McTag, I believe you are looking at the primary reason for the invasion of Iraq. Cycloptichorn
The justification for our invasion of Iraq is not derived from opinions or proclimations. This justification is derived from facts and logic
Ican:
Quote:... Unfortunately, if the government tries to take too much tax money from the private sector, the total amount of tax revenue collected by the governent is actually reduced.
The line I bolded is what I take issue with. I believe this is patently untrue, for several reasons.
First, you assume that any monies not paid in taxes lead to increased employment opportunities. This is not a logical position to hold, as there are many ways to spend one's money that do not in fact lead to greater employment opportunities, and a whole host of ways to spend it that do not lead to greater employment opportunities in America. Not to mention the very real possibility that you may not spend the money at all. Therefore it is disingenuous to say that taxation causes less job opportunities because it simply isn't true, and is the same old Voodoo economics all over again. I'd like to see your reasoning on this.
I know it's not"disingenuous." I think what I posted is true, but of course, I could be wrong and so could you.
Here's why I think I am right and not wrong.
I cannot think of anyway to spend one's own money that doesn't contribute to employment opportunity. Purchase any service, any product, or any comodity, and you together with millions of others doing the same thing help maintain employment. Purchase more of any service, any product, or any comodity, and you together with millions of others doing the same thing help increase employment.
Contribute to any charity, and you together with thousands of others doing the same thing contribute to the employment of charity workers and perhaps the incomes of the charity recipients. Increase your contribution, and you together with thousands of others doing the same thing help increase employment of charity workers and perhaps the incomes of the charity recipients.
Invest in any enterprise, you together with many others doing the same thing help increase the employment of workers by that enterprise.
Investing your money in a savings or checking account, you together with many others doing the same thing provide more money for the bank or investment fund to invest in enterprises.
Aaah, but investing your money by sticking it in a matress or equivalent helps neither your or any one else's employment. It probably doesn't help one's sleep either. :wink:
Second, how many are employed by the gov't itself? I know you think that number should be as close to zero as possible, but there are a large number of critical jobs for society that are funded with public monies, and when there aren't enough public monies, that reduces job opportunities in that sector accordingly. So by avoiding taxes, one can actually be said to be lowering job opportunity for many Americans.
The number employed in the private sector is about 40 times the number employed in the federal government. Approximately half of those employed by the federal government earn it one way or another by securing our rights or reducing the probability of our accidents. The rest are redistributors who are redistributing wealth from those who earn it to those who did not or do not earn it, and do not produce services, products or commodities.
By reducing the federal employment of these redistributors, we will thereby provide private employment opportunities for these redistributors as well as increase employment for everyone else.
Last, a question: how do you differentiate the private sector and the public sector of society? Cheers to all Cycloptichorn
Those people whose incomes are paid from funds collected from people or enterprises in the form of taxes, comprise the public sector. The public sector consists mainly of federal, state, county, and municipal employees.
The private sector consists of all employed people that are not employed in the public sector.
Except in countries governed by tyrannical governments, the number employed in the public sector is generally far less than the number employed in the public sector.
Quote:The justification for our invasion of Iraq is not derived from opinions or proclimations. This justification is derived from facts and logic
You are absolutely right; that is, if you state that my judgement is based upon facts and logic and that yours is based upon opinions and proclamations. Cycloptichorn
The justification for our invasion of Iraq is not derived from opinions or proclamations. This justification is derived from facts and logic, plus the proposition that our government cannot secure our lives, our liberties and our pursuits of happiness by attempting to exterminate al Qaeda terrorists without removing those governments that provide al Qaeda terrorists sanctuary for their bases.
President Bush announced to the nation, Tuesday night, 9/11/2001, that our war was not only with the terrorists who have declared war on us, it is also with those governments that “harbor” terrorists. President Bush announced to the nation, to Congress and to the rest of the world, Thursday night, 9/20/2001, that our war was not only with the terrorists who have declared war on us, it is also with those governments that “support” terrorists.
At that time there were terrorist training bases in both Afghanistan and Iraq. The terrorist training bases in Iraq were re-established in 2001 after the Kurds had defeated them a couple of years earlier.
We invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 without obtaining UN approval and removed Afghanistan's tyrannical government, because that government refused to attempt to remove the terrorist bases from Afghanistan.
We invaded Iraq in March 2003 without obtaining UN approval and removed Iraq's tyrannical government, because that government in Iraq refused to attempt to remove the terrorist bases from Iraq.
We are attempting to secure a democratic government of the Afghanistanis own design in Afghanistan primarily because such a government is presumed less likely to permit the re-establishment of terrorist bases there.
We are attempting to secure a democratic government of the Iraqis own design in Iraq primarily because such a government is presumed less likely to permit the re-establishment of terrorist bases there.
Only after this enormously difficult work is completed successfully, will the US again possess sufficient means to seriously consider invasions to remove any other tyrannical governments that refuse to attempt to remove terrorist bases from their countries.
what if they were lying, Ican?
The justification for our invasion of Iraq is not derived from opinions or proclamations. This justification is derived from facts and logic
What if who was lying about what?
Quote:The justification for our invasion of Iraq is not derived from opinions or proclamations. This justification is derived from facts and logic
This is false. I explained why in the previous post, as your argument IS based upon opinion and proclamation.
You did not exlain why. You merely proclaimed your disagreement with each statement of mine.
Quote:What if who was lying about what?
What if BushCo are lying about the reasons they chose to invade countries and prosecute the war on terror in this fashion? You have to admit the possibility, even if you never will the probability. Cycloptichorn
1. The justification for our invasion of Iraq is not derived from opinions or proclamations. This justification is derived from the following facts and logic, plus the proposition that our government cannot secure our lives, our liberties and our pursuits of happiness by attempting to exterminate al Qaeda terrorists without removing those governments that provide al Qaeda terrorists sanctuary for their bases.
2. President Bush announced to the nation, Tuesday night, 9/11/2001, that our war was not only with the terrorists who have declared war on us, it is also with those governments that “harbor” terrorists. President Bush announced to the nation, to Congress and to the rest of the world, Thursday night, 9/20/2001, that our war was not only with the terrorists who have declared war on us, it is also with those governments that “support” terrorists.
3. At that time there were terrorist training bases in both Afghanistan and Iraq. The terrorist training bases in Afghanistan were established in 1988 after the Russians abandoned their war in Afghanistan. The terrorist training bases in Iraq were re-established in 2001 after the Kurds had defeated them a couple of years earlier.
4. We invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 without obtaining UN approval and removed Afghanistan's tyrannical government, because that government refused to attempt to remove the terrorist bases from Afghanistan.
5. We invaded Iraq in March 2003 without obtaining UN approval and removed Iraq's tyrannical government, because that government in Iraq refused to attempt to remove the terrorist bases from Iraq.
6. We are attempting to secure a democratic government of the Afghanistanis own design in Afghanistan primarily because such a government is presumed less likely to permit the re-establishment of terrorist bases there.
7. We are attempting to secure a democratic government of the Iraqis own design in Iraq primarily because such a government is presumed less likely to permit the re-establishment of terrorist bases there.
8. Only after this enormously difficult work is completed successfully, will the US again possess sufficient means to seriously consider invasions to remove any other tyrannical governments that refuse to attempt to remove terrorist bases from their countries.
Cyclo
You made some good points about the dollar/euro factor being a big influence on the war.
You've probably seen this, but its well worth reading for anyone such as Ican who hasn't.
http://www.feasta.org/documents/review2/nunan.htm