1 - 6
In response to:

Fiscal Cliff Notes

kburdine Wrote: Dec 07, 2012 12:44 AM
A large number in academia are socialist operating in a mostly social institution and have never produced anything in the real world.
In response to:

Fiscal Cliff Notes

kburdine Wrote: Dec 07, 2012 12:35 AM
..... that wealthy people benefit from them and so should pay more. But, they have already paid more per individual to fund those roads in the first place. And, their business provide the means for others to contribute in taxes as well. So, the fairness issue is mute. More important, soaking the rich doesn't help the plight of the poor; it only makes it worse. It is because I care about the poor (I am a member) that I want the people who have proven they know how to produce and how to create jobs to be able to keep more of the money they've earned.
In response to:

Fiscal Cliff Notes

kburdine Wrote: Dec 07, 2012 12:31 AM
Actually, private companies build the roads though they are usually (not always) paid for by tax payer money that passes through the government. It is right for governments to invest in some roads, bridges, canals, etc. because (1) there would be a huge free-loader effect of people using the roads, etc. without helping pay for them (2) Roads and other services that must cross over a multitude of property lines and jurisdictions are extremely difficult to coordinate without government involvement and eminent domain. That is not out of line with classical liberal or libertarian thought. No one is saying there should be no government... except a few occupy anarchist. I suppose you mentioned roads to prove that wealthy people benefit......
In response to:

Fiscal Cliff Notes

kburdine Wrote: Dec 07, 2012 12:21 AM
Well put, Hig
In response to:

Fiscal Cliff Notes

kburdine Wrote: Dec 07, 2012 12:19 AM
I'm saying you gave a wordy response that you thought would sound smart, but means nothing, while you were disrespectfully calling a brilliant and clear minded thinker a BS artist. If you disagree, then refute his claims with facts or at least with plausible theory... give us something, man. Something beyond childish slurs.
The U.S. Constitution states: "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution." To make any agreement that does not support the Constitution, including the 2nd Amendment, should therefore be unconstitutional and void. And, it would be political suicide.
1 - 6