mainstream political rant #35 - The Cult of Barack Obama

[tyrannosaurus vex]

rp isn't a moron, he just plays one in his policies.

[Roo]

Not too fond of the man, myself. Just have a boyfriend who's bought it all, hook, line and sinker.

Ask him why Ron Paul takes hom $400,000,000 in pork per year.

Or why he hates article I, sec 2; article II, sec 8, and amendments XVI and XIV of the US constitution.

TGRR,
Knows Ron Paul is anything but a "constitutionalist".

Looking at the numbers rather quickly, it seems that Clinton requested quite a bit (over $340 million), while Obama only requested about $91 million this year. Seems that FY07 was over $300 million. I'm sorry, but I find it hard to believe that he stopped "because he felt it was getting out of hand". Especially when that just happens to coincide with his presidential campaign.
Given the size of Texas, and the comparison to how much other representatives are asking for, I tend to think that Paul is 'just doing his job'. He would be doing his state/district a disservice if he didn't try to bring home the bacon. 

mmm...bacon.

As for the Constitution...(do you mean Article I, section 8? There are only four sections in Article II.) Congressman Paul hates anything that limits freedom, especially taxes. I can't say I really disagree. I remember challenging my father about filing with the IRS on the grounds that paying taxes is supposed to be voluntary. It's not, of course...because right under the part in the IRS code where it says that paying taxes is voluntary, it says that the IRS has the right to force people to pay. Voluntarily.   

Now, kiddies, for a shiny new dime, name one modern society that has survived with a flat tax.

How about naming a modern society that has survived with fiat currency? Or really, any modern society that has managed to survive for more than a few hundred years at all?

Roo,
Wants her own damn planet now.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Given the size of Texas, and the comparison to how much other representatives are asking for, I tend to think that Paul is 'just doing his job'. He would be doing his state/district a disservice if he didn't try to bring home the bacon. 

Well, that would be fine, if he didn't bitch about pork and taxes all fucking day.

As for the Constitution...(do you mean Article I, section 8? There are only four sections in Article II.) Congressman Paul hates anything that limits freedom, especially taxes.

Taxes do not limit freedom.  Taxes have nothing to do with freedom, in fact.  If you have confused essential human liberties with your bank statement, then I feel kinda sorry for you.

And yes, I meant article I.  Oh, and Ron Paul LOVES a couple of things that limit freedom...for example, he loves telling women what they can and cannot do with their reproductive organs, despite amendment IX.  He also loves the idea of stripping people of their birthright, if their skin is smudgy...he just HATES amendment XIV, sec 1.

I can't say I really disagree. I remember challenging my father about filing with the IRS on the grounds that paying taxes is supposed to be voluntary. It's not, of course...because right under the part in the IRS code where it says that paying taxes is voluntary, it says that the IRS has the right to force people to pay. Voluntarily.   

Link to ANYTHING official stating that taxes are voluntary?  They are not, nor have they ever been.  They are - per the US constitution - levied. 

How about naming a modern society that has survived with fiat currency?

The USA.

Or really, any modern society that has managed to survive for more than a few hundred years at all?

England.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

rp isn't a moron, he just plays one in his policies.

RP isn't a moron.  That's what he has his cult of followers for.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Every modern society has a fiat currency, so the success rate there is better than a flat tax. Also, if RP hates restrictions on freedom so much, why does he want a federal law banning abortion nationwide? He's anti-war and anti-establishment and that makes him cool with a lot of people who are actually liberals and socialists but are too dumb to know how to follow policy, but it doesn't mean anything he proposes makes any real sense.

Taking our economy back to a 19th Century model sure as fuck doesn't make any sense. The Constitution doesn't technically provide any legality for the system we have now, but that's because economics wasn't very developed in 1787, and couldn't have predicted the need for a fiat currency or a global economy anyway, and the system we had wasn't working. Yes there's corruption and lots of people are getting screwed, but at least the economy provides for a certain continuity of civilization.

