RE: who is responsible for what

RE: who is responsible for what (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Lorr47 -> RE: who is responsible for what (5/16/2009 9:16:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble `fr` Federal should be responsible for national defense, foreign affairs/diplomacy, national parks and monuments (like the Statue of Liberty. I happen to like that ol' gal!), federal prosecutions for federal crimes like treason etc., the collection of foreign tariffs/federal income taxes and defending the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. States should be responsible for education, infrastructure, state police/highway patrol, crime prevention/prosecution and the collection of state income taxes. Local government should be responsible for the collection of applicable local taxes for things like gas/electric/water mains, local roads, local police departments/jails, the local library and parks/recreational facilities for their local. Parents/adults should be responsible for their children and themselves including providing for their food, shelter, clothing and health care, although may choose to involve a doctor in that last one if desired. Oversight .. that's the responsibility of everyone. If we don't watch the wiley bastards, they'll try to get away with murder. Master is responsible for what goes on in this household and what goes on in this house ain't nobody's damn business unless he or we decide to share the information. [8D] I'm sure there are a whole bunch of other things that could be assigned to a particular level of government but that's my list for now subject to change if I've had a menopausal moment or three. [8D] Great post, Bita. The only things I would add is that I believe that the Federal income tax shouldn't exist (although it does) and, I'm not menopausal. [:D] Firm Yes, great post. However, I too agree that the federal government should not have the power to tax. Then you would have to have some apparatus at the state level to decide what amount, if any, should be sent to the federal government. Maybe in Michigan that apparatus should be at the local level because of Grandholm. One major improvement is that the clowns are only ten miles away from me and my baseball bat.

Kirata -> RE: who is responsible for what (5/16/2009 9:37:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent Some details would be useful: a) What exactly do you mean? b) Where's the connection with my post? I was suggesting that you are making a rather sweeping generalization about the world based on your own limited and obviously fortunate experience. You might just as well conclude that thunderstorms are only as dangerous as you perceive them to be, because one has never caused you any problem. K.

NorthernGent -> RE: who is responsible for what (5/17/2009 1:09:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent Some details would be useful: a) What exactly do you mean? b) Where's the connection with my post? I was suggesting that you are making a rather sweeping generalization about the world based on your own limited and obviously fortunate experience. You might just as well conclude that thunderstorms are only as dangerous as you perceive them to be, because one has never caused you any problem. K. In that case the suggestion is inaccurate, and your analogy isn't comparable (it would have been had Mike's comment, and my response, been: "war is a dangerous situation"). We were talking of the world, however, which in that case really is a matter of perception. It is a subjective account of the degree of risk and reward throughout the world, as a consequence of that which you have seen with your own eyes. My perception is that every single minute of every single day I see mutual co-operation, whereas the incidence of war is an aberration by comparison. My perception is that the statement: "the world is a dangerous place", doesn't hold true. Yet every day I see problems with health, education, homelessness - right in front of my eyes, whereas I have never seen a war; nor I have seen a murder committed; nor have I seen a serious crime committed. Then there is the matter of what we believe that we haven't seen through our own eyes. Taking the Iranian President as an example: why do people believe he is intent on destruction? We're relying on newspaper accounts/second hand stories. "Wipe off the face of the map" is an English idiom (there is no Farsi equivalent) and in his speech he compared the removal of the Israeli regime with the removal of the Shah in Iran. Yet an Islamic source picked this up and reported it as an intent to nuke Israel and if memory serves the New York Times and the Guardian simply repeated this parrot fashion without stopping to consider the content of the speech, and then before you know it everyone has it in their heads that he's intent on destruction. I mean, why believe this without question? Is it habit - because a like-cause produces a like-effect and we expect a newspaper report to accurately articulate the nature of an event? I don't know, but it certainly isn't reasonable. In this one example of cause and effect, it questions whether wars are anything to do with reason, but rather are the product of instinct, habit and political agenda; and I'm assuming that reason is held to be preferable. Oh, and in terms of my fortunate experience. Well, I'm from a working class background - no mummy and daddy to pay for my education, no mummy and daddy to give me money, no hand outs to start a business. And, yes, I consider that fortunate. Perhaps that's a factor in why I'm more concerned with health and education: being working class, I wasn't sheltered from living among those at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder during my childhood.

