An irreverent, inclusive, alternative parenting community
Redistribuiton of wealth
So yeah. Figured I'd start a new topic rather than go off topic in the school food ban thread.
What are your thoughts?
What are your thoughts?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by GreenLantern on -
I don't know who this "other guy" is, and I don't know what playbook you are referring to. I just feel how I feel.
Just because something is a law doesn't mean it's not a threat.
We have laws that say if you do this, then you get that. If you murder someone, you go to jail. Then there are laws that say if you don't do this, we'll do that. If you don't pay taxes, we'll throw you in jail. Yes it's a law, but it's also a threat.
Also, blindly following laws is dangerous. I'm not saying people should not pay taxes, but look at past bad laws. If you are of the mindset that if something is law then it should be followed no matter what, then black people should sit on the back of the bus and not be able to use the same bathrooms as white people.
John T. Capp said:That's the exact same argument the other guy made, to the letter. You must have the same playbook.
There is no threat of force. The law is not "force." There is no "threat." The law doesn't make threats. Going to jail for breaking valid laws is not "force." All of us are bound by our social contract. If you choose to break that contract because you think you're above everybody else, the law spells out the consequences of your choices. That is not a threat. You do your legal duty to your country, which happens to be a democratic republic with laws enacted by the duly elected representatives of all the people, including their duly elected president.
GreenLantern said:Believe me, I'm not one of those nut jobs that thinks taxes aren't part of the law. I get that they are. But one could make the argument that since there is a potential penalty of going to jail if you don't pay taxes, that taxes are taken by threat of force. Now, I'm not advocating not paying taxes here, because I don't want to see anyone go to jail for something like that, but you can't deny that there is threat there if you don't pay your taxes.
So, if we agree that making rich people contribute a lot to poor people, how much should be taken from them? 20%? 50% 80%?
-
Permalink Reply by GreenLantern on
-
Who the hell is Cog?
You are missing the point.
I'm not comparing laws. What I'm saying is that if you say we should obey all the laws just because they are laws, then you should do just that, and you should, for consistency sake, be against those that fought for civil rights. After all, they were not obeying the law. You can dismiss it if you want, but then your argument doesn't hold much merit. I'm not saying that people should stop paying taxes either. You are just reading what you want to read, and claiming I'm someone named "Cog". If that's how you want to operate, then I guess we are done here.
John T. Capp said:Yes, and rich people being expected to contribute more in taxes is exactly like Jim Crow. Exactly.
Good to see you again, Cog.
-
Permalink Reply by kommishoner on -
Cog is a guy who was here for a while who made remarkably similar arguments to yours, and equally similarly, engaged primarily with JTC's comments despite the presence of many others. Additionally, occassionally people that leave this site come back under different names. Hence JTC's comment.
And since I'm here anyway, I'll say that I don't think going to jail is the same as force. And with respect to taxes, there's a long, long way to go between not paying your taxes and ending up in jail for tax evasion. There's quite a few hurdles the state has to jump before they put you in jail, and quite a few due process steps. If we must compare it to civil rights activists, however inapt the comparison, I'd say that disobedience of *particular* laws, i.e. sitting at the back of the bus, that reinforce an unequal social contract, as part of a larger movement to change laws via the courts and via the legislature is not the same thing as simply not paying your taxes. So no, not all laws should be obeyed. There's something to be said for the manner in which they are disobeyed that makes the disobedience meaningful.
GreenLantern said:Who the hell is Cog?
You are missing the point.
I'm not comparing laws. What I'm saying is that if you say we should obey all the laws just because they are laws, then you should do just that, and you should, for consistency sake, be against those that fought for civil rights. After all, they were not obeying the law. You can dismiss it if you want, but then your argument doesn't hold much merit. I'm not saying that people should stop paying taxes either. You are just reading what you want to read, and claiming I'm someone named "Cog". If that's how you want to operate, then I guess we are done here.
John T. Capp said:Yes, and rich people being expected to contribute more in taxes is exactly like Jim Crow. Exactly.
Good to see you again, Cog.
-
Permalink Reply by GreenLantern on
-
Well, I don't know who Cog is, but there are people out there that tend to be more towards the center politically, and I am one of them. People like me, and people like JTC, who seems to be more leaning to the left tend to focus in on one another. I don't think you are implying that I am someone else, Kommishoner, but I see what you are saying. I can avoid talking politics if my ideals end up upsetting people.
kommishoner said:Cog is a guy who was here for a while who made remarkably similar arguments to yours, and equally similarly, engaged primarily with JTC's comments despite the presence of many others. Additionally, occassionally people that leave this site come back under different names. Hence JTC's comment.
And since I'm here anyway, I'll say that I don't think going to jail is the same as force. And with respect to taxes, there's a long, long way to go between not paying your taxes and ending up in jail for tax evasion. There's quite a few hurdles the state has to jump before they put you in jail, and quite a few due process steps. If we must compare it to civil rights activists, however inapt the comparison, I'd say that disobedience of *particular* laws, i.e. sitting at the back of the bus, that reinforce an unequal social contract, as part of a larger movement to change laws via the courts and via the legislature is not the same thing as simply not paying your taxes. So no, not all laws should be obeyed. There's something to be said for the manner in which they are disobeyed that makes the disobedience meaningful.
