Dick Armey and Matt Kibbe have written an oped in the WSJ listing $3 trillion in cuts from the federal government. That’s a good start, but it does seem like it would be political suicide because you’d be taking away so many people’s shares of other people’s money. I have a solution: Don’t give those people a vote on it.
I know that’s undemocratic, but I don’t know where we got this idea that we can be democratic with other people’s money. The people who own the money should just be able to say, “I’ve decided to keep that money and spend it myself.” And then the entitlement would go away because there is no money for it. I know it was just one of Harry Reid’s brain delusions when he called taxation voluntary, but wouldn’t that be nice if it were true. Then the government would come to us and say, “We’d like money for poor people.” And I’d say, “No, you’re horribly inefficient with money. I’m giving to other charities.” And then they’d come back and say, “We’d like to build giant robots to crush terrorists.” And I’d say, “Let me find my check book.”
Think of that. Taxpayers would be someone the government would have to argue with individually to get our money instead of being piñatas they just keep whacking. But then, you might say, the government would have so little money it could hardly do anything. To which I’d say, “Yeah.”
First thing we need to do is eliminate having taxes taken out of our paychecks and go back to everyone paying quarterly. That would create an appropriate level of outrage right there.
Then, like Frank alluded to, everyone is on the hook for the necessities, and everything else is an optional line item: Social Security (if you want to participate), other social programs, and the like. You can choose to contribute or not. No more pilfering from the pockets of the masses. Of course, the argument would be over the necessities…
If it’s not listed in the Constitution as something the government should be spending money on, then it’s not the government’s problem. Why is that so difficult?
What most people forget is that the framers intended only LANDOWNERS (in todays world say producers) to vote. When George Washington was elected only about 6% of the population could vote.
This was not – as some might argue – racist or sexist. It was intentional, so that only people with a STAKE in the system could vote. The framers were well aware of what could happen when have nots could vote to take from the haves. Our whole governmental system was set up to avoid this.
Today something like 45% of the population pays no taxes. If you add in people who are working for the government and pay taxes (federal employees – school teachers – firefighters – etc – etc.), you quickly find that the people who actually PRODUCE to pay their taxes are VERY VERY limited. This small minority pays for everything and everyone and has an infintesimal say in what is taken from them and how it is spent.
More people need to know and understand their history. The framers were wise and accomplised men.
Silly Frank. Ask almost any intrenched politician or government bureaucrat and they will enlighten you. It’s not our money, it’s the governments money. It’s the money we pay to have them take away our liberties, ignore us and spit on the constitution and dang it we’re just not paying them enough.
First thing I’d do. Make Washington a lobbiest free zone. Then start dismantling special interest groups as well as stop funding for entities that hate us, including countries that pretend to be our friends. We should also cut loose the EPA, Homeland Security, the IRS and the Department of Education. I won’t get started on unions. I think maybe they and other special interest groups should have to pay a hefty fee to even exist. That might off set the amount of damage they’ve done over the years. Federal, state and local judges should have to take a test every 5 years to remain standing, just to make sure they are still conversant with the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
There are so many more options, like firing incompetent federal workers ( or ones like at state DMV’s who treat you like you walked in with a dead skunk around your neck). You don’t like your job or the people you have to deal with. Buh bye! But these are a good start. I’d say “let’s lock and load” but I’m afraid the FBI might come arrest the 5 ft 2, gray hair (if the dye job doesn’t last) old grandmother. I”m such a threat, be afwaiid , be wery afwaid.
So I’ll just say “Yippee ki yay yea……………”
I wish I could have the honor of writing a check to a group of servicemen standing on my porch.
The pain, oh the pain. That’s a prob, but I agree with the Beckmeister. The pain has to go all the way around. Seanmahair’s right in that foreign aid has to be eliminated. The military’s DRAP (Dinosaur Rocket Assault Program) will need to be put on hold while we eliminate the Department of Edumication. As far as the military goes, we could eliminate most of our overseas bases and military support (not Israel’s). We could make
countriesleeches like Korea and Germany — who don’t like us anyway — pay for our military there.In fact, we hardly need any overseas bases, provided that — as someone suggested — we become the Revengenator.
Every year I write a big fat check to the Federal Government because my quarterly filings have been too small. And what do I get in return? The Federal government comes to my house and buggers me and then wipes their weener off on my drapes, then they go out on my front steps and take a giant Obama! Then they tell me to have a nice day…
If everyone had to pay their taxes at the end of the year by writing a check instead of having it automatically deducted from each paycheck, all politicians would be replaced in the next tax year, programs would be cut and taxes would be lowered.
Completely unrelated: right now, 1243 EST, go to aol.com and look at the picture of Helen Thomas that they have under the headline stories. I realize that I’m ask you to intentionally look at Helen Thomas, but I just want to know if anyone else thinks she looks like Quagmire from Family Guy.
