blaze of glory and serve as example for the rest). It's an incremental approach. No step, by itself, seems fatal; but taken together, they amount to a gradual disarmament.
Eventually, your guns will be illegal. Canadians still have their guns - no one is rounding them up - but not legally. This was the case in England a few years ago. Do you have any idea how many Englishmen had guns?
After that, all it takes is one or two publicized incidents for the final roundup.
And, for every 1000 blowhards who claim they will resist when that time comes, there may be one (if that) who actually does. But the fact is that it won't happen by way of the goevrnment suddenly rounding up everyone's guns; it's a gradual process which is already underway.
http://www.antiwar.com/bock/b121002.html
http://www.antiwar.com/bock/b121702.html
"Really?"
Really. I don't feel like looking up the number for you.
Gee... I wonder why not? Maybe it's because you're full of it.
I already provided you with a reference that discusses it. You can also find numerous articles on the matter in the recent archives of lewrockwell.com and freedom news daily from free-market.net.
I believe I've already given you my opinion concerning such sites.
antiwar.com isn't a propaganda site.
Sure it isn't.
Just read Alan Bock's columns, you can learn the facts about the roundups.
Why can't you just tell me about them here? Can't you back up your arguments?
No registration required. You can find these same facts in other publications. Your stubborn refusal to learn the facts is galling.
So is your refusal to post them.
How would you possibly be harmed by reading a contravening point of view?
Like I said -- let's hear it.
"But it's perfectly legal to own an unregistered rifle, so it doesn't matter."
For how long?
Indefinitely as far as I'm concerned.
"Then I can't legally obtain them in the first place. So what? The gun store has plenty of other models."
The list of "paramiltary" models is growing. Remember, this is only one of several methods going on at the same time I discuss in conjunction.
Whatever. All of my guns are legal models.
"That's just stupid. What incentive would law-abiding citizens have to turn in their weapons, when they're not even breaking the law by having them?"
Money, in this case.
They spent good money to buy them in the first place. Only an idiot would sell a gun for less than he bought it for, and only a community full of idiots will let the cops buy guns from citizens when they can get them cheaper at the gun shop.
"You ever been to North Carolina? You have any idea how many of us have guns?"
Yes, I've been there. So what? By all of these means, and others, it is fewer and fewer all the time. And, illegally more and more among the ones that do.
I can go to K-Mart and buy a gun today if I want to, and there's nothing illegal about it.
With "Total Information Awareness" how long do you think it will be that government will not know exactly who has guns? (But, you probably don't know about Total Information Awareness, because you don't read "propaganda sites" - only the regime approved propaganda).
It doesn't matter. My dad never registered his guns, and I inherited them. Nobody knows I have them except my family.
I repeat: Little by little, you are being disarmed. By the time they come for *your* guns, there will
be too few people left with guns to stand up and do anything about it (except a few here and there that will go out in a blaze of glory and serve as example for the rest). It's an incremental approach. No step, by itself, seems fatal; but taken together, they amount to a gradual disarmament.
Like I said -- you won't disarm me until you kill me, and I don't think you've got it in you.
Eventually, your guns will be illegal. Canadians still have their guns - no one is rounding them up - but not legally. This was the case in England a few years ago. Do you have any idea how many Englishmen had guns?
I really don't care -- I'm not English. I'm American, and my right to bear arms is guaranteed by the Constitution.
After that, all it takes is one or two publicized incidents for the final roundup.
And, for every 1000 blowhards who claim they will resist when that time comes, there may be one (if that) who actually does. But the fact is that it won't happen by way of the goevrnment suddenly rounding up everyone's guns; it's a gradual process which is already underway.
http://www.antiwar.com/bock/b121002.html
http://www.antiwar.com/bock/b121702.html
Say what you want -- you won't get my gun until you pry it from my cold dead hands. You can count on that.
"Gee... I wonder why not?"
Beacuse you've already been provided with a reference.
I won't go around doing a bunch of research just because you have
falsely prejudged some resources as "propaganda sites" and refuse
to read.
"I believe I've already given you my opinion concerning such sites."
Yes, nothing like your willful ignorance.
Unfortunately for you, anyone else reading can look up the facts
even though you choose to remain ignorant.
"Why can't you just tell me about them here?"
I could, but then this would be a "propaganda site" and you
couldn't read it. Otherwise, you could simply go to the
recommended resources. I don't shy away from reading views I
disagree with. What do you think it would do to you if you read it?
"So is your refusal to post them."
Why should I repost what's already available?
