America, my opinion Options

[Akiko_Minagawa]

I think its messed upfor them to say we havefreedom of speech when the bleep out music and tell us what we can and cant say at school in some states you cant even wear hip huggers so why do the call it a free countryits like lying

[sadolakced acid]

your freedoms are suppost to stop the moment they infringe upon other's - that's why music is bleeped.

but as for clothing bans... i don't see how that's fair. but america isn't fair. far from it.

i think america is flawed. but at least i know i'm free. to some extent.


i still reserve the right to bash bush- people in iraq couldn't do that.

[Spirited Away]

i think america is flawed. but at least i know i'm free. to some extent.

Exactly. No country can be said to be completely 'free', but America comes closer than most countries in the world to the extent that our freedom are not infringed by the rights of others. Our system is flawed because each of us are flawed.

i still reserve the right to bash bush-  people in iraq couldn't do that.

Haha, cheers to that for you, I suppose.

[Guarneri]

This land is your land, this land is my land.. from california to the new york... highway? from the redwood forest... to the .. uhh uhh uhh.... This land was made for you and me......WOOOOOOOt.




GOOOOOOOOOODDDD BLEESS AMERICA... MY SWEET SWEEEEEEEEEEET HOME...............


lets all sing........ wheres your SPIRIT!?

[F1R3B4T]

tahst why im canadian!!

[LaRevolucion]

btw, when the mean freedom of speech, they mean that you are entitled to your own opinion and you wont get like exectuted or get imprisoned for saying sumthin bad about the government , pres......

Umm...actually you can get killed or arrested just for saying something against the government or how it's run.

Read the story on Gordon Kahl. It's horrifying.

http://www.constitution.org/abus/gkahl/kahl.htm

[sadolakced acid]

no, it's when you appear on radio or TV, you're tipping off athorities to where you are and what crimes you've done.

[LaRevolucion]

no, it's when you appear on radio or TV, you're tipping off athorities to where you are and what crimes you've done.

Are you referring to the story? If you were....I honestly didn't see that as a crime. He was only standing up for what he belived in. They had no right to treat him the way they did.

[sadolakced acid]

they have a right. it's called tax evation.

remeber the red scare? comradered should know about that.

the hunting of the communists? if they though you were communist or a communist sympathizer, then you could be arrested.

and did you know, the patriot act contains anti-freedoms, such as that?

they may hold you without regard to the constitution's bill of rights if you are a suspected terrorist or a material witness.

[ComradeRed]

they have a right. it's called tax evation.

If you read the story carefully, you'd realize that he never committed tax evasion. His income was so low that he did not have to file with the IRS. He simply ADVOCATED tax evasion, which is a different story altogether.

The Gordon Kahl Murder and other atrocities by the FBI make them the biggest threat to Americans today -- bigger than Al-Qaeda, communists, etc.

"We are THE most dangerous organization in this country."
--Former FBI Director Louis Freeh, explaining his resignation in 1997

[sadolakced acid]

ahh yes. i don't like the FBI. except for the x-files. that show is the best. well, the one with mulder.

income so low, don't have to file taxes. hmm. but advocating tax evation.

so how did they know his income, if he didn't file taxes?

it's like, not being a thief but advocating theft. not exactly a choice matyr for more freedom.

[ComradeRed]

Not really.

When the government taxes you, they forcibly take money from you. When you commit tax evasion, you just KEEP your own money -- you never take money from someone else.

If you remember, the American Revolution was started over a tax -- to be more precise, a tax of approximately 1.5% (1/30 of what we are paying today).

It's more so advocating resisting theft, not advocating theft.

[sadolakced acid]

although by law, the money is considered the US governments. which means, tax evation is theft.

[Mr. Psychotic]

what you said bout clean music is a censorship thing

[ComradeRed]

although by law, the money is considered the US governments.  which means, tax evation is theft.

No it's not. The money is onyl the government's after you pay.

Moreover, that is legal fiat. The Constitution clearly recognizes your money as your own. A law that goes against the COnstitution has just as much legitimacy as the "law" of when a robber breaks into your house and tells you to give him all of your money.

The Fifth Amendment: "No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law [i.e. a trial] ... nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

The means of raising money found in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution clearly prohibit a direct tax -- a government is not allowed to raise money by taking private property from individuals -- only by taxing trade (i.e. tariffs) and excises.

Direct taxes are equal to highway robbery. Until 1913, America relied solely on indirect taxes (such as tariffs). When the first income tax was passed in 1911, the Supreme Court ruled it UNCONSTITUTIONAL. So they amended the Constitution. When the first successful tax was pased in 1913, the rate was ONE PERCENT. And it only applied to people making above $20,000 a year ($300,000 a year in today's money -- only the very richest of Americans). If you read Progressive Papers from the era and Wilson's own writing, the Income Tax was a means to pay for World War I -- he intended for it to end in 1920, and he never intended for it to become the monstrous 30% rate it is today.

[sadolakced acid]

yet our government must have money to run- where are we to get this?

[ComradeRed]

First, we could cut the budget so that it only follows the things that are in the Constitution.

Harry Browne estimates that this could cut the budget to rougly $400 billion (mostly defense spending).

To raise this money, we could use indirect taxation -- tariffs, maybe a sales tax, excises, duties, etc.

Remember, until the 1960s, we did not have an income tax of any consequence. Our country survived for 150 years with a tax rate of 0%, and for another 50 years with a tax rate that only applied to the richest 20% of Americans (and even then the rate would have been lower than 3 or 4% for the most part). The mass income tax is a Great Society invention. And like Great Society inventions in general -- it doesn't work and it is un-American.

In 1910, we had no income tax -- and we had the fastest GDP growth in the world, the government was pretty much debt-free and able to fulfill all of its constitutional (and even some unconstitutiaonl) functions.

More taxes promotes more spending. More spending is always a bad thing. The only justifiable reason to have high taxes today is to pay off the national debt, and even then politicians aren't that trustworthy.

If I were a little more radical, I would advocate defaulting on our national debt and starting from scratch -- at this rate, sooner or later that may be the only possible solution to our growing fiscal crisis.

[sadolakced acid]

ahhh yes, cutting defense spending is the easietst way to cut money.

yet then where will Mr. bush get the pout to attack random dictators?

[ComradeRed]

It's cutting ALL spending ... in fact, defense spending is cut the least (because it is a constitutiaonl purpose). What I meant was, of the $300-400 billion a constitutional government would spend, a large chunk of that (over half) would be defense spending.