If you listen to RP's discourses on economics, you'll find that his views are vastly oversimplified and he makes a lot of assumptions that aren't necessarily true. I'm glad he's Fighting The Man and everything, but I'm also glad he doesn't have a chance in Hell of becoming the President, ever.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

And while I'm at it, libertarians and their "we don't need no stinkin' taxes" bullshit piss me right the fuck off. Who the fuck are these people to claim the right to live in any modern society full of modern conveniences, and expect to get all that for free? Where the fuck do you think the street in front of your house comes from? The Government Services Fairy? How do you expect to pay the people who are, at least once in a while, actually enacting public policy that makes your life better than the life of some poor mud-sucking victim of a corrupt Indonesian puppet regime? You'll drive a car made safer by government regulation down a street patrolled by government-paid police to your job where regulations cover you for pay and safety. For all my talk about taking down the System and bringing power mongering jackasses to justice, I do believe that if you live a good life, then you owe something back to the society that makes that possible.

[Roo]

Taxes do not limit freedom.  Taxes have nothing to do with freedom, in fact.  If you have confused essential human liberties with your bank statement, then I feel kinda sorry for you.

And yes, I meant article I.  Oh, and Ron Paul LOVES a couple of things that limit freedom...for example, he loves telling women what they can and cannot do with their reproductive organs, despite amendment IX.  He also loves the idea of stripping people of their birthright, if Howetheir skin is smudgy...he just HATES amendment XIV, sec 1.

I haven't confused essential human liberties with my bank statement, because I don't have a bank statement and freedom isn't essential. I cherish mine (as much as I have), that's for sure...but humans have often lived without liberty, and depending on who you are and where you live in this world, still do.

The world, from my admittedly limited perspective, is becoming a strange mishmash of Asimov's Foundation series, 1984, a little Brave New World, and Anthem for good measure. So that might explain a few things.


As for our dear RP, and Amendment XIV...IIRC, he's got beef with it, because of the way it was passed...something about being brought up for vote on the last day before the Christmas break, after most people had gone home for the holiday...something shady about it. I might be confusing that with something else though, as I can't find anything on it right now.

 

Link to ANYTHING official stating that taxes are voluntary?  They are not, nor have they ever been.  They are - per the US constitution - levied. 

But they should be voluntary, damnit. Cuz then I wouldn't have to pay them.

I was thinking of this: http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/payingtaxesisonlyvoluntary.htm But I don't think that counts as official.

[Roo]

And while I'm at it, libertarians and their "we don't need no stinkin' taxes" bullshit piss me right the fuck off. Who the fuck are these people to claim the right to live in any modern society full of modern conveniences, and expect to get all that for free? Where the fuck do you think the street in front of your house comes from? The Government Services Fairy? How do you expect to pay the people who are, at least once in a while, actually enacting public policy that makes your life better than the life of some poor mud-sucking victim of a corrupt Indonesian puppet regime? You'll drive a car made safer by government regulation down a street patrolled by government-paid police to your job where regulations cover you for pay and safety. For all my talk about taking down the System and bringing power mongering jackasses to justice, I do believe that if you live a good life, then you owe something back to the society that makes that possible.

If I've got the libertarian shtick right...they have this idea that if people aren't paying taxes, they'll somehow band together and plunk down the cash for all the stuff the government takes care of right now. It'd be nice.

TBH, I'm not so sure that that car is really safer because of gov't regulation, those gov't paid cops are starting to act like they're hot shit and they run the place, and the job...well, shit. I'm currently unemployed, so I can't speak to that. But when I was working, it was in retail, and 10 bucks an hour (while better than the Indonesian guy's pay) does not go very far in today's economy.

I'd agree that we do owe something back to society...but since when does the gov't = society? I feel that I ought to get off my ass and do something...but for my fellow citizens, not some faceless Government. 

But seriously, vex...what better way would there be to bring down the System, than to stop funding it?

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Government isn't society but it's our mechanism for distributing services to our society. It's overgrown and leaning a little too far past the Fascist mark right now, but obliterating it and pretending we'll be better off without it is hardly the answer. Government is a necessary evil. The problem is that too many people have forgotten that.

At the same time, absolute freedom in the market tends to put a lot of people in the position of eating shit sandwiches for every meal, and taking all the taxes away tends to disintegrate a society to the point that even if people were willing to band together, there's nothing left to band together for.

