|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Some ideas to think about /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1533050835 Message started by WebsterMark on 07/31/18 at 08:27:15 |
|
Title: Some ideas to think about Post by WebsterMark on 07/31/18 at 08:27:15 From Walter E Williams, one of the smartest men in America "Poverty is no mystery, and it’s easily avoidable. The poverty line that the Census Bureau used in 2016 for a single person was an income of $12,486 that year. For a two-person household, it was $16,072, and for a four-person household, it was $24,755. To beat those poverty thresholds is fairly simple. Here’s the road map: Complete high school; get a job, any kind of a job; get married before having children; and be a law-abiding citizen. How about some numbers? A single person taking a minimum wage job would earn an annual income of $15,080. A married couple would earn $30,160. By the way, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, less than 4 percent of hourly workers in 2016 were paid the minimum wage. That means that over 96 percent of workers earned more than the minimum wage. Not surprising is the fact that among both black and white married couples, the poverty rate is in the single digits. Most poverty is in female-headed households. Socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign garnered considerable appeal from millennials. These young people see socialism as superior to free market capitalism. Capitalism doesn’t do well in popularity polls, despite the fact that it has eliminated many of mankind’s worst problems, such as pestilence and gross hunger and poverty. One of the reasons is that capitalism is always evaluated against the nonexistent, non-realizable utopias of socialism or communism. Any earthly system, when compared with a utopia, will not fare well. Indeed, socialism sounds good but, when practiced, leads to disaster. Those disasters have been experienced in countries such as the USSR, China, most African nations and, most recently, Venezuela. When these disasters are pointed out, the excuse is inadequacies of socialist leaders rather than socialism itself. For the ordinary person, free market capitalism, with all of its warts, is superior to any system yet devised to deal with our everyday needs and desires. Here are a couple of questions: Does an act clearly immoral when done privately become moral when done collectively? Does legality or majority consensus establish morality? Before you answer, consider that slavery was legal; South African apartheid was legal; the horrendous Stalinist, Nazi and Maoist purges were legal. Clearly, the fact of legality or a majority consensus cannot establish morality. You might ask, “If you’re so smart, Williams, what establishes morality?” That’s easy, and you tell me when I make the wrong step. My initial premise is that we own ourselves. You are your private property, and I am mine. Self-ownership reveals what’s moral and immoral. Rape is immoral because it violates private property. So is murder and any other initiation of violence. Most people probably agree with me that rape and murder are immoral, but what about theft? Some Americans would have a problem deciding whether theft is moral or immoral. Let’s first define what theft is. A fairly good working definition of theft is the taking by force of one person’s property and the giving of it to another to whom it does not belong. Most Americans think that doing that is OK as long as it’s done by government. We think that it is OK for Congress to take the earnings of one American to give to another American in the form of agricultural subsidies, business bailouts, aid for higher education, food stamps, welfare and other such activities that make up at least two-thirds of the federal budget. If I took some of your earnings to give to a poor person, I’d go to jail. If a congressman did the same thing, he’d be praised. People tend to love a powerful government. Quite naturally, a big, powerful government tends to draw into it people with bloated egos, people who think they know more than everyone else and have little hesitance in coercing their fellow man. Nobel laureate Friedrich Hayek explained why corruption is rife in government: “In government, the scum rises to the top.” |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by LostArtist on 07/31/18 at 08:46:07 wow, those numbers are shocking..... wonder how they calculate those |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by WebsterMark on 07/31/18 at 09:14:36 what numbers? |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by verslagen1 on 07/31/18 at 09:31:11 Rather narrow assessment. And those numbers may work in a low cost state, but not CA or NY. I pay close to $10k a year just in property tax. Personally, food stamps, welfare, etc. are a welcome safety net. Just weed out the fraud. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by MnSpring on 07/31/18 at 11:35:59 “…Just weed out the fraud …” WHAT ! Is that, ‘Politically Correct’, to even Say that ??????? |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by Eegore on 07/31/18 at 14:49:58 I don't agree with the numbers, or the road map in the first paragraph. Marriage doesn't need to be part of the equation, plenty of people have successful long term relationships without religion. A democratic government with a welfare system isn't a government giving one person's money to another, it is the people allowing their elected employees to take their money on their behalf and give it to other people. You want less welfare then stop electing people who support it, and get involved reducing the need in your area. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by WebsterMark on 08/01/18 at 04:47:31 Poor people living together is not the same as poor people who are married. Yes, the religious aspect of marriage makes a difference. You can't get away from that fact. Remember, stats like this are macro, not micro. Everyone knows a successful unmarried couple living together but that's not the norm. When Uncle Sam takes my money and gives it to Planned Parenthood, that's stealing. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by Eegore on 08/01/18 at 06:01:18 "When Uncle Sam takes my money and gives it to Planned Parenthood, that's stealing." Isn't he saying that when Uncle Sam takes any of your money for anything its stealing? So taxes for the military, fire department, agriculture etc. unless approved, by you specifically, is theft as it is presented. "Yes, the religious aspect of marriage makes a difference" I'd be interested in what the religious part does. I understand the tax and insurance benefits of marriage, but not so much the religion. I'm not sure its religion that's the beneficial factor in statistics as the historical data will always point towards more successful marriage since culturally in the US marriage was the norm for so many years. In cultures where marriage is not as prominent and you get a lot of single parent, primarily mother upbringings there is more poverty. These tend to be highly religious groups such as Catholic Hispanics and Christian/Baptist African American families. Whites, 45 and under make up the largest group of Agnostics and tend to be more economically secure, and tend to have two person primary relationships with higher education. The variables seem to high to make an assessment on what part religion plays specifically in the marriage component. I unfortunately don't have accurate comparison of same-religion families of different race on equal economic footing to non-religious families of different race on equal economic footing. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by faffi on 08/01/18 at 06:11:30 Marriage and divorce are both common experiences. In Western cultures, more than 90 percent of people marry by age 50. Healthy marriages are good for couples’ mental and physical health. They are also good for children; growing up in a happy home protects children from mental, physical, educational and social problems. However, about 40 to 50 percent of married couples in the United States divorce. The divorce rate for subsequent marriages is even higher. Adapted from the Encyclopedia of Psychology But this contradicts that: https://www.refinery29.com/2017/01/137440/divorce-rate-in-america-statistics While this supports the first claim: https://www.mckinleyirvin.com/Family-Law-Blog/2012/October/32-Shocking-Divorce-Statistics.aspx |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by faffi on 08/01/18 at 06:23:21 But what I really was looking for was this below, although I cannot in any verify the accuracy of the claims. 11% of the adult population is currently divorced. 25% of adults have had at least one divorce during their lifetime. Divorce rates among conservative Christians were significantly higher than for other faith groups, and much higher than Atheists and Agnostics experience. http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm This site contradicts those numbers, so who the hell should one believe? https://divorce.lovetoknow.com/Divorce_Statistics_by_Religion |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by Eegore on 08/01/18 at 06:53:44 Yeah looking up information can be a pain, especially since its so easy to just manufacture contradictory data. I'd tend to use the CDC information as I have witnessed how that data is collected and its just numbers, there is no assessment as to how Christian someone is, are they born again and if they were "saved" prior to marriage or after. Its just information defining a self-proclaimed Christian and if that person is divorced, not why they are. I have to go through a lot of data and verify it for my work and surveys are typically a nightmare since they have so many variables. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by WebsterMark on 08/01/18 at 07:50:06 I'm reminded of that great phrase attributed to Mark Twain: Statistics are like a lamp post to a drunk: they're used more for support than illumination. If a statistic tells me Christians are more likely to divorce than atheists, I immediately suspect that because that goes against what I've seen over my lifetime. My first thought is polls where people report their personal beliefs are suspect because many feel compelled to go along with what they believe the social norm is on that particular topic. Perfect example is the last election: Trump out performed the polls because many said they weren't going to support him to a pollster's face, but obviously did. I witnessed last two years during my town's 4th of July parade. When anti-Trump float goes by, big cheers. When pro-Trump float went by, mostly boos but a lot were silent, very few open cheers for Trump. Yet, the elections results showed a majority supported Trump in our town so pro-Trumpers felt they needed to stay quiet. I think the same phenomena could occur when answering questions about marriage and religion. Regardless, it makes intuitive sense to me that, looking at the macro numbers, married couples are more committed to each other than unmarried couples. Also, those attending religious services regularly seem more likely to stick it out so to speak than those living together and not attending services. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by LostArtist on 08/01/18 at 08:02:41 704245545342556A46554C270 wrote:
so, when Uncle Sam takes my money and gives it to Farmers, that's stealing too. or, any number of programs I don't agree with, drones, spying, building a wall, etc... |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by Serowbot on 08/01/18 at 08:32:07 Kill the poor... :-? |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by WebsterMark on 08/01/18 at 09:32:31 No, not really. The point that was raised in the article is when the government takes money from one group and gives it to another whom that government perceives has claim to it, that should be a rare and well thought out event. Today, its not. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by Eegore on 08/01/18 at 11:17:54 In theory would it be possible to have your elected officials come up with a percentage of your money that is to be allocated to various funds that you choose from? For instance planned Parenthood is out for some, but Agriculture or Women's Shelters could be acceptable. So if you are choosing where the money goes, is it theft? You elected the government so the tax burden is 50 percent your doing, I am asking specifically in relation to the originally posted article that indicates that if a government official allocates your money to agriculture or any funds not of your choosing. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by WebsterMark on 08/01/18 at 14:26:10 5345524F57424F54200 wrote:
