Maraud, Wild, et al...Can we discuss this elephant in room? SHouse??

@AverageJoe1 said
Please, no natural right stuff. I cannot imagine anyone discussing that with anyone else.

And why not? Because you're wrong?

@AverageJoe1 said
It would be fairly easy to balance the budget with a few tax corrections like taxing capital gains, dividends and inheritances at regular rates.

You don't close your post....you should tell spruce and everyone what you will do with the money that you have saved by cutting military in half

(You and Bernie that is)

How about actively trying to solve the homeless issue, the hunger issue, the clean water issue and sending everyone back to school? It clearly didn't take the first time.

Either you actually want to make this country better or you're lying.

@spruce112358 said
The only problem I have with "inalienable" rights is when someone comes along and alienates them. 😆

I certainly agree that we are born and immediately are "endowed" with rights - no argument. And those rights should never be "alienated" - they can't be sold or traded or given up [NB. they can be taken away, e.g. in prison]

Is the source birth, though? Or cultural ...[text shortened]... the Book of Nature. I don't think we can find that list anywhere. Nature is not that...directive. 😆

Just make alienating people from their rights illegal.

As the Constitution tried to do. But finish the job.

@AverageJoe1 said
?? if we all live on an island, you are saying that it’s inhabitants, our citizens, have a right to an education. So that will be decided around a campfire on the island…by all the elders. So, so when everybody gets up from that meeting, and announce that everyone has a right to an education, where does it come from, this education that they have a right to? I do not know an easier way to ask this question.

Again with the stupid "island" analogy.

Go pack now, cause you'll be the first one voted off.

@AverageJoe1 said
Yes, that is all well and good, but what you have simply said is that the government decides to spend money of taxpayers to give to people who have these rights that y’all speak of. You have never really defined what the rights are, except to say that education, healthcare and housing are human rights.. Then you just stop with that ….you never tell us how it can be a huma ...[text shortened]... ld like to see you justify that one. I don’t see a lot of equality there as y’all also preach about.

But you're not actually providing anything.

@wildgrass said
No I think the system we have is just fine. I only wish we had caps on campaign contributions and a balanced budget amendment for federal politicians.

Hear, hear.

@Suzianne said
But you're not actually providing anything.

I am providing tax money from which to pay these mysterious 'rights' that you people keep mentioning. Right to housing. My taxes to go towards housing people????? I'd say that I am indeed providing,,,,,big time.
You need another tack to travel on.

@Suzianne said
Just make alienating people from their rights illegal.

As the Constitution tried to do. But finish the job.

What rights? NOW do you follow?

@wildgrass said
No I think the system we have is just fine. I only wish we had caps on campaign contributions and a balanced budget amendment for federal politicians.

We finally agree on something.
But have you read the opinions of your comrades on this thread. They are more into 'gimme it'.

@Suzianne said
How about actively trying to solve the homeless issue, the hunger issue, the clean water issue and sending everyone back to school? It clearly didn't take the first time.

Either you actually want to make this country better or you're lying.

You are not listening to my posts. I agree with you, don't you see that? govt is responsible for roads, clean water, providing welfare and food for the down-and-out, and the schools. We agree.

@AverageJoe1 said
What rights? NOW do you follow?

We've been talking to you about rights, trying to school you, FOR THIS ENTIRE THREAD.

Now do YOU follow?

@AverageJoe1 said
You are not listening to my posts. I agree with you, don't you see that? govt is responsible for roads, clean water, providing welfare and food for the down-and-out, and the schools. We agree.

And yet your boss wants to eliminate FEMA.

@AverageJoe1 said
We finally agree on something.
But have you read the opinions of your comrades on this thread. They are more into 'gimme it'.

There is NO one more into "gimme it" than Republicans. Especially rich Republicans.

How much did Elon Musk get handed to him by the government last year?

@AverageJoe1 said
I am providing tax money from which to pay these mysterious 'rights' that you people keep mentioning. Right to housing. My taxes to go towards housing people????? I'd say that I am indeed providing,,,,,big time.
You need another tack to travel on.

Stop focusing on ONE thing the Feds pay for.

And you're not paying for that anyways. It's the Feds. Not you.


Haven't you learned ANYthing from me in this forum?

If all you give is money, you might as well not give anything. You might fund some stuff, but you are NOT doing the "hard work". You write a check. Oh, how generous.

How much TIME do you give to Charity?

@Suzianne said
Would it be okay to raise taxes -- i.e. make it a function of government -- to provide these things to people who have never even had the option of having them?

Yes. I think government should act as the 'charity of last resort' for e.g. widows and orphans and the mentally ill who cannot do for themselves. No one on US soil should ever die of hunger or exposure - I think guaranteeing that right is required to justify guaranteeing the right to property that most of us pay much more daily attention to.

I think private charities and donations should chip in above the 'survival' level to make things more comfortable - adding cheese to those ham sandwiches and free internet, for instance. I've seen this public-private system work very well at a place where I volunteer which is about 1/3 gummint funded in opex. 😆