"Like I said -- let's hear it."
If you want to know, click on the link. It will open up a window
and you can read.
"Indefinitely as far as I'm concerned."
Well, unfortunately, the decision is not up to you. It's up to
people with a somewhat different agenda.
"Whatever. All of my guns are legal models."
For the time being.
"They spent good money to buy them in the first place. Only an idiot would sell a gun for less than he bought it for, and only a community full of idiots will let the cops buy guns from citizens when they can get them cheaper at the gun shop."
Apparently, there are a lot of idiots. The cops aren't buying guns to use, they are buying them to destroy them.
"I can go to K-Mart and buy a gun today if I want to, and there's nothing illegal about it."
Tomorrow, there might well be something illegal about it. Or K-Mart may bow to pressure and stop selling guns. And then somewhat later it will be illegal to buy them anywhere.
"It doesn't matter. My dad never registered his guns, and I inherited them. Nobody knows I have them except my family."
Well, so what? First of all, you just bragged about it here. The government is monitoring
the internet, and can trace your IP. They can (and are) also monitoring your email and phone. That's part of "Total Information Awareness", as are all credit card purchases (such as ammunition). Prefer to use cash? They have, or soon will have, you on camera (for national security purposes, to help us track criminals buying weapons, or whatever). Your friendly postman and repairman may soon be a Stasi style regime spy, thanks to the TIPS program which you may (like Total Information Awareness) not learn about since you don't read "propaganda sites".
Even some of your family members might end up among the twelve million TIPS spies, or may talk to them in an unguarded moment. And then there's satellite photo-radar and all sorts of other wonderful government technology (for your safety) that your taxes pay for. Smile, you're on camera!
"Like I said -- you won't disarm me until you kill me, and I don't think you've got it in you. "
I wouldn't want to. But, like I said, others do. And for every thousand that make such statements, there may be one or less that will actually give up his life.
"I really don't care -- I'm not English. I'm American, and my right to bear arms is guaranteed by the Constitution."
A lot of rights are guaranteed by your constitution. Your government violates them
every day.
"You can count on that."
Snooze. There were plenty of Australians who said that too. They had a Constitution as well.
I don't think you have it in you (that's a generic you. For all I know, you personally might be the exception that really means it. But probably not).
"Gee... I wonder why not?"
Beacuse you've already been provided with a reference.
I won't go around doing a bunch of research just because you have
falsely prejudged some resources as "propaganda sites" and refuse
to read.
You said you've already linked it, but now you've got to research it? Something tells me you're not being truthful here. Maybe it's the way you're contradicting yourself...
"I believe I've already given you my opinion concerning such sites."
Yes, nothing like your willful ignorance.
Unfortunately for you, anyone else reading can look up the facts
even though you choose to remain ignorant.
Well, you could just post them and end my ignorance. My questions weren't too hard to answer, were they?
"Why can't you just tell me about them here?"
I could, but then this would be a "propaganda site" and you
couldn't read it. Otherwise, you could simply go to the
recommended resources. I don't shy away from reading views I
disagree with. What do you think it would do to you if you read it?
Why can't you just post them here? If you're going to presume to debate, you're going to have to answer a few direct questions.
"So is your refusal to post them."
Why should I repost what's already available?
Because I don't feel like wading through your entire website looking for the backup that you should have provided for your argument.
"Like I said -- let's hear it."
If you want to know, click on the link. It will open up a window
and you can read.
I don't want to read your propaganda -- I just want you to answer my questions. Why can't you just do that?
"Indefinitely as far as I'm concerned."
Well, unfortunately, the decision is not up to you. It's up to
people with a somewhat different agenda.
And who might that be?
"Whatever. All of my guns are legal models."
For the time being.
I don't think they'll make rifles illegal anytime soon.
"They spent good money to buy them in the first place. Only an idiot would sell a gun for less than he bought it for, and only a community full of idiots will let the cops buy guns from citizens when they can get them cheaper at the gun shop."
Apparently, there are a lot of idiots. The cops aren't buying guns to use, they are buying them to destroy them.
They don't do this with legally owned guns.
"I can go to K-Mart and buy a gun today if I want to, and there's nothing illegal about it."
Tomorrow, there might well be something illegal about it. Or K-Mart may bow to pressure and stop selling guns. And then somewhat later it will be illegal to buy them anywhere.
Is that the best you can come up with -- maybe it'll be different in the future?
"It doesn't matter. My dad never registered his guns, and I inherited them. Nobody knows I have them except my family."
Well, so what? First of all, you just bragged about it here.
