FEMA rejects aid claims on homes battered by tornado

[slim 1,533]

Your country is also my country, and the country of many, many, many more people interested in living a modern life where [as I suggest the improvement go] than you, people are not left out just for the sake of punishing them, as your "improvement" clearly establishes.

I don't advocate punishing anyone. What I do advocate is everyone having the opportunity to achieve.

Notice I didn't say they should be handed something. I said they should have the opportunity to get it for themselves. Part of the major problem in this country today is folks like you think taking away "free stuff" from people is punishing them.

It's not. Contrary to your beliefs instead of punishing the beneficiaries of "free stuff" you're actually empowering them to achieve on their own. At the same time, you're relieving the burden on the rest of us who are forced - under threat of jail or worse - to pay for their free stuff.

Yes, we are forced. If you don't think so, stop paying the federal government and see what happens. Modern life? How is that any more modern than serfdom?

Then you talk about totalitarianism... odd and quite a bit out of touch with sanity and reality.

Look up the definition of totalitarianism. If you can't see how we're not living that system right now then your rose-colored glasses need a polishing.

[Zero Sum 305]

It depends on what your definition of is, is.

Part of the problem we've been having on here is many of you folks define things a certain way and use that as your justification of why it is the way it is. If you would take definitions straight out of Webster's (or even your favorite - wiki) you'd see that things aren't always what the government tells you they are.

And by the way, how is authoritarian any better (or, less bad) than totalitarian? Neither are acceptable in America.

Quite a bit of assumption here, slim. Kind of like your ridiculous definitions for the Federal tax system destined for the common good.

[Zero Sum 305]

I don't advocate punishing anyone. What I do advocate is everyone having the opportunity to achieve.

Notice I didn't say they should be handed something. I said they should have the opportunity to get it for themselves. Part of the major problem in this country today is folks like you think taking away "free stuff" from people is punishing them.

It's not. Contrary to your beliefs instead of punishing the beneficiaries of "free stuff" you're actually empowering them to achieve on their own. At the same time, you're relieving the burden on the rest of us who are forced - under threat of jail or worse - to pay for their free stuff.

Yes, we are forced. If you don't think so, stop paying the federal government and see what happens. Modern life? How is that any more modern than serfdom?

Look up the definition of totalitarianism. If you can't see how we're not living that system right now then your rose-colored glasses need a polishing.

And yet more 'folks like you' fluff. It seems slim is on a roll today with the assumptions.

You might just want to stop and go back and read the few original posts in the thread (read: noting for free, earning of benefits, etc) before you brought in your big bad government forcing you into servitude via taxes. Then cry to someone who cares about your lack of touch with modernity.

[slim 1,533]

Quite a bit of assumption here, slim. Kind of like your ridiculous definitions for the Federal tax system destined for the common good.

Are you saying the federal tax system isn't for the common good? (Or am I saying that? I'm not sure what you're saying here.)

And yet more 'folks like you' fluff. It seems slim is on a roll today with the assumptions.

You might just want to stop and go back and read the few original posts in the thread (read: noting for free, earning of benefits, etc) before you brought in your big bad government forcing you into servitude via taxes. Then cry to someone who cares about your lack of touch with modernity.

Yes, folks like you. Folks like you believe it necessary to pay the federal government for "modern" things and without the federal government, we wouldn't have those things. That's simply not true.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It depends on what your definition of is, is.

Part of the problem we've been having on here is many of you folks define things a certain way and use that as your justification of why it is the way it is. If you would take definitions straight out of Webster's (or even your favorite - wiki) you'd see that things aren't always what the government tells you they are.

And by the way, how is authoritarian any better (or, less bad) than totalitarian? Neither are acceptable in America.

Part of the problem here is that people like to throw big words around with no idea of what they actually mean and then relativise them into complete insignificance.

It's your claim that taxation is totalitarian - therefore its on you to explain how that works.

[slim 1,533]

Part of the problem here is that people like to throw big words around with no idea of what they actually mean and then relativise them into complete insignificance.

Scroll back through and see who threw out the big words. I like to keep things simple.

Believe it or not, when you argue in simple terms it's a lot easier for everyone to grasp your point and you can actually present your argument without the necessity of big words to add "oomph" to your point. I believe in letting the point speak for itself!

