Re: [RC] [ RC ] Constitution and Government

[David R. Block]

Title: ORourke1 Signature

A-men. Remember the "marriage penalty" in the income tax? If the "Bush tax cuts" expire, it will be back. And according to CPA and Tax law professors, even people who make as little as $100,000 will see their taxes go up 3 %. of their earnings or $3000 due to that and many other deductions being reduced. They may also fall victim to the Alternative Minimum Tax for the very wealthy. And this is just at $100,000. I'm gonna have to get another job to pay my damn taxes. Not going to raise taxes on those making less than $250,000?? Bullshit, like I figured. David "Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine."--P. J. O’Rourke On 11/12/2011 8:14 AM, Kevin Kervick wrote: Hi Billy:   I said government "intervention" causes the malady.  It strikes me that one way opponents of libertarianism discredit it is to use the straw man argument that libertarians are anti-government.  Libertarians believe in limited government, the more local and decentralized the better.   Let's take out of wedlock births for starters.  Government welfare policy, and some would argue, drug enforcement policy, have directly impacted the marriage rate.  Paying people more if they are not married has lessened the value of marriage.  Paying single people to have children has increased the numbers of single people having children.  Europe is way ahead of the US.   The nanny government creates a condition where-by people come to believe someone is there to take care of them, which impacts personal responsibility and neighborliness.  I trust spontaneous order more than the controlling tendencies of power-seeking men.   Kevin Kevin : Government causes "the" malady ?   I don't follow, although I suspect it is because we are thinking about different classes of things. Otherwise this is a mystery.   Government causes abortions ?         "              "      homosexuality ?        "              "       Hollywood movies and the nihilistic values they promote ?        "              "      out of wedlock births ?        "              "      drug abuse ?   Maybe gvt has some role in various such matters, but it seems much more likely that market forces, so to speak, are the greater culprits.   Anyway, why reflexively hit on government ? Why reflexively give a free pass to the market ?   We do have a Constitution that many people regard as inspired and a Great Good. Why not defend the Constitution and the government it created ? Government is not the enemy. The idiots who are now IN government, certainly a lot of them, are the enemy. Personally I'd like to lynch about half of everyone now in Washington DC. But this is very different than blaming government, especially our Constitutional government.   Libertarians cannot have it both ways, pro-Constitution and anti-government. The Constitution created our government. It legitimates our government. The Constitution is meaningless without our government. We need better government, hence my main reason for recommending all those new Amendments. But I sure in heck don't want to see our government gutted.   Which Amendments do you think would not improve government ?   Exactly what is the value in ceaseless attacks on government ? How does that make good sense ? Why not spend time and energy trying to improve government ?   And what is the alternative ?  No government ? That would be irrational. And, if successful, it would be suicidal.   Billy   -----------------------------------------------------------       11/11/2011 3:53:36 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, kerv...@comcast.net writes: Hello Billy:   I would take it a step further.  I believe government intervention causes the malady. Thus if we want to improve society we should eliminate the cause.   Kevin Mike : You certainly "get" the idea of Radical Centrism.  I don't think anyone here could have said it better. Not at all clear, however, what the relevance is to social conservatives and values issues. Kevin also made the point that these kinds of issues matter to many, many people.   How the government treats the less well off ( or the poor as such ) is mostly, at least as I see it, more a question of economics and incentives. Is there anyone who regards it as moral to injure the well being of Americans who live at poverty levels ?  Seems to me that, about this, there is no moral issue at all, just a means/ends issue, how to get the best result in terms of $$ for both gvt and individuals.   Generally, if not overwhelmingly, "values" refers to a very different set of issues, call them "hot button" if you prefer. They have this designation precisely because of emotional responses they arouse.   Billy   -----------------------------------------------------------       11/10/2011 2:10:39 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, mike.c.gonza...@gmail.com writes: This all goes back to "arete" with me.  Whether the government or private charity goes toward keeping the destitute alive, the homeless situation leaves the same economic drag either way.  The false choice here is between the liberal idea of keeping a permanent underclass just barely alive, or the conservative idea of denying the legitimacy of the problem.  Rather, I'd argue for a safety net that brings the destitute back to the starting line by medicating, providing the bare minimums, etc., but, in contrast with the current safety net, has an expectation of performance in return. -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <RadicalCentrism@googlegroups.com> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org   Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org   -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <RadicalCentrism@googlegroups.com> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <RadicalCentrism@googlegroups.com> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <RadicalCentrism@googlegroups.com> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org