That is where your error is.
Just because there are more people, does not mean there are more drivers.
In fact, licensed drivers have decreased at times, even as the population grows.
There were a total of 228,195,802 licensed drivers in the US in 2020, a decrease of 0.21% or 483,917 licensed drivers from 2019.
By 2023 estimated growth grew again, but only by 2 percent.
Using per capita is an inaccurate way of measuring fatalities or accidents.
We have more people in the country, but more and more do not drive, especially young people.
You measure them the same way you measure air traffic or rail fatalities, by miles traveled.
But my source, wiki collecting NTSB data, directly contradicts yours.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year
CaptUSA has been there, done that, and it went in one of your ears and whooshed right back out the other at the speed sound travels in air. You don't even seem to have noticed.
You repeat yourself like a spammer. I don't.
Well, boys, we've reduced him to spamming like a cracked vinyl record again. Suppose he really thinks spamming us will cause us to unsee the difference between uniform tariffs and protectionist tariffs? Suppose he really thinks spamming us will cause us to unsee the fact that tariffs couldn't possibly raise the amount of money Trump gave Big Pharma to poison us?
And how do you propose to make that happen?
Ron Paul is weaker than you because he has been in Congress and tried to really do real things, while you are almighty like every armchair quarterback. Only thing is, he lives in the real world. You just go around accusing others of having unrealistic theories, while shoveling your own.
Did the word "uniform" go in one of your eyes and out the other? Wasn't there anything in between to slow it down?
Show me where Ron Paul said enacting a tariff automatically ends other taxes, and/or where Trump (not you) proposed a package deal of that type.
Show me where Ron Paul called for intranational tariffs and state customs agencies.
When? How? Why? When has passing a tariff ever ended any other tax? Why are you acting like it's automatic? Has Trump said one thing -- just one word -- about making the repeal of other taxes a part of his proposed new tariffs?
Has he? You want us to believe your scheme is part of the plan, when Trump hasn't even made it one of his broken campaign promises?
You just made that up. If progs accuse others of doing what they themselves do all the time, and you accuse others of doing what you yourself do all the time, how are you not a prog?
Same spam, different thread.
I remember Obama trolls doing this to Ron Paul over his Republican endorsements, too. But they didn't lecture us constantly about political necessities and the perfect being "the enemy of the good" at the same time. They weren't so hypocritical.
You say state tariffs will result in the end of the federal income tax.
I say there's no reason in the world to believe that and you double down. With even less real-world evidence that it could ever happen, you then insist state tariffs are the only thing that could end the federal income tax.
Then you start doing the liberal "if you don't support the federal Department of Education you don't want children to learn" fallacy.
You want us to think you're not a liberal, but you can't seem to stop acting just like one.
Nothing to it :rolleyes:
News flash: I don't want interstate customs searches. So, I won't support this hare-brained scheme even if you type your fingers to the bone trying to sell it. Take your "Papers, pliss" totalitarian schemes and...
I don't care what you do with them.
Excuse, excuse, prognostication based on lesser evil dogma, spinning a meaningless "silver lining" offhand remark into an endorsement that never happened like those puppets who pose as journalists like to do.
I feel so darned edified now.
The fun thing about the senile is the way they forget to keep secrets secret.
So, now we know Bibi conducts false flag attacks against Israel. The president said so.
https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1780757367618940973
1780757367618940973
He filled his cabinet with outsiders. He bloated the deficit as much as all 44 prior administrations combined. He let Fauci shut down the economy.
These are verifiable facts. There's a word for people who call verifiable facts lies. Several words for such people.
I cannot erect unconstitutional interstate tariffs nor eliminate federal taxes, and neither can you. You can't do it, you're not trusting anyone else to do it, but you expect it to be done. And you say it has been done, but can't cite an example.
Then you hypocritically accuse me of creating straw men. It's kind of esoteric comedy. Not for everyone. But it is comedy. There's nothing serious about it.
There is definitely no more trollish behavior than going on a site supporting a constitutionalist and libertarian and calling for customs inspectors on every state border.
Humanity has seen that happen. Not by using your strategy of giving them more money and power on one end and trusting them to give it up on the other end like the sort of Polyanna that's still getting boosters, but by throwing the bums out.
I support the site Mission. (This will change your user title to "Supporting Member".)
Display site reputation bars.:
Display site reputation bars.
Signature
Based on the idea of natural rights, government secures those rights to the individual by strictly negative intervention, making justice costless and easy of access; and beyond that it does not go. The State, on the other hand, both in its genesis and by its primary intention, is purely anti-social. It is not based on the idea of natural rights, but on the idea that the individual has no rights except those that the State may provisionally grant him. It has always made justice costly and difficult of access, and has invariably held itself above justice and common morality whenever it could advantage itself by so doing.
--Albert J. Nock
Connect With Us