So what are they gonna do? Come and arrest me for legally owning a few guns? I don't think so.
The government is monitoring
the internet, and can trace your IP. They can (and are) also monitoring your email and phone.
I doubt that very seriously. It's probably people like you that are being monitored. I'm not a threat to the security of my nation.
That's part of "Total Information Awareness", as are all credit card purchases (such as ammunition). Prefer to use cash? They have, or soon will have, you on camera (for national security purposes, to help us track criminals buying weapons, or whatever).
So what? It's not against the law to own a gun or buy ammunition. As long as I'm buying it at the store, what do I have to worry about?
Your friendly postman and repairman may soon be a Stasi style regime spy, thanks to the TIPS program which you may (like Total Information Awareness) not learn about since you don't read "propaganda sites".
Have you adjusted your tinfoil hat lately? I think you might be wearing it too tightly.
Even some of your family members might end up among the twelve million TIPS spies, or may talk to them in an unguarded moment. And then there's satellite photo-radar and all sorts of other wonderful government technology (for your safety) that your taxes pay for. Smile, you're on camera!
So? I'm not breaking any laws. What are they gonna see?
"Like I said -- you won't disarm me until you kill me, and I don't think you've got it in you. "
I wouldn't want to.
Of course you wouldn't -- you know I'll use them.
But, like I said, others do. And for every thousand that make such statements, there may be one or less that will actually give up his life.
I don't think you'll cow us that easily. We're not as afraid as you are. You need to remember that.
"I really don't care -- I'm not English. I'm American, and my right to bear arms is guaranteed by the Constitution."
A lot of rights are guaranteed by your constitution. Your government violates them
every day.
Which ones?
"You can count on that."
Snooze. There were plenty of Australians who said that too. They had a Constitution as well.
I'm not Australian.
I don't think you have it in you (that's a generic you. For all I know, you personally might be the exception that really means it. But probably not).
Oh, I mean it all right. :)
"You said you've already linked it, but now you've got to research it? Something tells me you're not being truthful here. Maybe it's the way you're contradicting yourself..."
No contradiction, but I won't read it a second time just to find what you are looking for.
"Well, you could just post them and end my ignorance."
Why would you not read the same thing off site that you would read here? Does it become less propagandistic by being transported?
"Why can't you just post them here?"
I already told you.
"If you're going to presume to debate, you're going to have to answer a few direct questions."
I won't make any such presumptions.
"Because I don't feel like wading through your entire website looking for the backup that you should have provided for your argument."
That's why I suggested two specific articles as a starting point. You won't even read that.
"I don't want to read your propaganda -- I just want you to answer my questions. Why can't you just do that?"
Why, because it would be the same information here as there. If it were propaganda there, it would be propaganda here, and then you couldn't read this site.
"And who might that be?"
The million moms, agenda 21 and a lot of other folks. I won't bother with "conspiracy theories" for you, as you can't even follow some simple links.
"I don't think they'll make rifles illegal anytime soon."
Probably not completely. Just little bit at a time, step by step.
"They don't do this with legally owned guns."
Yes, they do.
"Is that the best you can come up with -- maybe it'll be different in the future?"
No, but that's the more than you deserve with your attitude.
"So what are they gonna do? Come and arrest me for legally owning a few guns? I don't think so."
They'll change the "law" first, then they will give you amnesty to turn them in voluntarily, and finally they will come after the last few people who still have guns.
"I doubt that very seriously. It's probably people like you that are being monitored. I'm not a threat to the security of my nation."
Again with the "people like me". What makes you think I'm a threat to anyoen? If you kept up with the "propaganda sites" you would already know that everyone is being monitored, and the surveillance is increasing. If (actually when), in the future, your rulers decide to round up your guns, you've let them know you have some. Congratulations.
"So what? It's not against the law to own a gun or buy ammunition. As long as I'm buying it at the store, what do I have to worry about?"
Laws change. (Edicts, actually, not that you would appreciate the subtlety).
"Have you adjusted your tinfoil hat lately? I think you might be wearing it too tightly."
That would be you, since you obviously have no idea what I was talking about when I referred to TIPS and Total Information Awareness. Keep ignoring "propaganda sites" and pay attention to only your ruler approved sources of information. (The tinfoil hat, in this case, would be refusal to read anything from sites you don't agree with, as if it will somehow brainwash you or something).
"So? I'm not breaking any laws. What are they gonna see?"
