Things you want the government to subsidize or stop subsidizing

[mitchboese]

If sex between consenting adults is legal, then why should it be illegal to charge a fee for giving that consent? Because you think it's evil? Hence the need for freedom from religion (the establishment clause) an not the notion that freedom of religion (the free exercise clause) means the ability to impose one's personal morality on others.

You mentioned human trafficking and cild prostitution. Those, my friend, ate evil. How do u propoe legalizing adult sex will rid those? (BTW, it's freedom OF religion from the constraints of government!)

 

[cbrarick]

here is ct of you absolutely can prevent someone from charging their ev in the parking lot. You don't even need a explicit prohibition.
Any recent (1980's on) condo controls what can and can't be added to common areas, and any parking lot is a common area (or at least a limited common element) so even if you don't say "no charging in the parking lot" there's no way to charge them, because the condo didn't have EV charging ports on the outside of the condo! On top of that, ev charging cords strung from building to car could produce a trip hazard that the association officers have a fiduciary duty to prevent. I trip and fall on resident x's cord, and if permitted (or not previously told not to) have such cord in a walkway turns into a looser legal issue for the board.

so , no I don't have to say "no charging in the parking lot" I just need to deny installation of charging ports (fine, because it breaks uniformity of the condo) and tell people no power cords on limited common elements or common elements. It's not a explicit refusal to allow charging, but making it impossible based on condo conformity (a high priority thing) and safety. Might seem wrong to EV owners, but that's how it's done

and that's 13 years of condo president experience! You learn to look for ways the condo could be hosed.....or you aren't doing the job....

 

[jqavins]

You mentioned human trafficking and cild prostitution. Those, my friend, ate evil. How do u propoe legalizing adult sex will rid those? (BTW, it's freedom OF religion from the constraints of government!)

My suggestion was NOT to regulate the unquestionably evil things you named. Criminal enterprises are like any other business in that the prices for their products are fixed by supply and demand. When the supply of sex for hire is ample, and that supply is from a well regulated, well run industry, the demand for illegal sex for hire will dry up, as well as the horrible, evil practices that go with it.

Sadly they will not disappear entirely, since there will still be the worst of humanity who still wants those evil things. That will be a tiny number as compared to the number who now patronize illegal prostitution operations and turn a blind eye to the horrors that happen.

So, what reason is there to keep sex for hire illegal, other than to indirectly subsidize criminals (through forgone revenue)? Because it's just intrinsically evil? Perhaps I misunderstood you in thinking that was your position. Certainly it is the position of many who oppose legalization. And it's for that that we need freedom from religion.

 

[Tyeeking]

It’s fascinating how threads morph and wander. Don’t mean that as a criticism. I just find it interesting.

 

[cwbullet]

Be careful on this thread. It can quickly go awry.

 

[jqavins]

Yes sir, quite right. Thank you, I think I needed reminding.

 

[kuririn]

Be careful on this thread. It can quickly go awry.

I doubt that the OP would mind that.
He moved the discussion here so that another thread would not get further derailed.
No big loss.
5,4,3,2,..........

 

[John Kemker]

I would like for the government to quit subsidizing re-election campaigns! No more pork barrels! No more re-election tours disguised as "fact-finding" tours! No more salary during campaigning!

Elected officials should have their salaries divided by the number of hours they can reasonably be expected to work. IE: 40 hour work weeks, 50 weeks a year. Every hour spent on the campaign trail while elected to office results in the same number of hours deducted from their pay, weekends, holidays and 2 weeks a year "vacation" excluded.

EXAMPLE:
Senator Leghorn is paid $200,000 per annum. Therefore, his pay rate is $100 per hour. (40 hours a week times 50 weeks = 2000 hours. $200,000 / 2000 = 100) Senator Leghorn can campaign every weekend, and has 80 hours he can campaign/year without penalty.

 

[vcp]

I would like for the government to quit subsidizing re-election campaigns! No more pork barrels! No more re-election tours disguised as "fact-finding" tours! No more salary during campaigning!

Elected officials should have their salaries divided by the number of hours they can reasonably be expected to work. IE: 40 hour work weeks, 50 weeks a year. Every hour spent on the campaign trail while elected to office results in the same number of hours deducted from their pay, weekends, holidays and 2 weeks a year "vacation" excluded.

EXAMPLE:
Senator Leghorn is paid $200,000 per annum. Therefore, his pay rate is $100 per hour. (40 hours a week times 50 weeks = 2000 hours. $200,000 / 2000 = 100) Senator Leghorn can campaign every weekend, and has 80 hours he can campaign/year without penalty.

Or perhaps fully subsidize election campaigns. Each candidate gets the same set amount of funds. No private or corporate donations allowed.

 

[Hobie1dog]

stop sending money to Israel

 

[TheTank]

stop sending money to Israel

Stop sending money everywhere.... And along with that, stop being the primary funding source for just about every international coalition out there. Enough being a giant ATM machine for the world.

 

[Hobie1dog]

Stop sending money everywhere.... And along with that, stop being the primary funding source for just about every international coalition out there. Enough being a giant ATM machine for the world.

Goes back to the same thing that General Smedly Butler of World War I said, we should never, ever go beyond 500 miles outside of our borders. What happens outside of that, is none of our business.

 

[TheTank]

Goes back to the same thing that General Smedly Butler of World War I said, we should never, ever go beyond 500 miles outside of our borders. What happens outside of that, is none of our business.

Agreed. I guess that is another subsidy as well... playing "World Police." I'm cool with stopping that as well.

