I recently had a conversation with someone about the fact that the same money is taxed over & over and over again. 

(02-17-2022, 09:31 AM)Duchess Wrote: I recently had a conversation with someone about the fact that the same money is taxed over & over and over again. 

and your conclusions?

We think it sucks, but what's the alternative when it comes to all the things that our tax dollars fund?

(02-17-2022, 09:31 AM)Duchess Wrote: I recently had a conversation with someone about the fact that the same money is taxed over & over and over again. 

Each dollar is loaned 8 times. That's 8 revenue streams per dollar for the banksters, plus all the taxation that local, state, and the federal gov't imposes. And the reserve requirements? I don't think there are any at this point. Going back to 2008, it was 10-15%, and very few banks had more than the minimum required. And the FDIC? That's not fully funded, and never has been. So it's an extremely precarious system that is maintained only by virtue of the federal government forcing people to accept and use dollars as payment, or dollar-denominated assets. And the only backing a dollar has is the debt that finances just about everything, including GDP, and that's created out of thin air. And as you may have noticed, the people that run this scam never lose, because they're "too big to fail". They get bailouts every time a boom goes bust, all losses are socialized, which debases our currency, and the net result is a massive transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to those at the very top of the food chain, which is about .25% of the top percentile.

This tiny segment of the population is where all the decision-making power resides, and they maintain our democratic facade because it shields them from accountability. And all this was accomplished by virtue of having control over the national money supply. If you're wondering if this system has a name, it's called fractional reserve banking, but it's nothing more than a confidence scam that has been legitimized by the federal government -- which as you might guess, is in fact a client.

(02-17-2022, 09:47 AM)Duchess Wrote: We think it sucks, but what's the alternative when it comes to all the things that our tax dollars fund?

how about getting government out of the charity business altogether? let's do what the founders did and let the free market solve these problems. before you say it; you better check your facts. History is on my side.

(02-17-2022, 12:49 PM)pyropappy Wrote:

(02-17-2022, 09:47 AM)Duchess Wrote: We think it sucks, but what's the alternative when it comes to all the things that our tax dollars fund?

how about getting government out of the charity business altogether? let's do what the founders did and let the free market solve these problems. before you say it; you better check your facts. History is on my side.

The problem with that sort of thinking is that there are no socio-economic theories that can withstand the vagaries of human nature. None. The only thing that can overcome corruption is virtue, and that isn't something that can be legislated. People have to embrace it of their own free will.

(02-17-2022, 12:49 PM)pyropappy Wrote: how about getting government out of the charity business altogether? 

It's no secret that I'm socially liberal, but that doesn't preclude me from being fiscally conservative and I am. Whether one has a little of it, or a lot, money must be managed in a way that it works for you in the best possible way. I don't view most programs that help the less fortunate as being a waste. When it helps them to be productive members of society it helps more than them, it helps their community. It's a positive thing and whether it's big government or little, I think their help is needed because in most cases they have the resources needed and I'm not strictly referring to their money.

(02-17-2022, 04:50 PM)Duchess Wrote:

(02-17-2022, 12:49 PM)pyropappy Wrote: how about getting government out of the charity business altogether? 

It's no secret that I'm socially liberal, but that doesn't preclude me from being fiscally conservative and I am. Whether one has a little of it, or a lot, money must be managed in a way that it works for you in the best possible way. I don't view most programs that help the less fortunate as being a waste. When it helps them to be productive members of society it helps more than them, it helps their community. It's a positive thing and whether it's big government or little, I think their help is needed because in most cases they have the resources needed and I'm not strictly referring to their money.

well said, but the government waste and corruption is rampant; the private sector has proven time and time again they can provide more help in a timelier fashion than government. then the tax money usurped, can remain in your pocket. the other major problem, states like California get far more money in government charity than taxes collected in their state. why should the other 49 states subsidize CA's frivolous spending?

(02-17-2022, 07:37 PM)pyropappy Wrote:

(02-17-2022, 04:50 PM)Duchess Wrote:

(02-17-2022, 12:49 PM)pyropappy Wrote: how about getting government out of the charity business altogether? 

It's no secret that I'm socially liberal, but that doesn't preclude me from being fiscally conservative and I am. Whether one has a little of it, or a lot, money must be managed in a way that it works for you in the best possible way. I don't view most programs that help the less fortunate as being a waste. When it helps them to be productive members of society it helps more than them, it helps their community. It's a positive thing and whether it's big government or little, I think their help is needed because in most cases they have the resources needed and I'm not strictly referring to their money.

well said, but the government waste and corruption is rampant; the private sector has proven time and time again they can provide more help in a timelier fashion than government. then the tax money usurped, can remain in your pocket. the other major problem, states like California get far more money in government charity than taxes collected in their state. why should the other 49 states subsidize CA's frivolous spending?

What you're saying doesn't relate to public/private sector, it is entirely related to scale. Huge corporations like Walmart are just as corrupt and inefficient as the federal government is. Adam Smith was arguing in support of decentralization, and that has to apply to both the public and private sectors to be beneficial.

(02-17-2022, 12:49 PM)pyropappy Wrote:

(02-17-2022, 09:47 AM)Duchess Wrote: We think it sucks, but what's the alternative when it comes to all the things that our tax dollars fund?

how about getting government out of the charity business altogether? let's do what the founders did and let the free market solve these problems. before you say it; you better check your facts. History is on my side.

Please propose how to that?

(02-24-2022, 04:00 PM)cannongal Wrote:

(02-17-2022, 12:49 PM)pyropappy Wrote: how about getting government out of the charity business altogether? let's do what the founders did and let the free market solve these problems. before you say it; you better check your facts. History is on my side.

Please propose how to that?

Article V - Convention of States

Joshua James is an Oath Keeper who provided security for Roger Stone on January 6^th, he plotted with Stewart Rhodes, who is the leader of the Oath Keepers and who is currently incarcerated for his participation in the insurrection. Today Joshua James pled guilty to seditious conspiracy & obstruction and is cooperating with prosecutors.


https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/...60.0_3.pdf

Why would anyone want to overturn a Democritic election? It makes no sense!

Troll

Liberal

I hope the lynchings are televised or at least the burning at the stake.

(03-30-2022, 01:47 PM)Maggot Wrote: I hope the lynchings are televised or at least the burning at the stake.

We can't lynch anyone,   Joe just signed that pretty law that says lynching bad

(03-30-2022, 03:14 PM)cannongal Wrote:

(03-30-2022, 01:47 PM)Maggot Wrote: I hope the lynchings are televised or at least the burning at the stake.

We can't lynch anyone,   Joe just signed that pretty law that says lynching bad

WTF! You just know these people deserve it! I mean ........they took Pelosi's lecturn. We MUST have blood and fire!   At least until the mid terms.