From: tom@europa.lonestar.org (Tom Kimball)
Subject: Re: Clinton Policies
Organization: Moria Mining Guild (BBS) -- Dallas, Texas, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 05:49:39 GMT

In article <21670@rpp386.lonestar.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
>In article <1992Oct5.034021.152@europa.lonestar.org> tom@europa.lonestar.org (Tom Kimball) writes:
>>I think there is a lack of appreciation for the consequences of defaulting on 
>>the debt among you and some other people on Usenet.
>
>No, I'd say we have a very CLEAR understanding of what would happen.  As

Likewise, I have a clear understanding of the magnitude of the disaster that
would ensue if we sold the right to vote or defaulted on the debt.


>>I am interested in reform, but not in going backwards.
>
>If going "forward" means going in the same direction we have been heading,
>I'd say "reform" is most certainly "going backwards."

By the definition in the dictionary this qualifies you as a reactionary.


>>(1) Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhistan, Byelorussia, France, Britain, and possibly 
>>    China had the capability of destroying all our cities 30 minutes after 
>>    making the decision to do so.
>>(2) We had a $3.5/$4 trillion debt.
>
>No, but Russia, France, Germany, Britain, etc. had the ability to take us
>over by conventional military force.  

Not.

Britain tried to take us over twice and failed (1775 & 1812).  France did in
fact take over Mexico in the 19th century.  If they thought they could get
away with it, I'm sure they would rather have tried to take the U.S. over
instead.  Germany was not even a country for most of the 19th century.  When 
they became one, they were unsuccessful even in taking over their neighor
France.  As for Russia, they had more land then they could handle, which is
why they sold Alaska to us.

>And I suggest you check out the size
>of the Revolutionary War debt.

It was several orders of magnitude less than $4 trillion.  Furthermore,
Alexander Hamilton saw to it the debt was later paid in full.


>>We have never in the past had a government that funded itself solely or
>>mainly or even significantly by selling the right to vote.
>
>That's correct.  It also doesn't contradict what I said.

You asserted that your plan was like what the country had in the past.
I'll let others decide whether you contradicted yourself.


>>If everybody stopped paying their taxes because with they don't agree
>>with everything the government spends money on there would be no government. 
>>If we have no government the Cubans will be happy to provide us with one.
>
>Then please explain why Britain didn't succeed in 1812 when they invaded
>Washington?

Because we had a government and a military, paid for by taxes.


>>>Maybe a Poll Tax is the dumbest idea every dreamt up, and being USENET that
>>>is probably pretty close to the truth.  But the simple reality is that the
>>
>>Are you admitting a mistake here?  I didn't know you were capable of doing
>>that. :-)
>
>No.  

Everyone can draw (or not) their own conclusions from this.

>The point behind holding a discussion is introducing new ideas and
>playing around with them.  

So far so good...

>You probably weren't aware of this concept.

Here is a clue why John Haugh is famous for getting into flame wars.  He
tosses little bits of flame bait around and later claims he didn't start it.


>>Yes the government sometimes wastes money.  And the government spends money
>>on some things I wish it wouldn't.  But I don't mind my tax dollars being 
>>spent on something if it is either (1) in the best interest of society as a
>>whole, or (2) its the right thing to do.
>
>Your attitude is the core of the problem.  If you accept that the government
>only "sometimes wastes money" and you "don't mind my tax dollars being spent"
>you will continue to get a government which wastes as much of you money as
>it has to in order to pad the pockets of those who support it.  And you won't

If this is your real concern it does you no good to make outlandish proposals
such as adopting a Poll Tax Government or defaulting on the debt because you
lose your credibility by doing so.


>complain because you look at the small amount of good that it is doing and
>think you are accomplishing something.

I'd say our government has accomplished more than any other in the world.
We are the world's sole superpower,  we are the only country that sent
men to the moon, and we saved the world three times this century.  

-- 
Tom Kimball  			tom@europa.lerctr.org    
tom@europa.lonestar.org		tom%europa@egsner.cirr.com