See, his education got paid for back in the 1950's. Probably by his parents. So, he's got his. Fuck the rest of us.
He paid for his own education by working over the summers. He wants people to be able to do that again, and NOT be in debt for life for a degree.
I think he is right. Government subsidies tend to make prices go up.
Some of the essential programs of the departments being cut get moved to other departments under his plan.
In addition to the national income tax, most states have their own state income tax. In addition to that most, have property taxes, school taxes (also paid by property owners). Counties, towns, and other localities can also levy their own property taxes and sales taxes.
The national income tax goes directly to the federal government (which they then use to bribe the states into passing laws they can't pass nationally), everything else is local to the state and/or municipalities.
When you add everything up, I'm not sure it is so certain that our taxes are lower than anywhere else, but I have not looked at the numbers closely.
Money wouldn't even have the same real value today compared to a hundred years ago without inflation, since it would experience deflation.
You're right, it wouldn't be worth the same. Deflation would cause it be worth more.
Even an entirely gold-based economy would experience inflation.
It would only experience inflation if the amount of gold being mined and added to the money supply substantially outpaces the addition of new labor into the workforce.
I think you are absolutely right.
We are entering an era where individuals have unprecedented access to information and have a much greater ability to innovate. However, go ahead and try to do that and see how far you get.
As soon as you start to make any kind of money with something, the IRS will consider your little venture to be a business and you will have to pay self-employment taxes (that is, all the taxes you would normally pay if you worked for someone else PLUS the employer-paid portions). If, despite that and all the hoops you have to jump through to make your business legal, you still manage to grow successfully, you will have to hire employees (paying more taxes, more regulations, etc).
If you STILL have the gall to be successful, why we'll show you! We'll just raise your taxes! Anyone making over $250k a year (that's enough for a business to hire, what, one or two employees?) is rich and needs to pay more!
Ok, ok. I'm a little frustrated at how hard it is to start a business. I guess it doesn't help that I live in New York state.
He is not necessarily advocating anarchy, but liberty.
Government's main role is to protect the people's rights, but the philosophy of liberty says that people cannot delegate authority to another agent that they don't have to begin with. So, if you don't have the right to use violence against others to take away their possessions, neither can you delegate that ability to the government.
In your example, the person raping and pillaging the countryside does not have the right to use violence against others. However, the victims of his actions do have the right to defend themselves, using force if necessary. Therefore, those individuals can delegate the task of protecting them to the government, who can use force and the law to prosecute that individual.
Jesus wouldn't say "For millions of years" because he believes his father only made us 4,000 years ago.
Actually, no place in the Bible comes right out and says what the age of the Earth is. The 6000 year figure comes from some people's (weak) interpretation of some verses.
But the changes happen very quickly. Natural selection happens over a very long period of time.
I don't think the changing beak sizes are due to natural selection. I think the capability for the range of beak sizes is already present in their DNA (and maybe they evolved that way). But the changes are too fast to say that natural selection is causing the variance. If it were true, wouldn't there be a lot of dead finches? (Maybe there are, but I haven't heard any mention of it)
Being a seeker of the truth, if something I say is incorrect, I will gladly accept correction. Name-calling is totally unnecessary and inappropriate.
My understanding is that Darwin attributed the changes in the finches' beak sizes to natural selection; that they were evolving to new species as a result of a separation of different populations of finches on the islands.
He was only observing them for a short time, so he would not have noticed that the beak sizes actually revert back to their previous size once the environmental conditions favor it. Because it happens in far less time than would be required if natural selection were the mechanism of change, it would seem that Darwin's theory does not explain the changing beak sizes in the finches.
I have not read any books on Darwin's Finches, so if I am mistaken on anything I said, please feel free to enlighten me.
Nothing I said should be construed to suggest that I don't believe evolution is a real phenomenon.
New York... when civilization falls apart, remember, we were way ahead of you. - David Letterman