|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
Re: I'm against Libertarians using epinions to further their political cause (Reply to this comment)
by matthewn
Oh, I see and whiny liberals don't use Epinions for their own gain? Liberals are the reasons why we all this poltical correctness BS, and why we can't get people to get off welfare.
THis man accurately explained why he liked his book, and you don't agree with it, so therefore you rate based on your biases, didn't you? Do I smell a whiny "tolerant" liberal?
matthewn
|
Aug 24 '02
2:11 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Preaching to the choir (Reply to this comment)
by jay1051971
Which reminds me of another point for Midoyle...
True.. There are SOME Libertarians who are near, if not outright, Anarchists. There are others, who simply want the Government to obey the Constitution. But to say that Libertarians are "isolationist" is completely off base. Like I said in the previous comment, Libertarians are pro-free trade and pro-open immigration. That is not in any sense "isolationist", and in fact quite the opposite. If you want an example of real isolationism, look at someone like Pat Buchanan who would just love to put a 50 foot high stone wall around our borders....
What Libertarians are opposed to, is being FORCED into relationships against their will. Libertarians are opposed to being FORCED to supporting foreign nations who they either may know nothing about, or care nothing about. And when government passes a law, or levies a tax to pursue these ends, they are forcing people into doing these things.
|
Apr 25 '02
6:27 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Also, to qualify Chomsky's point (Reply to this comment)
by jay1051971
Ginzo -
If Libertarians (and libertarians) have some good ideas, why don't you tell us what some of them are. Instead of being Mr. Negative all the time, why don't you try and be positive about and discuss what we agree on? Name me ONE issue you think we agree on.
And your "seperatist" comment is WAY off base. The fact is, Libertarians are all for fre etrade, and open immigration. That is not "seperatist", that is not "isolationist", and that certainly isn't racist...
|
Apr 25 '02
6:19 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Preaching to the choir (Reply to this comment)
by jay1051971
Midoyle...
You raise some good points, and I agree, the tax system must be fair, equitable, and I would add, respectful of individual liberty....
What you say about consumption taxes are true....BUT...there is a solution. Don't tax basic staples, like food and clothing. Those are things that everyone buys, and most states do not tax them.
There is another, very real alternative to the income tax. There has been a movement that has been really gaining momentum in the past few years, called the Fairtax. Their website is Fairtax.org, check it out. Basically, their goal is to repeal the income tax amendment, and substitute in its place an amendment to the Constitution authorizing a national sales tax. Now the kicker is, under their plan, the first X number of dollars of purchases (with X equally the poverty line) would be exempt from taxation. How would it be exempt? On a quarterly basis, everyone gets a rebate check in the mail for whatever amount is determined to represent that tax rate.
Personally, I think this is a great compromise. Although, I would just love to see the income taxed abolished, and the government restored to its Constitutional limits, the fact is, that probably won't happen. Too many people are addicted to having their lives dominated by their government masters. But this type of tax would lessen the burden... As all retailers collect sales taxes already, it would only require a minimal amount of extra work to document and collect the taxes, PLUS.. there would be no more need for every one to waste all the time, energy, and money preparing encumbersome tax forms. So a few CPAs will be lose some work..big deal. The net gain to us all would be enormous. Just think.. You would get to keep every dime you earned. No withholding.. And YOU could control what tax load you would incur through your decsision on what purchases you would make.
|
Apr 25 '02
6:14 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Also, to qualify Chomsky's point (Reply to this comment)
by Arthur.Rubin
Continuing ... among the 7 political parties in California, the American Independent and Reform parties, and to a lesser extent (proportionately), the Republicans, have the "white upper-class separatists" you're referring to. Libertarians probably have a lesser percentage of those.
|
Apr 25 '02
8:19 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Also, to qualify Chomsky's point (Reply to this comment)
by Arthur.Rubin
If people can't see The white upper class seperatists that dominate the libertarian party bent on leaving the less fortunate behind then I don't know what to tell ya.
That's because they're not there. Those are Republicans and populists (aka Ross Perot).
