It will probably be less expensive than burning cigars!
20,000 Percent Tax Increase???
- Thread starter JonEdangerousli
- Start date
It will probably be less expensive than burning cigars!
- Thread starter
- #122
It probably would be. Those "Made in Pakistan" flags are pretty cheap if I remember correctly. I wonder if their flags are any better than their razors?
Comedian Tim Wilson said this about burning the flag:
"I think it ought to be legal to burn the flag. I also think it should be legal to beat the crap out of anybody you catch doing it"
Rocky strikes back...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kT8au5WUb74&sdig=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kT8au5WUb74&sdig=1
Here's the "go pound sand" message from my other Senator:
Thank you for contacting my office to express your views on Congressional reauthorization of the State Children?s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). As the Senate continues to consider legislation on this issue, I will keep your views in mind.
I believe that all citizens should become involved in the legislative process by letting their voices be heard, and I appreciate the time and effort that you took to share your thoughts with me. One of the most important aspects of my job is keeping informed about the views of my constituents, and I welcome your comments so that I may continue to represent California to the best of my ability. Should I have the opportunity to consider legislation on this or similar issues, I will keep your views in mind.
For additional information about my activities in the U.S. Senate, please visit my website, http://boxer.senate.gov. From this site, you can access statements and press releases that I have issued about current events and pending legislation, request copies of legislation and government reports, and receive detailed information about the many services that I am privileged to provide for my constituents. You may also wish to visit http://thomas.loc.gov to track current and past legislation.
Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. I appreciate hearing from you.
Barbara Boxer
United States Senator
Thank you for contacting my office to express your views on Congressional reauthorization of the State Children?s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). As the Senate continues to consider legislation on this issue, I will keep your views in mind.
I believe that all citizens should become involved in the legislative process by letting their voices be heard, and I appreciate the time and effort that you took to share your thoughts with me. One of the most important aspects of my job is keeping informed about the views of my constituents, and I welcome your comments so that I may continue to represent California to the best of my ability. Should I have the opportunity to consider legislation on this or similar issues, I will keep your views in mind.
For additional information about my activities in the U.S. Senate, please visit my website, http://boxer.senate.gov. From this site, you can access statements and press releases that I have issued about current events and pending legislation, request copies of legislation and government reports, and receive detailed information about the many services that I am privileged to provide for my constituents. You may also wish to visit http://thomas.loc.gov to track current and past legislation.
Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. I appreciate hearing from you.
Barbara Boxer
United States Senator
- Thread starter
- #125
At least that was just a generic "thanks for your opinion" boilerplate. The other one was insulting.
You are probably right. All I know is I emailed my two senators and the president and all I got back was a generic response from one of my senators saying I would get an actual human response at a later date. That was about two weeks ago. I'm going to try calling them on Friday morning. Anyone want me to relay a message to Dubya?
You are probably right. All I know is I emailed my two senators and the president and all I got back was a generic response from one of my senators saying I would get an actual human response at a later date. That was about two weeks ago. I'm going to try calling them on Friday morning. Anyone want me to relay a message to Dubya?
Funny, I emailed Schumer the other day, and he promised to mail me back Gonzoles' head on a pike!
- Thread starter
- #129
That used to be more true than it is now. A well written email (not one that you may have copied from a blog or some other source) counts. It's even more effective if you follow it up with a phone call.
Anyone want me to relay a message to Dubya?
Yeah. Tell him, "Mission Accomplished!"
Yeah. Tell him, "Mission Accomplished!"
If you do, be sure to explain the joke to him, so he gets it.
I've made my thoughts clear on tobacco before. I'm happy to see such a phenomenal rise personally. That stuff is evil.
Of course the problem with such a large rise is that some will stop buying the stuff so there will be unemployment in the industries that manufacture, distribute, wholesale, and retail the stuff and there will possibly be a reduced revenue to the exchequor which defeats the object of paying for a public service with the revenue.
We saw such a mistake in London with the introduction of congestion charging for road users in town. The original pricing was too high and so there were less vehicles entering town than expected and less revenue for public transport.
The fine on smoking in public places recently introduced in England is pathetically low and I'll be campaigning for it to be increased to the cost of 15000 'fags' (that's cigarettes guys.)
Of course the problem with such a large rise is that some will stop buying the stuff so there will be unemployment in the industries that manufacture, distribute, wholesale, and retail the stuff and there will possibly be a reduced revenue to the exchequor which defeats the object of paying for a public service with the revenue.
We saw such a mistake in London with the introduction of congestion charging for road users in town. The original pricing was too high and so there were less vehicles entering town than expected and less revenue for public transport.
The fine on smoking in public places recently introduced in England is pathetically low and I'll be campaigning for it to be increased to the cost of 15000 'fags' (that's cigarettes guys.)
Nail being hit soundly on head. 100% agreement here.
Remember the old "National Lampoon" cover photo of a dog with a revolver pointed at its head, and the caption, "Buy This Magazine or We'll Shoot This Dog?"
I'm a proud liberal, and I believe that the U.S. can afford to prevent children from suffering and dieing for want of medical care, but that is an obligation that should be shared by all Americans, not just the smokers (and especially not just the cigar smokers
I can't argue with you here at all. Her version of "liberal" involves class persecution and unwarranted taxation. It's sad when a "liberal" like her would remove "liberty".
