My take on the US presidential election.

I was saddened by the realization that we as a country have such low ambitions, and have lost our way when it comes to the spirit of space exploration and the need for a national program to do big things. Instead, those who desire the big wheels of government look to petty handouts and a paternal state system.

Right As Rain Broheim. I'd rather see TRILLIONS go to a Moon Base than see Agencies, as so Aptly Posted By Sir Guy, get All That Taxpayer Dough.

I'd Love To See all those Hand Outs Agency Job workers push themselves away from their computers/phones/paperwork, walk out of The Cubicle, out of The Office Building and over to The Hanger/Fabrication-Assembly Building and Get Cracking on REAL WORK putting HumanKind On The Moon.

We, As Humans, have to get off this Live Planet, where we are Destroying Life(non-human kind) and get on a Dead Planet, where we can start Destroying Ourselves without Destroying Defensiveless(against us) life.

But, The Zombies(Dem/Libs/Socialists) Of The Pitiful(Prez) Party won't have it.

Meh For Prez. To The Moon Meh! Thanks Newt!

SpaceDustDiggingDullnanDo

Many of the agencies listed are income producing (state franchise tax board), self sustaining, or duplicate names of the same agency (multiple listings of the same phone number).

Also included was every state college, (I did not look for community colleges) and many other things.

But it looked impressive as long as someone does not look too close.
____________

Janice

But it looked impressive as long as someone does not look too close.

Hello xclusive585,

Thank you for the welcome also. I have no problems with the government taxing and spending, well I accept is as a reality lets say ;-). For public works, roads, military spending, space programs etc. I think I have already stated that there are many valid reasons for governments, and that means taxation.
What I disagree with is the argument for social justice that was being proposed, often by progressives and liberals. Social Justice for the poor through government spending is something I reject. And the notion that if one is really a “good Christian”, they should be supporting social spending via the government.

This is actually a veiled argument that religions impulse and government should be married, when I am making the opposite argument. Religious impulse to charity should be divorced from government functions. Taxation is compulsive and forced by law, charity should come from the individual agent or group of agents by free association as protected by our constitution.

When you say that the government is “tasked” with this, it conveys a world view where one might not see the value in not for profit charities, such as many religious and non-religious, charities we are free to donate our funds to towards any disparity we see in our society, enviroment or world. Those who do not actively participate in this system of charities may view the government as the only way to provide this relief to those in need. When this happens, whether people see it or not, the government starts to become a kind of ersatz religious institution in their lives and the only institution to solve social problems. I see this outlook as a big problem.

To be clear I am not against the government helping the less fortunate in principal, I am just against it being the primary form of conveyance, as it results in the abuse of power by the government and has the effect of unburdening the individual responsibility to be involved directly to solve these types of issues. History has shown that this does not work, and we can see what the entitlement culture is doing to Europe and here in the States. I expect we are probably going to have to mutually disagree on this, respectfully of course.

That’s quite a wager. For your sake I hope Obama wins then. If I lose my bet I only lose a few bucks ;-)

I am curious just what you believe the AZ law does. I have obviously not read the whole thing but by the extract and the Supreme Court arguments I have heard I understand it only drives behaviors for state authorities to uphold existing Federal law as mandated under Title 8 in the lawful arrest and detention functions of everyday policing. So if the laws are unjust, it is not AZ law that is to blame, it is the laws of the land. If the Feds are not going to enforce them, or allow the states to, what is the point of them? The real question is are the Federal laws valid, and if so why are they not being enforced? If they are not worthy of being enforced, why is the Federal government not overturning or changing them?

[sarcasm]

Doesn't look good for our current dictator.

Now here's a popular leader.
Look at what he has accomplished.

"As the hours and days pass, I'm sure that with God's favor, medical science and this soldier's body that envelops me, I will get back to where I must be, in the front line of the battle, alongside the Venezuelan people, promoting the socialist revolution."

During his stay in Havana, Chavez discussed means of accelerating Venezuela's drive toward socialism with Fidel Castro, one of his political mentors.

"The transition to socialism requires increased social justice and equality every day," he said. "Yesterday, I was speaking with my colleague and comrade Fidel about these issues."

Chavez thanked Cuban President Raul Castro and his elder brother for providing medical care as he attempts to overcome his illness.

Manned space exploration can wait. unmanned missions can do more than sending a fragile species into space with all the things it needs to survive. All that stuff takes up weight and space on any spacecraft sent to explore. We are better served by sending unmanned craft to other worlds and out of the solar system to explore where humans would easily expire after a short time.

If and when we find something to leave for then yes start up a manned space program again. Until then science is better served with our robotic friends doing the exploring
____________
Proud member of TSWB.

End terrorism by building a school

California deficit has soared to $16 billion, Gov. Jerry Brown says

Don't look at this very close and it doesn't seem too bad.

Too bad states can't print more money, eh?

Well maybe our next president will print another $16 billion (not much compared to $5 trillion) and bail California out.

Well maybe our next president will print another $16 billion (not much compared to $5 trillion) and bail California out.

How much money did POTUS just take from fat cat Hollywood types that they should have paid in taxes to California?

Can I ask an honest question Guy?
How about just making BIG hikes on the taxes on the 500(or even 100)milion/year+ group? (and even then, only on income taxes- so as to encourage spending in/from business or else; taxes...)
That doesn't hurt anyone that most of us would know. What do you think/feel?

Can I ask an honest question Guy?
How about just making BIG hikes on the taxes on the 500(or even 100)milion/year+ group? (and even then, only on income taxes- so as to encourage spending in/from business or else; taxes...)
That doesn't hurt anyone that most of us would know. What do you think/feel?

Let's bring back the 91% tax bracket. That *causes* the least amount of unemployment. So let's do it. I'm ready.

(I'm tired of trying to say we have a spending problem...)

California has the exact same problem GM had. Can we declare bankruptcy and get some TARP money to fix it? How about in POTUS? We even vote democrat.

I always wondered about the 91% tax rate working, after all it's a violation of the Laffer curve. It turns out the reason 91% worked in the 1950's was because this was just after WW II and we had no competition. Japan and most of Europe was destroyed and about the only country left to compete with us was England. Any tax rate short of 100% would work. That is not the case today.

Since we don't have a couple continents to rebuild 91% is a bit farfetched for our current system.

But we do have a moon to colonize, if we have the guts to take on a real project we can't predict the outcome of in advance.