How much say should I have in your sex life?

[iustitia]

I'm a bit confused by progressive positions on sex. So sodomy laws, abortion restrictions and banning contraception are wrong because sex is a private matter. But why then can sexuality be protected from private discrimination and why can abortion and condoms be subsidized by the state?

If I'm paying for your condoms, is your sex a private matter? Ignoring the historically ugly roots of Planned Parenthood, isn't it inconsistent to force citizens to fund organizations primarily associated with sexual matters?

Are there any progressives here that would compromise on the issue so that tax-payers can fund general health services without subsidizing sexual matters?

[Mister D]

That's some cognitive dissonance there...

Good question.

[Crepitus]

I'm a bit confused by progressive positions on sex. So sodomy laws, abortion restrictions and banning contraception are wrong because sex is a private matter. But why then can sexuality be protected from private discrimination and why can abortion and condoms be subsidized by the state?

If I'm paying for your condoms, is your sex a private matter? Ignoring the historically ugly roots of Planned Parenthood, isn't it inconsistent to force citizens to fund organizations primarily associated with sexual matters?

Are there any progressives here that would compromise on the issue so that tax-payers can fund general health services without subsidizing sexual matters?
How about all those older folks on medicaid, should their medical procedures/records be public?

[Cigar]

You can say anything you want ... :laugh:

[nathanbforrest45]

In other words Cigar you don't know but want to be seen anyway!!


If you are paying for something you have the right to some input into the matter. If I am buying your condoms then I should have the right to tell you how often you can use them. Also if I am buying you condoms and you get pregnant anyway, well tough, no welfare for that little bastard.

[Cigar]

In other words Cigar you don't know but want to be seen anyway!!


If you are paying for something you have the right to some input into the matter. If I am buying your condoms then I should have the right to tell you how often you can use them. Also if I am buying you condoms and you get pregnant anyway, well tough, no welfare for that little $#@!.

Go ahead, try. :grin:

[Green Arrow]

I'm one progressive that will happily compromise on the issue, iustitia.

No more federal funding for Planned Parenthood and no federal funding for contraceptives. In exchange, I want all conscientious objectors to have immunity from their tax dollars going to fund wars and other foreign adventurism they don't approve of, as well as any other action or behavior they find morally reprehensible.

Do we have a deal?

[Matty]

I'm one progressive that will happily compromise on the issue, iustitia.

No more federal funding for Planned Parenthood and no federal funding for contraceptives. In exchange, I want all conscientious objectors to have immunity from their tax dollars going to fund wars and other foreign adventurism they don't approve of, as well as any other action or behavior they find morally reprehensible.

Do we have a deal?


I can can see where this might go. I want to tell people what to spend their food stamps on.

[Green Arrow]

I can can see where this might go. I want to tell people what to spend their food stamps on.

Not how this works. You can simply choose for your tax dollars to not go to food stamps. But you'll have to come up with a very convincing argument as to how funding food stamps would be morally objectionable.

[Matty]

Not how this works. You can simply choose for your tax dollars to not go to food stamps. But you'll have to come up with a very convincing argument as to how funding food stamps would be morally objectionable.



The waste and fraud is morally objectionable. Agreed?

[Cigar]

I'm one progressive that will happily compromise on the issue, iustitia.

No more federal funding for Planned Parenthood and no federal funding for contraceptives. In exchange, I want all conscientious objectors to have immunity from their tax dollars going to fund wars and other foreign adventurism they don't approve of, as well as any other action or behavior they find morally reprehensible.

Do we have a deal?

If you look as the Data, Teen Pregnancies and Unwanted Adult Pregnancies out of Wedlock are historically down.

That Proves the Success of the program.

Time to move on to real important issues that impact everyday Americans Each and Every Day.

[Cigar]

The waste and fraud is morally objectionable. Agreed?

Not as much as is wasted on Obamacare, Benghazi and Email Server Hearings. :laugh:

[Green Arrow]

The waste and fraud is morally objectionable. Agreed?

Not really, no. It's not morally objectionable, just politically and fiscally stupid.

[Green Arrow]

If you look as the Data, Teen Pregnancies and Unwanted Adult Pregnancies out of Wedlock are historically down.

That Proves the Success of the program.

Time to move on to real important issues that impact everyday Americans Each and Every Day.

Adults are talking, Cigar.

[Matty]

Not really, no. It's not morally objectionable, just politically and fiscally stupid.



Think of it this way. Those who use the system and are not entitled, or those who find ways around the rules and use the money friviously are depriving the really needy. That is morally objectionable.

[Green Arrow]

Think of it this way. Those who use the system and are not entitled, or those who find ways around the rules and use the money friviously are depriving the really needy. That is morally objectionable.

That's a fair point and I'd support that.

[Mister D]

I'm one progressive that will happily compromise on the issue, iustitia.

No more federal funding for Planned Parenthood and no federal funding for contraceptives. In exchange, I want all conscientious objectors to have immunity from their tax dollars going to fund wars and other foreign adventurism they don't approve of, as well as any other action or behavior they find morally reprehensible.

Do we have a deal?

Does anyone insist that defense is a deeply personal matter that the state should not interfere with in any way?

[Cigar]

Adults are talking, Cigar.

Getting OLD doesn't make you an Adult ... it just means you're Old :laugh:

[iustitia]

Does anyone insist that defense is a deeply personal matter that the state should not interfere with in any way?
LOL, "defense"?

[Mister D]

LOL, "defense"?

Of course. You can call it defense of imperial interests if that makes you more comfortable. Defense is a pretty generic, routine term for military spending, planning etc.

[iustitia]

To be fair, we offer religious groups conscientious objector status for war. So clearly imperialism is a deeply personal matter to some. I mean, I think it ought to be for anyone. Ought to be.

[Mister D]

To be fair, we offer religious groups conscientious objector status for war. So clearly imperialism is a deeply personal matter to some. I mean, I think it ought to be for anyone. Ought to be.

Ah, but it's the taking of human life that is a deeply personal and objectionable matter in that case. That is what the state accommodates. It does not accommodate a desire to not be involved in any capacity at all.

Moreover, the belief must be general. It cannot be an objection to a specific war but all war.

[Redrose]

I'm a bit confused by progressive positions on sex. So sodomy laws, abortion restrictions and banning contraception are wrong because sex is a private matter. But why then can sexuality be protected from private discrimination and why can abortion and condoms be subsidized by the state?

If I'm paying for your condoms, is your sex a private matter? Ignoring the historically ugly roots of Planned Parenthood, isn't it inconsistent to force citizens to fund organizations primarily associated with sexual matters?

Are there any progressives here that would compromise on the issue so that tax-payers can fund general health services without subsidizing sexual matters?


The government should stay out of our sex lives, as long as it is legal, not involving children or animals and all parties involved are consenting. Also, the government should not subsidize contraception or abortions. You want it, you pay for it, or private money supports it.

[iustitia]

Ah, but it's the taking of human life that is a deeply personal and objectionable matter in that case. That is what the state accommodates. It does not accommodate a desire to not be involved in any capacity at all.

Moreover, the belief must be general. It cannot be an objection to a specific war but all war.

Is not funding the taking of human life just as objectionable as if not equivalent to the taking of life? I'm not debating policy as it is.

[Mister D]

The reality of conscientious objector status is a great example of why one of the more common objections to religious exemptions is off base. It's oft heard that if we accommodate this or that then we must accommodate everything else. Or people will make sarcastic comments about how you should just claim your religion is against taxes if you don't like paying them. Well, no. It doesn't work that way. It's actually quite difficult to get a religious exemption. The belief in question must be historical (both in collective and personal terms) and it must be genuine.

[iustitia]

Cool. But like I said, wasn't debating what the law currently is. Generally though I would suggest that if what the government wants to do is so great it shouldn't have to fund it through the barrel of a gun.

[Mister D]

Is not funding the taking of human life just as objectionable as if not equivalent to the taking of life? I'm not debating policy as it is.

That's both reasonable and logical but it's beyond the bounds of the OP. I was responding specifically to the inconsistency you highlighted: if sexual matters are private and off limits than why does the taxpayer have to be involved? Pay for your own condoms. You can't apply that logic to an activity that is collective by definition. War mongers, as it were, don't argue from a right to privacy like progressives do regarding sexual matters.

[Mister D]

Cool. But like I said, wasn't debating what the law currently is. Generally though I would suggest that if what the government wants to do is so great it shouldn't have to fund it through the barrel of a gun.

I'm not disagreeing with you. On the contrary, I agree with the OP.

[iustitia]

That's both reasonable and logical but it's beyond the bounds of the OP. I was responding specifically to the inconsistency you highlighted: if sexual matters are private and off limits than why does the taxpayer have to be involved? Pay for your own condoms. You can't apply that logic to an activity that is collective by definition. War mongers, as it were, don't argue from a right to privacy like progressives do regarding sexual matters.

Ah. That's fair enough.

[Ransom]

I asked almost the same question since the AIDS crisis in America appeared. The gay community's agenda clearly claimed that what happened behind anyone's bedroom door wasn't the concern of the Government...... but then cried about being ignored when that behavior behind closed doors was engaging holocaust on the male gay community.

[Dr. Who]

Not how this works. You can simply choose for your tax dollars to not go to food stamps. But you'll have to come up with a very convincing argument as to how funding food stamps would be morally objectionable.
It would be really interesting if people could direct their tax dollars by percentage, how much voluntary funding would flow to the military and how much might flow to "social welfare" including PP.

[Mister D]

I asked almost the same question since the AIDS crisis in America appeared. The gay community's agenda clearly claimed that what happened behind anyone's bedroom door wasn't the concern of the Government...... but then cried about being ignored when that behavior behind closed doors was engaging holocaust on the male gay community. Excellent point.

[Green Arrow]

Does anyone insist that defense is a deeply personal matter that the state should not interfere with in any way?

Obviously not, it's hard to have national defense without state involvement.

[Lineman]

100% agree.


I'm one progressive that will happily compromise on the issue, iustitia.

No more federal funding for Planned Parenthood and no federal funding for contraceptives. In exchange, I want all conscientious objectors to have immunity from their tax dollars going to fund wars and other foreign adventurism they don't approve of, as well as any other action or behavior they find morally reprehensible.

Do we have a deal?

[Subdermal]

Not how this works. You can simply choose for your tax dollars to not go to food stamps. But you'll have to come up with a very convincing argument as to how funding food stamps would be morally objectionable.

Now you have to come up with an argument? Before, you were all about simply being able to withhold funding for that which you found morally objectionable!

This is as it has always been: only what liberals want - because I'll accept your deal, and withhold my money from DPE and a MASSIVE laundry list of BS programs that do not work, and - as such - are morally objectionable.

[Subdermal]

If you look as the Data, Teen Pregnancies and Unwanted Adult Pregnancies out of Wedlock are historically down.

That Proves the Success of the program.

Time to move on to real important issues that impact everyday Americans Each and Every Day.

And open carry causes crime to decrease.

Welcome to the NRA.

[Subdermal]

Getting OLD doesn't make you an Adult ... it just means you're Old :laugh:

This refreshingly critical self-analysis brought to you by Cigar. POTD.

[Green Arrow]

Now you have to come up with an argument? Before, you were all about simply being able to withhold funding for that which you found morally objectionable!

This is as it has always been: only what liberals want - because I'll accept your deal, and withhold my money from DPE and a MASSIVE laundry list of BS programs that do not work, and - as such - are morally objectionable.

My statement would also protect people like Kim Davis, so you can take your labeling and shove it.

[Bob]

I'm one progressive that will happily compromise on the issue, iustitia.

No more federal funding for Planned Parenthood and no federal funding for contraceptives. In exchange, I want all conscientious objectors to have immunity from their tax dollars going to fund wars and other foreign adventurism they don't approve of, as well as any other action or behavior they find morally reprehensible.

Do we have a deal?

The FAIR TAX would solve most of your problems.

