Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Forum at

Why should YOU join our forums?

  • Connect with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Read up on the latest product reviews
  • Make new friends to go shooting with!
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

Glock Talk is the #1 site to discuss the world’s most popular pistol, chat about firearms, accessories and more.

Which Path for the Right?

Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by muscogee, Dec 13, 2012.


  2. Syclone538


    Jan 8, 2006
    What's the problem? If you reward success and punish failure there will be inequality, but anyone with a brain knows that is best for everyone.

    It has none, though I wouldn't really argue one way or the other on a law against false advertising.

  3. The deck is stacked.
  4. Syclone538


    Jan 8, 2006
    Not that I disagree, but how so?
  5. People with money and power make the rules to suit themselves. I could never get a government loan the way General Motors and Chrysler did. If it's good for the economy for Mitt Romney to only pay 13% in taxes, why isn't it better for everyone to just pay 13%. It seems that would stimulate the economy even more. Many people are barely getting by. If they had more money they would buy more stuff which would create jobs. If the rest of us could write vacations off as business trips, (e.g. Romney taking his family to the Olympics last summer) many more people could afford vacations and afford to spend more on them. It would help many people if they could write off all their health care and call it a business expense. The list goes on.

    The article points out that there are the people ion the Right who think everyone but them are a RINO or worse. These people refuse to compromise on anything. Everything must be their way or no way. The article further points out that these people cannot ever persuade enough people to agree with them to win elections. Instead of changing their perspective they try to keep those who disagree with them from voting. If they can't win an election the use their power to circumvent the election and get laws favorable to them passed by fiat. This undermines out system and peoples' faith in the system. Why play fair if you can't win?
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2012
  6. Syclone538


    Jan 8, 2006
    Problems caused by too much government can't be solved by more government.

    I was going to post this as post #4, but thought I'd ask you to clarify on the unlikely possibility you could think of a related problem not caused by government.

    I'd prefer a one paragraph tax code. Sales tax, not income tax. One rate for everyone, no deductions, no exemptions.

    I guess some would consider me to be on the right, and I don't compromise. I vote against almost everything, and pretty much vote straight LP.
  7. Cavalry Doc

    Cavalry Doc MAJ (USA Ret.)

    Feb 22, 2005
    Republic of Texas
    Yes it is. The likelihood of someone that works hard with a good plan of being successful is greater than those that don't plan, have a bad plan or don't try.

    In most people that fail in life, if you look hard, you can find what led to thier failure.

    Nothing will (should) be given to you. You have to go get it if you want to be successful.
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2012
  8. series1811

    series1811 Enforcerator. CLM

    I love the fact that people on the left are sure everything would be fine if conservatives would just stop being conservative and be liberal.
  9. aspartz


    Oct 19, 2000
    Sandstone, MN 55072
    Actually the government has one very important role in the economy: To provide a stable currency.

  10. BobbyT


    Jul 27, 2008
    Putting aside that you're mixing earnings on already-taxed money with money earned for the first time, I'd say it IS better for everyone to just pay 13%. And then reduce bloated spending levels to match.

    No exemptions, no exceptions...flat 13% for all, scaling with earnings, leaving everyone with skin in the game. Tax reform done.

    But there's a certain mentality that seeks to use government as a weapon to punish others, and confiscating others' earnings to fund their pet projects is one of their favorite ways to do that.
  11. series1811

    series1811 Enforcerator. CLM

    I'm in. Or for a national sales tax to repace the federal income tax. Either one, and then cap spending at revenue.
  12. Good post.
  13. I agree. Taxation isn't just about funding the government. It's about modifying behavior. Unfortunately, those modifications are frequently made by some group other than the majority of the voters.
  14. The way Conservative has been more and more narrowly defined in the past decade, fewer and fewer people are identifying with that mindset. Many Conservatives don't want to accept the results of elections and choose instead to end run the system to get their way. This is going to drive even more people who are potentially Conservatives away.

    What is a "true Conservative"? Who gets to decide? Why?

    What's the difference between a "true Republican" and a RINO? Who gets to decide and why?
  15. JimP


    Mar 20, 2007
    The minute libs start up with the "Romney only pays...XX% in taxes..", I shut off. It is simply not worth trying to educate the uneducable. Either the OP knows what he said is unsupportable, demonstrably false and misleading; or, he is uneducable. Either way I'm out.
  16. aircarver

    aircarver Ride Continues Silver Member

    I'm in. :thumbsup:

  17. Atlas

    Atlas transmogrifier

    Oct 1, 2001
    north of the equator
    Taxation = control.

    Government, once having acquired power will never willingly relinquish that power.
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2012
  18. With regard to the 13% rate, it is an argument based on an unfair standard. They are talking about his effective tax rate after all legal deductions. His taxable income is still taxed at the higher rate (somewhere in the low 30% range).

    I would bet that most here have a very low effective rate. Mine, after mortgage interest, state and local taxes, and the tax credit on three kids, is about 7%. Unless they are idiots, the people attacking Romney for his 13% rate, are doing the same thing. It is hypocritical.

    posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
  19. pugman


    May 16, 2003
    While I think in theory this is a great idea because it will cause everyone to be paying something into the someone who just received his property tax bill there is one certainity.

    A government will always get its money

    Whether they drop your rate but increase your assessment or vice versa it doesn't matter.

    Many food staples here in Wisconsin are excluded from sales tax..things like milk, eggs, etc.

    The fed will get its share and tax it..guarantee it.

    Our local beach charges a nominal fee ($3) for non locals to use it - its a beautiful beach. Suddenly, you will see tax paid on this...and of course anything the fed charges tax on so will the state.

    Medical bills will have federal sales tax added to them....

    And this allows the fed to influence purchases widely...could you imagine a 25% federal sales tax on firearms? People will say this will never happen....want to bet.

    A very interesting experiment would be to set the rate at say 5% - then if fed wants to increase it have a national vote just like the presidental election. This way every person who votes for it will know they are in effect taking money directly out of their own pocket.

    A tax is a tax.
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2012
  20. snerd


    Apr 20, 2007
    Do you have mental problems, or just live under a rock?!






    Yeah, who is making end runs?! And who is the end-runner-in-chief?!