Actually, you are. With 20,000 gun "laws", 40,000 regulations on cooking a hamburger, and similar numbers of edicts regarding anything and everything imaginable, you are bound to be breaking some of these "laws" without even knowing it. Even if you weren't, the information would still be there when the gun confiscation starts. Actually, it has already started, although selectively.
"Of course you wouldn't -- you know I'll use them."
Beyond that, I believe in an armed citizenry and private property, so why would I want to?
I'm all for you having guns.
"I don't think you'll cow us that easily. We're not as afraid as you are. You need to remember that. "
Why would I want to cow you, and why would you think I am afraid? I'm not afraid at all, I just observe how people act under those conditions.
"Which ones?"
Every single one. But I won't bother showing you how, since you won't read anything that disproves your preconceptions. I could recommend "Lost Rights" by James Bovard, but then you probably don't read "propaganda books" either....
"I'm not Australian."
So what? Americans aren't special. They are giving up their rights left and right. And, sadly, they will give up their guns too.
"Oh, I mean it all right."
That you say so is of no consequence. Every one of the 999+/1,000 that won't stand up says they mean it, too. So what? Attitudes like yours will simply bring it to the point where that contention will be put to the test.
And, even in the unlikely event that you actually will stand up, it won't matter because too few of your fellows will stand up for it to count.
After all you think you have your Constitutional rights. LOL. What fools!
The constitution means about as much to the so-called federal government as any piece of toilet paper.
But keep thinking it will protect you right until you are painted into that corner. You will be saying "but I'm not doing anything illegal" even as the jackboot crushes your neck.
Look cobe -- I've only asked you two questions, and you can't seem to answer them.
1) What Executive order allows the government to declare someone a terrorist at any time and hold them indefinitely without any charges, trial, lawyers, or communication? This should be a very easy question to answer. You could tell me which order allows the government to do that, and I could look the order up and see what it says for myself. But you don't want to do that. What are you afraid of?
2) Who all has the government rounded up under this Executive order? This should also be a very easy question to answer. Why can't you answer it?
Until you can back up your premise, I'm simply going to dismiss all of your rantings.
Once again: I've already provided the reference that answers those questions.
If you wish to dismiss it, remain ignorant.
It doesn't take anything away from me.
Still can't answer my questions, huh?
Already have. You refused to read it.
You've answered nothing. Don't expect anyone to believe you when you can't back up your claims. Stop hiding behind other authors, and answer the questions yourself.
Anyone who wants to read the links can see for themselves, and people who can't even do that much are of no consequence.
I daresay you're the one of no consequence cobe -- you can't even answer a couple simple questions. When pressed for the facts, you're nothing but a flop, and so are your articles. I checked them out, and they don't answer my questions either. As a matter of fact, the words "executive order" can't be found in either one of them. They provide absolutely zero substantiation for any of your claims.
Merry Christmas, and have a nice day. :)
LOLOL
"you can't even answer a couple simple questions. "
Can and did.
"I checked them out, and they don't answer my questions either. As a matter of fact, the words "executive order" can't be found in either one of them"
ROTFL....you "checked them out" by doing a word search for executive order, huh?
It would be nice if you actually read them, they are not that long.
Unfortunately, probably above your reading level or attention span.
Anyone who wants to read the links [I should have added - and knows how to read, ruling out One Eyed Jack] can see for themselves, and people who can't even do that much are of no consequence.
Meshuga Mikey
12-25-2002, 02:40 PM
I daresay you're the one of no consequence cobe -- you can't even answer a couple simple questions. When pressed for the facts, you're nothing but a flop, and so are your articles. I checked them out, and they don't answer my questions either. As a matter of fact, the words "executive order" can't be found in either one of them. They provide absolutely zero substantiation for any of your claims.
Merry Christmas, and have a nice day. :)
but,..but ,..But,..BUT ,..It IS SOMEBUDDY~! IN THE MOLD---- OF THE JESSE JACKSON MANTRA~!!!!
Say It LOUD---- it's a JUIVE PUKE---- and Its PROUD~!!
Inconsequential barely scratchess the surface of how little veracity has ever out of the "mouth" of this OverBlown JUIVE PUKE~BUMPKIN~!!!
THE IMPEACH BUSH BUMPER STICKERS ---that this puke uses as an AVATAR---????? -ARE NEVER DISPLAYED BY ANYBODY OVER 30.---so far as I have yet been able to discern, and I DISCERN WITH THE VERY BEST OF EM~!!!!
