LadyJazzer wrote: "general welfare"... (There's a phrase guaranteed to send a couple of people here over the edge...)
<over the edge> Redistribution of wealth is an evil, twisted idea that basically yells out "Take a flying **** in a rolling donut all you dang free market capitalists!".
Your socialistic tendencies are showing.</over the edge>
Is that about what you were looking for?
Remember this person?
Will you not organize a share-our-wealth society in your community tonight or tomorrow to place this plan into law? You need it; your people need it. Write me, wire to me; get into this work with us if you believe we are right. Help to save humanity. Help to save this country. If you wish a copy of this speech or a copy of any other speech I have made, write me and it will be forwarded to you. You can reach me always in Washington, D. C.
LadyJazzer wrote: "general welfare"... (There's a phrase guaranteed to send a couple of people here over the edge...)
<over the edge> Redistribution of wealth is an evil, twisted idea that basically yells out "Take a flying **** in a rolling donut all you dang free market capitalists!".
Your socialistic tendencies are showing.</over the edge>
Is that about what you were looking for?
"General welfare" doesn't mean what LJ thinks it does and it never has.
President Washington didn't create a food stamp program while he was in office. Nor socialized medicine.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
LadyJazzer wrote: It certainly should be means-tested for those who make enough off of their investments, trust funds, offshore accounts, and the "money daddy gave them". Medicare too. If your annual income exceeds a certain level, you shouldn't get to take it back out just because you put it in... I'd like all the money back that I put in to give everybody else's kids a "free" education...but I happen to believe it was for the "general welfare"... (There's a phrase guaranteed to send a couple of people here over the edge...)
Excelllent points!
Let's extend the idea to private insurance too. If your house burns down and the homeowner's insurance company finds out you have enough money to rebuild, they should be allowed to refuse coverage. This will allow them to reduce insurance rates for everyone else! Plus, it will make the rich bastard poorer and make everyone more equal.
Means based fines too? Finland decided it was unfair that a rich guy could easily pay $500 for a speeding ticket so it didn't really discourage speeding, so they decided to base the cost of the speeding ticket on your income, so a rich guy in a fast car had to pay more than 100K.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
Medicare already has means testing in that higher income people pay higher premiums for Part B (up to $220 a month more) and Part D (up to $66 more). But even these higher premiums come no where close to what the benefits actually cost.
I guess to be fair, private insurance companies should be able to see your income tax forms as well, so they can charge you more if you make too much. :VeryScared:
There is a guy up around Bear Mountain that is rich and you could hear him coming up the canyon in one of his Lamborghinis from a mile away because he was taking the curves at 70 MPH. He doesn't give one ounce of fecal matter if he gets a ticket or hits someone. I have heard him say this.
When you plant ice you're going to harvest wind. - Robert Hunter
Soulshiner wrote: There is a guy up around Bear Mountain that is rich and you could hear him coming up the canyon in one of his Lamborghinis from a mile away because he was taking the curves at 70 MPH. He doesn't give one ounce of fecal matter if he gets a ticket or hits someone. I have heard him say this.
So...
Does being rich make him a jerk?
Does being a jerk make him rich?
Or does being a jerk have no correlation with wealth?
"Whatever you are, be a good one." ~ Abraham Lincoln
"General welfare" doesn't mean what LJ thinks it does and it never has.
