WSJ: Democracy loses if Prop. 8 is overturned.

[steven787]

TheRealMafoo said:

 

Your quote "Money does not equal liberty" is inaccurate. Well, money does not in itself. If I were able to acquire it with no effort, it would not represent my time. I unfortunately, have not learned that trick, so for me (and hundreds of millions of other americans) money means time. My time. If all taxes were used for, was to run a government (pay for roads, military, police, fire, judges,congress, etc..), then asking me to pay that is not an infringement on my liberties.

When you create a social program however (like healthcare), and I am required to pay for some else's service with money I am required to earn. I am working in the service of others forcibly. I become an indentured servant. That is a loss of liberty.

So two ways to fix this.

 

• No social programs funded by the government. (Aside from education, as that one is profitable. Educated people make more money, and thus pay more taxes)
  
• flat tax with no exceptions.
  

 

Either one of those goes into service, then no longer is the government taking away my liberties (with respect to taking my time and giving it to someone else)

As for your comment that no one is forcing you to become rich (and 1/3 of what I make goes to the government, and I am anything but rich), is the same argument that no one is forcing a man to marry a woman.

You say not having same sex marriage is a loss of liberty. I could say that's true only if a gay man was not allowed to marry a woman, and straight men were allowed to marry men.

Every man in this country has the same right with respect to marriage. Every one of then can marry a woman. If you don't want to (for whatever reason), that's not a loss of liberty.

There you go, I used your philosophy about rich and poor, and applied it to marriage. It sounds just as stupid there too.

 

You didn't explain how in your fair system how the wealthy will secure their wealth?  With a bank insurance? With police?  With a military?  Well if there's a flat tax and minimal government services, then what do the poor and middle class get for paying the higher taxes?

Who decides what's a good thing to spend government money on? Roads? Not everyone benefits equally from roads.  Military... what poor person cares who their master is, if they live in a system that doesn't provide any benefits?

Think about history for a minute.  What has happened in countries where the rich didn't take care of the poor?  (Hint: French Revolution, Russian and then the Bolshevic Revolution, most of modern day Africa, every Asian communist country, and failed colonies.) I'm not saying it's fair or right, just that it works.

Your missing the point on my stance on gay marriage.  Why not let people do something that doesn't harm anyone, when it will give them one less thing to revolt over.  The fact of the matter is gay marriage upsets a lot of straight people, but if it is allowed, then they will get used to it with time.  If the ban continues, the civil unrest will continue.  It's just what works.

I wil complete my whole idea from earlier.

The balance is between liberty and order.  People rebel for the sake of liberty when they have significantly less than they want.  It fails and order is restored with less liberty than before.  If you don't manage with liberty and order in mind, you will have neither.

My original line was used to show that we are going to far in the direction of order, and now we have people rioting.  That is a failure of government.