Guard Dog

Changing the tax system is a good start. but what really needs to be done is to reign government spending in. Right now Uncle Sam spends money like a drunken sailor who won the lottery. It is doing things far beyond the scope of it's power as described in the Constitution. For example, the US Department of Education and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. There should be no such thing as these agencies. The Constitution does not charge the Federal government with the tasks of either. In fact, the 10th amendment proscribes the govt from involving itself in this and specifically assigns these tasks to the states. Yet the spend billions of dollars per year doing jobs that could be dne much cheaper and more efficiently at a local level. The same deal with Universal Healthcare. I'll support that as soon as someone shows me what clause in the constitution empowers the govt to provide healthcare. There is not one. Now if a state wanted to do it, that is up to the voters in that state to do it and PAY for it.

My impossible dream was to run the Iditarod. Probably never happen. Or get elected to Congress. The Iditarod is a little more likely. Scuba diving is easy and fairly cheap Astr0creep. And unless you live in Nevada somewhere, there is probably a place to go somewhere near you.

No, the Fed is not funded by congress at all. In 2005 (I do not have the 2006 numbers) the US government spent 1.731 Trillion dollars. 34% went to just running the government. Federal payroll, office expenses, running all of the different departments, administrative costs, etc. It was the biggest piece of the pie. So the biggest tax burden comes from just paying these people to get up and come to work everyday and be a general pain in the a**. After that, the next biggest was 27% for the military and homeland security, CIA. Next was 20% past expenses such as national debt, VA admin, government pensions, etc. Next was 13% into the "general government" fund which covers the costs of running all the government programs out there such as HUD, HHS, NASA, etc. Last was 6% for Physical Resources. That covers the costs of Dept of the Interior, Dept of Transportation, FCC, FAA, Army Corps of Engineers, Park Services, DOJ, etc. So you see the biggest taxpayer burden is not all of the services, it's the cost of the government itself. HR expenses account for more than the military and infrastructure combined. Tell me this is not getting out of hand.

In the US we have income tax, FICA tax, import tax, sales tax, estate tax, property tax, non-ad valorem tax, tag tax, sin tax, excise tax, capital gains tax, ad valorem tax, school tax, withholding tax, corporate tax, highway tax, water tax, license tax, gasoline tax, alternative minimum tax (F*** you Bill Clinton), CMV tax, E911 tax, utility tax, tax, tax, tax...... The colonial government was over thrown over a 3 cent stamp tax. WTF happened?! The sick thing is, if the Federal and state govenments restrained themselves to govenring withing the restrictions placed on them by their respective Constitutions, none of this crap would be necassary. And don't trot out the argument that taxes are lower in the US than elsewhere. They are, but that does not mean they are not too damned high here now. If we held elections on April 16 this would be a VERY different country.

C'mon Calax. Do you really consider the southern states to be on par with Iraq and Israel? If so you really should take a drive down here. I think you will find it is just like the rest of the country.

No. Guard Dog says so. Forums are about voicing your opinion, not parroting someone else.

Just as well. After "Master of Puppets" Metallica was never the same.

NPR is left wing propaganda radio. I listen to "All Things Considered" and "Morning Edition" somewhat frequently and they have a steep leftward slant IMHO. I have never, ever heard them run an unflattering story about any democrat. Nor have they ever run a complimentary piece about any republican. But then again, there is no politically unbiased news to be found anywhere these days. For commentary I listen to Neal Boortz (the best syndicated news/commentary show on radio IMHO) and Walter E Williams whenever he is guest hosting someone's show. As for what I think YOU should be listening to? Whatever the heck you like. Based on the things you post I'd say you are probably a liberal so it does not surprise me you listen to NPR. People tend to seek out shows that "fit". But if you really want my recommendation, get Sirius and put it on Channel 31, Radio Margaritaville. (or just click here: Radio Margaritaville) Besides, listening to political talk all the time is bad for your health. Trust me on that one.

What, you've never read George RR Martin?

Now THAT figures.

No they tax clothing because the government (any government) needs money like a junkie needs heroin. They will tax anything they can until voters reign them in. That is happening in Florida right now over crippling property taxes.

That was beaten to death over on the BSG forums. The shows producer RJM came right out and said if you are seeing real life allegories in that show, then you are the one putting them there.

