Thursday September 29, 2016
Jump to content
Since I work for a construction company, and I am responsible to see all those various taxes paid, I fully agree. :-)
Since when is government, even under a Republican Governor, fair?
Here's how I see it. Your state, unlike Texas, has an Income Tax. Therefore, as the head of that state government, the governor feels it 'necessary' to maintain the influx of income taxes, even as the dems are so well known for. (And, now big government Republicans--RINO's) Obviously, if they take their foot off the neck of business, that income has to come from somewhere else, or cut services to compensate, which loses votes. There is no free lunch.
As head of that business (State government) she understands that it is politically safer to unfairly tax (And, yes, it is grossly unfair) the business than the individual, for those same dollars.
The disconnect she, and all politicians, take advantage of is that people think in terms of
the business as being equal to them in the need for the businesses to pay taxes, as people do. What people can't (Don't want to?) grasp, is that businesses don't pay taxes, under any government. They bundle that tax into the added costs to their customers in the form of higher prices, in order to maintain a profit. (Their only reason for staying in business.) Therefore, they are simply collecting the tax from the customers (The people who would otherwise pay the tax anyway) for the state/feds, and passing it on to the state/feds when they pay 'their' taxes.
Therefore, it operates exactly the same way, and in effect is, a sales tax paid for by the end user. The people. All this, therefore, is simply smoke and mirrors to maintain the illusion that the people pay less tax than they actually do.
I think it reprehensible that those who claim to be 'conservative' don't disclose to the people, who really just don't get it (For whatever reason) the fact that all the tax comes out of the pocket of those who work.
On the positive side of the picture, these taxes are not limited to just the few people who pay taxes anyway. (over 50% of the population pay no personal taxes) In this methodology, everyone that buys products pays the tax.
One the negative side, it makes Arizona producers (Even those in 'non-producing' jobs like construction) less competitive than out of state producers, because their prices are artificially high. And so goes the game. Smoke and mirrors, and a public who "really cares", but really doesn't, really. Anything complex, they don't want to deal with. Therefore, they are sheep led to the slaughter.
Simple, right? :-)
Absolutely. You know, I got caught sweeping stuff under the rug one time. :-)
Never did it again. :-)
So, what is the difference? Their skin color? Surely not! The difference is that those other folks were left to fend for themselves, and it was a hard row to hoe; but they did it; and, have become strong and self-assured for it. But, the Sioux, many of the Apache, the Cheyenne the Comanche, the Arapahoe, the Nez Perce and a host of other almost forgotten tribes have sunk to near non-existence in the eyes of the world. Their lives are so substandard, to visit their reservations is typically depressing. (I think the Mescalero Apaches of New Mexico, and the Arizona tribes have fared some better, because they are using their heads to be free.) The difference is the domination by a conquering power that treats them as substandard people.
And, the subjugation of the blacks is having the same effect. Some of this is well intentioned by people who think they are helping them, as it was (And is) with the American Indians. But, their movement has been hi-jacked by those not so well intentioned. And, now, they expand this subjugation effort to include LBGT groups, as well. What is so mind-boggling is that these people rush to be dominated so quickly, and without thought. The carrot of something for nothing, or to be considered ‘better’ somehow, is an allure that is like a flashing spinner to a bass. Once they are hooked, they are trapped on the end of that line, just like these poor victims of a malicious government that seeks greater power and strength through their servitude.
I think of the Pied Piper with his siren’s call to children who trust, and we stand on the side lines wishing there was something we could do to save them from un-ending slavery and the mundane existence without true freedom. The biggest thing I see, is that we will all be sucked into that dark hole with them.
Exactly right. We're all 'half-breeds' (To use an old derogatory term) when it comes to that. I'm part Irish, English, Scottish, Swedish (Viking) with a touch of Snapping Turtle tossed in. A dupe's mixture, if you will. Oh, and I’m 1/16th Cherokee, as well. And, no, I can’t prove it. :-)
The Micks (Irish) landed here and took every dirty job handed out. They were ridiculed, and spit on, but within 100 years, they’d worked their way up to respectable status, with one even becoming President of the U.S. So, did the Wops, and the Polocks (I use those terms not in derision, but to point out that each was thought of as substandard, at one time). Each struggled, as a people, to better themselves, and did. But until recently, the one example of a race that hasn’t fared so will is the American Indian, as a whole.
