PDA

View Full Version : repeal Mass income tax




boethius27
11-04-2008, 07:33 PM
Damn these idiots. I need to hurry my way out of this moronic state. So far the question to eliminate the state income tax is losing 70 to 30.

Fucking stupid.

:mad:



results here: http://boston.com/

kirkblitz
11-04-2008, 07:35 PM
taxs are patriotic!!!

Paul.Bearer.of.Injustice
11-04-2008, 07:41 PM
at least the dogs are winning.

AdamT
11-04-2008, 07:47 PM
Is there any hope at all left for this country? We are overrun by dumbed down sheeple.

muzzled dogg
11-04-2008, 07:48 PM
at least we can get high now without getting paranoid

self-evident
11-04-2008, 07:52 PM
Dead serious question:

Why the hell would you vote to have your state keep taking money out of your paycheck when you have a simple push of a button to eliminate it?

boethius27
11-04-2008, 07:53 PM
at least we can get high now without getting paranoid

Too bad I don't smoke, but I have a lot of friends who might be a bit more relaxed now. And good for them.

boethius27
11-04-2008, 07:55 PM
Dead serious question:

Why the hell would you vote to have your state keep taking money out of your paycheck when you have a simple push of a button to eliminate it?

I talked to a lot of people whom I just couldn't convince. They would always say things like, "the homeless shelters will close down. The libraries will have to be shut. Public programs can't just be turned off.... etc etc."

The worst one to hear was, "Poor people need that money." Exactly!!!!! Stop taking it from them!!!!!!!!!

powerofreason
11-04-2008, 07:58 PM
Wasn't there a ballot initiative in CA for weed legalization? Anyone have a link to those results?

powerofreason
11-04-2008, 08:04 PM
Found its called Prop. 5 and its basically a decrim thing, plus other stuff thats a step in the right direction. No results in cuz they're on they're on the west coast (doh!)

penguin
11-04-2008, 08:48 PM
Damn these idiots. I need to hurry my way out of this moronic state. So far the question to eliminate the state income tax is losing 70 to 30.

Fucking stupid.

:mad:



results here: http://boston.com/

I'm with ya but where to go? The moron's have taken over NH.:confused:

Pepsi
11-05-2008, 08:34 AM
Found its called Prop. 5 and its basically a decrim thing, plus other stuff thats a step in the right direction. No results in cuz they're on they're on the west coast (doh!)

It was voted down with 61.9% voteing NO and 31.3% voteing YES

Cinderella
11-05-2008, 08:50 AM
im from mass and let me tell u why i voted no on question one....if question one would have passed with a yes vote they would have shut down over 20 schools in the state and would have created a 40 kid classroom in public school...teachers aides would be fired and after school programs would also be out the window...i work at a substance abuse hospital that relys on this money as well so that would have limited our resources even more so that they already are...voting yes would have caused alot of harm...so im glad this didnt pass

ghengis86
11-05-2008, 08:57 AM
im from mass and let me tell u why i voted no on question one....if question one would have passed with a yes vote they would have shut down over 20 schools in the state and would have created a 40 kid classroom in public school...teachers aides would be fired and after school programs would also be out the window...i work at a substance abuse hospital that relys on this money as well so that would have limited our resources even more so that they already are...voting yes would have caused alot of harm...so im glad this didnt pass

then maybe publics schools are not the best option for educating our children. maybe instead of canning 20 schools, they should have canned a propotional amount of administrators. maybe we should spend time with our children after school to teach them things, instead of relying on the school.

and one more point to consider; if you had an extra $3,500 a year in your pocket, would you be more or less likely to donate money to chairty? would you be more or less likely to volunteer in a hospital? would you be more or less likely to support privately run community outreach/education centers?

