AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

... 1) We should not be forced to work without compensation for the exclusive benefit of another. Such forced labor is the technical definition of slavery, however benign, and however it is implemented, it chips away at and erodes our liberties and freedoms.

... 2) The second principle is the corrupting influence that is automatic when government can use the people's money to curry favor and influence with individuals or targeted constituencies. It is corrupting both for those who assume the power to dispense the money and for those receiving it.

...I agree. If Texas needs an airport, Texas should build an airport. Unless necessary for the common defense, the Federal government should not be building airports in Texas.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

The fact that someone trained their dog to do that is pretty sad. Don't you right-wingers have anything better to do?

Cycloptichorn

Naw. It's more fun teasing a gullible liberal who thinks the dog was trained to do that.

When my taxes go to pay for that airport in Texas, I'm financially worse off and you're financially better off. It doesn't matter that you don't own the airport. That's a transfer of wealth from me to you, isn't it?

When my taxes went to pay for that airport in Texas, I was financially worse off, and you were financially worse off too.

I do not become financially better off until I lawfully use that airport for my profit. However, my profits--and everyone else's profits--from lawfully using the airport are limited by the fees required to lawfully use that airport. We lawful users of the airport must pay some of those fees regardless of how much we use the airport, while the rest of those fees do depend on how much we use the airport.

Foxfyre wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

The fact that someone trained their dog to do that is pretty sad. Don't you right-wingers have anything better to do?

Cycloptichorn

Naw. It's more fun teasing a gullible liberal who thinks the dog was trained to do that.

Oh, so you think the Dog naturally doesn't like Barack Obama or his name?

Who is the Gullible one here, Fox?

Cycloptichorn

The 'why' for me lies in two basic principles.

1) We should not be forced to work without compensation for the exclusive benefit of another.

It is not a legitimate function of the federal government to lend money to a bank for the exclusive use of the bank or for the purpose of enriching the owners of the bank or any individual associated with the bank.

It is a legitimate function of the federal government to require banks to make a reasonable portion of deposits available for legitimate use of the people and to utilize sensible rules of lending and investment and not put the peoples' money at unacceptable risk.

The bank bailout of late 2008 was a sticky wicket because it was the government that essentially forced the banks to make risky loans and therefore bore a great deal of responsibility for the inevitable financial collapse.

I agree. If Texas needs an airport, Texas should build an airport. Unless necessary for the common defense, the Federal government should not be building airports in Texas.

Yeah, those aren't payroll tax cuts. Here -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009#Tax_cuts

I wonder if that chart is somehow an average, or somethin'

Cycloptichorn

Tax cuts for individuals
Total: $237 billion

$116 billion: New payroll tax credit of $400 per worker and $800 per couple in 2009 and 2010. Phaseout begins at $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for joint filers. [26]

$70 billion: Alternative minimum tax: a one year increase in AMT floor to $70,950 for joint filers for 2009.[26]

$15 billion: Expansion of child tax credit: A $1,000 credit to more families (even those that do not make enough money to pay income taxes).

$14 billion: Expanded college credit to provide a $2,500 expanded tax credit for college tuition and related expenses for 2009 and 2010. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $160,000.

$6.6 billion: Homebuyer credit: $8,000 refundable credit for all homes bought between 1/1/2009 and 12/1/2009 and repayment provision repealed for homes purchased in 2009 and held more than three years. This only applies to first-time homebuyers.[38]

$4.7 billion: Excluding from taxation the first $2,400 a person receives in unemployment compensation benefits in 2009.

$4.7 billion: Expanded earned income tax credit to increase the earned income tax credit " which provides money to low income workers " for families with at least three children.

$4.3 billion: Home energy credit to provide an expanded credit to homeowners who make their homes more energy-efficient in 2009 and 2010. Homeowners could recoup 30 percent of the cost up to $1,500 of numerous projects, such as installing energy-efficient windows, doors, furnaces and air conditioners.

$1.7 billion: for deduction of sales tax from car purchases, not interest payments phased out for incomes above $250,000.

President Eisenhower correctly recognized that the German Autobahn was efficient and effective in moving troops and supplies around Germany and saw the benefit to having the same capabilities here. And because the highway sysem extended to and mutually benefitted all the states without prejudice, it was a legitimate federal project. A public airport does not mutually benefit all the states without prejudice and is therefore not a legitimate federal project.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

The fact that someone trained their dog to do that is pretty sad. Don't you right-wingers have anything better to do?

Cycloptichorn

Naw. It's more fun teasing a gullible liberal who thinks the dog was trained to do that.

Oh, so you think the Dog naturally doesn't like Barack Obama or his name?

Who is the Gullible one here, Fox?

Cycloptichorn

If you honestly believe that dog is responding to Obama's name, I guess that explains how you are gullible enough to believe all the ideological junk you believe and keep repeating.

If you have a better idea, you can share it with our government.

Foxfyre wrote:

The 'why' for me lies in two basic principles.

1) We should not be forced to work without compensation for the exclusive benefit of another.

I'm not sure how paying taxes qualifies as "being forced to work without compensation for the benefit of another." Care to explain?

Foxfyre wrote:

It is not a legitimate function of the federal government to lend money to a bank for the exclusive use of the bank or for the purpose of enriching the owners of the bank or any individual associated with the bank.

Is it a legitimate function of the federal government to buy troubled assets from banks?

Foxfyre wrote:

It is a legitimate function of the federal government to require banks to make a reasonable portion of deposits available for legitimate use of the people and to utilize sensible rules of lending and investment and not put the peoples' money at unacceptable risk.

How surprisingly liberal of you, Foxfyre. That kind of intrusive regulation of private business is the sort of thing that most conservatives can't stand. They would argue that all of those things that you mention are best left to the banks, who are in a better position to evaluate and act on their own interests.

Foxfyre wrote:

The bank bailout of late 2008 was a sticky wicket because it was the government that essentially forced the banks to make risky loans and therefore bore a great deal of responsibility for the inevitable financial collapse.

The government forced AIG to issue credit-default swaps without any hedges? Really?

Foxfyre wrote:

I agree. If Texas needs an airport, Texas should build an airport. Unless necessary for the common defense, the Federal government should not be building airports in Texas.

You'll have to take that up with Ican. He may not want his taxes going to pay for social programs, but he sure does like his airports.

Not specifically, but the government did threaten and coerce lending institutions to make extremely risky loans and underwrite such loans and allowed Fannie Mae and Freddic Mac to bundle them into larger financial packages while assuring the banks that Fannie Mae and Freddic Mac were fundamentally sound which was a flat out lie. Neither the banks nor their insurors should have gone along with this ponzi scheme, but the immediate profits--an illusion created by the government--were too attractive for many to resist. That does not excuse anybody. But it is a reason for the problem. And it was an irresponsible government that started the snowball rolling that created it.