BTW, If you (ginzo) write a review which reviews a book, and attempts to promulgate your political point of view, whatever it may be, E-mail mail and I'll review it fairly. I don't consider the politics in the review, unless the review then inaccurately describes the book.
|
Apr 25 '02
8:16 am PDT
|
|
Re: Also, to qualify Chomsky's point (Reply to this comment)
by ginzo
Libertarians have a lot of good points and need them to keep their cause afloat.They put a magical spin on everything they touch much like the Nat. Enquirer.If you get caught up in their literature, you could be fooled. Their main objective is scary. If people can't see The white upper class seperatists that dominate the libertarian party bent on leaving the less fortunate behind then I don't know what to tell ya. Call me what you want. But, I'm smart enough to see what they are REALLY up to.
|
Apr 24 '02
11:09 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Preaching to the choir (Reply to this comment)
by MiDoyle
Everybody hates paying taxes but a consumption tax would be seen as even more unfair as it would then place an undue burden on the poor. They would pay even more. Most of their income goes to supporting themselves does it not? Then, most of thir income would be devoted to the consumption of services/goods, while people of greater means would always have more left over. [It's the same issue (fair and equitable taxation)but clothed in a different suit.]
And, I won't even get into the other loonier aspects of Libertarian philosophy: Anarchism, isolationism, and whole lot of other "isms" that really make them look goofy. It's amazing what google can find.
I voted for Pat Paulson as usual.
|
Apr 24 '02
10:32 am PDT
|
|
Also, to qualify Chomsky's point (Reply to this comment)
by girlboxer5
Chomsky's use of the word hate has nothing to do with racism. It, in fact, refers to the cutthroat sort of society that American Libertarianism if followed to the letter would bring about, i.e. bullying of the poorer members of said society by corporations and the rich.
For the record, racism DEFINITELY is NOT a Libertarian phenomenon, and even if I dislike certain portions of the Libertarian economic agenda, I admire them for this aspect of the ideology, as well as for the stands in supporting civil liberties... Racism and Libertarianism are inherently on opposite sides of the political coin.
Statement over, thank you for ignoring it LOL
|
Apr 24 '02
10:28 am PDT
|
|
I'm against Libertarians using epinions to further their political cause (Reply to this comment)
by ginzo
Hey Bryan,I mean Jay! Do I smell the thought police?!!
Author Rubin going to report another?
So hypocritical.
Lmfao
|
Apr 24 '02
8:57 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I'm against Libertarians using epinions to further their political cause (Reply to this comment)
by ginzo
Listen,
Jay and I have been ranting at each other for months now in comment sections.
Heck, we even trust each other. We don't need the cry baby raining on our political parade.
Jay has invaded my comment sections with way off topic comments. He has invaded my email with 100's of libertarian literature from months ago and I respond as I see necessary. We both have been guilty of getting a little out of line.
My chonsky quote is what it is. A quote. If I feel I'm not being listened to, (libertarians do a lot of talking and listen to no one)I will repeat myself if I think it is needed to be said again. Call me stupid. I offend no one personally.
Accusations and words by Authur rubin in this comment section are abusive.
Not me.
Chill.
|
Apr 24 '02
8:38 am PDT
|
|
ABUSE ?????? (Reply to this comment)
by ginzo
I simply posted a quote from a well known speaker about his thoughts on LibertARIANIZM. I did not use any part of your personal thoughts in this comment section nor did I bring you into this in any way.
I'm just trying to make the same point as Midoyle is making in his comment below.
The pattern of book reviews by Jay and Bryan are clear that they intend to use them to further their political cause.I find it appauling. I can speak about it too.
There is ALWAYS a personal libertARIAN point in every review.
There is NO abuse by me in this comment section and the words chosen by the almighty authur rubin can be considered abusive.
Not mine.
chill.
|
Apr 24 '02
8:10 am PDT
|
|
Re: I'm against Libertarians (ab) using epinions to further their political cause (Reply to this comment)
by jay1051971
Ginz...
I never said Chomsky wasn't smart, in fact quite the opposite. All I said were that his conclusions were off base. He has no sense of basic economic theory.
I also agree with him on some issues. I even did a review on a couple of his books.
|
Apr 23 '02
7:34 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Hell, since I'm here... (Reply to this comment)
by jay1051971
ROCK ON, BOX!!
|
Apr 23 '02
7:25 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Preaching to the choir (Reply to this comment)
by jay1051971
Midoyle..
Actually.. A major point of this book was that much of the wastefulness of government comes because it has the power to tap into a virtually unlimited supply of money. You can tax people at 99% of their earnings and they still have to get up in the morning to go to work to be able to put food on the table...
I understand your point about needing something to replace the income tax, but the fact of the matter is, if our government stuck to only doing those things it has constitutional authority to do (of which, providing a military is one), we could fund the Federal government with the tarriffs and excise taxes already being collected. There would be NO NEED to replace the income tax. We have a $2 Trillion+ budget for our federal government, and I would be willing to bet that 90% of the expenditures it makes are not authorized by the Constitution. (ok, well maybe 75%...but you get the point....)