I have a strong affinity for them. I lived in South Dakota for a time, and dated a nice girl who was half Ogallala Sioux, and half Norwegian. I have yet to find a girl as beautiful as she was. (And, I’ve looked, too.) Through her friends, I had some dealings with the Sioux on the Rosebud Reservation, and got to know a few that eventually were in that uprising back in ’76. (I knew them during the late 60’s.) Curiously, I later became a friend to a Federal Marshal who was with the FBI at the standoff in ’76. He admitted to shooting some of the Ogallala. But, I digress. :-)
All to say that their shanties and their poverty is a direct result of 130 years of mistreatment by the Federal Government that had put itself forward as the care-giver and protector of those folks. They have been lied to, cheated, knifed, clubbed, shot and otherwise trampled under the feet of an abusive government. Their spirit is almost broken, but not quite. Deep down, is still that wild and beautiful desire to once again be free on the land.
BTW, racism isn’t what folks see it as, today. Here’s a definition of it from an old dictionary.
“• abusive or aggressive behaviour towards members of another race on the basis of such a belief”
Now, just believing someone of another race is not equal to you, in some respect, isn’t, within itself, racist. Personally, I don’t see anyone that way, but some do, and I have in the past. But, that, in itself, isn’t racism.
That was taken from a dictionary printed in the ‘40’s. Looking on line, I see that, and another definition “the belief that races have distinctive cultural characteristics determined by hereditary factors and that this endows some races with an intrinsic superiority over others” that has been added in the last few years. According to this new definition, it is what we think that is wrong. That’s what all this hullabaloo is about, now. Those who are stroking them into this frenzy, want to control our very thoughts. The term ‘Thought police’ is a prevalent term of today.
And, we see it in our government. Just a few days ago, I heard that a prominent senator was to soon present a bill to restrict our first amendment rights of free speech. Doesn’t that sound Orwellian to you? Are not your words the expressions of your thoughts?
So, how does this affect this school in Ohio? The brutality, and insanity of a neighborhood, mostly black, I suspect, come not from racism, but from the breakdown of society and the functions of its local government. These big cities have the strongest gun laws anywhere, but have much more crime. The stronger the government is, local or otherwise, the more it controls. The more it controls, the more resistance to law, civil liberty and decency abound.
Look at the small to midsized towns of America. You don’t hear of it there. Take the four biggest towns in America out of the stats, and America falls from the second most criminalized nation to the fourth least criminalized nation in the world. Those cities aren’t ruled by whitey, they are ruled by the very people who promote this hatred against whitey, for their own gain.
The solution isn’t busing them twenty miles, through the war zone, to a safer neighborhood. It is taking government’s foot off the neck of these mainly black people. Give them the chance to run their own businesses, and to find decent work. Take away the spoon, and cause them to want to feed themselves. It can’t be done overnight. And, in all likelihood it will never will happen. When the black folks of America recognize that they are just Americans and not some special subspecies, then they will rise up on their own, and become “free at last.”
Is it not because the feds have spoon fed these folks for years? Giving them every thing they wanted? Offering them more; while the act of receiving those free things actually prevented them from striving to better themselves. Is that not the major different between them and whitey? I know many black folks who aren’t deprived, who work for a living, who turn their noses up at handouts, and most of all don’t feel racial hatred from whitey or anyone else. These people are great people. Those I know well enough I love dearly, and the ones I don’t I have respect for. Why should I hate them? They are like me. They like to do their own thing, make their own money, and live the American dream.
I met a black man in the Air Force. He was obviously rich, drove an Austin Healy and took this poor old white trash boy from Alabama under his wings. Why? I don’t know. I later found out he had been pretty far up in the ranks of the Bostonian NAACP, and had close connections to the national NAACP, as well. (He told me he’d joined the Air Force to avoid a hot time in ‘Nam. Hind sight tells me he probably did the right thing.) He and I had some pretty deep conversations regarding not just the race issues of 1967, but on varied other things as well. Damn, I wish I could remember his name. I really liked that man. :-)
When I said they were being fed a line of bunk, I meant they were being victimized by liberals for their votes. The liberals have a good thing going here. Oh, and by the way, I know a lot of good liberals too, and I certainly don’t think all liberals are dishonest, at all. But, liberal or conservative, when you have power, it corrupts you, and you want more. “Total power corrupts, totally”.