Cinderella
11-05-2008, 09:06 AM
then maybe publics schools are not the best option for educating our children. maybe instead of canning 20 schools, they should have canned a propotional amount of administrators. maybe we should spend time with our children after school to teach them things, instead of relying on the school.

and one more point to consider; if you had an extra $3,500 a year in your pocket, would you be more or less likely to donate money to chairty? would you be more or less likely to volunteer in a hospital? would you be more or less likely to support privately run community outreach/education centers? people would be LESS LIKELY to do any of this stuff!

right but most people cannot afford private schools....do u really think theyd can administrators?? hell no the children would have paid for that one!

maybe we should spend time with our kids after school? i agree but parents work...we are slaves to debt and taking after school programs away would be determental to families especially single mothers who do it alone...

and another point do u really think that in a shallow materialistic society we live in that people would donate money to charitable causes? are u effin kidding me? no they wouldnt...they be buying phones clothes and coach bags

ghengis86
11-05-2008, 09:32 AM
people would be LESS LIKELY to do any of this stuff!

right but most people cannot afford private schools....do u really think theyd can administrators?? hell no the children would have paid for that one!

maybe we should spend time with our kids after school? i agree but parents work...we are slaves to debt and taking after school programs away would be determental to families especially single mothers who do it alone...

and another point do u really think that in a shallow materialistic society we live in that people would donate money to charitable causes? are u effin kidding me? no they wouldnt...they be buying phones clothes and coach bags

already, private charitable donations far exceed government charity (regarding poverty, the arts, churches, etc.), so even though we do live in a shallow materialistic society, your premise is incorrect.

whoever said anything about private schools (as they currently exist)?

if people understood that there's no government safety net, they would be more apt to give charitably because one would want the same treatment, should they fall on hard times. not saying this would happen over night; it might take a generation or two.

but $3,500 a year is a good start. there is nothing efficient about a government run program. its clear that we have differing views; i would just ask that you rationally consider the practice of stealing money with the threat of violence no matter what that money is used to accomplish.
regards

Athan
11-05-2008, 10:47 AM
LOL omg Massachusetts people are so FUCKING STUPID!

fr33domfightr
11-05-2008, 11:07 AM
If anyone from MA believes income taxes are good, why stop at 5.3%, why not make it 10%. C'mon, there must be a whole lot more that can be done with more money, right? And if 10% is OK, why not even go as high as 20%? With that kind of money, the state could have even MORE programs to get class sizes really small, offer tons of after-school activites, probably even have daycare too! That would help every single parent in the state, right? That would be awesome, don't you think?!


FF

Cinderella
11-05-2008, 11:38 AM
u have to understand that people here are not ready for this...im not ready to send my child to school where shell be forced to comepete against 39 other children for some attention from 1 teacher...i work at a substance abuse hospital and we are already suffering from budget cuts as is i cant even imagine what wed be working with if a yes vote passed...yes its ideal to get rid of the tax but then the officials would punish children and people who are sick...its unfortunate but i felt like i was stuck between a rock and a hard place with this one

JohnMeridith
11-05-2008, 11:40 AM
im from mass and let me tell u why i voted no on question one....if question one would have passed with a yes vote they would have shut down over 20 schools in the state and would have created a 40 kid classroom in public school...teachers aides would be fired and after school programs would also be out the window...i work at a substance abuse hospital that relys on this money as well so that would have limited our resources even more so that they already are...voting yes would have caused alot of harm...so im glad this didnt pass

Voting to save your own hide at the expense of others. You need some liberty training.

Cinderella
11-05-2008, 11:41 AM
at the expense of others?! i pay taxes! its at my own expense

JohnMeridith
11-05-2008, 11:43 AM
at the expense of others?! i pay taxes! its at my own expense
What about the people that have no kids and/or don't have someone in your school? Shouldn't they have the right to decide where they use their money? Have you learned anything about what liberty is? You have been posting here for 10+ months, I would think you would know a little better.