As I have said below, if you really want a to have a superior tax system, consumption based taxation would be your answer.
|
Apr 23 '02
7:23 pm PDT
|
|
Hell, since I'm here... (Reply to this comment)
by girlboxer5
ya got my real VH :-D
Rock on,
Elizabeth
|
Apr 23 '02
3:31 pm PDT
|
|
Give me a break! (Reply to this comment)
by girlboxer5
Boy, I swore I was going to stay signed out and non-participating from Eps, but I gotta say something here:
Ginzo-- why on earth did you post that Chomsky quote I sent both you and Jay? I mean,I thought both of you would get a kick out of it. Jeez! And why did you post the first paragraph about elitism and "free speech" from my e-mail as a response to Jay's response to the quote I sent both of you privately? Godz above! That was a "private" e-mail to both of you! **shakes her head**
Arthur-- there's a thread going on at the Nest about the "abuse" in this comments section...why did you start it in response to this silliness? This is all really stupid!
Jay, I respect you, and while I agree with much of what was in the quote, I don't agree with all of it, OR with your economic beliefs, but ya know what, this is a heck of a review, which, were I still "participating," I would have VH'd (but we've already IM'd about all of this LMAO) ;-)
Ginzo-- suggestion: delete your comments-- I don't want you to end up kicked off of Eps if Abuse agrees with Arthur on this...
This is all so bloody stupid! Chill, people!
Rock on, Jay,
Elizabeth
|
Apr 23 '02
1:28 pm PDT
|
|
Preaching to the choir (Reply to this comment)
by MiDoyle
Jay:
Sorry, but this book is just another political screed. Without any suggestions to replace taxes, there's no benefit. The author is only preaching to the choir.
Getting rid of the tax system cannot be done without replacing it with a system (a fair and equitable one) that can fund needed programs and resources here in the USA. Charity would not be enough to fund needed programs. No serious person could ever believe that.
No one could even think of funding social security or even the military without some kind of taxation.
If the author were to suggest a practical alternative, I would take him him more seriously. And, I'm a GDI which is far beyond anything the libertarians have ever come up with. cheers
|
Apr 23 '02
10:14 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: I'm against Libertarians using epinions to further their political cause (Reply to this comment)
by ginzo
Right !! True reality!
|
Apr 23 '02
6:58 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: I'm against Libertarians using epinions to further their political cause (Reply to this comment)
by jay1051971
Thanks Art!
I've read some Chomsky. He's know alot of stuff.. But his conclusions are way off base, and he is, like you say, a leftist wacko...
|
Apr 22 '02
6:19 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I'm against Libertarians using epinions to further their political cause (Reply to this comment)
by Arthur.Rubin
ginzo:
Why do you think that a lot of people disagree with LibertARIANS ? Do you think we are all stupid??
No, I think you all either have government funding, or (in your case) are anti-white racists, as opposed to be being anti-white-racists.
|
Apr 22 '02
2:32 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: I'm against Libertarians using epinions to further their political cause (Reply to this comment)
by Arthur.Rubin
Chomsky is a fanatic. Bryan, Jay, and I are not.
Besides, that quote only needs to be placed once per review, or, preferably, on your Epinions home page so everyone can see you're being foolish, with pointers in comments.
Besides, what happened to the first copy?
Good work, Jay.
|
Apr 22 '02
2:24 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Re: I'm against Libertarians using epinions to further their political cause (Reply to this comment)
by ginzo
Don't accuse me of plagerizing when I;m not. It is properly placed and noted as a quote.Don't tell me what I can say or can't say.
What kind of libertarian endorsement of "freedom of speech" is
that? Pretty hypocritical, isn't it, to have that sort of an elitist, and asinine attitude that "you can only speak if you agree with me," when
in theory by your own ideology, you should be embracing all forms of free speech!
|
Apr 22 '02
7:32 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: I'm against Libertarians using epinions to further their political cause (Reply to this comment)
by ginzo
Why do you think that a lot of people disagree with LibertARIANS ? Do you think we are all stupid??
I can't complain to Epinions about the way you and Bryan abuse epininions for your political cause because your being careful how you do it and you can't get epinions to respond to much of anything, anyway.