Exactly; Planned Parenthood's mission statement. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by WebsterMark on 08/01/18 at 14:29:02 if you don't know much about Walter E Williams, you should read up on him. When he talks about government stealing money, what he's really referring to is his suggestion, that a couple of congressmen have actually submit it as a legislation, which is known as the enumerated powers act. basically the suggeslaw says every appropriations from Congress must cite chapter and verse from the US constitution giving them authority to spend the public's money. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by faffi on 08/01/18 at 23:44:14 Eegore points out something important; either every cent the government take as tax (term used broadly) is theft, or every cent is going to the better for society. Yes, I know that is simplistic, but if you think about it, everything else is opinions. If you say no to taxes, you also say no to government, which again says no to laws and any kind of welfare. In other words, you have anarchy. If you say yes to taxes, you invariably will feel that some of your money is wasted on "useless" things. However, what you consider useless, another will think of as money well spent, meaning what you consider stealing is nothing more than an opinion. So your only two weapons will be who you vote for and/or trying to get into a position of power where you can change the system from within. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by WebsterMark on 08/02/18 at 04:45:13 Again, the Enumerated Powers Act is a response to that. Certainly you can't be against all taxes, that's unreasonable. However, I like the concept behind the act. Basically the suggested law says every appropriations from Congress must cite chapter and verse from the US constitution giving them authority to spend the public's money. In reality would it accomplish anything? No. The tenth amendment is completely ignored and I suspect this one would be too. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by LostArtist on 08/02/18 at 09:50:36 wouldn't they all just cite the Preamble: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by Eegore on 08/02/18 at 10:33:12 I think any tax for digital tech, or space travel etc. would be hard to find in the Constitution, unless it is viewed in broad enough terms to include concepts and freedoms unimaginable at the time the Constitution was written. So pretty much anything could be connected to the Constitution if the interpretation is broad enough. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by MnSpring on 08/02/18 at 12:37:55 “…I think any tax for digital tech, or space travel etc. would be hard to find in the Constitution…” “… unimaginable at the time the Constitution was written…” Yep. Have Never heard anybody say: ’The Constitution is outdated/obsolete, because it says nothing about space travel’. Yet have heard, MANY, people say that some: ‘Amendments are, ‘outdated/obsolete’, because they don’t stay a specific thing, about a specific kind of thing. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by Eegore on 08/02/18 at 14:05:28 I've heard the same thing. I base my outdated/obsolete assessments on actual modern use, and suggest alterations that prepare them for the future. Instead of expecting the future to apply to the past. So to apply this to the actual topic presented and not ones in other threads - If the Constitution is to be interpreted broadly enough to apply to all aspects of modern society, and all possible future aspects, then it would be very easy to make any future tax plan apply. Especially using the method behind the Enumerated Powers Act. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by WebsterMark on 08/02/18 at 14:10:30 032321293423460 wrote:
Good point, hadn't considered NASA. Under the enumerated powers act, the government couldn't fund NASA, it would have to be private. Now, I would say we would be worse off without NASA because while private firms may be able to take this task on today, I'm not sure about in 1960. I may need to rethink my opinion of that act which I thought was a good idea, at least from an academic point of view. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by MnSpring on 08/02/18 at 16:14:45 A question. Planed Parenthood, started as a, private, origination. When did it become a recipient, of tax payer money. And when was the tax payer money, authorized, to fund the killing of babies ? Would that be like, the local County, Paying 3.5 MILLION, for a piece of property, which was taxed at a value of 900 thousand, with, NO, None, NADA, Public impute. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by T And T Garage on 08/02/18 at 16:17:35 1B380526243F3831560 wrote:
You should really start another thread for this. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by LostArtist on 08/02/18 at 16:33:41 12310C2F2D3631385F0 wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by LostArtist on 08/02/18 at 16:36:51 49696B637E690C0 wrote:
First, you all don't give the constitution enough credit, and Second, we can always amend the constitution, and Third, does every law have to be a constitutional amendment to be taken seriously???? There's nothing in the Constitution about Rape and Murder and Theft either.... |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by MnSpring on 08/02/18 at 16:42:43 6F4C50576251574A5057230 wrote:
WOW, O, I know the South part of TX boarders of the Gulf. However I found some lots in the NORTH half of TX, that are Ocean Front, Ya want to BUY some ??? |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by LostArtist on 08/02/18 at 18:05:22 64477A595B40474E290 wrote:
WOW, O, I know the South part of TX boarders of the Gulf. However I found some lots in the NORTH half of TX, that are Ocean Front, Ya want to BUY some ??? [/quote] well, since you are so delirious that you think you own some.... actually, nah, you know, I just don't deal with the delusional hey WEB, I thought you said this place changed after TT left, did you forget to inform MNsprings (I own every ocean front lot and bridge literally IMAGINABLE or imagined maybe????) cause he hasn't stopped being an insulting prick since day 1. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by WebsterMark on 08/02/18 at 18:21:40 I've not been insulting to you. We don't agree often, but I haven't TT'd you have I? |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by LostArtist on 08/02/18 at 18:46:28 7C4E49585F4E59664A59402B0 wrote:
you do it in your own special way, like they say down south..... bless your heart..... that's usually an insult btw |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by WebsterMark on 08/02/18 at 19:11:30 i disagree. |
|
Title: Re: Some ideas to think about Post by LostArtist on 08/02/18 at 19:58:48 083A3D2C2B3A2D123E2D345F0 wrote:
I'm not going to go back through and dig up examples, but they are there. I've done it too. Just quit pretending that there was any "deal" to be civil, some of us brought it up, but it was never universally accepted, people are still "telling it like it is" cause that's how/who they are. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |