| Author |
Message |
    
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 12239
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 4:30 pm: | 
|
Hang on a sec. You don't not have permission to say what I care about, OK?
I grew up with a certain understanding of what I am responsible to pay for and what will be taken care of for me, through my tax payments. I am following those rules.
And what are you saying about childless people who believe everyone, including them, should pay school taxes?
We all work for our money. I'm not disputing that. And we all owe some back, too.
And if you want to change the system to the way you'd like to see it, do you envision people having far fewer kids? If so, do you think that would improve the economy?
"This is the only thing my signature says."
|
Joan
Supporter
Username: Joancrystal
Post Number: 6962
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 4:39 pm: |
|
Real property tax is closer the maintenance fee paid by owners of coop and condo units than it is to rent. Real property taxes are a means by which each of us contributes a share towards the joint purchasing of goods and services that we may all need at some point in time. For some of us, portions of our real property tax go to fund immediate needs for others some of this money is an investment in our individual and collective future. |
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1463
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 4:41 pm: |
|
Hang on a sec. You don't not have permission to say what I care about, OK?
then what gives you the right to make assumptions about what i think ? you do it alot and in a very condescending manner.
I grew up with a certain understanding of what I am responsible to pay for
an understanding of what you are responsible to pay for based upon your belief system of responsibility.
i know what i am forced, at gunpoint, to pay for, i dont think it should be my responsibility. i dont ask you to pay for my dog, i dont think i should pay for your kids.
Complaining isnt activism.
stop bitching on the internet and do something about it!
|
dave23
Citizen
Username: Dave23
Post Number: 1297
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 4:47 pm: |
|
Send your dog to school so he can get a job and contribute to the economy and to society at large.
Oh, wait a sec, he can't.
Your analogy is cute in that Helpless-Libertarians-Are-Us way.
Ignore it all you want, but an eductated populace is the foundation of our economy. |
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1464
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 4:50 pm: |
|
my dog does contribute to society. he makes me happy and when i am happy i am more productive at work. i make more money and put more money into the economy.
my dog has just as much of a chance to help the economy as any kid does.
pay for my dog.
Complaining isnt activism.
stop bitching on the internet and do something about it!
|
Joan
Supporter
Username: Joancrystal
Post Number: 6964
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 4:54 pm: |
|
Do you license you dog? Do you take advantage of the free rabies clinic held in town every year? Do you ever let your dog run on the grass in any of our town parks (on or off leash)? Do you ever not clean up after your dog when you are on town property? If you have done any of these things even once, then I and everyone else in town (dog owner or not) is helping to pay for your dog. |
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1465
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 4:57 pm: |
|
then you are not paying for my dog.
next!
Complaining isnt activism.
stop bitching on the internet and do something about it!
|
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1466
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 4:57 pm: |
|
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/1986/1229/072_print.html
Complaining isnt activism.
stop bitching on the internet and do something about it!
|
dave23
Citizen
Username: Dave23
Post Number: 1298
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 5:00 pm: |
|
I've noticed that once you drove down the one-way street of "we all benefit from police protection" your posts have become more and more puerile, meaningless and unrelated to what others have said. You realized that you'd just argued against your own point.
You've also ignored my two posts that an educated populace is the foundation of the economy and Tom's similar post that and educated population is part of the infrastructure.
If you can't fully refute these posts, you must forfeit your Libertarian card and join the Green Party (an organization that's actually had an effect).
|
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1468
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 5:06 pm: |
|
You realized that you'd just argued against your own point.
wrong. my point was that i do not receive a direct benefit from the educating of your kid. i do from a police presence.
you claim i am ignoring your points when in actuality you have ignored my point. having a child is a personal private choice. a choice made selfishly and without public approval. you should take responsibility for your choice and pay for it rather than forcing the rest of us to pay for a choice we were never a part of.
Complaining isnt activism.
stop bitching on the internet and do something about it!
|
Eponymous
Citizen
Username: Eponymous
Post Number: 50
Registered: 6-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 5:06 pm: |
|
The L wrote:
"my dog has just as much of a chance to help the economy as any kid does."
And here I was going to try to compose a serious reply.
"Please explain how the roads benefit someone who does not drive
economic product is delivered via an existing infrastructure, ie;roads.
we all benefit from a healthy infrastructure. "
So I guess we've not both quoted each other out of context. :-)
Your argument, as Tom and others have already pointed out, works for many many things. You can certainly choose which economic benefits you think we all should pay for, but you're not doing it in a principled way, and should stop presenting yourself as such. |
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1470
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 5:10 pm: |
|
but you're not doing it in a principled way, and should stop presenting yourself as such.
1. i am doing it in a very principled way. i am willing to accept personal responsibility for my choices. unlike those who selfishly demand that i pay for a child that they have abdicated responsibility for.
2. i may present myself as i wish, without your permission.
So I guess we've not both quoted each other out of context. :-)
i am glad that you got it. 
Complaining isnt activism.
stop bitching on the internet and do something about it!
|
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2834
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 5:10 pm: |
|
O.K. so let's ALL stop procreating and see where that leaves you, eh Looney? Then you won't have to pay for my kids. But then again, there won't be anyone to wipe your silly butt when you're too old and senile to do it yourself. But hey, I guess that'll be your problem--everyone for himself and all.
It takes a village--remember? |
Eponymous
Citizen
Username: Eponymous
Post Number: 51
Registered: 6-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 5:11 pm: |
|
At the risk of double-posting...
The L wrote:
"wrong. my point was that i do not receive a direct benefit from the educating of your kid. i do from a police presence."
We don't ALL receieve a direct benefit from roads, to take your other example, yet you are perfectly happy to require that we all pay for these.
And if you'd like to argue that we all do receieve a direct benefit, then you'll have to explain that more completely.
On another note, I am unaware of a method by which society can function without reproduction. |
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1471
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 5:18 pm: |
|
i am in no way saying "dont have kids". that is a product of your imagination. i have never said that. it is another example of meand theboys making something up to make a childish attack in a thread he has no other way of contributing to.
what i am saying is that if YOU decide to have a kid, YOU should pay for it.
Complaining isnt activism.
stop bitching on the internet and do something about it!
|
dave23
Citizen
Username: Dave23
Post Number: 1299
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 5:19 pm: |
|
I responded a long time ago. You benefit from being in a society made up of educated people, including my children.
It's a very basic principle that you simply are unable to rebut. So you rely on facetiousness.
You would have benefitted by posting a thorough educational philosophy from the LP site if they had one. Let us know when they tell you what to say beyond the silly retriever analogy.
Third strike.
Fin.
|
aquaman
Supporter
Username: Aquaman
Post Number: 689
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 5:23 pm: |
|
Libertarian,
Not having shorties didn't pan out for the Shakers. |
Eponymous
Citizen
Username: Eponymous
Post Number: 52
Registered: 6-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 5:25 pm: |
|
The L wrote:
i am in no way saying "dont have kids". that is a product of your imagination. i have never said that. it is another example of meand theboys making something up to make a childish attack in a thread he has no other way of contributing to.
You did say that children provide no economic benefit to society. So the task then becomes to explain then how society is to exist without reproduction. That is, how is it that children do not provide a benefit if, without them, there can be no society? That is meandtheboys' point (and mine).
Your road analogy makes it clear that you don't think society should pay for nothing beyond simple security (the police). The problem is you haven't shown why education doesn't qualify, since obviously an educated society is richer than an uneducated one (to stick with a purely economic argument). Now, you might say that that's simply not the state's job, and that would be fine, but then why are the roads? |
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1472
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 5:29 pm: |
|
You benefit from being in a society made up of educated people, including my children.
so you are saying that you had children for the benefit of society?
one night , you were snuggling up to the missus and said, "lets do this one for society".
You did say that children provide no economic benefit to society.
i never said that either.
Complaining isnt activism.
stop bitching on the internet and do something about it!
|
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2838
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 5:29 pm: |
|
Ah yes, there you go again Looney, dismissing anything the debunks your theory as childish or unimportant.
I do pay for my kids, all day, every day, in ways big and small, financially, physically and emotionally. But society is set up so that my child can get an education without me having to pay for it, because society ultimately benefits from providing all of it's children with an education, so they can then go on to become productive members of society and assure the continued success of our society as a whole. The fact that you can't or won't (and I suspect it's more of a "won't) see that, clearly indicates that you are the one who is incapable of making an intelligent contribution to this thread, or society as a whole.
I would suggest you would be better served by disappearing into the wilderness and setting up your own self-sustaining commune. Then you won't have to be burdened by making a financial contribution to the continued and future success of civilized society.
Just because YOU choose not to have children (and thank heaven for that) doesn't mean you should be excused from the responsibility of assuring the success of future generations.
Here's hoping you and your SO are nicely spayed and neutered! |
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1473
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 5:34 pm: |
|
Meandtheboys,
i admit that i did not read past the looney in your post. your inability to post without being insulting disqualifies you from receiving my participation in any discussion.
until you can debate with me without being insulting, your posts to me will go unread.
toodles
Complaining isnt activism.
stop bitching on the internet and do something about it!
|
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2840
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 5:38 pm: |
|
Looney, I'm not insulting you. It's just my favorite little pet name for you. And I really think it fits. Where's your sense of humor? Or do Libertarians not believe in a sense of humor. If you are representative of the group as a whole, I'd have to guess they don't.
But really, you'll grasp at any excuse you can find to avoid intelligent debate, eh?
Toodles. Think I'll run off and get busy having a few more kids just to piss you off! |
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2841
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 5:40 pm: |
|
BTW, if I were to insult you, boy howdy it'd go so far beyond "Looney" your head would spin. But I figure your just not worth the ban. |
Eponymous
Citizen
Username: Eponymous
Post Number: 53
Registered: 6-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 5:48 pm: |
|
The L,
Quoting meandtheboys, you said:
You benefit from being in a society made up of educated people, including my children.
so you are saying that you had children for the benefit of society?
one night , you were snuggling up to the missus and said, "lets do this one for society".
You're confusing cause and effect. Just because parents don't do it for society, doesn't mean that society doesn't benefit. Motives are irrelevant to the question at hand.
And again from me:
You did say that children provide no economic benefit to society.
i never said that either.
Your arguments require that children provide no benefit, otherwise they fall under your road rule (which you continue not to defend, btw), but here's what you did say, excerpted, but not misleadingly :
we all dont benefit from your kid.
yes, i know, "society benefits from ..." blah blah blah.
we all dont receive benefit from your kid going to school.
...they will get a job, get married, have kids and die. the only people benefitting will be themselves.
I'd love to discuss libertarianism and it's on-going rejection, now by the American right whose gov't is spending more money than the left could imagine. Too bad we're not doing it here. |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 10488
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 6:24 pm: |
|
Sounds like Libbie is the type who doesn't like paying school taxes while forking out tuition for private school. |
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1475
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 6:33 pm: |
|
Sounds like Libbie is the type who doesn't like paying school taxes while forking out tuition for private school.
you are incorrect.
next!
Complaining isnt activism.
stop bitching on the internet and do something about it!
|
Joan
Supporter
Username: Joancrystal
Post Number: 6966
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 7:12 pm: |
|
Libertarian:
Could you please clarify:
1. Who would educate the police in how to provide security for us if we didn't have police academies which are supported by public funds?
2. How would the police get from their base location to where they are needed if we didn't have good roads?
If I am not supporting your dog does that mean that your dog is unlicensed, which means that you as a dog owner are breaking the law or does it mean that you don't have a dog? |
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1477
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 7:30 pm: |
|
Who would educate the police in how to provide security for us if we didn't have police academies which are supported by public funds?
i never called for the abolishment of police academies in any way
How would the police get from their base location to where they are needed if we didn't have good roads?
i argued for good roads, so i dont see your point.
If I am not supporting your dog does that mean that your dog is unlicensed, which means that you as a dog owner are breaking the law or does it mean that you don't have a dog?
whether i own a dog or not is besides the point completely.