I posted this qoute because it is from a highly intelligent person well versed on the subject where I am just touching the edge of LibertARIANism. I think it is worth the mention and it answered your question appropriately:
The American version of "libertarianism" is an aberration, though-- nobody really takes it seriously. I mean, everybody knows that a society that worked by American libertarian principles would self-destruct in three seconds. The only reason people pretend to take it seriously is because you can use it as a weapon. Like when somebody comes out in favor of a tax, you can say: "No, I'm a libertarian, I'm against that tax"-- but of course, I'm still in favor of the government building roads, and having schools, and killing Libyans, and all that sort of stuff.
Now there are consistent libertarians, people like Murray Rothbard-- and if you just read the world that they describe, it's a world so full of hate that no human being would want to live in it. This is a world where you don't have roads because you don't see any reason why you should cooperate in building a road that you're not going to use: if you want a road, you get together with a bunch of other people who are going to use that road and you build it, then you charge people to ride on it. If you don't like the pollution from somebody's automobile, you take them to court and you litigate it. Who would want to live in a world like that? It's a world built on hatred.
The whole thing's not even worth talkig about, though. First of all, it couldn't function for a second-- and if it could, all you'd want to do is get out or commit suicide or something. But this is a special American aberration, it's not really serious.
--Noam Chomsky, "Understanding Power: The Indispensable Chomsky"
|
Apr 22 '02
6:57 am PDT
|
|
Good review! (Reply to this comment)
by AdaDavis
Several European countries have a Value Added Tax. I rather like it, since unprocessed items- like raw food items, are not taxed. Each processing step adds to the tax. Buy raw veggies and make your own bread - no tax. Live on packaged junk food - taxed! Bicycle to work - no tax. Drive your Mercedes - tax on the car and the gas. Etc. Unfortunately, these countries have not eliminated the income tax; the VAT is in place of some of our sales taxes.
|
Apr 22 '02
6:08 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: I'm against Libertarians using epinions to further their political cause (Reply to this comment)
by jay1051971
Yes.. I know there is a lot of people who disagree with the Libertarian point of view. But that is not the issue. The issue is, why do you keep posting the same thing over and over again? If you are going to do that, then I would prefer that you do not post anything. No one reads it after the first time. All you do is show that you have no imagination to coherently express your point of view....
I will respond to any comment you make, so long as it is original.
And by the way.. If you don't like me, Bryan, or anyone else posting reviews on subjects you disagree with, I would suggest you lobby Epinions management to take all the books that offend you out of their database....
|
Apr 21 '02
6:00 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Government waste.... (Reply to this comment)
by jay1051971
Well, the author is critical of even a flat income tax, because it still allows the government to have the first claim over the results of all economic activity.
And I agree with your assessment about the efficiency of government, but the problem all lies with the income tax. Because the taxation of income creates virtually an unlimited resource pool to tap, there is no incentive for government to become more efficient. After all, you can keep raising taxes higher and higher, and people will still have to work (unless they want to starve). In the case with higher taxation, they will have to work harder and harder to just to maintain the same standard of living.
With consumption taxes however, if you raise taxes, the law of supply and demand kicks in. Higher prices will discourage people from buying, and government revenues eventually cap themselves, and then forces government to either become more efficient, or abandon the project.
|
Apr 21 '02
4:01 pm PDT
|
|
Government waste.... (Reply to this comment)
by pearl-drum-man
I think its obvious that the Government needs to maintain an income to provide for basic infastructure and services we all rely on daily. The point is, that the Government, if run efficiently, needs a fraction of what it takes to provide those things. I don't remember the numbers, but I read that a large percentage of every dollar taken from us to the Government is completely wasted. I too favor something along the consumption or flat tax mode, as you say, it taxes what you choose to consume, instead of taking %30 out of you without your consent. The other thing about taxes in general is how the system is setup to double and triple tax you all the way down the line.
Whats funny, is in just doing my state taxes, there's a section where I can claim items I bought out-of-state (like via the internet),I can offer to list that amount so I can offer up the taxes lost to the state of Ohio as if I bought them in state. Yeah right!
pearl-drum-man
|
Apr 21 '02
3:15 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Ginzo V Jay (Reply to this comment)
by jay1051971
Part 403.....
|
Apr 21 '02
8:46 am PDT
|
|
Ginzo V Jay (Reply to this comment)
by dedemw
I knew it would be here when I clicked the comments. I think it is time for a pay per view bout.
"I almost destroyed this book with my bare hands."
- But, can you do that to a phone book?
LOL-
I will just sit back and watch the battle.
|
Apr 21 '02
8:40 am PDT
|
|
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.