It's your claim that taxation is totalitarian - therefore its on you to explain how that works.

Please be clear. I claimed federal taxes are totalitarian. I specifically said state and local aren't necessarily totalitarian but federal is when applied arbitrarily and not in direct support of what's mandated in the constitution.

Straight from wiki - Totalitarianism (or totalitarian rule) is a political system where the state recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible.[

Does that not sound like the America we all know and love?

[Zero Sum 305]

Are you saying the federal tax system isn't for the common good? (Or am I saying that? I'm not sure what you're saying here.)

Yes, folks like you. Folks like you believe it necessary to pay the federal government for "modern" things and without the federal government, we wouldn't have those things. That's simply not true.

Folks like me, since you're too lazy/illiterate to read back- prefer people have all options available to them, including government assistance when all other options fail. There's hardly a replacement there, is there? The only generalization here is that folks like you tend to fail at reading things carefully.

Slim... I'm worried about your mental state, really.

[slim 1,533]

Folks like me, since you're too lazy/illiterate to read back- prefer people have all options available to them, including government assistance when all other options fail. There's hardly a replacement there, is there? The only generalization here is that folks like you tend to fail at reading things carefully.

Slim... I'm worried about your mental state, really.

Folks like you = government assistance available.

Folks like me = no government assistance available.

Get it?

[Zero Sum 305]

Folks like you = government assistance available.

Folks like me = no government assistance available.

Get it?

Yeah, slim, not that I didn't 'get it'... you on the other hand, don't get quite a lot of things.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Scroll back through and see who threw out the big words. I like to keep things simple.

Believe it or not, when you argue in simple terms it's a lot easier for everyone to grasp your point and you can actually present your argument without the necessity of big words to add "oomph" to your point. I believe in letting the point speak for itself!

Please be clear. I claimed federal taxes are totalitarian. I specifically said state and local aren't necessarily totalitarian but federal is when applied arbitrarily and not in direct support of what's mandated in the constitution.

Straight from wiki - Totalitarianism (or totalitarian rule) is a political system where the state recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible.[

Does that not sound like the America we all know and love?

You did exactly what I said you would...

By your rationale every country in the world with a government is Totalitarian.

That's just...

[slim 1,533]

Yeah, slim, not that I didn't 'get it'... you on the other hand, don't get quite a lot of things.

Keep in mind disagreeing with your position doesn't mean I don't get it. I get it, I just don't agree.

You did exactly what I said you would...

Where did you say I'd do that?

By your rationale every country in the world with a government is Totalitarian.

Not at all. There could be governments out there that tax their people for things outlined in their constitution and nothing more.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

If you believe that Totalitarianism relates solely to taxes. It doesn't. Ergo you don't know what it means.

[slim 1,533]

If you believe that Totalitarianism relates solely to taxes. It doesn't. Ergo you don't know what it means.

Remember a few posts back when I posted the definition?

You can scroll back up there and see what it means if you're still unclear.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Remember a few posts back when I posted the definition?

You can scroll back up there and see what it means if you're still unclear.

Yes I remember you cribbed two lines from an extensive article and used it to suggest that America is totalitarian. It is not. As I said, you don't know what it means. It goes far beyond taxation.

You might want the us to be totalitarian because you have a penchant for exaggeration. But it simply is not. Regardless of your feelings about paying taxes.

[Zero Sum 305]

Keep in mind disagreeing with your position doesn't mean I don't get it. I get it, I just don't agree.

Where did you say I'd do that?

Not at all. There could be governments out there that tax their people for things outlined in their constitution and nothing more.

You're both free to disagree and to be off the mark on the same subject.

Maybe what we need is for the 'people' to draft a clear constitution that delineates responsibilities for taxation. Your states rights argument won't get you far after most rational people see this for what it is: tax dodgers trying to concentrate themselves by smaller jurisdictions. We can do a 'thought experiment' if you wish, granting you the tax conditions that you want to see and matching it with real dollars, agree to minimal services provided even by local governments (since you are obstinate about having a Spartan society), to likely notice the abject failure many of those small jurisdictions would likely be imbued with after having extremist financiers doing things 'their way.'