 

[cerving]

Goes back to the same thing that General Smedly Butler of World War I said, we should never, ever go beyond 500 miles outside of our borders. What happens outside of that, is none of our business.

Two words... World Trade. Gen. Butler was wrong.

 

[Hobie1dog]

Two words... World Trade. Gen. Butler was wrong.

Hey wrote that book when he came back from WW1, so that is really an exception, but he also said if you cross over into our 500 mile space, we have the right to blow you away

 

[ThirstyBarbarian]

Goes back to the same thing that General Smedly Butler of World War I said, we should never, ever go beyond 500 miles outside of our borders. What happens outside of that, is none of our business.

A lot of our business, I mean literal business, like the buying and selling of our products, is outside that 500 mile limit. A lot of our economy is dependent on customers, suppliers, and partners that are further away than 500 miles. We definitely have interests all around the world.

 

[TheTank]

A lot of our business, I mean literal business, like the buying and selling of our products, is outside that 500 mile limit. A lot of our economy is dependent on customers, suppliers, and partners that are further away than 500 miles. We definitely have interests all around the world.

I haven't read his book... but did he mean commerce? Or just military action seeing as he had just come back from WW1?

 

[Hobie1dog]

A lot of our business, I mean literal business, like the buying and selling of our products, is outside that 500 mile limit. A lot of our economy is dependent on customers, suppliers, and partners that are further away than 500 miles. We definitely have interests all around the world.

he said to go fight a war 500 miles out.
And if we saw you needed to go fight a war, the second part was that every person on Capitol Hill had to sign an agreement that their immediate family members would be the first ones sent to the front lines, and that right there will eliminate 99% of all of our wars .... Vietnam and Afghanistan, both a total waste of a trillion dollars and thousands of lives.
"War is a Racket" is the name of the book it's only about 90 pages long.

 

[cwbullet]

Not all wars are avoidable. Some were meant to stop evil and inaction led to World War. Look at WWII for example. Do you think that the Axis would have stopped if the Allies had not stood up and fought?

The problem today is that only a select few serve. Many do not even know what it is like to do something for your country or someone else.

 

[ThirstyBarbarian]

he said to go fight a war 500 miles out.
And if we saw you needed to go fight a war, the second part was that every person on Capitol Hill had to sign an agreement that their immediate family members would be the first ones sent to the front lines, and that right there will eliminate 99% of all of our wars .... Vietnam and Afghanistan, both a total waste of a trillion dollars and thousands of lives.
"War is a Racket" is the name of the book it's only about 90 pages long.

Some of our wars have been mistakes, but others have not. This book was written after WWI and before WWII? What would our world look like today if we had followed the advice in that book and had not fought WWII? What would it mean for us, the United States?

My point about how our economy is integrated into the global economy was that we do have vital interests around the entire world, and sometimes our interests are aligned with the interests of our friends, allies, and trading partners. So sometimes it’s in our interests to defend those friends, allies, and trading partners.

 

[cerving]

Don't forget that the reason the French got involved in the Revolutionary War was because they didn't want the British to control the New World. An enemy of your enemy is a friend...

 

[Wrightme43]

I guess using the government to procure giant woodchippers to feed the government into would just be out of the question?

 

[Hobie1dog]

Past time to hit the ignore button....again

 

[bwayne64]

Stop subsidizing the defense of other countries borders, while leaving ours wide blankin open !

 

[Orestes Mayo]

Goes back to the same thing that General Smedly Butler of World War I said, we should never, ever go beyond 500 miles outside of our borders. What happens outside of that, is none of our business.

That was a time when 500 miles was a real distance. Anyone can do that and more in a day.

 

[Orestes Mayo]

You mentioned human trafficking and cild prostitution. Those, my friend, ate evil. How do u propoe legalizing adult sex will rid those? (BTW, it's freedom OF religion from the constraints of government!)

Freedom OF religion but also freedom From religion. There is a difference.

 

[ThirstyBarbarian]

Freedom OF religion but also freedom From religion. There is a difference.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”

It’s both. The government can’t impose a religion on you — freedom FROM an official religion. And the government can’t prohibit you from exercising your own religion — freedom OF religion.

Almost all of the controversy regarding religion and government or the laws has to do with how these two things can be in conflict.

 

[jqavins]

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”

It’s both. The government can’t impose a religion on you — freedom FROM an official religion...

And, according to numerous Supreme Court rulings, it can't impose religion in general either. Thus, any law that's based only on a religious notion of what's moral or evil is unconstitutional.

You mentioned human trafficking and cild prostitution. Those, my friend, ate evil. How do u propoe legalizing adult sex will rid those? (BTW, it's freedom OF religion from the constraints of government!)

So, if the prohibition on sex for hire is based only on religious morality then those laws should be struck down. If it's based on an attempt curb human tracking and child sexual abuse, we should admit that it doesn't work, and try another way to eliminate those things. Such as bringing the sex for hire business into the light.

As a reminder of why this is in the subsidies thread, it's because keeping prostitution illegal is an indirect subsidy to the criminal enterprises that do run the business.

 

[Antares JS]

If it's based on an attempt curb human tracking and child sexual abuse, we should admit that it doesn't work, and try another way to eliminate those things. Such as bringing the sex for hire business into the light.

I'm skeptical of this idea. Pornography with 18+ performers is legal, but its legality hasn't stopped child pornography from proliferating.

 

[afadeev]

I guess using the government to procure giant woodchippers to feed the government into would just be out of the question?

Yep.
Because anarchy is vastly inferior to the government we have, even if some find it trendy to complain about its deficiencies.
BTW, the government we have is precisely the government we deserve.