[Green Arrow]

The FAIR TAX would solve most of your problems.

It wouldn't solve any of them. Limit how much I'm being taxed and my tax money is still going to fund things I object to, both on a personal and moral basis.

[Common]

It wouldn't solve any of them. Limit how much I'm being taxed and my tax money is still going to fund things I object to, both on a personal and moral basis.

Thats a perspective I never viewed it from and its the truth. Along with that however, is that the fair tax is a windfall for the rich. Yet the poor ass and lower income middleclass rightwingers comon forums and tout it. That amazes me

[Bob]

Not how this works. You can simply choose for your tax dollars to not go to food stamps. But you'll have to come up with a very convincing argument as to how funding food stamps would be morally objectionable.

Sorry but they are already told what to spend their food funds for. They may not buy booze or they break the law is one instance. I don't know just when, but they don't hand out food stamps today. You are issued a card that looks exactly like a credit card. The card is swiped and the money is transferred. If the purchase tries to buy banned items, the clerk can't check it in.

[Bob]

http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Bob http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=1276571#post1276571)
The FAIR TAX would solve most of your problems.


It wouldn't solve any of them. Limit how much I'm being taxed and my tax money is still going to fund things I object to, both on a personal and moral basis.

The FAIR tax would solve many of your problems but there is no way to get your will carried out on what you seek. So you ask for the impossible from Justitia.

[Bob]

Not as much as is wasted on Obamacare, Benghazi and Email Server Hearings. :laugh:

Here is the major hole in the food stamp program.

You can simply use them as an ATM and use the money obtained on drugs or booze or prostitutes.

[Common]

I have no problem limiting what people on food stamps can buy with the actual stamps. For example, booze, cigarettes. Food Stamps should be for buying food especially for children so they never go hungry. Anyone who is reasonable should feel the same way.

I think there is a lack of knowledge by some on just who is getting food stamps. I dont know who gets more foodstamps than anyone else. I do know there are many once middleclass people on foodstamps because their jobs are in china and they cant find work to sustain them here.

How right wing posters cant grasp what the rich and corporations are doing to this country amazes me.
I have no choice to feel that intelligent people are just being partisan hacks and trolls.

[Bob]

Thats a perspective I never viewed it from and its the truth. Along with that however, is that the fair tax is a windfall for the rich. Yet the poor ass and lower income middleclass rightwingers comon forums and tout it. That amazes me

The FAIR TAX puts vast funds into the hands of the poor and the middle class. And now that you know that, why do you object? As it stands, the rich pay no income tax to buy a huge home. But the FAIR tax slaps them with a large tax on that home.

[AeonPax]

I'm a bit confused by progressive positions on sex. So sodomy laws, abortion restrictions and banning contraception are wrong because sex is a private matter. But why then can sexuality be protected from private discrimination and why can abortion and condoms be subsidized by the state? If I'm paying for your condoms, is your sex a private matter? Ignoring the historically ugly roots of Planned Parenthood, isn't it inconsistent to force citizens to fund organizations primarily associated with sexual matters?Are there any progressives here that would compromise on the issue so that tax-payers can fund general health services without subsidizing sexual matters?
`
Health care, with or without government subsidies, is primarily interested in maintaining your health by preventing harm to your body. Insurance companies champion this approach to health which is why providing condoms and birth control are usually covered, unless you work at a Christian, Islamic or other religious facility. This isn't progressive thought though; it's common sense.

[Bob]

I have no problem limiting what people on food stamps can buy with the actual stamps. For example, booze, cigarettes. Food Stamps should be for buying food especially for children so they never go hungry. Anyone who is reasonable should feel the same way.

I think there is a lack of knowledge by some on just who is getting food stamps. I dont know who gets more foodstamps than anyone else. I do know there are many once middleclass people on foodstamps because their jobs are in china and they cant find work to sustain them here.

How right wing posters cant grasp what the rich and corporations are doing to this country amazes me.
I have no choice to feel that intelligent people are just being partisan hacks and trolls.

I will give you the same shot I give to every left winger.

Explain to me how Oprah Winfrey is ultra greedy due to her vast income each year. She has made, that I know of, 450 million dollars in 12 months.

Tell me what you would do to her.

[Bob]

`
Health care, with or without government subsidies, is primarily interested in maintaining your health by preventing harm to your body. Insurance companies champion this approach to health which is why providing condoms and birth control are usually covered, unless you work at a Christian, Islamic or other religious facility. This isn't progressive thought though; it's common sense.

Except for one thing. The Government knows and preaches the fact of a good diet yet does not supply the common citizen with good healthy food. We pay for our own food.

Progressives seem to see sex as a government matter and that is why Justitia asked the question.

[Common]

The FAIR TAX puts vast funds into the hands of the poor and the middle class. And now that you know that, why do you object? As it stands, the rich pay no income tax to buy a huge home. But the FAIR tax slaps them with a large tax on that home.

The first ones to spout and tout the fair tax was the x texas congressman and Steve Forbes.

When Forbes ran for president on the fair tax his numbers showed he would get 60% reduction in taxs and make hundreds of millions and a middle class worker would pay more.

15% fair tax is a windfall for the rich and it costs lower middleclass more in taxs.

Ah just thought of the congressmans name that always touted the fair tax. Dick Armey

[Bob]

The first ones to spout and tout the fair tax was the x texas congressman and Steve Forbes.

When Forbes ran for president on the fair tax his numbers showed he would get 60% reduction in taxs and make hundreds of millions and a middle class worker would pay more.

15% fair tax is a windfall for the rich and it costs lower middleclass more in taxs.

Ah just thought of the congressmans name that always touted the fair tax. Dick Armey

I nor you can prove your numbers on the so called savings.

But the fact is, the FAIR tax gives cash to the poor and middle class. They spend it and move the economy forward.

The general person anti the FAIR TAX has yet to read the two books that fully explain it.

Actually the RICH, and this is my view, should pay no more than 5 percent. The Income tax law got approved and made part of the constitution based on that very premise.