YOU KEEP BRINGING the GASOLINE ---I'LL BRING THE MATCHES~!!
http://people.delphiforums.com/artcruncher/JeesehFaceAward.gif
VAN NUYS JOB~!!!! Did it "listen? ,..... NOT LIKELY~!!!!!
Hey, Gollum Mikey pies himself in the face
and talks some more shit about himself!
Well except for the laughable self-aggrandizement
about his "discernment".
What a dolt!
LOLOL.
Mikey, just what every forum needs...our own
dumb joke in action.
LOLOL
"you can't even answer a couple simple questions. "
Can and did.
You didn't answer anything. "I can't remember the number, I don't know," and "read the articles" don't qualify as answers. What's your next excuse going to be?
"I checked them out, and they don't answer my questions either. As a matter of fact, the words "executive order" can't be found in either one of them"
ROTFL....you "checked them out" by doing a word search for executive order, huh?
I skimmed them while I was there, but yeah -- that's exactly what I did. See the menu bar towards the top of your browser? Okay, click edit, then click find, then type in what you're looking for. The term "executive order" isn't mentioned in either of those articles, nor does it give the name of the 'executive order' that supposedly gives the government the right to just declare someone a terrorist and lock them up.
It would be nice if you actually read them, they are not that long.
I went there to get the answers to the questions I asked you (which weren't there), not to read a bunch of liberal propaganda.
Unfortunately, probably above your reading level or attention span.
No, but they were certainly devoid of the answers you said I'd find there. That's what happens when you huff and puff and bluff too hard -- somebody ends up calling you on it. Now where are my answers?
Anyone who wants to read the links [I should have added - and knows how to read, ruling out One Eyed Jack] can see for themselves, and people who can't even do that much are of no consequence.
Like I said -- I checked out your articles, and they don't answer my questions. You haven't answered them either. Care to give it a try now, or were my questions too hard for you? I could repeat them, if you think it would help...
Hey, dumbass...antiwar.com isn't a liberal site.
Not even close.
If you read it, you would know that.
I don't have to make any excuses. I pointed you to the articles.
You haven't read them.
I know how to do a text search. I knew that's what you did.
Sometimes you have to have a slightly longer attention span.
To get the context.
Get this: I don't care how ignorant you are.
You can huff and puff from now until doomsday that I didn't
"answer your questions," but nevertheless the links are there
for anyone with enough attention span to actually read the
articles and see that they provide your answers.
Go back to sleep.
I don't care if you think there are no roundups.
I don't care if you think you have all your constitutional rights.
I hope you remain completely oblivious until
the very moment that they come for your guns,
after most of your neighbors have voluntarily given theirs up.
Then, they can take your guns from your cold, dead hands, which they will do.
On the other hand, they may shoot you in the hands and knees so you can't fire
your guns and can't run. Then they can take you and torture you, and make
you scream for mercy by death, but there will be no mercy.
Or, they may surprise you in your sleep, and before you know what's going
on you will be gassed and incapacitated.
By all means...don't rean any "liberal" (yeah right) "propaganda" (ha!) and
remain as ignorant as possible.
I don't need an excuse for your ignorance.
I think it's great!
Keep your head firmly buried in the sand. That's the best possible place for it to be.
See, by now I have spent enough time on this to give you 100 other articles which
address this matter.
I have chosen not to, because I want you to remain ignorant.
Since you have the freedom to educate yourself, and have even
been pointed in the right direction, and stubbornly refuse to learn
anything, you deserve your fate as a slave.
Have to it!
Hey, dumbass...antiwar.com isn't a liberal site.
Not even close.
If you read it, you would know that.
I don't have to make any excuses. I pointed you to the articles.
Yeah, but they don't answer my questions. That makes them pretty much worthless, as far as I'm concerned.
You haven't read them.
Yes I have.
I know how to do a text search. I knew that's what you did.
That's the first thing I did. When I didn't find the answers I was looking for using the search function, I had to read them. I still didn't find the answers to my questions -- because they aren't there.
Sometimes you have to have a slightly longer attention span.
To get the context.
Get this: I don't care how ignorant you are.
Well good, but I'm not the one that can't answer questions here.
You can huff and puff from now until doomsday that I didn't
"answer your questions," but nevertheless the links are there
for anyone with enough attention span to actually read the
articles and see that they provide your answers.
You're lying. The articles do not provide the answers to the questions I asked. I guess it's a safe bet to write your other claims off as lies too.
Go back to sleep.
I don't care if you think there are no roundups.
I don't care if you think you have all your constitutional rights.
Well good, but can you prove any of your allegations? I've given you ample opportunity. The obvious conclusion is that you can't prove them.