Cinderella
11-05-2008, 11:48 AM
What about the people that have no kids and/or don't have someone in your school? Shouldn't they have the right to decide where they use their money? Have you learned anything about what liberty is? You have been posting here for 10+ months, I would think you would know a little better.
who said all the money goes to the schools? or to the hospitals? all i said was if a yes vote passed these are the places they would have cut budgets....and i dont think thats right! crucify me all u want...i stand by what i voted for...

JohnMeridith
11-05-2008, 11:51 AM
who said all the money goes to the schools? or to the hospitals? all i said was if a yes vote passed these are the places they would have cut budgets....and i dont think thats right! crucify me all u want...i stand by what i voted for...
You are clueless, why are you even a member of this forum?

Cinderella
11-05-2008, 12:03 PM
You are clueless, why are you even a member of this forum?


because im a ron paul supporter! :D

and if u cant respect my right to make my own decisions then i throw the same question back at u!

boethius27
11-05-2008, 01:03 PM
im from mass and let me tell u why i voted no on question one....if question one would have passed with a yes vote they would have shut down over 20 schools in the state and would have created a 40 kid classroom in public school...teachers aides would be fired and after school programs would also be out the window...i work at a substance abuse hospital that relys on this money as well so that would have limited our resources even more so that they already are...voting yes would have caused alot of harm...so im glad this didnt pass

Just like New Hampshire fell into pieces when their income tax went away huh?

bitch.

Cinderella
11-05-2008, 01:06 PM
bitch.


watch your tone little boy! i dont appreciate you calling me that...people like you are the ones that push people away from the movement...keep up the good work:rolleyes:

Danke
11-05-2008, 01:09 PM
because im a ron paul supporter! :D

and if u cant respect my right to make my own decisions then i throw the same question back at u!

Respect your right to use third party thugs to extract others' property for you?

No, can't do that.

Fox McCloud
11-05-2008, 01:10 PM
bummer, sounds like Massachusetts is ok with legalized theft.

70% taking from themselves and the 30% who voted against it...dunno how else you could define theft.

*sigh* Let's hope that other States try to get a similar initiative up and running and it passes there.

JohnMeridith
11-05-2008, 01:13 PM
because im a ron paul supporter! :D

and if u cant respect my right to make my own decisions then i throw the same question back at u!
My decisions do not harm anyone or take from them anything. Yours was an endorsement for legalizing theft. Do you have a problem with this comprehension or should I try to use only 3 and 4 letter words?

Cinderella
11-05-2008, 01:14 PM
i def see eveyones point here but i dont need to be insulted for voting the way i did...ive never been one to insult anyone here (besides the time i told ghemminger to kill himself)

i guess u could say that i voted out of fear that alot of programs were going to be cut if this passed...i should have been more informed but i doubt my one little vote would have made a difference in the 70 percent of people who voted no as well

Cinderella
11-05-2008, 01:15 PM
and enough with the insults please

JohnMeridith
11-05-2008, 01:21 PM
i def see eveyones point here but i dont need to be insulted for voting the way i did...ive never been one to insult anyone here (besides the time i told ghemminger to kill himself)

i guess u could say that i voted out of fear that alot of programs were going to be cut if this passed...i should have been more informed but i doubt my one little vote would have made a difference in the 70 percent of people who voted no as well
You are making progress if you admit you voted out of fear(or self preservation) AND see the error in your ways. It reminds me of this article on the ronpaul2008.com campaign site.

Not Yours To Give

Col. David Crockett
US Representative from Tennessee

Originally published in "The Life of Colonel David Crockett,"
by Edward Sylvester Ellis.


One day in the House of Representatives a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose:

"Mr. Speaker--I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has not the power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him.

"Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."

He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.

Later, when asked by a friend why he had opposed the appropriation, Crockett gave this explanation:

"Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. In spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made houseless, and, besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them. The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done.

"The next summer, when it began to be time to think about election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up. When riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up, I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather coldly.

"I began: 'Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called
candidates, and---‘


"Yes I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine, I shall not vote for you again."