[Bob]

The FAIR TAX has been brought to congress several times only to get killed by Democrats. They want no part of the poor or middle class getting cash payments monthly from the government.

And this of course would really make the economy hum.

[Common]

I nor you can prove your numbers on the so called savings.

But the fact is, the FAIR tax gives cash to the poor and middle class. They spend it and move the economy forward.

The general person anti the FAIR TAX has yet to read the two books that fully explain it.

Actually the RICH, and this is my view, should pay no more than 5 percent. The Income tax law got approved and made part of the constitution based on that very premise.

Bob if the top tax rate is 35% which it is now and we do a fair tax at 15% do you need more math than that ?

Retirees making 40-60,000 retired pay around 9% adjusted tax. Make the tax rate 15% WHO gets an increase.

Listen bob NOTHING the republicans push or tout ever helps anyone but the rich and corporate america. All one has to do is just LOOK at congressional voting.

The fair tax is a windfall for the rich at everyone elses expense

[Crepitus]

I asked almost the same question since the AIDS crisis in America appeared. The gay community's agenda clearly claimed that what happened behind anyone's bedroom door wasn't the concern of the Government...... but then cried about being ignored when that behavior behind closed doors was engaging holocaust on the male gay community.
This I think is a decent argument for the Government paying for people's condoms. You could look at it as a preventative matter, people without disease cost the public less.

[Bob]

The first ones to spout and tout the fair tax was the x texas congressman and Steve Forbes.

When Forbes ran for president on the fair tax his numbers showed he would get 60% reduction in taxs and make hundreds of millions and a middle class worker would pay more.

15% fair tax is a windfall for the rich and it costs lower middleclass more in taxs.

Ah just thought of the congressmans name that always touted the fair tax. Dick Armey

I corrected your comments in a new thread.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_For_Fair_Taxation

Actually it is a grass roots operation.

[Bob]

This I think is a decent argument for the Government paying for people's condoms. You could look at it as a preventative matter, people without disease cost the public less.

When the Feds hand benefits to states, every time, they put strings on.

Do you want homosexuals to have strings put onto them by the funding of them by the Feds?

[Bob]

Bob if the top tax rate is 35% which it is now and we do a fair tax at 15% do you need more math than that ?

Retirees making 40-60,000 retired pay around 9% adjusted tax. Make the tax rate 15% WHO gets an increase.

Listen bob NOTHING the republicans push or tout ever helps anyone but the rich and corporate america. All one has to do is just LOOK at congressional voting.

The fair tax is a windfall for the rich at everyone elses expense

We are not treated equally per the constitution and I have hoped the Supreme court could solve this.

You should try for fair. Equal treatment is fair. The rich get shafted.

i realize they have a lot of money, but the 14th amendment calls for equal treatment.

You would stop paying any income tax. If you want to spend a hell of a lot, because you can, your taxes go up. But you get that windfall payment each month. It is there to offset what you paid.

I do not agree republicans are for the rich. When I figured out that lie, I converted to being republican. Besides, I support a fair and equal use of the constitution. This is the amendment the homosexuals claim gave them marriage. Apply the 14th amendment to the income tax law and tell me if that changes your mind.

[Bob]

Bob if the top tax rate is 35% which it is now and we do a fair tax at 15% do you need more math than that ?

Retirees making 40-60,000 retired pay around 9% adjusted tax. Make the tax rate 15% WHO gets an increase.

Listen bob NOTHING the republicans push or tout ever helps anyone but the rich and corporate america. All one has to do is just LOOK at congressional voting.

The fair tax is a windfall for the rich at everyone elses expense
Common

First my friend, I have not pointed out prior to this, you do not understand the FAIR TAX law.

I suggest you google it to get accurate data from the group's site. There are 2 good books published. I read both.

Your tax rates are way off on the FAIR TAX. It has no 35 percent rate nor 15 percent rate.

It replaces the income tax law. The income tax law is not FAIR. It is distorted to harm one group of citizens.

[Common]

I corrected your comments in a new thread.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_For_Fair_Taxation

Actually it is a grass roots operation.

Yes dick armey started that group and 800,000 richer than average members isnt going to change anything.

Dick Armey and Forbes were the first to tout it both rich of course

[Green Arrow]

The FAIR tax would solve many of your problems but there is no way to get your will carried out on what you seek. So you ask for the impossible from Justitia.

Actually, there is a way to do it, but there's no political will to do it. The special interests buying our politicians would never allow the American people the right to choose where their tax money goes.

[Common]

@Common (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=659)

First my friend, I have not pointed out prior to this, you do not understand the FAIR TAX law.

I suggest you google it to get accurate data from the group's site. There are 2 good books published. I read both.

Your tax rates are way off on the FAIR TAX. It has no 35 percent rate nor 15 percent rate.

It replaces the income tax law. The income tax law is not FAIR. It is distorted to harm one group of citizens.


Bob you didnt read my post correctly, I realize it replaces the tax code and in the tax code right now

Is a 35% top tax rate and corporate tax rate, the 15% fair tax does what then bob ?

[Common]

Actually, there is a way to do it, but there's no political will to do it. The special interests buying our politicians would never allow the American people the right to choose where their tax money goes.

That isnt the biggest mt to climb GA. You cant expect americans to go for a huge decrease in taxs for the rich and a hike for the middleclass. Unless its graduated and not slightly

[Green Arrow]

That isnt the biggest mt to climb GA. You cant expect americans to go for a huge decrease in taxs for the rich and a hike for the middleclass. Unless its graduated and not slightly

It is the biggest mountain to climb. Allow the American people to choose where their tax money goes and the special interests will be forced to fund their own projects instead of forcing us to fund them. That is the opening salvo in the war to get freedom back in the hands of Americans.

[Matty]

It is the biggest mountain to climb. Allow the American people to choose where their tax money goes and the special interests will be forced to fund their own projects instead of forcing us to fund them. That is the opening salvo in the war to get freedom back in the hands of Americans.
How about if we choose for our money to go nowhere? If you gave me a choice I wouldn't spend a dime on anything.

