Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum - EcoModder.com - View Single Post

theunchosen · 05-30-2009, 04:29 PM

Jacob,

the number one expenditure of government is welfare spending, which you failed to mention completely. Military spending only makes up 1/3 of all government spending. With the expenditures lately. . .its not even remotely close to 1/3. New estimates put it at 1/9 of all government spending(yes this is both Iraq and Afghanistan and contributions to the UN to account for us soldiers on loan as UN peacekeepers).

Don't lie. If you are going to present an argument be very careful.

Ford never asked for any money. You lose all credence when you post overt fallacies.

Back to the top, you can throw all of those things the government provides away and allow for the private sector to pick them up. Bodyguards pick up where police forces are useless. If you were correct then being a bodyguard is not a viable career. I know 2 and they make 4 or 5 times the money I make.

Look at situations in which there is no military to speak of. Rich families in Mexico have their own para-military body guard service. They pack automatics body armor and bullet proof vehicles. They don't hold trials and they don't take prisoners.

A justice system that provides quick and immediate punishment to murders, thieves and what the CIA classifies as "abrasive" crimes or "assualt" crimes typically has fewer of them and it costs far less. I don't have to hold criminals in jail for months before trial feeding them and I don't have to put up with appeals and other issues. If someone breaks into my home there will not be a trial. I might have to go into a civil case with their surviving family but as I live in the south I know my local judges will throw it out and the appelate judges will also throw it out.

Adam Smith did not argue that the government was out to protect the poor from the rich. If you read your quote again he said that government is necessary to protect those who have(corporations) from those who dont(employees). At Smiths time the East India Trading company were a racketeering organization that stole from honest traders by imposing their own taxes on their goods so that they wouldn't be attacked by privateers. Smith was agains this practice. He obviously was not against a corporation in and of itself because he had his own.

Jacob do you honestly believe that taxing one person 80% is fair and one person 10%?

If you do I'm leaving Ecomodder. What you are saying is. . .because I work 2 full time jobs and 2 part time jobs I should only be allowed to have 2x as much as someone who works never and gets a welfare check? I put in 80 hours a week(2 full times) I mow for 6 hours a week and I work for a neighbor for about 5 hours a week. You are saying that some slackass that works 0 hours deserves the same amount of money I get when I work vastly more hours than he does(90 compared to 0 and he gets the same amount as me)?

05-30-2009, 04:29 PM	#59 (permalink)
theunchosen Master EcoModder Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Cookeville, TN Posts: 850 Thanks: 1 Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts	Jacob, the number one expenditure of government is welfare spending, which you failed to mention completely. Military spending only makes up 1/3 of all government spending. With the expenditures lately. . .its not even remotely close to 1/3. New estimates put it at 1/9 of all government spending(yes this is both Iraq and Afghanistan and contributions to the UN to account for us soldiers on loan as UN peacekeepers). Don't lie. If you are going to present an argument be very careful. Ford never asked for any money. You lose all credence when you post overt fallacies. Back to the top, you can throw all of those things the government provides away and allow for the private sector to pick them up. Bodyguards pick up where police forces are useless. If you were correct then being a bodyguard is not a viable career. I know 2 and they make 4 or 5 times the money I make. Look at situations in which there is no military to speak of. Rich families in Mexico have their own para-military body guard service. They pack automatics body armor and bullet proof vehicles. They don't hold trials and they don't take prisoners. A justice system that provides quick and immediate punishment to murders, thieves and what the CIA classifies as "abrasive" crimes or "assualt" crimes typically has fewer of them and it costs far less. I don't have to hold criminals in jail for months before trial feeding them and I don't have to put up with appeals and other issues. If someone breaks into my home there will not be a trial. I might have to go into a civil case with their surviving family but as I live in the south I know my local judges will throw it out and the appelate judges will also throw it out. Adam Smith did not argue that the government was out to protect the poor from the rich. If you read your quote again he said that government is necessary to protect those who have(corporations) from those who dont(employees). At Smiths time the East India Trading company were a racketeering organization that stole from honest traders by imposing their own taxes on their goods so that they wouldn't be attacked by privateers. Smith was agains this practice. He obviously was not against a corporation in and of itself because he had his own. Jacob do you honestly believe that taxing one person 80% is fair and one person 10%? If you do I'm leaving Ecomodder. What you are saying is. . .because I work 2 full time jobs and 2 part time jobs I should only be allowed to have 2x as much as someone who works never and gets a welfare check? I put in 80 hours a week(2 full times) I mow for 6 hours a week and I work for a neighbor for about 5 hours a week. You are saying that some slackass that works 0 hours deserves the same amount of money I get when I work vastly more hours than he does(90 compared to 0 and he gets the same amount as me)?