Having The Same Argument, Again.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

That's certainly an argument for a downward adjustment. Meanwhile, the more convenient access to full-release massage parlors peopled with Asian lovelies would be an argument for an upward adjustment. It kind of goes on to infinity, and the number is always made up. I might put one value on "free speech" one day, and then a different value on it after a Penske trifecta, know what I mean?

Seems like a pretty solid basis for the AZ law--don't want any free riders having it easy. Not so very different from that country club that kicked out the black kids.

[PresentTense Pirate Penske]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

I can't decide between:

Cite please. I don't recall the part of 2A that give a right to shoot cops, but it's not really my area.

or

See the part abouting bearing arms. Then bridge that to self defense. And then extrapolate self defense as applying to law breaking rights trampling cops with tear gas.

I think I am okay. Worst case scenario I go out Butch and Sundance style.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

I ignored everything after this point in the post because I knew it was total bullshit. Could one of the posters with more patience validate my judgment call?

He's offering to pay $25k for (1) the equivalent of school tuition for his (many, many) children, (2) a police force that exists only in places named something like Mount Caramel or Candyland, AND (3) new roads, bridges, etc. I, too, would like to pay $25k tomorrow and have all of these things the next day and on into the future. Just so long as my annual tax bill goes back to $5k in that future. That's not so unreasonable is it?

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by PresentTense Pirate Penske

I pay about 5K or something like that for property taxes now. I would be happy to pay 5x that tomorrow if the administrators of my local government could provide services that were at least barely competent; but for a local school that is 947/1000 similar schools (i.e. elementary), cops who are either ignorant racists or idiots, or both, and an infrastructure that is falling apart, I am opposed to throwing good money after bad.

This does not sound like a complaint about how much taxes you spend. It sounds like a complaint about how things are run. Obviously the two are linked, but your choices are (i) vote for someone who run things in a better (and conceivably) more efficient manner or (ii) vote for someone who will reduce your taxes and (let's be quite honest) almost always make things worse for a great deal of people because of it. If politicians could actually reduce taxes while improving institutions like public education, the police force or the infrastructure generally, things would be great right now, wouldn't they?

TM

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by PresentTense Pirate Penske

See the part abouting bearing arms. Then bridge that to self defense. And then extrapolate self defense as applying to law breaking rights trampling cops with tear gas.

I think I am okay. Worst case scenario I go out Butch and Sundance style.

So laws prohibiting the discharge of firearms in city limits (or hunting from a car or whatever) are unconstitutional? Huh.

And, the first time "self-defense" gets a cop killer off, every cop starts shooting first.

[PresentTense Pirate Penske]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

I ignored everything after this point in the post because I knew it was total bullshit. Could one of the posters with more patience validate my judgment call?

Look at this way, 5x 5000= $25000; that's $25000 less than I currently pay for independent school. If it could help turn my local school into say the 347th/1000 school in the state, I could take that savings and actually exercise my Second Amendment rights by purchasing some guns, instead of relying on an ineffectual and corrupt police force for safety, find inexpensive workers from Casa Latina to fill in the potholes on the road in front of my house and the alleyway behind it, and still have about $20,000 in disposable cash for to increase my wine inventory.

Now does it make a little more sense.

[PresentTense Pirate Penske]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

He's offering to pay $25k for (1) the equivalent of school tuition for his (many, many) children, (2) a police force that exists only in places named something like Mount Caramel or Candyland, AND (3) new roads, bridges, etc. I, too, would like to pay $25k tomorrow and have all of these things the next day and on into the future. Just so long as my annual tax bill goes back to $5k in that future. That's not so unreasonable is it?

I'd pay $25000 to the authorities year and out for decent schools (see my other post on the win for me)

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by PresentTense Pirate Penske

Weren't they self-identified as liberal anarchists?

What the hell does that even mean? Anarchists are completely against government, no?

TM

[PresentTense Pirate Penske]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

This does not sound like a complaint about how much taxes you spend. It sounds like a complaint about how things are run. Obviously the two are linked, but your choices are (i) vote for someone who run things in a better (and conceivably) more efficient manner or (ii) vote for someone who will reduce your taxes and (let's be quite honest) almost always make things worse for a great deal of people because of it. If politicians could actually reduce taxes while improving institutions like public education, the police force or the infrastructure generally, things would be great right now, wouldn't they?

TM

Yes, just like in Candyland.

[PresentTense Pirate Penske]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

So laws prohibiting the discharge of firearms in city limits (or hunting from a car or whatever) are unconstitutional? Huh.

And, the first time "self-defense" gets a cop killer off, every cop starts shooting first.

Bring it on!

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

What the hell does that even mean? Anarchists are completely against government, no?

TM

Which makes them very like the TPers.

Except for the military.

And medicare.

And republican politicians.

[PresentTense Pirate Penske]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

What the hell does that even mean? Anarchists are completely against government, no?

TM

Individualist anarchism v. social anarchism (i.e. liberal anarchism). Google and educate yourself. I believe that the WTO protestors were of the social anarchist variety.

[PresentTense Pirate Penske]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

And republican politicians.

Those dudes are wannabe faux-individualist anarchists.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

Seems like a pretty solid basis for the AZ law--don't want any free riders having it easy. Not so very different from that country club that kicked out the black kids.

Anyone who opposes the AZ law on the basis that it's unfair to undocumented immigrants is not really thinking clearly about the bigger problem with the law, particularly what it is certain to do to legal residents.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

Anyone who opposes the AZ law on the basis that it's unfair to undocumented immigrants is not really thinking clearly about the bigger problem with the law, particularly what it is certain to do to legal residents.

I think anyone who opposes the law for any reason whatsoever--other than for being too permissive--is thinking clearly enough.