[Nast]

Government is only a necessary evil until we figure out how to make it

a) less necessary

b) less evil

...which is in fact, the big problem so far.
I'm not sure if people can't live without a government, it's just that people will, like you said, really like things that come with a big government.
In the Old Testament, the Israelites lived without a king until they saw how other lands had a glorious ruler. God even told them that a king would just steal their horses and tax 'em, but people wanted one anyway. *shrug*

[tyrannosaurus vex]

the only way to have a perfect society with no government is to drag our enemies into the streets and kill them.

[Cainad (dec.)]

But that would involve killing ev-

...

Oh, I get it! Good idea!

[Roo]

Government isn't society but it's our mechanism for distributing services to our society. It's overgrown and leaning a little too far past the Fascist mark right now, but obliterating it and pretending we'll be better off without it is hardly the answer. Government is a necessary evil. The problem is that too many people have forgotten that.

At the same time, absolute freedom in the market tends to put a lot of people in the position of eating shit sandwiches for every meal, and taking all the taxes away tends to disintegrate a society to the point that even if people were willing to band together, there's nothing left to band together for.

Hm. Well, the best solution for things that are overgrown is often to cut them back ruthlessly. They might look ugly for a while, but you end up with a healthier result. And when a plant or a government is leaning too far one way, it'll often just topple over on its own. You can try propping it up, but that only works as long as the prop is there. And I might be way off base here, but I think our government, and by extension, our monetary system, is already propped up. I'm starting to get the feeling that Fascism is all that's holding it up, and we'd better come up with something else real quick, if we'd like to keep our precious freedom.

People eating shit sandwiches...happens now. Frequently. Absolute freedom in the market...I could be wrong, but I don't think it's ever been tried. Seems like that would require people having absolute freedom in the first place, and that's never happened, not even in the Land of the Free. (Absolute freedom, in my mind, being a state of having no rules or regulations.)

As for disintegrating society...and people banding together...they always will, as a matter of survival. People do not do well on their own, in general. We don't know that taking away taxes would disintegrate society either. It would definitely change it, enormously. It would almost certainly destroy our current form of government. But people will survive, and where there are people, there is society.

[Cain]

I thought Ron Paul wanted a flat tax?  That seems in line with ammendment 16.  (Of course, I don't remember the ammendment very well).

No, that is another matter entirely.

Now, kiddies, for a shiny new dime, name one modern society that has survived with a flat tax.

Somalia.

[Cain]

  Obama's team, on the other hand, seem to be saying "this doesn't seem to be working, lets try something else".  Which is often normally a good idea.

Except when no one seems to know what that "something else" would be. I hear the word Change loud and clear. But I don't really hear what that Change would be. I do agree that he's probably the best hope...but we've been running on Hope for a long time. Hope ain't cuttin' it. And Change, for the sake of change, isn't either.

We do need change. We do need something different. But we need to stop and think about what really needs to change.  We need to listen to each other more than the politicians. We need to rethink politics, as a whole. We may need to rethink government, as a whole.

I dont live in America, I just like to comment upon its politics, because they're more exciting than BBC Parliament.

A change would be good because Bush and the NeoCon gravy train has become predictable.  I'd love to see Obama invade Kenya, for example.  None of the other candidates would do that.  The others are all the boring dull "lets have a war with the Middle East zomg the Mooslems will rape yuor daughter fear fear fear" candidates.  That was funny until about 2005.  Besides, I'm a gambler.  Unsure ruin > definite ruin any day of the week.  And is often more amusing.

Speaking of which, I was watching McCain on C-Span today.  It was very interesting, to watch the change between when he was asked about China, Tibet and Taiwan (sensible, cautious, pragmatic) and then was asked about the Islamic world, where suddenly it became a war of values like the Cold War.  I think McCain has his priorities screwed up.  If he wants to talk about wars like the Cold War, he should really be concentrating on North Asia.  China, Russia and Japan are working their way up to blowing the shit out of each other, and India probably wants a piece of the action as well.  Nothing's set in stone though, and if the US managed to either turn Russia out of China's orbit or bring India fully on side, any war there could be deterred before it starts.

But nooooooooo, lets fuck around in the strategically worthless Middle East instead!