kdsub -> RE: who is responsible for what (5/17/2009 9:14:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY The only things I would add is that I believe that the Federal income tax shouldn't exist (although it does) and, I'm not menopausal. [:D] Firm Hi Firm I would love to hear your ideas on an alternative to the federal tax and what would be the advantage of your changes. Many fear federal income taxes has produced a strong central government concentrating power at the federal level and weakening the power of the states. One of the basic tenets of our forefathers was to keep the real power at the state level to better represent its citizens. However it was found early on that a government could not be supported on the whim of states contributions. The federal government has been levying taxes since 1789 I believe. At first the states collected the money but within a few years the government was taxing and collecting directly. Money is needed…we can’t get around that... at least with a federal tax we all have a say in the voting booth. I can’t see how in this day and age we could go back to voluntary state contributions. I never understood how anyone could think voluntary state contributions would work anyway. Imagine the problems that would ensue when New York voters found out what they were giving compared to Louisiana for instance. Even if the amount was mandated by the federal government but still collected at the states level what would happen if a particular states citizens decided through their legislatures they could or would not pay? Power at the states level could present problems when relative small areas of land but with large populations and large political pull because of taxes collected would hold sway over small population states with large land areas. This sounds like the beginnings of revolution to me. Taxes are a burden but an unavoidable one I’m afraid. Personally I think a good way to collect taxes would be a national sales tax. That way the money collected would reflect our countries economic health… All that would be required is a law to forbid the Federal government from borrowing money except in a national emergency. And let the emergency only be declared at the state level not federal. Butch

Kirata -> RE: who is responsible for what (5/17/2009 9:43:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent My perception is that the statement: "the world is a dangerous place", doesn't hold true. That is a reasonable statement. However, what you actually said, and the statement I responded to, was: quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent The world is as dangerous as you wish to perceive it. It is no matter of perception that that is quite a different statement. K.

NorthernGent -> RE: who is responsible for what (5/18/2009 12:00:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent My perception is that the statement: "the world is a dangerous place", doesn't hold true. That is a reasonable statement. However, what you actually said, and the statement I responded to, was: quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent The world is as dangerous as you wish to perceive it. It is no matter of perception that that is quite a different statement. K. Let's agree to disagree, then.

TheHeretic -> RE: who is responsible for what (5/18/2009 11:29:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy Ok, so i can place some of the posters here, please tell us what responsibilities you think ought to be Federal, which State, which local and which are individual. If you're Canadian please replace state with province.....and if you're British, central, county, local or individual. Although if you're British and Welsh or Scottish, what duties lie with the state assembly. The sort of responsibilities i'm thinking of are things like, health, education, military, regulatory oversight, taxes.....you get the idea. This question has been drifting around in my head over the weekend (good updrafts, perhaps? [:D] ), and I think I've found the way to approach it. Ice cream. What the OP seems to be asking is for a layered ice cream, a neapolitan, or triple chocolate variety, with clear lines between the flavors and colors. What I see in the various jurisdictions of US government is an exotic Ben & Jerry's swirl w/chunks and clusters. That is probably as it should be. Our social safety net is a good example of how the mix achieves the goal. At the federal level, we have social security and medicare addressing long term need (theoretically, anyway), and nationwide assistance programs like WIC (basic nutritional support, with vouchers for milk, eggs, cereal, cheese, and fruit juice). Unemployment is handled at the state level, with all sorts of other stuff the individual states may be running with. I live in California. We have lots of those (at least until they get the election returns tomorrow). At the county and municipal levels are programs which are federal mandated and 'funded,' but locally administered. These are supposed to be short term, but the path of good intentions has led to the usual destination Thrown into the swirl, are the chunks, clusters, and more than few fruits, nuts and flakes called NGO's (non-governmental organizations). They write their own rules, and get the money from wherever they can. For most things, I think it is a pretty good model. You'll have to place me based on how strong the various flavors and ingredients are, and frankly, I think we need to tone the whole thing down about three notches out of five

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.140625