[Green Arrow]

How about if we choose for our money to go nowhere? If you gave me a choice I wouldn't spend a dime on anything.

I support eliminating the income tax.

[Bob]

Yes dick armey started that group and 800,000 richer than average members isnt going to change anything.

Dick Armey and Forbes were the first to tout it both rich of course

Come forth and prove please.

This is the truth.
AFFT was founded in 1994 by three Houston businessmen, Jack Trotter (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jack_Trotter&action=edit&redlink=1), Bob McNair (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_C._McNair), andLeo Linbeck, Jr. (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Leo_Linbeck,_Jr.&action=edit&redlink=1), who each pledged $1.5 million as seed money to hire tax experts to identify what they perceived as faults with the current tax system, to determine what American citizens would like to see in tax reform, and then to design the best system of taxation.[4] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_For_Fair_Taxation#cite_note-ABKS-4) The three went on to raise an additional $17 million to fund focus groups with citizens around the country and tax policy studies.[4] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_For_Fair_Taxation#cite_note-ABKS-4)
Some of the experts funded include:

Professors David Burton (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Burton_(lawyer)&action=edit&redlink=1) and Dan Mastromarco (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dan_Mastromarco&action=edit&redlink=1), University of Maryland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Maryland,_College_Park) and The Argus Group
Laurence Kotlikoff (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurence_Kotlikoff), Boston University (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_University)
Stephen Moore (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Moore_(economist)), The Cato Institute (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cato_Institute)
Professor Dale Jorgenson (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dale_Jorgenson), Harvard University (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_University)
Bill Beach (economist) (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bill_Beach_(economist)&action=edit&redlink=1), the Heritage Foundation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritage_Foundation)
Jim Poterba (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jim_Poterba&action=edit&redlink=1), The National Bureau of Economic Research (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bureau_of_Economic_Research)
Professor George Zodrow (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=George_Zodrow&action=edit&redlink=1), Rice University (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice_University) and the Baker Institute for Public Policy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Baker_Institute)
Professor Joseph Kahn (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joseph_Kahn_(economist)&action=edit&redlink=1), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Institute_of_Technology)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_For_Fair_Taxation#History

[Bob]

I support eliminating the income tax.

Which the FAIR tax accomplishes. Maybe you are being won over to the FAIR TAX.

[Bob]

That isnt the biggest mt to climb GA. You cant expect americans to go for a huge decrease in taxs for the rich and a hike for the middleclass. Unless its graduated and not slightly

I ask you one more time. Apply the 14th amendment to your own argument.

Justify to us all why one group must be treated unequal.

You promote an unfair system.

[Common Sense]

Grassroots billionares.

[Bob]

Actually, there is a way to do it, but there's no political will to do it. The special interests buying our politicians would never allow the American people the right to choose where their tax money goes.

You are admitting this "way to do it" is impossible.

Why then bring it up?

[Crepitus]

When the Feds hand benefits to states, every time, they put strings on.

Do you want homosexuals to have strings put onto them by the funding of them by the Feds?
Like what?

[Bob]

Grassroots billionares.

The poor have no means to do such studies. I remind you there is nothing wrong with billionaires. If there was, you would examine Oprah Winfrey and explain to us how bad she is.

This is the challenge.

Examine her and explain why she sucks?

[Bob]

http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Bob http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=1276884#post1276884)
When the Feds hand benefits to states, every time, they put strings on.

Do you want homosexuals to have strings put onto them by the funding of them by the Feds?


Like what?

Sounds as if that if I can tell you some, you accept them.

[Bob]

Bob you didnt read my post correctly, I realize it replaces the tax code and in the tax code right now

Is a 35% top tax rate and corporate tax rate, the 15% fair tax does what then bob ?

Why are you talking of a tax rate that would not exist in the FAIR TAX?

[Crepitus]

Sounds as if that if I can tell you some, you accept them.
Like what Bob, what kinda strings could be attached to people by including condoms in the healthcare?

[AeonPax]

Except for one thing. The Government knows and preaches the fact of a good diet yet does not supply the common citizen with good healthy food. We pay for our own food. Progressives seem to see sex as a government matter and that is why Justitia asked the question.
`
The government provides food stamps so citizens can buy their own food. Such a concept is hardly progressive. If the citizen, despite all the available information on a good diet, chooses to spend that money on junk food, then so be it. On the other hand, such diets seem to encourage obesity and/or vitamin deficiency and become an expensive health concern. To a certain extent, I agree that some people cannot be trusted to spend their food dollars wisely and should instead, be given food directly from the government, like in the 50's.

[Bob]

`
The government provides food stamps so citizens can buy their own food. Such a concept is hardly progressive. If the citizen, despite all the available information on a good diet, chooses to spend that money on junk food, then so be it. On the other hand, such diets seem to encourage obesity and/or vitamin deficiency and become an expensive health concern. To a certain extent, I agree that some people cannot be trusted to spend their food dollars wisely and should instead, be given food directly from the government, like in the 50's.

Actually states provide, if you can prove to them you need them, a free EBT card that looks like any credit card.

The key is prove. I believe you call for free things to prevent the birth of children. And you did not qualify who gets them.

I worked at a food bank and there we served the poor. We did not make them fill out a dozen forms. We got the name, address and minor details to identify them since we did not give each of them a full basket of groceries daily but had limits on how often per month they got served. A family got more food than a single person, but the single got at least a grocery store basket amount. And those not able to make use of the basket could get free lunches for the asking.

Compare that to the cold way you get treated by Government.

[Bob]

Like what Bob, what kinda strings could be attached to people by including condoms in the healthcare?

First, if you have enjoyed going to your local DMV or other government agencies for the benefits you want handed out, expect a long wait in line. And if you need a condom to have sex, probably it is to shield yourself from your sex partner. A better selection of partners must be available.

Strings are automatic when Government gets involved. But if you never visited government offices, you just have not yet learned.

[Green Arrow]

Which the FAIR tax accomplishes. Maybe you are being won over to the FAIR TAX.

Bob, the Fair Tax won't solve a single problem I have mentioned in this thread except the elimination of the income tax. It's not a religious doctrine for me like it is for you.

