USDoT cooks the books
- Thread starter jimpeel
- Start date
randomJACKASS
Banned
You do realize gasoline is, (whether they admit it or not) a "sin tax"? If it doesn't burn clean it ought to be taxed. Nobody would argue that there is waste in goverment, and that's a different matter entirely. All the same, assuming that petroleum is an exhaustable resourse that damages our world, there ought to more incentive to find other ways, not less.
jimpeel
Well-Known Member
Then the entire industrial revolution was a sin; and you are a sinner because you are using a computer to post messages on the Internet that is powered by electricity created by fossil fuels.
Do you really believe that if the entire Earth were powered by ultra-clean hydrogen that there would be no tax on hydrogen because it is clean and is not harming the Earth? If so, you simply do not understand the insatiable greed of politicians. They would tax you for sex, by the stroke, if they could somehow install a peter meter on your penis.
H2O boy
New Member
there have been taxes since we became a nation, beginning with the whiskey tax, which led to the whiskey rebellion. government has always imposed it, then tried to make us like it. we have up until recently opposed inordinate taxation. then came the liberal with his guilty conscience, screaming and pleading for the government to fix all our woes for us. they've been more than happy to oblige or pose as obliging at least
what we need is people to realize how much tax they pay, then do something besides whine about it and vote in more taxhappy morons of either party.
what we need is a few more people to flat out refuse to pay it, and then their peers to support them instead of cowering in fear of the massive government they created
if we all just stopped paying it we might be surprised how quickly the strong arm of enforcement goes without pay and then refuses to enforce any longer. can you imagine if april 15 arrived and 90% of the people just said 'go fuck yourself. come take it from me' how many irs agents would put in the work to track anybody down if they themselves werent getting paid? the government is already in debt so deep it would take generations to balance the checkbook. without our money they cant arrest us
just something to think about as your annual property taxes come payable
what we need is people to realize how much tax they pay, then do something besides whine about it and vote in more taxhappy morons of either party.
what we need is a few more people to flat out refuse to pay it, and then their peers to support them instead of cowering in fear of the massive government they created
if we all just stopped paying it we might be surprised how quickly the strong arm of enforcement goes without pay and then refuses to enforce any longer. can you imagine if april 15 arrived and 90% of the people just said 'go fuck yourself. come take it from me' how many irs agents would put in the work to track anybody down if they themselves werent getting paid? the government is already in debt so deep it would take generations to balance the checkbook. without our money they cant arrest us
just something to think about as your annual property taxes come payable
randomJACKASS
Banned
Then by that logic either A. we should stop all technology, of B. we should just do whatever and not worry about consequences? There are lots of ideas for renewable energy sources, but nobody with the money seems to be willing to explore it. Unfortunately I see horrible economic devastation, and possible environmental repercussions happening before people in this country wise up and make changes, but I hope I'm wrong.
Not a damn thing you and I can do about it other than perhaps using that old American spirit and making something worthwhile ourselves. I just can't understand why people fear change so much that they continue with old outdated ideas despite the consequences that may result. Oh well....
Gato_Solo
Out-freaking-standing OTC member
Property taxes are not federal. Those taxes go to the local school board.
Income taxes are, first and foremost, for the defense of the nation and to pay off the debt...at least on paper. How much you want to bet that refusal to pay federal income taxes by a large majority would result in the repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act? As for the rest of the taxes...it's built in to the purchase...
The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside the United States by
Too late.
Washington Post
Too late.
Washington Post
jimpeel
Well-Known Member
Then you should be able to show us the permanent environmental repercussions of WWII.
The permanent damage to the oceans and atmosphere from all of those burning oil tankers sent to the bottom.
The permanent damage from the two atomic bombs dropped on Japan and why those are not thriving cities today.
Nagasaki today
A barren wasteland!
Hiroshima today
OMG! Just look at that devastation!
JTP
New Member
"They would tax you for sex, by the stroke, if they could somehow install a peter meter on your penis".
OMG, that's hilarious! You should copyright that, if it's original, because it had Ginnie and me ROTFL! She is threatening (jokingly) to install such a meter. Thanks for the humor!