"This was a sockdolager...I begged him to tell me what was the matter.

" ’Well, Colonel, it is hardly worth-while to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the constituent to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you. I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest.
…But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the more honest he is.'

" 'I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional question.’

“ ‘No, Colonel, there’s no mistake. Though I live in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?’

" ‘Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did.'

" ‘It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. 'No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life.' "The congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution.'

" 'So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you.'

"I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go to talking, he would set others to talking, and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is, I was so fully convinced that he was right, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:

" ‘Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it fully. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot.'

"He laughingly replied; 'Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and, perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way.'

" ‘If I don't’, said I, 'I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it.'

" ‘No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. This is Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you.’

" 'Well, I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-bye. I must know your name.’

" 'My name is Bunce.'

" 'Not Horatio Bunce?'

" 'Yes.’

" 'Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me, but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend.'

"It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible integrity, and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him, before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.

"At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before.

"Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight, talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before.

"I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him - no, that is not the word - I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if every one who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.

"But to return to my story. The next morning we went to the barbecue, and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted - at least, they all knew me.

"In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered up around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying:

" ‘Fellow-citizens - I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only.’"

"I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:

" ‘And now, fellow-citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.

" ‘It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the
credit for it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so.'

"He came upon the stand and said:

" ‘Fellow-citizens - It affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today.'

"He went down, and there went up from that crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.'

"I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.'

"Now, sir," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday.

"There is one thing now to which I will call your attention. You remember that I proposed to give a week's pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men - men who think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them, for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased--a debt which could not be paid by money--and the insignificance and worthlessness of money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $10,000, when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."

Truth-Bringer
11-05-2008, 01:57 PM
Damn these idiots. I need to hurry my way out of this moronic state. So far the question to eliminate the state income tax is losing 70 to 30.

Fucking stupid.

:mad:


People are basically being told: "You have two choices - 1) you can have the freedom to keep all that you earn, or 2) you can allow the government to arbitrarily decide at any time how much you can keep and use men with guns to force you to pay if you won't comply." If you choose number 2 in that scenario, then you are a complete and total idiot. There is no question about it.

Truth-Bringer
11-05-2008, 02:00 PM
and if u cant respect my right to make my own decisions then i throw the same question back at u!

You absolutely have the right to make your own decisions, if your actions are peaceful, honest and voluntary. But what you don't have the right to do is use force, fraud or coercion against other people. And that is exactly what you did by voting to keep the income tax in place.

Taxation is theft. It is not a contribution. If you refuse to pay, you will receive threatening letters demanding payment. If you ignore them, eventually a case will be filed in court. If you ignore the summons and fail to appear, a warrant will be issued for your arrest and men with guns will come to your home to take you to jail. If you tell them you're not going and to leave your property, they will forcibly try to take you in. If you physically resist and fight back, they can and will legally kill you. That is taking money by threat of force, and by force if the threat isn't sufficient. That is theft, which is continual in the case of taxation and which therefore equates to slavery, and it is immoral.

"To take a man's property without his consent is robbery; and to assume his consent where no consent is given, makes the taking none the less robbery. If it did not, the highwayman has the same right to assume a man's consent to part with his purse, that any other man, or body of men, can have. And his assumption would afford as much moral justification for his robbery as does a like assumption, on the part of the government, for taking a man's property without his consent. The government's pretense of protecting him, as an equivalent for the taxation, affords no justification. It is for himself to decide whether he desires such protection as the government offers him. If he does not desire it, or does not bargain for it, the government has no more right, than any other insurance company to impose it upon him, or make him pay for it." - Lysander Spooner, "Trial by Jury"

Mortikhi
11-05-2008, 02:35 PM
im from mass and let me tell u why i voted no on question one....if question one would have passed with a yes vote they would have shut down over 20 schools in the state and would have created a 40 kid classroom in public school...teachers aides would be fired and after school programs would also be out the window...i work at a substance abuse hospital that relys on this money as well so that would have limited our resources even more so that they already are...voting yes would have caused alot of harm...so im glad this didnt pass

LOL you got fuckin' conned.