[Bob]

Bob, the Fair Tax won't solve a single problem I have mentioned in this thread except the elimination of the income tax. It's not a religious doctrine for me like it is for you.

You can't use a few hundred dollars per month for free?

So, in your small world, this is religious to me?

[Green Arrow]

You are admitting this "way to do it" is impossible.

Why then bring it up?

No, Bob, it's not impossible. There's just no political will to do it. That doesn't mean it's impossible, just that right now, the dickheads we have in office won't do it.

So change the dickheads and it becomes possible.

[Green Arrow]

You can't use a few hundred dollars per month for free?

We can do that without the "Fair Tax."


So, in your small world, this is religious to me?

You're trying to convert everybody to the religion of the fair tax just like you try to convert people to Mormonism.

[Bob]

No, Bob, it's not impossible. There's just no political will to do it. That doesn't mean it's impossible, just that right now, the dickheads we have in office won't do it.

So change the dickheads and it becomes possible.

In other words, you just speculated. And you still admit that today it is not possible.

[Bob]

We can do that without the "Fair Tax."



You're trying to convert everybody to the religion of the fair tax just like you try to convert people to Mormonism.

Sure we could hand you cash with no fair tax, but then we would still have the super unfair tax we today have.

I don't try to convert any posters. If they read my seldom explanations and they decide, it is up to them.

In my world, what's your name, taxes are not religion. They are government.

[Green Arrow]

In other words, you just speculated. And you still admit that today it is not possible.

I've said the exact opposite of that, Bob, but if that's what helps you sleep at night, continue believing incorrectly.

[Captain Obvious]

How about all those older folks on medicaid, should their medical procedures/records be public?

To a degree, what is covered and what isn't is up to public discretion.

Your question is almost akin to saying "ACME Co. covers your birth control pills, so we want videos of you schtupping, just to make sure you're not abusing our benefit".

[Captain Obvious]

To the extent that the OP is a fair point there are a lot of ambiguities.

The US Postal Service has laws on what we can deliver through the mail but that doesn't give them a basis to censor us in say publications.

Sodomy laws came from old English law and have since become obsolete, those that are still lingering on the books that is. Still there is no connection between those laws and federally funded benefits.

[Bob]

I've said the exact opposite of that, Bob, but if that's what helps you sleep at night, continue believing incorrectly.


Now it is possible right now?

That is not what you said earlier.

[Bob]

I've said the exact opposite of that, Bob, but if that's what helps you sleep at night, continue believing incorrectly.

To remind you

http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Green Arrow http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=1277250#post1277250)
No, Bob, it's not impossible. There's just no political will to do it. That doesn't mean it's impossible, just that right now, the dickheads we have in office won't do it.

So change the dickheads and it becomes possible.


Going on and on why it is not done is not the case to prove it is possible today. I don't deal very well with maybes and way out in some foggy future.

[Crepitus]

First, if you have enjoyed going to your local DMV or other government agencies for the benefits you want handed out, expect a long wait in line. And if you need a condom to have sex, probably it is to shield yourself from your sex partner. A better selection of partners must be available.

Strings are automatic when Government gets involved. But if you never visited government offices, you just have not yet learned.

The DMV? Be serious Bob. Go to the CVS, wave your card at the clerk, leave with your condom. Also they aren't necessarily for protecting you from your partner. They prevent pregnancy as well you know.

[Green Arrow]

To remind you


Going on and on why it is not done is not the case to prove it is possible today. I don't deal very well with maybes and way out in some foggy future.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it think.

[Crepitus]

To a degree, what is covered and what isn't is up to public discretion.

Your question is almost akin to saying "ACME Co. covers your birth control pills, so we want videos of you schtupping, just to make sure you're not abusing our benefit".

But isn't that what the op is getting at?

[Captain Obvious]

But isn't that what the op is getting at?

Ask the OP.

I'll gladly review the films for accuracy.

[Crepitus]

Ask the OP.

I'll gladly review the films for accuracy.

Fine, but this time your bringing the beer.

[Bob]

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it think.

I may get you to drink at some point.

If this was reversed, you would be all over me telling me to think before typing.

[Bob]

The DMV? Be serious Bob. Go to the CVS, wave your card at the clerk, leave with your condom. Also they aren't necessarily for protecting you from your partner. They prevent pregnancy as well you know.

I am talking of getting the card to begin with. Sure, so is it your intention to involve government in the sex of people?

[Crepitus]

I am talking of getting the card to begin with. Sure, so is it your intention to involve government in the sex of people?
How does including condoms in healthcare "involve government in the sex of people"?

[Captain Obvious]

How does including condoms in healthcare "involve government in the sex of people"?

Because the ACA is fucking the middle class with it's pants on.

The least it could do is provide the condoms.

...and breakfast

[Bob]

How does including condoms in healthcare "involve government in the sex of people"?

Same way shooting animals gets the government involved. They simply intrude.

[Crepitus]

Same way shooting animals gets the government involved. They simply intrude.
And do what?

[Bob]

And do what?

Well, in the case of animals tell you where to hunt or not hunt, when to hunt and when to stop.

In your case, they may hold your hand at the store you named. I dunno, try using your imagination.

[Tahuyaman]

How about all those older folks on medicaid, should their medical procedures/records be public?

if I was old enough to be on Medicaid and still needed condoms and contraceptives, I'd have no problem with the world knowing that.

[Crepitus]

Well, in the case of animals tell you where to hunt or not hunt, when to hunt and when to stop.

In your case, they may hold your hand at the store you named. I dunno, try using your imagination.

So you have issues with hunting licenses/seasons? I don't really see how they relate.

[Crepitus]

if I was old enough to be on Medicaid and still needed condoms and contraceptives, I'd have no problem with the world knowing that.

Point.

[Bob]

So you have issues with hunting licenses/seasons? I don't really see how they relate.


When Dad owned 20 acres where deer roamed, it was a hell of a pain in the ass to get a hunting permit given the deer wandered in over his property. So, sure, I have issues.

