When someone takes my money and gives it to someone else who needs it
to go to school, that's called "re-distribution".   There's no two
ways about it.

I don't, in fact, have a problem with taxes.  They are required to
make the country function.  However, on a federal level the entire
government was initally intended to do things that the states cannot
provide individually for themselves.  The classic example here is
National Defense.  Taxes are only the means to this end (providing
national services).  An end that's been perverted beyond all
recognition.

-Cameron

On 10/9/06, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> no it's not a redistribution of wealth, however, in a sense it does create 
> wealth ( or more precisely the possibility of wealth) when you build 
> infrastructure.
>
> It is possible to have the economy that we do in the US because Eisenhower 
> built the interstate system, possible in a way that it is not currently 
> possible in Afghanistan. A more educated, healthier workforce also is an 
> infrastructure improvement.
>
> >None of those are a redistribution of wealth.  For example highways
> >provide for commerce as does education; highways are used more for
> >work than travel, and more kids work than not.
> >
> >This would be in contrast to, say, Welfare where prior to Pres Clinton
> >a large percentage never moved off.
>
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting,
up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four 
times a year.
http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:217205
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5

Reply via email to