Re: Heartburn of the Day

On Jul 7, 1:12 pm, Richard The Dreaded Libertarian <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 08:10:37 -0400, Chuck Harris wrote:
Bob Quintal wrote:
Taxes are not to pay other people's bills. they're to pay for
things that everyboddy uses, like roads, and schools, and
hospitals.and fire departments. You may argue that the health of
the street sweeper is of no concern to you, but if she spreads
tuberculosis to your neighborhood, it damn well is.

May I have your permission to argue that I don't give a rat's ass
if that lazy hunk of garbage and his spawn starve to death? Why
should I have to pay for him and the fruit of his lazy loins to
eat, have shelter, medical coverage, ...?

If you're talking about the guy who sweeps your streets once a week,
in that case the neighborhood could get together and ask some street-
sweepers for bids, and if a majority vote for it, then each person
can be assessed whatever the consensus is, and pay the damn street
sweeper.

Oh so you'd form a new government. Now what happens if I don't want
to pay the taxes *YOUR* government is trying to collect. Does
everyone have to agree? Can those who don't agree opt out?


Now, _that's_ the kind of tax I could live with - the street
sweeper's bill was $500.00 to do one street, and so each of 10 houses
pays $50.00 and that's it. Who in hell needs some Washington Bureaucrat
to manage that?

You haven't stated what you would do about those who don't want to pay
this tax *YOUR* government is trying to collect. Do you hire an
accountant to keep track of the money collected? Do you pay that
accountant for his services? I don't want to pay for your accountant.



The only thing government is supposed to be for is a meeting place where
larger groups can get together and resolve larger things, like a street
sweeper who does a whole district or city might be cheaper per house
than doing one street at a time piecemeal.

But that arose from the governed, it wasn't imposed from top-down, which
is what you seem to be advocating.

I certainly have never advocated anything of the sort. I have pointed
out the flaws in your thinking. I have not said that the current
system is without flaws. I am just pointing out that your idea is
worse by a long measure.


I've seen good government in action, and it was awesome. My folks took me
to a school board meeting when I was in 5th or 6th grade, and I watched
them debate a bond issue for "brick-and-mortar building money" for the
schools, and it was put to a vote, and won by a landslide, because the
people knew they were spending their money on their kids' education. AND
IT WAS ENTIRELY LOCAL! There weren't even any people from the county there,
let alone the state or federal governments!

I have seen the same sort of completely local government screw up
massively. Take a look at things like condo HOAs. I have also seen
school boards make disasterous errors in judgement. Just because you
spead the process around among many people doesn't make the people
involved any smarter. If the power to collect taxes or fees is
involved, you have all the issues wwith the local goverenment you
claim are a problem with Washington. You haven't suggested any sort
of a solution. In fact you have made a suggestion than makes things
worse.



That government is best which governs least.

Thanks,
Rich


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Heartburn of the Day
    ... the street sweeper is of no concern to you, ... can be assessed whatever the consensus is, and pay the damn street ... schools, and it was put to a vote, and won by a landslide, because the ... Take a look at things like condo HOAs. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Heartburn of the Day
    ... the street sweeper is of no concern to you, ... can be assessed whatever the consensus is, and pay the damn street ... Oh so you'd form a new government. ... schools, and it was put to a vote, and won by a landslide, because the ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Palin and the Jet
    ... The problem with this is that they are required to spend a sizable fraction of their time in schools where they are, presumably, being taught something. ... The instruction would make it clear that governments exist mainly to take money from some people and give it to others, based not on any principle of justice but on the shifting status of coalition politics, and that the net effect of government involvement in things is mostly bad--creates things such as the Great Depression and the current mess, and generally makes most people poorer. ... I'm interested not in your disagreements with that view, which I already know, but in trying to get you to imagine being a parent in that situation. ... Then consider your reaction to someone who explains to you that you have no grounds for complaint, since if you want to teach your children your myths about benevolent government, you can always do it at home or in weekend classes that you arrange and pay for yourself. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.fandom)
  • Re: IJA Passions Anonymous
    ... government does actually deny their choice. ... gives you the option of pay the commercial sector for health and schooling ... There are numerous private schools in the UK (only we call them public ...
    (rec.juggling)
  • Re: Palin and the Jet
    ... have a religious education. ... Are schools the only place where these poor ... Keith's view of government. ... home or in weekend classes that you arrange and pay for yourself. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.fandom)