[donttread]

I'm a bit confused by progressive positions on sex. So sodomy laws, abortion restrictions and banning contraception are wrong because sex is a private matter. But why then can sexuality be protected from private discrimination and why can abortion and condoms be subsidized by the state?

If I'm paying for your condoms, is your sex a private matter? Ignoring the historically ugly roots of Planned Parenthood, isn't it inconsistent to force citizens to fund organizations primarily associated with sexual matters?

Are there any progressives here that would compromise on the issue so that tax-payers can fund general health services without subsidizing sexual matters?

The bottom line is that mass media has taken "sex sells" to the Nth degree and we are an over sexualized society with a bunch of sexually irresponsible grown ups raising another generation to be sexually irresponsible. I mean if you cannot locate and afford condoms on your own you probably shouldn't be having sex whether your 16 or 46. But were all of you so sexually responsible in your youth? I wasn't. It was of course a kinder, gentler time when STD's were cured with cold shots on PCN .
But despite all our efforts people tend to act like people. Stupid

[Ransom]

The bottom line is that mass media has taken "sex sells" to the Nth degree and we are an over sexualized society with a bunch of sexually irresponsible grown ups raising another generation to be sexually irresponsible. I mean if you cannot locate and afford condoms on your own you probably shouldn't be having sex whether your 16 or 46. But were all of you so sexually responsible in your youth? I wasn't. It was of course a kinder, gentler time when STD's were cured with cold shots on PCN .
But despite all our efforts people tend to act like people. Stupid

What say you're Sandra Fluke and cannot locate bc on your own?

[Crepitus]

When Dad owned 20 acres where deer roamed, it was a hell of a pain in the ass to get a hunting permit given the deer wandered in over his property. So, sure, I have issues.
How horrible that you had to get a permit. Gosh, that must have taken minutes on end out of your day! And all that pain and agony just to prevent over hunting of those damn deer so they could continue to wander onto your property where you could hunt them. What a waste of time, energy, and resources!

[donttread]

What say you're Sandra Fluke and cannot locate bc on your own?

I say just about anyone can afford condoms and they unlike the pill offer some disease protection too

[donttread]

When Dad owned 20 acres where deer roamed, it was a hell of a pain in the ass to get a hunting permit given the deer wandered in over his property. So, sure, I have issues.

But dead deer tell no tales

[Bob]

How horrible that you had to get a permit. Gosh, that must have taken minutes on end out of your day! And all that pain and agony just to prevent over hunting of those damn deer so they could continue to wander onto your property where you could hunt them. What a waste of time, energy, and resources!

This is the problem with engaging the left wingers.

They really don't care. And this is why I have such problems with government. They don't care as well.

Minutes to get a permit? Not where Dad lived.

[Bob]

But dead deer tell no tales

Dead deer made for some nice meals at Dad's home.

[Bob]

The bottom line is that mass media has taken "sex sells" to the Nth degree and we are an over sexualized society with a bunch of sexually irresponsible grown ups raising another generation to be sexually irresponsible. I mean if you cannot locate and afford condoms on your own you probably shouldn't be having sex whether your 16 or 46. But were all of you so sexually responsible in your youth? I wasn't. It was of course a kinder, gentler time when STD's were cured with cold shots on PCN .
But despite all our efforts people tend to act like people. Stupid

There are major problems with far too many citizens. Yet the Feds don't pay for those.

Let's take a look,.

Dental care

Dental care is a lot more important than condoms, yet Dental care is not part of Medicare.

Imagine that, the female wanting BC can get it paid for by the Feds, yet she can't get toothpaste or mouthwash delivered for free. Even the old are denied dental care.

Then our doctors. We expect a reasonable price from our doctors. But when he cuts a visit fee from $140 to $100, then gets the shaft by the Feds who pay him $16, is that right?

A few fewer pills to keep from getting pregnant or condoms and by golly, our doctors just might get fair treatment.

Would you want to get paid fractions of your paycheck at your job?

When you shaft your doctor, how well will he treat you?

[Crepitus]

This is the problem with engaging the left wingers.

They really don't care. And this is why I have such problems with government. They don't care as well.

Minutes to get a permit? Not where Dad lived.
Takes minutes to get one here. buy them online.

[Bob]

Takes minutes to get one here. buy them online.

Dad died in December of 1995 and never once used the internet. Hunting permits on line 20 years ago? I don't believe there were.

The major issue actually is when the deer came onto his land, they belonged to him at that moment. If he killed one, it was to provide food for him and Mom. No permits were used because on his land he was king.

[Crepitus]

Dad died in December of 1995 and never once used the internet. Hunting permits on line 20 years ago? I don't believe there were.

The major issue actually is when the deer came onto his land, they belonged to him at that moment. If he killed one, it was to provide food for him and Mom. No permits were used because on his land he was king.

Actually, IIRC in the U.S. you may own the property but you don't own the game that passes through it.

[Bob]

Actually, IIRC in the U.S. you may own the property but you don't own the game that passes through it.

Deer ended up in the freezer. How could the government figure it out? Don't you own the meat in your freezer?

[Crepitus]

Deer ended up in the freezer. How could the government figure it out? Don't you own the meat in your freezer?
I'm not saying you didn't do it. I'm saying you didn't do it legally.

[Bob]

I'm not saying you didn't do it. I'm saying you didn't do it legally.


Not to make a switch, but what you told me is that the Government by law has the right to take away my fathers rights.

Strange argument.

[Crepitus]

Not to make a switch, but what you told me is that the Government by law has the right to take away my fathers rights.

Strange argument.
No, what I said was:
Actually, IIRC in the U.S. you may own the property but you don't own the game that passes through it.Meaning you still need a tag to shoot a deer on your own property in most cases.

[Bob]

No, what I said was:Meaning you still need a tag to shoot a deer on your own property in most cases.

Meaning the government rather than protecting your rights as a property owner, took away your rights.
Dad rejected that idea and that is why he had deer in his freezer.

I never got a "taste" for deer. Still like beef and pork better.