Mani
11-05-2008, 02:51 PM
u have to understand that people here are not ready for this...im not ready to send my child to school where shell be forced to comepete against 39 other children for some attention from 1 teacher...i work at a substance abuse hospital and we are already suffering from budget cuts as is i cant even imagine what wed be working with if a yes vote passed...yes its ideal to get rid of the tax but then the officials would punish children and people who are sick...its unfortunate but i felt like i was stuck between a rock and a hard place with this one

This is probably one of the most insightful threads I've ever read.

Thank you Cinderella for speaking up. I completely disagree with your beliefs, but it provides a major insight to what we are dealing with.


FEAR. The government and these big hired media guns sell FEAR.

She is afraid for the well being of the sick and the children. This is an emotional response.

We as a liberty movement HAVE TO KNOW HOW TO CONQUER THIS FEAR!


Insulting Cinderella isn't going to help, but rather we need to understand her mindset, because THIS IS WHY WE ARE LOSING THE FREEDOM BATTLE!!!!

Xenophage
11-05-2008, 02:58 PM
Cinderella,

When government stops, the world does not stop. People do not stop. Everything continues. Nobody is less safe. Nothing bad happens. All the same people that were around before are around the next day. Don't be afraid.

akihabro
11-05-2008, 03:21 PM
Wasn't there a ballot initiative in CA for weed legalization? Anyone have a link to those results?

No

akihabro
11-05-2008, 03:26 PM
If anyone from MA believes income taxes are good, why stop at 5.3%, why not make it 10%. C'mon, there must be a whole lot more that can be done with more money, right? And if 10% is OK, why not even go as high as 20%? With that kind of money, the state could have even MORE programs to get class sizes really small, offer tons of after-school activites, probably even have daycare too! That would help every single parent in the state, right? That would be awesome, don't you think?!


FF

u shop at south coast plaza so it doesn't matter how high taxes are. J/K

Cinderella
11-05-2008, 04:28 PM
this is probably one of the most insightful threads i've ever read.

Thank you cinderella for speaking up. I completely disagree with your beliefs, but it provides a major insight to what we are dealing with.


fear. The government and these big hired media guns sell fear.

she is afraid for the well being of the sick and the children. This is an emotional response.

we as a liberty movement have to know how to conquer this fear!


insulting cinderella isn't going to help, but rather we need to understand her mindset, because this is why we are losing the freedom battle!!!!

thank you!

fr33domfightr
11-05-2008, 04:51 PM
I'm sure the state collects other taxes as well, so it wouldn't be like they wouldn't have any money left. As a legislator with limited resources (tax revenue), you'd have to prioritize. Once the law passed, it would immediately give much more power back to THE PEOPLE.

As such, your legislators would be having meetings like crazy to determine what they should do, and/or cut. That's the way it should be! As it is, they think the tax money is there's to do whatever they want, as they see fit.

Once fiscal responsibility comes into play, wasteful programs will get the axe. Those that are truly needed would stay. Some things might even be handed off to churches, as they might have been in the past.

From what I've seen here in California, I agree, scare tactics are how they get people to comply. Every recent measure that resulted in government having less money or less power had a ton of scare tactic Ads running against them. And those measures were defeated, keeping the status quo or maintaining taxes that were illegal in the first place.

In California, we are one of the highest taxed states in the country, and we still don't have enough money, by our (democratic majority) legislators, sheesh!!!

Edit: I voted for Ron Paul, even though as president he could have caused me to get laid off. Why? Because I do believe in Country First, over my personal gain.


FF

Paul.Bearer.of.Injustice
11-05-2008, 09:10 PM
the "for the children" excuse is emotional blackmail, pure and simple.

Schools are paid for by state lotteries, cigarette/alcohol tax, etc.