I gave up local radio when I got Sirius. But my all time favorite was WEGR the Eagle in Memphis.

Maybe, but unless you spoke chinese you would not understand him.

There are different taxes Wals. The Federal Government does not have a sales tax. They tax income, capital gains, estates, tariffs, etc. They do not tax goods, services, real estate, that kind of thing. The states do. But if you ask about state taxes (like your orginal post would be a sales tax) you will get fifty different answers. Wayyyy too many taxes actually. In the US, 47% on average of every dollar you earn goes to taxes. That is insideous. But that is what you get when people vote for democrats. They will tax you to death.... then tax your corpse and take 50% of everything you leave behind.

I could never get used to drinking the warm beer.

If YOu chaps had pitched in earlier it could have been over by Chrsitmas, and the rage engendered by the years of slaughter would have been lessened, probably avoiding the treaty. Heh, balme America eh? How PC of you! But seriously, that is exactly the kind of thing I would have argued the US needed to stay out of. And to tell the truth, if not for the Zimmerman incident, the US would never have gotten involved. The Lusitania did not piss anyone off. The Zimmerman Telegram did.

Ohhh speculative historical revision is my FAVORITE intellectual game. If WWI had ended in a stalemate there would have been no treaty of Versilles. Without that there would have been no opportunity for Hitler to be elected chancellor. History would have turned out VERY different.

Walter G22 bullpup: $429.99 Flame resistant balaclava: $39.99 Smith & Wesson combat knife: $69.99 Eddo staking his reputation on hordes of Shakespearean vampire zombies: Priceless There some things money can't buy. For everything else there's JaguarCard now with only 86.5% APR! This thread is over! Nobody is going to top that post!

That conflict is taken out of context if you look at it by itself. It was part of a larger war with Spain.

Good point. Then I'll say it is very very uncommon.

When has the US ever treated a defeated nation with brutality? Never. And I seriously doubt anyone in the US govenment, "neocons" or not want to return to the days of Rome where defeated nations were sacked and enslaved. It's more than a little unreasonable to view people who have a different political viewpoint than you have as some kind of barbarians.

Yea Japan is so awesome its PM tries to cover up past atrocities by pretending they never happened: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8...1595375,00.html Sound like someone we in the US have dealt with? *ahem* Ahmadinejad *ahem* *shakes head and wonders when people will stop associating the geek culture in Japan with the nation in general* Anyways, besides the obvious problem with this topic (if people could be united simply by a few individuals willing it national borders would've long ceased to exist by now), one issue you have with uniting any number of countries into a greater entity for the sake of becoming more powerful is the not-so-ironic fact that the bigger you become the weaker each constituent actually is. If the US were to unite with Mexico, we'd have to give at least 1/3rd of the votes TO Mexico. The same is probably true for Canada. That means the average American politician, citizien, decision-maker, et. all becomes less influential as he has to deal with the desires of Mexicans and Canadians in addition to his own. The loss of such decision-making power means that all that extra clout you gain by virtue of being bigger is in turn lost by vice of internal divisions. It'd work temporarily in response to a great threat, but over time all empires - especially the big ones - disintegrate simply because people fail to see why they should listen to each other. And of course, the geopolitical solution to a united NA, on the part of our rival nations, is a united Asia, a new Soviet Union, a enlarged EU, a coalition of Muslim countries, and what-have-you. No one wants to return to a world divided between mega-powers where the sovereign rights of smaller states are automatically compromised vis-a-vis their size, yet that's exactly what will happen if people feel threatened by the rise of a new pan-American bloc. You band together, others band together to counter you. You think Russia and China are polite to each other now, watch how close they become if a pan-American bloc emerges to challenge their mastery of Asia (as for your beloved Japan, I fear it shall become only a satellite state of the pan-Asian empire it once dreamed of leading). Your points are well taken. But not to pick salt out of snoflakes here, an alliance between Russia and China will never, ever happen. That emnity is too great.

Certainly. But you also have to recognize the world for what it is. You are a smart guy Gorgon, but you see the world through a prisim of idealisim. I am not saying that you are an idealist but it would not suprise me to find out that is the case. There is nothing wrong with that at all. I am a pragamtist. I see things for how they are and do not give much thought to how they could be better.

You are beginning to worry me Eddo.