-
Permalink Reply by GreenLantern on
-
I should be clear that I'm not against taxation. I understand that in order to have a functioning government with government services like roads, cops, fire departments, schools, and the like that that stuff isn't free. The money has to come from somewhere. I just don't get the whole "well they are richer than me so they should pay a higher percentage in taxes than me" attitude. I don't want to say it's a jealousy thing, because that doesn't seem to be it, but it sometimes almost comes off as resentful. I can see why it does for some people, when all you hear about in the news is bankers and other wall street people making billions on housing scams and government bail outs. But not all rich people are like that, just like not all poor people abuse the welfare system. I've often felt the same things that some of you do. Why do those people have to hoard all that money? They are never going to use it all. They should give it to others who need it. Where I see that morally they should, it's their money, not mine. They already pay taxes. Rich people pay the majority of taxes in this country. I get that people fall on hard times and need help, especially these days. Many of us have been there. Many of us come out of that too. The question is, where do you draw the line. How much do you need to tax the rich? Why can't the government be made more efficient in order to save money in order to have more money for social welfare programs? Where does all the tax money go? Why hasn't there been a serious audit done of the federal government to look at these issues? That's where my frustration comes from. To me it's I feel like "alright government people, you are getting plenty of money from us, you have to make due with what you have. Those of us in the real world have to do it, now it's your turn. We can't spare any more cash". I think that's where some of the Tea Party people are coming from (maybe? who really knows?). We have a president that promised to not raise taxes on the middle class, and yet he's done so. Of course, I can't be critical of only Obama. At least Obama is doing what he feels is the right thing. Before him we had a guy that was just a moron and didn't know what he was doing.
-
Permalink Reply by kommishoner on
-
Well, I'd argue that mcglory, Kat and I lean pretty far to the left too, and have both made substantive, if less argumentative (sorry JTC) comments. I'm curious what makes you think of JTC's views as leftier than either of ours. But really that's neither here nor there. I'm not going to tell you what you should say or not say with respect to politics, because that's your business, and while we tend to lean left around here that's for sure not universal, and we can usually deal with one another's opinions.
However, I will say that your delivery thus far has been a bit broadstroke. We're a little different than other websites here in that we try to avoid the tendency to say things on the internet we wouldn't say to someone's face. Given that, I'd say that regardless of your political opinions but rather as a person who's new to the site, maybe you could try to be a little more focused on your own experiences, try to be aware of who else might be the audience (for example, don't make broadstroke criticisms of teachers when you are not a teacher yourself and haven't checked whether there are teachers who hang out here (hint: there are)), and try not to hold people you don't know up as an example to prove a political point, like you did with Kat in the school food thread. Of course, I'm not trying to act as the Offsprung police or some kind of Carrie Community - I'm just trying to let you know why you might be feeling some frost in the comments.
GreenLantern said:Well, I don't know who Cog is, but there are people out there that tend to be more towards the center politically, and I am one of them. People like me, and people like JTC, who seems to be more leaning to the left tend to focus in on one another. I don't think you are implying that I am someone else, Kommishoner, but I see what you are saying. I can avoid talking politics if my ideals end up upsetting people.
kommishoner said:Cog is a guy who was here for a while who made remarkably similar arguments to yours, and equally similarly, engaged primarily with JTC's comments despite the presence of many others. Additionally, occassionally people that leave this site come back under different names. Hence JTC's comment.
And since I'm here anyway, I'll say that I don't think going to jail is the same as force. And with respect to taxes, there's a long, long way to go between not paying your taxes and ending up in jail for tax evasion. There's quite a few hurdles the state has to jump before they put you in jail, and quite a few due process steps. If we must compare it to civil rights activists, however inapt the comparison, I'd say that disobedience of *particular* laws, i.e. sitting at the back of the bus, that reinforce an unequal social contract, as part of a larger movement to change laws via the courts and via the legislature is not the same thing as simply not paying your taxes. So no, not all laws should be obeyed. There's something to be said for the manner in which they are disobeyed that makes the disobedience meaningful.
-
Permalink Reply by GreenLantern on
-
People who tend to think like I do often use similar language. It happens all over the place. Not with just us nutty people in the middle. I hear republicans all repeat the same stuff, and democrats all repeat the same stuff, and the "out-in-the-woods-off-the-grid-stockpiling-guns-ammo-and food" libertarians repeat the same stuff. So, it sounds like this Cog person was more of an independent/libertarian type. Since I am really more of an independent, and I agree with some libertarian principles, and there aren't really any other people like that on this site that I've seen yet, I can see why someone might be suspicious of someone who uses similar language as someone else that has already left this site.
-
Permalink Reply by mcglory13 on -
Yeah, I can see what GL is saying, if you read the same stuff you tend to use the same jargon. From GL's posts, I haven't gotten the impression he (she?) is as committed to any party line as Cog (who was a decent guy, most of the time). I appreciate hearing other political points of view, honestly, I just prefer it to be a little more thoughtful than swiping coworkers $20s. :) That's more of a cheap stunt than an argument.
-
Permalink Reply by GreenLantern on
-
I'm a "he".
Wait...hold on....
....just double checked. I'm a "he".
mcglory13 said:Yeah, I can see what GL is saying, if you read the same stuff you tend to use the same jargon. From GL's posts, I haven't gotten the impression he (she?) is as committed to any party line as Cog (who was a decent guy, most of the time). I appreciate hearing other political points of view, honestly, I just prefer it to be a little more thoughtful than swiping coworkers $20s. :) That's more of a cheap stunt than an argument.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
© 2013 Created by Offsprunger.
Powered by