Complaining isnt activism.
stop bitching on the internet and do something about it!
|
aquaman
Supporter
Username: Aquaman
Post Number: 690
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 7:43 pm: |
|
Libertarian is annoying, but Meandtheboys...whew!
Nobody on MOL is calling you insulting "pet names".
Because you disagree with a poster is not an excuse to name-call, ridicule and mock his sense of humor.
Please explain what's funny about calling "Libertarian", "Looney"?
Is it because they are both words that begin with "L"?
Would it be equally playful if posters who disagree with you start calling you "Meandthebrats"?
Thankey |
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2845
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 8:12 pm: |
|
I'd have to be pretty thinned skinned to take "Meandthebrats" as an insult.  And I really couldn't care less whether you or anyone else think "Looney" is funny. It amuses me. Besides, it seems to me that you and the Looney man are pretty much cut from the same humorless cloth.
And, last but not least, I have to say that your saying "Because you disagree with a poster is not an excuse to name-call, ridicule and mock his sense of humor" has got to be one of the most clear-cut illustrations of the pot calling the kettle black I have seen here on MOL in quite some time. Not to mention, it's also something my Looney friend is quite adept at doing as well. So, as the saying goes, he sure seems to be able to "dish it out," but very clearly cannot "take it," eh watertroll (get it aquaman=watertroll--ha ha ha)! |
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2846
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 8:12 pm: |
|
BTW, are you stalking me, or just looking for a date? |
aquaman
Supporter
Username: Aquaman
Post Number: 691
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 8:43 pm: |
|
Meandtheboys,
Looking for a date? Ick.
Please take your sexual harrassment elsewhere.
Besides name-calling, you tend to call those who disagree with you as "trolls" without bothering to bolster your argument.
Here's an example of trolldom (which I do not advocate) If I disagreed with you and called you a middle-aged, overweight, bad-dye-job, short-haired grump - that would be trolling.
And I'm just guessing.
Questioning your definition of humor?
Not so much. |
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2847
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 8:50 pm: |
|
Whatever! Still haven't hurt my feelings. But I'm sure you'll keep trying.
And here is the definition of trolling that I think fits you and Looney to a "T:"
"An individual who chronically trolls in sense 1; regularly posts specious arguments, flames or personal attacks to a newsgroup, discussion list, or in email for no other purpose than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion. Trolls are recognizable by the fact that they have no real interest in learning about the topic at hand - they simply want to utter flame bait. Like the ugly creatures they are named after, they exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as such, they are recognized as a lower form of life on the net." |
aquaman
Supporter
Username: Aquaman
Post Number: 692
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 8:54 pm: |
|
Meandtheboys.
"regularly posts specious arguments, flames or personal attacks to a newsgroup, discussion list, or in email for no other purpose than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion. Trolls are recognizable by the fact that they have no real interest in learning about the topic at hand - they simply want to utter flame bait. Like the ugly creatures they are named after, they exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as such, they are recognized as a lower form of life on the net."
Look in the virtual mirror - that's you. |
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 2848
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 9:00 pm: |
|
Not quite, but keep trying. |
aquaboy
Citizen
Username: Crabbyappleton
Post Number: 453
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 9:01 pm: |
|
hi daddy! Let's read Trouble with Trolls tonight, please? |
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1480
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 9:19 pm: |
|
it read as a perfect description of meandthe boys. he drops in, insults someone, derides there opinion, and splits.
he is the troll, no doubt.
nice catch, aquaman.
Complaining isnt activism.
stop bitching on the internet and do something about it!
|
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 12246
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 - 10:31 pm: |
|
Libertarian, school taxes are just a matter of the public making a decision collectively to pool our money, collectively, for a collective purpose. That's democracy in action.
"mem's signature is trendier than mine."
|
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1484
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 1, 2006 - 12:22 pm: |
|
y to pool our money, collectively, for a collective purpose. That's democracy in action.
actually that isnt democracy at all.
Complaining isnt activism.
stop bitching on the internet and do something about it!
|
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 12251
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 1, 2006 - 12:28 pm: |
|
Quote:Democracy:
1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
I vote for representatives to enact policy that aims to serve society at large. Doing so does sometimes impinge on individual liberties. Society has to balance individual liberties with the benefit of society at large.
