Recent content by Serene

Well, the government can throw you in jail for putting the wrong type of substance in your body.

I've disagreed with several policies of Democratic presidents in this very thread, so I guess you're saying I'm not a socialist?

Society has lots of laws that punish people for not directly harming another person. If you can convince enough people to not make it a crime, then maybe we can do that.

I didn't argue that they should. In fact, I asked why we don't lower those tax breaks. (In fact, Donald Trump doubled the Child Tax Credit.)

Bud, it's a joke. Lighten up.

I don't disagree with you, you're preaching to the choir. This is one of the big reasons that I don't see all the calls for drastically lowering taxes for everyone as a viable solution. There's no way that we can do that and also reasonably cut enough of the budget to make headway on debt...

You're looking for, "You go to jail," which can eventually happen if you don't pay. We don't tend to call enforcing punishments for other crimes slavery or theft.

I don't agree that's how it is, but that might be a better system. In general, I don't think the Social Security system is particularly great; I haven't given it a lot of thought, but it seems to me that, on the face of it, a private account system would be preferable.

How very proletariat of you to complain about the ruling class.

I'm arguing that, in general, it's melodramatic to call taxes slavery and theft. That's the principle.

Yes, the people making additional income above Social Security to the point where they have to pay federal income taxes obviously means that they're not in the group of retirees who don't pay federal income taxes (to which I was referring). In general, I think it's silly to pay federal income...

Sorry, I kicked the hornet's nest so it's been a pain to try to keep up with all the responses. I saw this one, but got sidetracked in another response. Yes, I agree that at the moment (as in for the last couple of decades at least) we don't generally pay the principal on our debt. Yes, I...

I'm not sure I follow your meaning.

If they find evidence that lawmakers helped organize with the knowledge that it would be violent, I say they deserve the maximum sentence (seditious conspiracy, not treason). That's really not all that far-fetched; if it actually happened and they weren't very careful to avoid incriminating...

Even if this turns out to be true, I don't think it's enough to convict. If they thought they were helping to plan a peaceful protest, then I don't think they broke any law. The fact that the protest turned violent doesn't change that if they didn't intend for that to happen. If they can...