From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Clinton Policies
Date: 5 Oct 92 13:19:43 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Distribution: usa
Organization: River Parishes Programming, Austin, Republic of Texas

In article <1992Oct5.034021.152@europa.lonestar.org> tom@europa.lonestar.org (Tom Kimball) writes:
>The idea that the Federal government could be funded solely through the Poll
>Tax and the State government would have regular taxes is bogus.  After all,
>the States could reimbose both the taxes and the services that the federal
>government does now.

I don't know what "reimbose" is, but I assume you are implying that the
states would just give us back what we had just forced the Federal
Government to stop doing.

This is wrong on several counts.  First, the State of Texas does not have
the "credit" that the USoA has.  We just couldn't borrow the money and say
"Full faith and credit ...".  People wouldn't buy it.  Second, Texas has a
constitutional requirement for a balanced budget.  Third, much of what Los
Federales do is demand that states provide services without providing the
funding - we'd be better of because we could start ignoring those demands.

>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
Jefferson said, a little revolution now and then is a good thing.  With
respect to the "Death of Capitalism", I'd suggest at different message
would be sent - don't mess with countries that have gigantic governments.

>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."

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

>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.

There is a difference between "Welfare" and "Head Start" and gasoline tax
funded highways.  A highway is not a "program".

>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?

>>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.  The point behind holding a discussion is introducing new ideas and
playing around with them.  You probably weren't aware of this concept.

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

The Framers didn't want a strong central government with the ability to tax
us until oblivion for exactly the reasons we are seeing today.
-- 
John F. Haugh II           [  TSAKC  ]       UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151    [ DoF #17 ]            Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
Newsgroups: tx.politics