What’s the result? Black people, in droves, are dependent upon the spoon feeding of Uncle Sam. Does that not make them slaves to the one that feeds them? Are they not obligated to vote for the one that feeds them? If you were so fed, could you vote yourself the loss of your meal ticket? I think not. Especially if that’s all you ever knew.
So, they know they are dissatisfied, and they know they are told it’s whitey’s fault, and they’ve been told of the racial hatred, that was real, in the early nineteen hundreds. So, isn’t it logical to conclude (Not having heard anything else—and if they had, wouldn’t they not believe it?) that it’s whitey’s fault? If I were in that situation, it’d be hard for me not to feel that way, and I’d surely love to get my hands of the ones that I thought were doing me wrong.
You have struck a note that I've been thinking about, since this race tension has come up, again. I thought we were past all that. I am, anyway.
I grew up in Alabama, and when Governor Wallace stood in the door at Tuscaloosa, to prevent blacks from going to school with the whites, I had my gun, and was ready to go, when the call came. Not that I had anything against the blacks, nor them me. But, I despised the idea that white people from up north were down there agitating an issue that (To me) had never been a problem before. I have long since come to see that it was a problem, and those nosy goody two shoes type agitators were right. I still don’t agree with how it was done. But, that’s another issue. The fact that black folks did have it bad, and ultimately got the same freedoms I had puts the silver lining in the cloud.
And, through this, our own government was dictating to us how to live our own lives. (Think Civil War issues—and the federal government knocking the scab off old wounds.) So, my agitation—and Bamians as a whole—wasn’t with the blacks, who we knew just wanted something better; but with the whites who thought themselves so superior to us, and getting the local black folks up in arms against us. Worse yet, we hated a central government telling us that our own state government was not able to stand between us and the monster we had so grown to hate.
Now, to modern times. I see more of a racist view from most black folks, than from white. I see whites bending over backwards to placate the blacks, generally speaking. Sure, there’s a few racists in any group, and there always will be. So, why do I think blacks more racist? IMHO, it is because they are being fed a line of bunk regarding their problems. They are told that whitey will never take his foot off their necks until the government forces them to.
Those problems aren’t because whitey wants to keep them in the dark. Those problems are because they live in neighborhoods that are controlled by liberals. :-) Consider that most major cities in the U.S. are politically dominated by liberal regimes. Consider Detroit for example. It’s bankrupt, and can’t provide even basic services. And most of the others are struggling along those same lines. Who suffers? Mostly blacks, who can’t flee from such truck, as most of the whites have. And, why is that?
Pardon me barging in. :-)
About 2 years ago, the Houston Independent School Districts made national headlines by developing their own curriculum; and then have the state over-rule that curriculum. Those schools had adopted a Pro-Muslim, and Pro-Abortion programs, giving different classes that addressed each area of interest.
The state has the right and duty to develop minimum standards, and also to protect the children from rogue schools doing weird things, like Houston. I certainly would not want my kids to have to set through anything like those courses.
The result was that Texas law says that the state will decide the text books used, and the also decide if certain courses are to be allowed or not.
Wow. Big stink over that one, pretty much on party lines. Therefore, since the state government is very conservative, it was the liberals who screamed.
But, if they state should become liberal (Not that impossible, considering the way the morals and the anything goes mentality of younger people as switching to the very opposite) we would not like what they come up with, either. I think the conservatives have set themselves up for a fall, at some point.
Personally, I think school boards should be able to set the curriculum for their own schools, and if that doesn't meet the standards of the community, then vote the scumbags out, and elect those with the vision to do it the way the community wants it.
Having said that, I also see the need for the state to preserve the rights of the minorities from the tyranny of the majority (Familiar phrase, eh?) even in local situations.
Therefore, there are good arguments for either cause.
I detest the notion of National Standards. That should belong to the states and the people. It is beyond the mandate of our gov't. (Yes, I understand Common Core isn't a government entity.) But, more importantly, why should someone in New Jersey, or Florida, have any say in how Payson teaches their kids?
To allow the schools to set their own curriculum keeps more of local control out of gov't hands. Freedom! It's like a leaking dam. We know freedom is leaking out, but there are so many losses we're like the boy who stuck his finger in the hole in the dam. What happens when we see another leak? Eventually the dam will break, and spell disaster for those down stream.
Last login: Saturday, April 9, 2016