Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner

Making America Great Again?

51K views 745 replies 44 participants last post by  NTA 
#1 ·
#5 ·
Donald Trump wins the presidency!

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/19/politics/electoral-college-donald-trump-vote/index.html

Electors remain faithful to Trump and select him as official winner
(CNN)Donald Trump surpassed the necessary 270 votes in the Electoral College on Monday, taking the next step in the official process to become President.

Trump received 304 electoral votes to Hillary Clinton's 227. Seven "faithless" electors voted for other candidates, costing Trump two votes and Clinton four. Hawaii's votes -- three for Clinton and one breaking from the state's results and supporting Bernie Sanders -- were the last to be counted.
 
#14 ·
When Trump was asked the question he said he thought the late 40s and 50s were great. I'm assuming he meant for white people.
What in particular about yourself leads you to the conclusion that race even crossed his mind?
 
#16 ·
When exactly was America great? I have yet to hear anyone actually explain the phrase, other than the vague notion that at some point in the past America was better than it is now. In what specific timeframe was America "great"?
What is your definition of great? When was it not?
 
#18 ·
back to 1950s

I would rather live in the America of the 1950s-early 1960s than the America of today.
I think we were MUCH better off then, generally.

Of course that's not true for homosexuals, blacks, and to a much lesser extent, Jews and Hispanics and Asians. They had a lot of institutionalized discrimination back then that we don't have today.

But as for the national economy, infrastructure, manufacturing capacity, self-reliance (no dependency on overseas trading for all our goods), and our position as a world leader, we were at our peak.

We also had morality. Sometimes too much. Anything can be taken too far. But our hippie / drug/ sex orgy permissiveness of the late 1960s and 1970s has really hurt American families, and all our values. I'd like to roll back morality and reset the expected behavior of our fellow citizens to that of the "Norman Rockwell" heyday.

Back in the old days, the government was a lot more limited in size and scope. Sure, the legal framework for a socialist totalitarian State had been laid in the 1930s with all the New Deal programs and all the new federal agencies created. But the feds didn't grow into the monster that they've become until generations later. The seeds were germinating at the time, that's all.
 
#19 ·
I would rather live in the America of the 1950s-early 1960s than the America of today.
I think we were MUCH better off then, generally.

Of course that's not true for homosexuals, blacks, and to a much lesser extent, Jews and Hispanics and Asians. They had a lot of institutionalized discrimination back then that we don't have today.

But as for the national economy, infrastructure, manufacturing capacity, self-reliance (no dependency on overseas trading for all our goods), and our position as a world leader, we were at our peak.

We also had morality. Sometimes too much. Anything can be taken too far. But our hippie / drug/ sex orgy permissiveness of the late 1960s and 1970s has really hurt American families, and all our values. I'd like to roll back morality and reset the expected behavior of our fellow citizens to that of the "Norman Rockwell" heyday.

Back in the old days, the government was a lot more limited in size and scope. Sure, the legal framework for a socialist totalitarian State had been laid in the 1930s with all the New Deal programs and all the new federal agencies created. But the feds didn't grow into the monster that they've become until generations later. The seeds were germinating at the time, that's all.
Good post
 
#21 ·
The progressive tax rates of the 50's and 60's certainly helped drive the economy with working class folks having some disposable income, unlike today with the concentration of wealth at the very top. ☺ Merry Christmas
The economy flourished because of basic education and little regulation, industry, the US flourished despite taxes, not because of them. How does theft help anyone out economically? :rotfl:
 
#23 ·
It keeps money flowing, driving the economy rather than being amassed as static wealth that drives nothing.
:rotfl: keep believing that rich people do not invest and that those investments are not what drives the economy. Statist are just flat out hilarious, the lack of understanding about how economics work is hilarious, the state worship is great.

Taxes hurt the economy in more than one way, it hurts it in multiple ways.

Who did you study economics under? Karl Marx? :rotfl:
 
#25 ·
It is a glaring absurdity to pretend, that taxation contributes to national wealth, by engrossing part of the national produce, and enriches the nation by consuming part of its wealth.[2]

Taxation is the transfer of a portion of the national products from the hands of individuals to those of the government, for the purpose of meeting public consumption or expenditure. Whatever be the denomination it bears, whether tax, contribution, duty, excise, custom, aid, subsidy, grant, or free gift, it is virtually a burden imposed upon individuals, either in a separate or corporate character, by the ruling power for the time being, for the purpose of supplying the consumption it may think proper to make at their expense; in short, an impost, in the literal sense.[3]

Taxation is a coercive, non-contractual transfer of definite physical assets (nowadays mostly, but not exclusively money), and the value embodied in them, from a person or group of persons who first held these assets and who could have derived an income from further holding them, to another, who now possesses them and now derives an income from so doing. How did these assets come into the hands of their original owners?

Taxation is not just a punishment of consumption without any effect on productive efforts; it is also an assault on production as the only means of providing for and possibly increasing future income and consumption expenditure. By lowering the present value associated with future-directed, value-productive efforts, taxation raises the effective rate of time preference, i.e., the rate of originary interest and, accordingly, leads to a shortening of the period of production and provision and so exerts an inexorable influence of pushing mankind into the direction of an existence of living from hand to mouth. Just increase taxation enough, and you will have mankind reduced to the level of barbaric animal beasts.
https://mises.org/library/economics-taxation
 
#26 ·
In my last column I pointed to the harm government typically does when it attempts to promote prosperity by creating jobs. Such attempts always distort the market cooperation that directs people into those jobs in which they create the greatest value. But government does have legitimate, though limited, functions, and performing them requires hiring people. If government confines itself to its legitimate role and performs efficiently, government employees will produce more value than they can in alternative jobs. Unfortunately, government neither limits itself to its legitimate functions, nor performs efficiently. I shall consider one reason for this government failure, a reason based on a distortion in the political process. Because the costs of taxation are never fully considered in political decisions, those decisions are biased in favor of excessive taxing and spending.

The costs of taxation are dispersed widely. Everyone pays taxes, so when a general tax is increased it is spread over so many people that no one individual will find the increase very burdensome. Conversely, if the tax is decreased, no one may perceive a significant benefit. And even if some people do notice the costs of a tax increase, or the benefits of a decrease, an effort to organize other taxpayers (given their large numbers, geographic dispersion, and diverse interests) to take effective political action would be difficult. This helps explain why the costs of taxation are largely ignored politically. Politicians can nudge certain taxes up without hearing from taxpayers, except for some brief grumbling.

Of course, not everyone is politically passive about tax burdens. Relatively small groups with an intense interest in the burden of particular taxes are well positioned to influence policy on those taxes. The federal tax code is full of highly specific loopholes for particular industries, and often for particular companies. Also, some general tax breaks, like interest deductions on mortgages, are seen as promoting a desirable objective (home ownership), are easily noticed as significant by taxpayers, and also benefit an organized interest (homebuilders). Thus they are politically popular.
https://fee.org/articles/the-hidden-cost-of-taxation/
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top