[Crepitus]

Meaning the government rather than protecting your rights as a property owner, took away your rights.
Dad rejected that idea and that is why he had deer in his freezer.

I never got a "taste" for deer. Still like beef and pork better.
which is why I said he did it illegally.

My father is a beef farmer so I'm pretty big on beef as well. And I get the gooood stuff too.

[Bob]

which is why I said he did it illegally.

My father is a beef farmer so I'm pretty big on beef as well. And I get the gooood stuff too.

I have the pistol right now, right here, right in front of me, that Dad used to kill his deer.

I wish good beef that is affordable were still easy to get.

[Crepitus]

I have the pistol right now, right here, right in front of me, that Dad used to kill his deer.

I wish good beef that is affordable were still easy to get.
I've never even tried to get a deer with a pistol. I usually use my old 30.06.

If you were closer I could hook you up, but shipping from KS to CA will eat up any savings I could pass on to you.

[Bob]

I've never even tried to get a deer with a pistol. I usually use my old 30.06.

If you were closer I could hook you up, but shipping from KS to CA will eat up any savings I could pass on to you.

This pistol is a long rifle .22 cal and dad took down an Elk once with this pistol. Dad of course was an excellent shooter.

Yes, shipping costs are pretty high. Thanks for the thought. The simple truth is it is very seldom I eat beef unless in the form of a hamburger.

[Crepitus]

This pistol is a long rifle .22 cal and dad took down an Elk once with this pistol. Dad of course was an excellent shooter.

Yes, shipping costs are pretty high. Thanks for the thought. The simple truth is it is very seldom I eat beef unless in the form of a hamburger.
Just goes to show that shot placement is more important than caliber.

[Tahuyaman]

I never got a "taste" for deer. Still like beef and pork better.

Elk is much better than deer.

[donttread]

Meaning the government rather than protecting your rights as a property owner, took away your rights.
Dad rejected that idea and that is why he had deer in his freezer.

I never got a "taste" for deer. Still like beef and pork better.


I love all three, but pork is far better when locally raised. The factory farm stuff is so dry and flavorless you have to cook it in bacon grease, add some breading or otherwise keep it ediably moist and add flavor

[rembrant]

I'm a bit confused by progressive positions on sex. So sodomy laws, abortion restrictions and banning contraception are wrong because sex is a private matter. But why then can sexuality be protected from private discrimination and why can abortion and condoms be subsidized by the state?

If I'm paying for your condoms, is your sex a private matter? Ignoring the historically ugly roots of Planned Parenthood, isn't it inconsistent to force citizens to fund organizations primarily associated with sexual matters?

Are there any progressives here that would compromise on the issue so that tax-payers can fund general health services without subsidizing sexual matters?No tax $ go to abortion. There's MANY laws against. MOSTLY.. PRIVACY and Freedom FROM your urge to impose your freaky religion on EVERYONE......are both stuff we LIKE and the LAW supports. However.. if it's IMPORTANT.....send me your email and I will notify you every time I choke the Chicken.

You THEN can complain..rant....not that I CARE.


CONSENTING ADULTS in PRIVATE.....read that till you get it. That's sort of the line. Can't bang a minor. No public sex. No hump the dog (or sheep,goats) Otherwise...MIND YOUR OWN F-ing BUSINESS.

[rembrant]

I love all three, but pork is far better when locally raised. The factory farm stuff is so dry and flavorless you have to cook it in bacon grease, add some breading or otherwise keep it ediably moist and add flavorMarinate in a Dark beer. I DO like Pork Tenderloin. MANY ways to cook it... I wish I had a smoker,and access to Bay Laurel and Mesquite.

[iustitia]

Should I feel sexually harassed over this guy wanting to message me about his wank schedule? :undecided:


if it's IMPORTANT.....send me your email and I will notify you every time I choke the Chicken.

[Bob]

I love all three, but pork is far better when locally raised. The factory farm stuff is so dry and flavorless you have to cook it in bacon grease, add some breading or otherwise keep it ediably moist and add flavor

Thank you FDA for what we eat.

[Bob]

Elk is much better than deer.

I suppose part of the reason i am not up for deer is where it came from. The coastal CA deer are not large. Maybe they need more fat like the Elk or Mule Deer.

[OGIS]

If you are paying for something you have the right to some input into the matter.

Why?



Also if I am buying you condoms and you get pregnant anyway, well tough, no welfare for that little $#@!.

You DO know, don't you, that condoms (even when used properly) are not 100% effective? Which would then not be the young lady's (oh, pardon, nignog b1tche's) fault. So you would then be advocating punishment for no ethical reason, and official neglect of an infant child, should the pup come to term.

But reasons, right?

[OGIS]

Thank you FDA for what we eat.

Wait wait wait! Isn't the FDA one of the "three letter" agencies you guys want to abolish?

[OGIS]

Actually, IIRC in the U.S. you may own the property but you don't own the game that passes through it.

Those are the property of the King and the Noble Class, Citizen!

[Bob]

Wait wait wait! Isn't the FDA one of the "three letter" agencies you guys want to abolish?

Actually, this agency ought not be a function of the Feds, though in each state they should manage this function.

[OGIS]

Wait wait wait! Isn't the FDA one of the "three letter" agencies you guys want to abolish?


Actually, this agency ought not be a function of the Feds, though in each state they should manage this function.

I am not at all sure what you mean by that. State-level regulatory bodies? How does that work?

[Captain Obvious]

Wait wait wait! Isn't the FDA one of the "three letter" agencies you guys want to abolish?

No, just reduce to an operationally effective, politically minimalized institution.

[Captain Obvious]

Should I feel sexually harassed over this guy wanting to message me about his wank schedule? :undecided:

Only if he doesn't buy you breakfast afterward.

[OGIS]

No, just reduce to an operationally effective, politically minimalized institution.

So... reduce all that lovely corporate welfare?

[Captain Obvious]

So... reduce all that lovely corporate welfare?

Absolutely, why would you think I opined otherwise?

[OGIS]

Absolutely, why would you think I opined otherwise?

Just checking.