I hope you remain completely oblivious until
the very moment that they come for your guns,
after most of your neighbors have voluntarily given theirs up.
With any luck, maybe it'll be you that comes for them. :)
Then, they can take your guns from your cold, dead hands, which they will do.
Not if I kill them first.
On the other hand, they may shoot you in the hands and knees so you can't fire
your guns and can't run. Then they can take you and torture you, and make
you scream for mercy by death, but there will be no mercy.
You're not talking to a little girl here -- liberal scare tactics aren't going to work on me. I'm not afraid of you or your goons.
Or, they may surprise you in your sleep, and before you know what's going
on you will be gassed and incapacitated.
Yeah, sure. You won't be leading that wave, will you?
By all means...don't rean any "liberal" (yeah right) "propaganda" (ha!) and
remain as ignorant as possible.
I don't need an excuse for your ignorance.
I think it's great!
Keep your head firmly buried in the sand. That's the best possible place for it to be.
See, by now I have spent enough time on this to give you 100 other articles which
address this matter.
But you've yet to give me one...
I have chosen not to, because I want you to remain ignorant.
In other words, you're saying you can't back up your claims. Well hell son -- I knew that all along.
Since you have the freedom to educate yourself, and have even
been pointed in the right direction, and stubbornly refuse to learn
anything, you deserve your fate as a slave.
Have to it!
You might as well admit that you can't answer the questions I asked you. I'm sure everybody reading this thread has noticed that by now.
"That's the first thing I did. When I didn't find the answers I was looking for using the search function, I had to read them. I still didn't find the answers to my questions -- because they aren't there."
Yes they are. You can lie about it all you want. Anyone else following along can check.
Besides, if you read you wouldn't be calling antiwar.com a "liberal" site as that was one of the subjects addressed.
"You're lying."
You can claim this all you want. It won't help you one bit.
"Well good, but can you prove any of your allegations? "
Yes, but why bother?
"With any luck, maybe it'll be you that comes for them."
No such luck. I love guns and I hate the government.
"Not if I kill them first."
Keep dreaming.
"You're not talking to a little girl here -- liberal scare tactics aren't going to work on me. I'm not afraid of you or your goons."
They ain't my goons. I hate them. You claim to have read my links, and you still haven't figured out even that much? Just proves you are a liar, as anyone who has read my links would not think they are my goons for one second. You have no need to be afraid of me, but you should be afraid of them - or, not, I don't care - as I said before, I want you to remain ignorant because you deserve your fate.
"Yeah, sure. You won't be leading that wave, will you?"
No, I'll be as far away from it as humanly possible. Matter of fact, I won't even be anywhere in your country.
"But you've yet to give me one..."
Pearls before swine.
"In other words, you're saying you can't back up your claims. "
No, I'm saying you don't deserve it.
"I'm sure everybody reading this thread has noticed that by now."
You wish. If they have any intelligence, they will have noticed that you are an idiot. You don't read, and even if/when you do you don't understand what you read. Hell, you still think I'm a liberal and that I am on the side of the government that wants to take your guns away. How much dumber can you get?
On the other hand, it is highly likely that if anyone is reading they are just as dumb as you. In which case, they deserve the same as you.
thebib
12-30-2002, 01:33 AM
Back to taxes:
Moonchild compares apples to oranges.
The gov't, fed, state, local, luxury and hidden takes more than 50% of my income BEFORE medical benefits and college tuitions ALL of which I pay for myself and children.
To the one who says there is no comparison to the Boston Tea Party, I reply:
Au contrare!
As with the first revolution, so to THIS revolution will be because of "taxation without representation." ;)
Why don;t I move out of NJ? The day is coming but New York Metro is still one of the best places to make the bigger bucks. And since I'm paying about $30,000 a year in college tuitions, before I pay the mortgage or buy a hamburger, (American citizens don't get the grants or reduced tuition rates the immigrants ... legal & illegal, do), You can see why I need to stay in a high pay area.
Why don't I make them take student loans?
They're already behind the tax 8 ball trying to get started after college without being totally buckled with student loans.
We really need to start voting EVERY incumbant out of office until they (AND WE) learn that their job security depends on their being servants of the people's will and not their own fat cat, corrupt, self serving, self aggrandizing, meglomaniaical positions.
They think money grows on trees.
They take none of the risks, do none of the labor nor invest in any of the pursuits, yet they feel ENTITLED to be the first in line with their UNENTITLED hands out.
It's called indentured servitude .... time to get rid of the fat at the top.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.