So many points to argue in so few words. 1. I don't support subsidized health care. Therefore there would be no government money used to pay for smoking related care, and no extra taxes needed for that.
2. I don't think that raising taxes on cigarettes is going to stop kids from smoking. Why? Because its already illegal to sell them to minors. Kids will just steal them from their parents like I did. I mean hell a roll (xtc) goes for 20 bucks a pop on average and they are still getting them all the time. There are deeper underlying arguments here. Personal choice versus public sentiment. The "public" thinks they should be able to tell people how to live, what to put in/on/around their bodies, what they may posses, and how to use what they may be able to purchase. This is ridiculous. I am a pretty diverse person politically. I don't really fit on either side. I think we really need to take a second look at our government and it's policies. Some of the things I think we need to do: 1. All federal programs and laws must have a factual basis in the constitution in order to be allowed. Basically the 10th amendment says that if the power is not expressly granted to the federal government than it falls to the state or to the people. That means a whole lot of our federal government shouldn't exist. I mean subsidized anything (education, medicine, roads, fcc, faa, etc.) Basically they ether need to provide a constitutional justification for it, or abolish it. If they want to add all these new laws and departments let them get approval for a constitutional amendment like their supposed to. 2. Internationalism. I believe in a sovereign United States. I don't think we should be a member of any organization that can impose it's views on us as law. That means the UN, international court, or any other third party. This also means I don't think we should be jumping all over other sovereign nations, unless what they are doing DIRECTLY impacts our national security. N Korea and it's missiles directly impacts us. Iraq and their ability to choke off oil and destabilize the entire region impacts us and our interests. Kosovo, the Balkans, Chechnya, and most of South America do not directly affect our national security or interests. 3. Personal Liberty. I believe this is the lynch pin of our society. That means your body you choose what you want to do with it and with whom you will do it. Full recognition of gay and lesbian marriages. No federal drug law (which wouldn't prevent state laws). No laws at all that pertain to what you can do to yourself. 4. Private property. The federal government tells people all the time what they can and can't do with and on their own property. Fencing, environmental laws, zoning, all of these things prevent people from developing their property as they see fit. It's wrong. 5. Privacy rights. I think I should be secure in all things, unless there is a warrant that says the government may search, secure or record any of my activities or belongings. That means if I am walking down the street I know no one is recording me or my conversations, even in places where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. No one should scan my email, or phone conversations without a reason. Both of those things are done on a wide and random scale. 6. States rights. I believe in a very loose central government. I think that the closer to the individual you can bring a government, the more granular control you will have of that body. Many of the federal programs that I am very much against, I would not be apposed to on a state level. Because then I could move, or start a true grass roots movement that could make a difference. There is actually a libertarian program trying to get many people to migrate to a specific state to gain more of a voice in local and state politics. These are just some of the issues I pay attention to. I didn't touch on guns because I think I have spoken on it enough. Anyway need to get back to work now :) Laters Tim -----Original Message----- From: William Wheatley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 10:36 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: SUV break? So you disagree with the higher cigarette taxes as a way to discourage children from smoking and even to help discourage people from quitting smoking. The tax helps pay for smoking illness but its also and has been shown to help people stop smoking for which alot of the taxes were intended. It was made to curb consumer choice and i support it. Of course personally i wish every smoker would keel over so i dont have to smell the smoke but hay we cant all get what we want. I could always go the bubble boy route lol ----- Original Message ----- From: "Timothy Heald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 10:15 AM Subject: RE: SUV break? > See Adam this is one of the big differences between the US and England. The government is not supposed to use tax as a method to curb consumer choice here. As a matter of fact on of the issues that kicked off our little argument back in the 1700s was taxation of goods if you remember. As well as an attempt to disarm us. > > Hmmm Sound familiar? > > Tim > > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Reynolds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 9:57 AM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: SUV break? > > > In the Uk a litre of petrol is about 75p. You are looking at close to ?3 for > a gallon or about $4.50 per gallon. The US I think pays around $2 per > gallon. > > People with your argument over here choose to purchase Estate cars, > particularly Volvos, as the running costs are so much lower. > > The USA is completely up its own arse when it comes to this issue. If the US > government put an environmental tax on petrol/gas that put the cost of gas > up to $3+, you would find the whole I need a SUV cos argument go away as it > is bull and realistically is an image thing. > > You would also find that there would be greater consumer demand for cheaper > alternative, rather than states (i.e. California, LA I think) having to put > things into law to force manufactures to invest in alternative fuel cars. > > As to your emissions argument. It's the CO2 that is at issue here. Older > cars release more toxic gases, but it is the amount of C02 that is produced > that is at issue here. A 100% clean emission from a car is CO2 and H2O. So > that argument is bull as well. > > Adam > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Timothy Heald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 22 January 2003 14:27 > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: RE: SUV break? > > > > > > I have an SUV (Chevy Blazer). I bought it for several reasons. > > > > 1. I am in the National Guard. That means every month I have to > > lug all kinds of gear several hours away to go train. The room issue. > > > > 2. I have 2 children. The room issue. > > > > 3. I (at the time of purchase) was living in rural NC. While > > snow wasn't a major issue, storms, floods, and icing were. The > > safety issue. > > > > 4. I did a lot of contracting. This meant that I had computers > > and all sorts of accessories to carry around. The room issue again. > > > > 5. I have 2 children. The safety issue. > > > > I looked at a lot of vehicles before I bought my truck. It was a > > toss up between an Explorer, Blazer or a Santa Fe. I went with > > the Blazer with a 6 cylinder. What's funny is the Camaro that I > > previously drove, the one with the 350 Small Block, wasn't > > getting any heat from environmentalists, even though it used far > > more fuel, and was loud and fast. Now that I have a newer 6 > > cylinder with better emissions control I get flack. It's a bunch > > of bs if you ask me. I mean I have seen major studies that show > > how with proper maintenance modern vehicles have very low > > emissions, and you can get good mileage out of most vehicles by > > doing things like making sure your tires are inflated, using > > additives and such. The same studies also showed that most > > emissions come from older beaters not from newer trucks or even > > high performance cars. > > > > Now do peeps all need their excursion or suburban? Maybe not. > > But this is a free country damn it. If they want to drive a damn > > monster truck down the road that's their prerogative. > > > > I mean seriously people, I know that a lot of the left leaning > > people think that government is here to tell people right from > > wrong. That its place is to enforce 'society's wishes'. That's > > not what this country is supposed to be about. Here it's > > supposed to be individual rights first and foremost. > > > > bah some of you really suck :) > > > > Tim Heald > > Sovereign Individual :P > > > > "Bite me!!" T.H. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Robert Everland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 9:00 AM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: RE: SUV break? > > > > > > I wouldn't say that, I would get a hybrid car if it was > > reasonably priced. > > I think a lot of people get SUVs because they are the in thing > > today. Not so > > much that they even care about the gas mileage. It's not until after they > > have the car for a while do they realize exactly how much more money they > > are spending on gas. They really need to make a hybrid SUV, that > > would prob > > make them up around regular car gas mileage. > > > > Robert Everland III > > Web Developer Extraordinaire > > Dixon Ticonderoga Company > > http://www.dixonusa.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 7:51 AM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: SUV break? > > > > > > The only thing I see SUVs hauling are soccer moms and spoiled > > businessmen... > > > > And isn't America great. A land where if you have the money you > > are free to > > buy what you want. > > > > Since you felt the need to make a generalization, I might as well to. > > > > The only people I see driving hybrid cars are tree huggining > > environmentalist wackos. > > > > I mean c'mon even with a $5000 tax rebate nobody wants them. > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
