Tax rates should be returned to their original 1913 levels

How much money did they spend a year on the Air Force in 1913? How about NASA?

Maybe what we need to ask is why we need to spend so much more.

Further I will note we have a larger population base to support it.

It may even be that the federal government is involved in far more than it should be?

Among the mistakes the Founding Fathers made, or any founders make, is to give government the power to increase and add taxes. It is a power that will grow until it consumes everything. Government should only have the power to lower or eliminate taxes....everything to do with increasing taxes or adding new taxes should go to public vote, and preferably to those that would be subjected to the tax.

That is exactly how the NH town meeting system works, we all can deliberate, amend and vote on any additions to the budget, but it becomes awkward as town populations increase to ~25,000 people from an influx of politically naive MA refugees, and the lib fringe is constantly screaming spin-doctored excuses of why grass-roots democracy isn't fair to teachers, unions et al. They greatly prefer centralized power that they can more easily control.

By naive I don't just mean unaware of Robert's Rules of Order and how to argue forcefully but politely. They demand whatever benefits them, can't comprehend how we managed without their urban luxuries, and don't appreciate compromise for the common good.

It's like this group, amusing to watch them turn red as 20 of us take the mike to courteously tear them a new a-hole.

jsw

He mustn't embarrass "57 state" Obama.

The new socially nondiscriminatory libromath:

One; Both; Many.

That's what you want. You want the nation to be run exactly like it was 100 years ago with no progress at all. Not even any highway system because we didn't need it 100 years ago. Why stop at 100?

Feudalism is authoritarian contro and ownership of everythingl by an aristocracy or in our case a plutocracy. That is by definition corporatism. Feudalism is the goal of the ultra wealthy (corporations) so they can live like kings while the lesser people can die in filth and disease. That is not socialism. It is the absolute opposite of socialism which is government run by and for all people regardless of wealth.

I've already instructed you in this.

On Sep 17, 3:12=A0pm, Hawke wrote: . If you want the America of today you have to pay

Yes but Obama is spending a higher percentage of the GDP.

Cheers

Good luck getting a liberal to answer a math problem.

That series converges asymptotically to 30% at infinity.

jsw

Spending for battleships was at its all-time high in that period.

Can you not read? He said one rate for everyone. Explain how that translates to " the richer you are the lower the rate you pay". If there is only one rate then there is no lower rate.

You seem to stand with the confused, not the majority.

Dan

Hawke wrote in news:k38fb0$275$ snipped-for-privacy@speranza.aioe.org:

?????

a flat tax has a pernicious effect on the poor and a very beneficial impact on the rich. Look at it this way - if you are skipping meals to save money to pay the rent, taking away 10% means you don't eat for 3 more days out of the month (at least). If you make a million dollars, taking away 10% means nothing to your ability to feed yourself and your family, nor to provide housing and clothing and transportation. If you are choosing medication or electricity, 10% can mean you don't treat your disease or you have your power turned off, if you are rich you just pay these things and maybe don't buy that 12th ferrari you were going to display on the front lawn. Remember the great Anatole France, who said "The law, in its infinite majesty, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets and to steal bread".

You shouldn't be teaching things you know nothing about.

I was- not arguing for a flat tax. I believe that a progressive rate is the right thing. But was just pointing out that Hawke can not express himself in a clear manner. He claims he can, but then posts really silly things as he did. How he ever came up with the rich paying a lower rate, when there is only one rate is truly a mystery.

=20 Dan

"max headroom" wrote in news:k38o50$45q$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:

I don't know where he gets that from. Must have flunked middle school.

And playground.

That ideal has been difficult to achieve in peacetime and completely impossible in hot or cold war:

jsw

Surplus means you're over taxed. Well, one way to look at it.

Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus

That ideal has been difficult to achieve in peacetime and completely impossible in hot or cold war:

jsw

Now you are attacking your own fabricated strawman.

Once a year we debate the next year's town and school budgets and warrant articles, then submit the amended versions to a normal yes/no ballot election a few weeks later. Elected Selectmen and School Board members represents us to administer the regular business. They can reallocate line item funds if they choose, though they will hear about it, but they can't overspend the approved total.

The state strongly recommends a 5~10% surplus fund to cover emergencies, and will pitch in along with FEMA to cover natural disasters like ice storms, tornados, hurricanes and floods that wash out bridges and roads.

jsw