PDA

View Full Version : How is Massachusetts this stupid?




malkusm
11-05-2008, 02:08 PM
Text of Question 1: Repeal of income tax

No: 70%
Yes: 30%

Full text of Question 1 here: http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/massachusetts/question1_text/



SECTION 1. This law, to be known as The Small Government Act to End the Income Tax, is enacted upon the following findings and declarations:

(a) The government of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts today is Big Government, and
(1) Massachusetts Big Government programs do not work; all too often, they do not achieve their stated objectives; all too often they fail in their duties;
(2) Massachusetts Big Government programs make things worse;
(3) Massachusetts Big Government programs create new problems;
(4) Massachusetts Big Government programs squander and waste; and
(5) Massachusetts Big Government programs divert money and energy from positive and productive uses in the private sector.

(b) Big Government has a harmful impact on those who rely upon it, and
(1) Big Government promotes irresponsibility;
(2) Big Government makes people weak and dependent; and
(3) Big Government saps personal initiative and undermines the work ethic.

(c) Big Government cannot work. It is inherently flawed and unreformable.

(d) High taxes feed and increase the size and scope of Massachusetts Big Government.

(e) High taxes drive jobs out of Massachusetts.

(f) High taxes reduce our standard of living, making more people poor and fewer able to help their friends, families, and communities in need.

(g) Government spending rises to meet government income. To dramatically shrink government spending, we must dramatically shrink government income.

(h) Ending the personal income tax is intended to dramatically shrink the revenue of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Ending the personal income tax is
designed to be a bold step in making Massachusetts' government small.

(i) Small government leaves us free and unburdened to fashion our own lives, and
(1) Small government is simple, cheap, and good;
(2) Small government is thrifty and effective;
(3) Small government is accountable and responsible;
(4) There’s no place to hide waste and corruption in a small government budget; and
(5) Small government leaves us with the responsibility and the resources to manage our own lives, educate our children, protect our families, care for our neighbors, and assist those who cannot support themselves.


Any insights?

Truth-Bringer
11-05-2008, 02:10 PM
Any insights?

There's already a thread on this issue. (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=166700) Yes, they were f***ing stupid.

gls
11-05-2008, 02:11 PM
I don't think the majority who voted in favor of legalized theft are "stupid" as much as they are immoral and greedy.

Danke
11-05-2008, 02:12 PM
Everyone needs to pay their fair share. It's for the children!! :p

danberkeley
11-05-2008, 02:12 PM
Text of Question 1: Repeal of income tax

No: 70%
Yes: 30%

Full text of Question 1 here: http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/massachusetts/question1_text/



Any insights?

That's like someone holding a gun to your head asking you, "do you want me to raping you?", and you saying, "yes".

EDIT: :mad:

Xenophage
11-05-2008, 02:16 PM
I don't think the majority who voted in favor of legalized theft are "stupid" as much as they are immoral and greedy.

They're "unprincipled." Unprincipled people don't necessarily have to be stupid, but it helps.

malkusm
11-05-2008, 02:16 PM
Ohhhh NOEZ! "Small Government Act???" What will we do without the government?!?!?!1111@@

Xenophage
11-05-2008, 02:17 PM
That's like someone holding a gun to your head asking you, "do you want me to raping you?", and you saying, "yes".

EDIT: :mad:

"Do you want for me to raping you?" "Yes please for me to be of raped!" "Ok now rape go ok?" "OK!"

mwkaufman
11-05-2008, 02:21 PM
As a Massachusetts resident, I'd like to point out that the full text was on the ballot. But the reason this measure was so decisively defeated, was because a lot of money was spent to defeat it. The group sponsoring bill spent their 400,000 to get signatures to get it on the ballot, where when no one saw it coming it nearly passed six years ago. This year, the opposition was prepared however. They outspent them ten to one and there were tons of advertisements against it, never actually talking about what the bill does. I bet more than half the people that voted yes would tell you that the reason they voted this way was because they didn't want higher property taxes.

FWIW, I voted no and wrote in Ron Paul.

akihabro
11-05-2008, 03:19 PM
That's the whole bill that was linked? Is that so hard to understand? There was some propositions here in CA that were easily 40-60 pages long. How could this bill not make sense? Unfortunately I think people are watching too much TV ads to be swayed. They should have done some internet research. I do admit that its hard to get unbiased facts and figure who really gains. I guess they think no taxes, no services. I believe the farther u get away from federal i.e: federal, state, county, city the more taxes actually benefit the public. am i wrong?

Aratus
11-05-2008, 03:27 PM
dahhhhhhmmm... i have to come up with an explanation... somehow...:rolleyes:

Aratus
11-05-2008, 03:28 PM
there had better not be any october or november surprises!!!
at least none that have me verbally flatfooted... or confused!!!

Truth Warrior
11-05-2008, 03:34 PM
"A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul. " ;)