INCOME tax is a slush fund for ridiculous pensions and govt bloat.

People clearly voted they'd rather have "experts" in the government making monetary decisions for them... and why not? We all sweat 40-60 hours a week to support our debt-slave existence and don't have time or energy to give it any thought

anaconda
11-05-2008, 09:12 PM
Why do the people there want to pay state income tax?

Cinderella
11-05-2008, 11:50 PM
People clearly voted they'd rather have "experts" in the government making monetary decisions for them... and why not? We all sweat 40-60 hours a week to support our debt-slave existence and don't have time or energy to give it any thought


:(sad but true:(

Fox McCloud
11-05-2008, 11:55 PM
Why do the people there want to pay state income tax?

it's one of the most liberal States in the US, and most liberals somehow think that generally high taxes somehow equates to higher income brackets....plus they tend to think "how would we fund roads, schools, etc" when they don't realize that roads are funded via gas tax, school are funded via property tax, etc.

IMHO Massachusetts is the absolute worst State to hope to get the income tax repealed in; it'd be far better to try some State like Ohio, Alabama, Arkansas, or some other generally conservative State.

at least Massachusetts has just a flat income tax; I wish more States would move to that.

boethius27
11-06-2008, 08:11 AM
OK, so I apologize for calling Cindy a B*CH, but I'm just so frustrated that we actually had it on the ballot and people still voted it down.

My fiancee and I sat down and added up exactly how much we would save over the next two years if this would have passed and the number was astounding to us. It would have helped us so much in trying to get our student loans paid back off and to get ourselves feeling like we are finally something other than broke college kids who are going on 30 years old!

The campaign against this was incredible. I saw so many signs saying "it's a reckless idea" that I just wanted to puke. The trouble is everybody seeing no farther than their own personal career and aspirations. Everyone who's job even remotely uses government funding was told that they would just crumble into dust. I know someone who works in a public library and was given flyers by the management saying that the library would revert back to standards of 1889! INSANE.

Sigh, but there is nothing I can do for now, the people were hoodwinked again.

Cinderella
11-06-2008, 08:29 AM
im really upset over this...i was very unimformed and took their fear mongering bait hook line and sinker....i feel like such a fool because i should have known better....ughhh

im sorry everyone in mass

JohnMeridith
11-06-2008, 08:32 AM
im really upset over this...i was very unimformed and took their fear mongering bait hook line and sinker....i feel like such a fool because i should have known better....ughhh

im sorry everyone in mass
It sucks you messed up, but unlike most you actually know it and dislike it. Sorry if I was harsh to you. Did you read the article?

JohnMeridith
11-06-2008, 08:32 AM
OK, so I apologize for calling Cindy a B*CH, but I'm just so frustrated that we actually had it on the ballot and people still voted it down.

My fiancee and I sat down and added up exactly how much we would save over the next two years if this would have passed and the number was astounding to us. It would have helped us so much in trying to get our student loans paid back off and to get ourselves feeling like we are finally something other than broke college kids who are going on 30 years old!

The campaign against this was incredible. I saw so many signs saying "it's a reckless idea" that I just wanted to puke. The trouble is everybody seeing no farther than their own personal career and aspirations. Everyone who's job even remotely uses government funding was told that they would just crumble into dust. I know someone who works in a public library and was given flyers by the management saying that the library would revert back to standards of 1889! INSANE.

Sigh, but there is nothing I can do for now, the people were hoodwinked again.
I called my buddy that lives in Boston Monday and told him to vote against the tax. I bet he didn't.

Mani
11-06-2008, 09:09 AM
im really upset over this...i was very unimformed and took their fear mongering bait hook line and sinker....i feel like such a fool because i should have known better....ughhh

im sorry everyone in mass

See guys, once we get passed the emotion and the fear mongering people will understand. But it just takes much longer because we have to logically work passed emotion.

Some people will never get passed that, but some people can be informed.