MB, the only answer is to remove the "well meaning" government from our activities. Because,......... see the comment below......
Ahem...
I don't find it hard to believe that some people cannot conceive of free people doing as they please without the all mighty overseer of government because some people are obviously indoctrinated well in other "idealistic" states (idealistic to whom, that remains to be seen) of socialism and statism. Socialism lets you put all of you worries into well meaning government institutions, that obviously know better than we do how to run things, right?
Statism, tells you that you need to keep on paying taxes and agree with every single portion of their rule book at gunpoint to keep this system going. If you don't agree, you can be shot (just stop paying taxes if you don't believe me). Authoritarian regimes always begin to persecute the minorities. After all, they have the "support" of the majority to act on their behalf, for the better "of all". They will also furnish you will other rules of conduct in order to keep themselves on top. Mostly, by the argument that they have been doing it for a long time now already, or simply status quo. Nobody is saying that inflation and unemployment would be solved by removing the FED system of banking, but rather the free marketplace is the only way of allowing a legitimate growth or correction in economy to occur. To artificially set interest rates, print fiat money (or "create money") by a small group of government "qualified private banks" is insane. Wait until the price of an average house is 1-3 million dollars, and you and your wife are making 150,000 a year. (rich enough to pay all those taxes, but too poor to buy a house). This is the coming face of the "New" American Dream. (and Canadian for that matter)
Use of Government=Protection of borders. full stop.
I'm not a fan of the government climbing up my lower alimentary tract, but surely you can't be suggesting that, for instance, it was a good thing for us in Connecticut or the folks in California when the electric utilities were deregulated? Or that the health insurance providers, left to their own, would have my best interests in mind? Or the FCC should be allowed to repeal the regulations preventing single corporate entities from controlling all the media in an area? God forbid there isn't oversight where it's needed. Reasonable regulation and oversight is necessary. Us "little guys" on our own can't protect ourselves from corporate conglomerates that regularly have proven to put profit ahead of doing the right thing. Not that the government is always that good at the oversight, but it's all we have.
I thought the Powell-led FCC really tore down many such regs.
Many, but not all, yet. And there's a movement afoot to reverse what had been taken down.
the problem in electricity is simple. there was not a "true" deregulation in California. Selected private businesses such as "Edison" or [take your pick] were allowed to lobby for limited access to the state's utility contracts, by becoming "authorized" by,..... guess who? The government. You can see the same thing going on with Google vs. "The Telecom" companies over the 700MHZ wireless situation. Pennsylvania had a very successful Deregulation process, mostly because their government took a back seat to the process once it went into play. So again, to be clear, I am not suggesting in any way that the current system of deregulation of utilities works when special interest groups are favored by the government.
http://blog.mises.org/mt/comments?entry_id=5384
The FCC is completely another story. Absolutely no need whatsoever for the FCC. Think about it. If cable companies and satellite companies incur all of the expense to put together programming for the "consumers", why do we need to "regulate" the free choice of consumers? Who are we protecting here? It is simple to me that in an FCC free world, if there was a demand for alternate programming, there would be a commensurate choice in programing. Alas, the government gets involved, and pretty soon we are all paying for programing in foreign languages, objectionable (to some)programming, etc. Simply remove the FCC, and let everyone get whatever stupid TV channels or cable programs they can from the entertainment industry. It's like going to the movies. Most theaters show some but not all movies. So, you pick the cinema that plays the movies you like. Funny thing is, most people go to the same theater. Why? Because they tend to show the kind of movies that they like. Everyone leaves happy. (unless you are me and hate the idea of spending $10 to see a movie). We have moved far beyond what the FCC was originally designed to control. It is time to put this relic to rest.
http://www.theadvocates.org/ruwart/questions_maint.php?Category=0&id=100
(see how this relates to what google is trying to accomplish now)
http://www.prometheusinstitute.net/opinion/mh61107.html
(a good article on what the FCC is doing about "obscenity")
Anyways, just spouting off some opinion here. I hope I haven't offended anybody with my views. Just ask yourselves this. Who are the first advocates for any government programs, be they social or economic? Governments and their greedy friends. We the people? Nah. It's us and them. Don't believe me? Try and ask a policeman why he is giving you a ticket. Stop paying your taxes. Put vegetable oil in your bio-diesel car. Dig a hole on your private property. Try to do business with a known friend of yours from Iran. Do all of that and I can almost guarantee you will never see the light of day again. (in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if these remarks in the post are being scrutinized, legally by our government through the patriot act) and so on and so forth. Good day! I need a drink after that rant!
We need to regulate the airwaves so that they're not all bought up by Ruport Murdoch and others. We already have way too much centralization of the media upon which democracies rely. While many listeners may be content with a few megacorporations owning all the radio stations it is not true that market forces will answer to the needs of the rest due to the ability of the large corporations to leverage out everyone else.
The silver lining though is that internet radio and other alternatives allow more access since they don't have to compete for the small number of available radio frequencies.
The FCC may not be necessary to regulate content, but it is necessary to regulate EM spectrum assignment and usage. Without them, the interference generated by competing signals would render RF useless as an effective communications medium.