I hope someone yells “we don’t want your steenkin yen” at Hu during lunch today. that ought to fix things fast.
Burmashave is correct, especially in regards to oversea bases. I classify the world as such:
Class 1 countries are countries that are not America, but are not overrun by leftist rebels and are not plagued by disease. They may be worth fighting for, provided they prove they like free enterprise. Examples could include the UK, South Korea, and Canada.
Class 2 countries are countries in and outside of our own hemisphere that are pathetic and overrun by leftist rebels and terrorists, plagued by disease, and/or are home to massive amounts of drug production. Haiti, Mexico, Afghanistan, Colombia would probably fit the bill. Such countries are filled with horrible jungles and low-intensity warfare – perfect for producing men like Chesty.
Class 3 countries are entirely worthless. France, Kazakhstan, Switzerland, etc.
Class 4 countries are countries like Russia, North Korea, Venezuela. These countries primarily serve to fund the Air Force and Navy.
Giggity
While I’m open to the idea of reducing the size and number of our foreign military bases, I’m very reluctant to say to just axe them all. As anyone who has played “Axis and Allies” knows, the best way to get troops into a fight is to already have them near the action. If you have to move your troops over to the action from overseas, it’s a much more difficult proposition logistically.
Speaking of which, if we made all students take part in strategy games instead of touchy-feely leftist indoctrination in school, I think we’d have a much higher collective level of critical thinking.
I agree that abolishing paycheck withholding would ventilate the fires of outrage over the very high taxes that some of us pay without thinking about it, but I just mentioned the larger issue. Only some of us are paying taxes at all. Nearly half the eligible voters in this country aren’t paying income taxes, and a large portion of them actually get money from the government – money they got from us!
I find the communist practice of levying taxes based on your income to be wholly outrageous! From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. That’s the communist creedo, it should not be our tax code! It wouldn’t even be so bad if the takers in the scenario were at least required to be moderately productive.
I invite you to re-read and pass on to your friends the Ten Men Go Out To Dinner story.
But only if they have space lasers attached.
@Ernie: I hear what you’re saying, but Von Rundstedt and Patton didn’t have global reach in the form of intercontential missiles, bombers and satellite imaging. They were also lacking in C5’s and C27’s and C130’s, not to mention the US Military Airlift Command. It’s not an easy way to do it, but it’s prolly cheaper than maintaining bases abroad.
Five foot two, eyes of blue, gootchy, gootchy, gootchy goo….
Oh wait, off topic, seanamahairmama grandmama.
Send me a bill for my share of our military, federal courts and border control and I’ll gladly pay it. Oh, and please itemize. Also, I’d like stock in the United States Corporation and insist that it break even or make a profit. And it shall send me an Annual Report with full financials in it.
Hey, I pay for water, sewer (used to), garbage, electricity, phone and other services from an invoice, why not our State and Federal Governments.
Total accountability. Keep going on this, Frank.
Burma, this will be as serious a post as a civvy such as I can make on the topic.
In order to get boots on the ground, the sadly undernumbered and overpriced cargo jets of our military require an airbase, and while the Corps can open up a beachhead, a port will still be needed.
If we are to properly project power, we will need to retain the ability to get boots on the ground. We can’t send in the Marine Corps to blast open a beachhead everytime, so we will need some bases. I do believe, though, that with some smarts and some thrift we could cut out a tremendous amount of waste that emanates from foreign stationing.
Of course, the best way to eliminate the need for foreign bases is to eliminate the need other, more pitiful countries have for our military! I don’t know how we do that. Perhaps by assassinating more foreign leaders? That’s always fun.
I’ve been following (and voting) this program for some months now… I don’t know if they got anything actually passed into law yet, but now that they have a majority, it looks hopeful.
http://majorityleader.gov/YouCut/
As far as overseas bases, maybe we could find one half-way decent country (or half-way decent portion of an already existing but mostly sucky country) on each continent and invite them to become sovereign states of the US of A.
Then we’d have all the excuse we needed to stick our noses into other countries business whenever we wanted to, “Hey! We’re neighbors!” and a ready made launch point for any nation-building or nation-destroying operations in the area.
Pingback: Right to Opine » Daily Digest
Eliminate foreign bases? Simple, eliminate the countries requiring foreign bases! Nukes ma’ boy, Nukes! Bring our boys and girls home and start nukin!
O.K., Marko, you’re prolly right. Mebbe we should continue the DRAP project after all.
I have said before, No Representation without Taxation! I would love to see those working for non-enumerated in the Constitution jobs prohibited from voting. If it isn’t in the Constitution then it is a bribe, kick-back or payoff and you don’t get to vote.
But paying taxes is patriotic, ain’t it?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJ69X1qt4sQ
(don’t miss the giant killer robot at 4:44)