Previous 11 - 20 Next
As for New Jersey, they could make the residents responsible for declaring everything they buy on the internet and paying the tax due. While that would be legal, it would be devilishly hard to enforce.
Some years ago, the city of Chicago created an additional tax on the sales of new cars. They then went to dealers in the neighboring cities and towns and told them that they had to collect this tax from Chicago residents that bought a car in these dealerships. I cannot use the words that the dealers used, but the tax was removed at the behest of the Chicago car dealers' association as unfair to the Chicago dealers. A tax on internet sales would have to be a federal tax, since a state has only jurisdiction on its own residents. Any thinking person should see that a federal sales tax would be a new tax ability for the feds, and why would anyone want that?
It was a given that the conservative side of the Republicans would be attracted to the libertarian views of economics. (The conservative side of Republicans is relatively recent, about the early 60's.) Cato is pure libertarian in nature, and will now remain so.
The battle between the warriors and pacifists has raged in the libertarian movement always. In the founding days of the Libertarian party, anti war sentiment was higher than most other times. The larger part of the libertarian anti war movement was primarily anti draft, with the telling motto "slaves cannot be effective fighters for liberty". There was, however a group that was against even self defense. At no time has the libertarian movement been either Republican or Democrat. There has always been talk about the fact that on the social side of libertarianism, many Democrats could agree. It was hoped that this agreement would pull some Democrats to the libertarian ideas if not the Libertarian party.
In response to:

Roberts' Ruling Took Guts

Sandy235 Wrote: Jun 29, 2012 4:56 PM
To paraphrase The Chief Justice: You elected these idiots, you fix it. If you can't figure that out, you deserve what you get. Looking back at all the laws passed in the last 50 years, this is merely the "latest and greatest".
In response to:

The Liberal Tax Myth

Sandy235 Wrote: Jun 17, 2012 4:47 PM
Back in the 60's, when offered overtime, I mostly refused. While the pay at time and one half was very good, it would push me into another tax bracket and my take home was less. This is one of the few ways that a wage earner can adjust his income to benefit taxwise. Usually it only applies to persons who are in sales or other occupations that can manipulate when and how they get paid. As an investor, you can delay sales of stocks and bonds (or accelerate) to meet tax goals. The poor shlub working for a paycheck has less flexibility.
What if these "wizzards" were paid in IOUs? OH - they are... it says on all paper money Federal Reserve Note. A note is an IOU. Perhaps if they were paid in Monopoly Money... OH - only the feds can print money - a monopoly. Guess we will just have to throw them in a body of water and see if they can float an anchor.
In response to:

The Fight for Voter Integrity in Florida

Sandy235 Wrote: Jun 12, 2012 4:08 PM
There is a law requiring Homeland Security to turn over their roll of non-citizens to the State. The Constitution leaves the power of voter eligibility to the individual States (hence Montana being one of the first to allow women to vote). Florida should just tell the AG to pound sand, and sue for the list. Continue to do what they are doing, and dare the AG to take action. If sued (in progress) have the court throw out the case for lack of standing.
In response to:

Egg on Face(book)

Sandy235 Wrote: May 29, 2012 12:12 PM
I object to calling these people "investors". An investor is one who puts money in a business to make it grow - it is a long term deal. These people are speculators, betting on the come.
In response to:

Moderates Only Look Dead

Sandy235 Wrote: May 10, 2012 11:36 AM
The only poll that counts is the one on a ballot. The opinions of those who do not vote are just that, opinions. I understand that when a vote goes against "common opinion" that it must be because of the stupidity of the voters. After all the pundits all have much higher IQs and learning. If you don't believe me, just ask them.
Previous 11 - 20 Next