"mem's signature is trendier than mine."
|
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1505
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, February 2, 2006 - 1:15 pm: |
|
Doing so does sometimes impinge on individual liberties
from usinfo.state.gov
In a democracy people have to respect the rights of others, if not out of courtesy, then out of the basic understanding that the diminution of rights for one person could mean the loss of that right for all people.
james madison:
Wherever the real power in a Government lies, there is the danger of oppression. In our Government, the real power lies in the majority of the Community, and the invasion of private rights is chiefly to be apprehended, not from acts of government contrary to the sense of its constituents, but from acts in which the Government is the mere instrument of the major number of Constituents |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 12294
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 2, 2006 - 2:38 pm: |
|
Those things are true and worth remembering, but if we are ever to make a decision collectively, some people will be unhappy, for sure. I don't think I would always characterize that as trampling of rights, though perhaps it's a fair term some of the time. Taking your argument to the extreme, however, would get rid of government.
|
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1508
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, February 2, 2006 - 2:42 pm: |
|
Taking your argument to the extreme, however, would get rid of government
not at all. if we just followed the ideas set up by the writers of the constitution. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 12295
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 2, 2006 - 3:04 pm: |
|
There is probably a service that the government provides that you are happy about that other people think is unnecessary. They would be happier if they didn't fund that service.
For every service, there is at least one person who opposes it and thinks the money is better spent by the individual.
If we were to respect the rights of those minorities by not voting to "take their money away" there would be no government programs at all.
And since that would be an undesirable state, I believe that there are cases where the majority should rule. And I do say that cautiously, because I'm familiar with the concept of tyranny of the majority.
|
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1525
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 4, 2006 - 8:23 pm: |
|
If we were to respect the rights of those minorities by not voting to "take their money away" there would be no government programs at all.
if the people want those programs then they will donate money to continue them. the current method is for a larger group of people, who want those programs, to create legislation to force everybody to contribute to programs they want. on the schoolyard, this method of coercion is called bullying.
these programs should be voluntarily funded by those who want them. if enough people want them, then they will be properly funded. if they are underfunded, then the people have spoken and dont want the program.
|
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 2570
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, February 4, 2006 - 8:48 pm: |
|
It's so nice to take a week's vacation from MOL.
LIBERTARIAN: Why is yours not a totally anarchist argument? If people want roads they should get together and pool their money and build them. They can then charge tolls to those who have not contributed but wish to use those roads.
If a large group of people in this country did not like the regime in Iraq they should have been allowed to pool their money and hire soldiers to overthrow that regime.
In either case why should I be compelled to contribute? |
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 2571
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, February 4, 2006 - 8:49 pm: |
|
Why isn't this thread in Soapbox-Politics? |
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1526
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 4, 2006 - 8:58 pm: |
|
Why is yours not a totally anarchist argument? If people want roads they should get together and pool their money and build them. They can then charge tolls to those who have not contributed but wish to use those roads.
i have detailed in previous threads my opinion of what government should oversee and why. based upon the original ideals for government as laid down by our founding fathers. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 12322
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 5, 2006 - 1:35 am: |
|
Some programs (policies, programs, whatever) don't work unless they're fully funded. For example, I personally oppose the size of our military. I'd have it be one tenth the size it is. Yet most people would argue that if we did that, our borders, assets, and interests would be so vulnerable that others would take this country over and flatten it. |
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 2578
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, February 5, 2006 - 1:01 pm: |
|
based upon the original ideals for government as laid down by our founding fathers.
The "founding fathers" set up a structure. They did not set forth specific policies as to what government should or should not do. Certainly Jefferson and Hamilton had very different points of view. |
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1527
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, February 5, 2006 - 1:03 pm: |
|
They did not set forth specific policies as to what government should or should not do
actually, they did |
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 2581
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, February 5, 2006 - 1:50 pm: |
|
Do you want to play "yes they did, no they didn't" or would you like to give me an example? |
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 1528
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, February 5, 2006 - 2:22 pm: |
|
http://www.house.gov/house/Educate.shtml |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page