OMG, that's hilarious! You should copyright that, if it's original, because it had Ginnie and me ROTFL! She is threatening (jokingly) to install such a meter. Thanks for the humor!
spike
New Member
Then you should be able to show us the permanent environmental repercussions of WWII.
The permanent damage to the oceans and atmosphere from all of those burning oil tankers sent to the bottom.
The permanent damage from the two atomic bombs dropped on Japan and why those are not thriving cities today.
A barren wasteland!
OMG! Just look at that devastation!
You should probably realize that your statements don't contradict random's. Kinda weird the direction you went with that.
randomJACKASS
Banned
The truth needs little explanation. Sounds like jimpeel is trying to convince himself of something to me. I don't know that any damage is permanent, but I don't know it isn't either, and none of you can be absolutely certain either. I am just arguing for progress, admitting to myself that change can be good and that not all that we currently do is "right" on a "forever basis". But I also know humans fear change and it usually requires tragedy to motivate us.
spike
New Member
It's misdirection. Instead of replying to your points he's shown us pretty pictures to try and force the conversation into just "damage done by WW2" but he kinda jumps around like that.
I know it's weird and in a logical discussion this wouldn't happen. So you could go on his sidetrack and explore this tangent of whether there was permanent damage done by WW2 but since that really has nothing to do with your point you just have to ignore that crap and try and figure out the overall point he's going for. That's also hard to nail down.
But knowing his posts I would guess it's something along the lines of "environmental irresponsibility is the way to go" and "all energy but fossil fuels is bad". Hard to say for sure though.
I know it's weird and in a logical discussion this wouldn't happen. So you could go on his sidetrack and explore this tangent of whether there was permanent damage done by WW2 but since that really has nothing to do with your point you just have to ignore that crap and try and figure out the overall point he's going for. That's also hard to nail down.
But knowing his posts I would guess it's something along the lines of "environmental irresponsibility is the way to go" and "all energy but fossil fuels is bad". Hard to say for sure though.
chcr
Too cute for words
Good or bad, change is inevitable. The way some people constantly whine about it is merely annoying (always IMO). I don't necessarily like every change that happens more than anyone else does. I do recognize, though, that I can only make the best of it regardless of whether I like it or not. It's clear, to me at least, that there is no shortage of folks who would far rather whine than deal with it and that I, unfortunately, have a decided lack of patience with this.
jimpeel
Well-Known Member
I gave you two examples where permanent damage to the environment should have been evident; and it isn't.
The enviros claim that oil pollution is permanent and devastating yet there is no evidence of any lasting damage from WWII.
The enviros claim that nuclear disasters will be permanent and devastating yet there is no evidence of any lasting damage from two atomic blasts over thriving cities which thrive to this day.
Have you sen Prince William Sound? The oil is almost all gone; and not from any "clean up" efforts by humans.
Nature takes care of itself. All that humans do is to thwart that effort.
Nature leaks more oil into the ocean than man has & it's scrubbed & absorbed daily. The planet is self-sustaining.
Since there is no evidence of permanent enviromental damage due to man, why should we lower our standards of living to appease some paranoid fool with a fetish for trees?
Since there is no evidence of permanent enviromental damage due to man, why should we lower our standards of living to appease some paranoid fool with a fetish for trees?
randomJACKASS
Banned
By your logic, if I decided to start murdering homeless folks who nobody would miss, and I did so quietly and completely disposed of the bodies, there would be nothing wrong with it.
If I beat the crap out of anyone I think is an idiot, but only to the point of being black and blue with no lasting damage that would be OK.
If I had a restaurant and served people feces and there was no noticeable lasting effect that would be fine too?
Environmental studies would have to span many generations before one could say anything definite, and since technology wasn't there until recently looking back is not proof of any kind.
If I beat the crap out of anyone I think is an idiot, but only to the point of being black and blue with no lasting damage that would be OK.
If I had a restaurant and served people feces and there was no noticeable lasting effect that would be fine too?
Environmental studies would have to span many generations before one could say anything definite, and since technology wasn't there until recently looking back is not proof of any kind.