****ing seals part II, or "I demand a recount!"

Force Pit Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2007
Messages
495
Best answers
0
John Adams said:
Contrary to what I stated previously, I'm cool with ending it on that if Spunky is. I still think it's silly to believe the government owns the money, but I'll admit it's semantics and open for interpretation. Who the investors are isn't.
As silly as you think it may be, you can't deny the fact that the government owns the money. You're giving it to them. Albeit not willingly, but you're giving it to them. When you give someone money, it's theirs, they own it. If you were loaning it to them, and they had to give it back, yes I'd say the that people own the money.

However you pay taxes on a lot of things you won't get back. If you buy a bike, or a car, or certain kinds of food that are taxable. That 5,6 or 7% tax goes to the government. You won't get it back, ever. It's the governments, they can spend it on what they want, with the influence of the American people. Which is where the 'co-ownership' comes into play. The taxes you can get back, are when you receive a paycheck, or when you spend money on something that's taxable for business related reasons or work related reasons. That is money that can be argued is neither the governments or yours, simply because you're giving it to the government now, but eventually they're going to give it back. Much like a loan.

We'll use my job as an example. When I first started I had to pay for my uniform, it came out of my check. Because it's an item, it's taxable. However, once tax season came around, I got the taxes that were taken out, back because I needed it for a work related reason. So that money which was once in possession of the government is given back to you.

I think in this case, the most simple answer would be; the government physically owns the money until it's distributed to something or someone else.

Just because you have some control over what they do with the money doesn't really make it your money. It's the same concept of the owner and the investee. I can tell my friend to buy a video game, but whether or not he buys it is up to him. And to make it more to the point, we can say that I gave him the money for his birthday. Although the money was once mine, he is now in possession of it, and I am trying to influence what he does. He can agree or disagree with me on what I'm trying to influence it on, but when it comes down to it, he's the one that makes the decision. And the money is no longer mine, I gave it to him.

I don't like the idea of the money the government spends is still the money of the citizens because then that makes me feel like I'm responsible for the decisions they make, and, well, I can bet everyone here will agree when I say, our government doesn't always make the best decisions.

Not to mention the fact that, if it were my money, going back to the seals, would have said "nuh uh, no way you're spending my money on two animals that are going to die soon anyway."
 
New Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2001
Messages
692
Best answers
0
I get my tax money back every time I drive on a road, when my neighborhood is save, when the government paid for my education, when they'll pay my dad's retirement money etc etc. The government is merely hired to buy that stuff for me, because I'm too lazy to arrange all that myself. If you gave your friend money to buy a video-game for you, would that then be his money? And would he be allowed to do whatever he wants with it?
 
Cunning as Zeus
Banned
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 23, 2003
Messages
6,079
Best answers
0
The fed is supposed to work for the people. If I give an investor my money, and tell him to do me right, it's up to him to do me right. It isn't his money. It's still my money, and he gets to keep some of it if I get rich. The fed is supposed to be investing money in things that benefit us. Not wars that no one wants.

Btw, it said I voted for one of the options before I had even read the thread, so there's something wrong with it. I'd like to vote.
 

sub

Active Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jun 18, 2003
Messages
5,961
Best answers
0
The ****? I demand a recount! It's the 2,000 elections all over again.
 
Force Pit Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2007
Messages
495
Best answers
0
Thomas Jefferson said:
The fed is supposed to work for the people. If I give an investor my money, and tell him to do me right, it's up to him to do me right. It isn't his money. It's still my money, and he gets to keep some of it if I get rich. The fed is supposed to be investing money in things that benefit us. Not wars that no one wants.

Btw, it said I voted for one of the options before I had even read the thread, so there's something wrong with it. I'd like to vote.
Except the government isn't an investor that's there to get you rich. You're giving him money to spend on you, and in this case other people. The government is there to use the money you gave them to make America better.

Let's say you have 500 dollars in cash. You open up a bank account and put your 500 dollars in it. You can access that money any time you want, anywhere you want. It's not on your person, it's safely tucked away electronically (well, not really but to make this easy to explain it is). Fact of the matter is, you can take that money and do whatever you want with it, buy whatever you want with it. You can choose to spend it, or you can choose not to.

Now let's say that 10 dollars of that goes to taxes. So you're at 490. The 10 dollars went to the government. What happens if you want that money back? And want to spend the full 500? In fact, if it's my money, why do I have to give it to the government in the first place? I don't want to. It's my money, why should I have to? Am I not free to decide where my money goes to or not? If so, I want all the money that went to the government in the form of taxes back, please.

;edit;

note that I'm only talking in the standpoint that the taxes going to the government in all my cases is money I won't get back when filing a tax form.
 
Active Member
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 6, 2004
Messages
3,055
Best answers
0
FP explained my thoughts better than I did. That's sad. :(

But alright Sub, we're almost tied so I'm willing to drop this now if you are. We'll simply agree to disagree and move on.
 
Force Pit Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2007
Messages
495
Best answers
0
Spunky said:
FP explained my thoughts better than I did. That's sad. :(

But alright Sub, we're almost tied so I'm willing to drop this now if you are. We'll simply agree to disagree and move on.
Irony at it's finest because I agree with sub, I just wanted to debate something. But now you're ending it :(

Who am I going to argue with now D:
 
Cunning as Zeus
Banned
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 23, 2003
Messages
6,079
Best answers
0
Benjamin Franklin said:
Except the government isn't an investor that's there to get you rich. You're giving him money to spend on you, and in this case other people. The government is there to use the money you gave them to make America better.
Which means it's working in the exact same capacity as an investor, in that it's investing in our future, making us all "richer", where richer can mean better quality of life (because driving on nicely paved roads versus **** filled streets makes life worth living) They can't do whatever they damn well please with out money, because we voted them in, and we can vote them out. If they aren't doing what feel is in our best interest, they lose their power and some other person destined to betray us takes his place. And it goes on and on and on.

Bottom line, it's all of our money is pooled in such a way that while we don't have direct control of it, it's our-the collective's-money. No one person decides what goes where. People seem to have forgotten that the government serves us; not the other way around.
 
Moving with Sonic Speed
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jan 9, 2003
Messages
4,534
Best answers
0
Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own.

According to this standard of merit, the praise of affording a just securing to property, should be sparingly bestowed on a government which, however scrupulously guarding the possessions of individuals, does not protect them in the enjoyment and communication of their opinions, in which they have an equal, and in the estimation of some, a more valuable property.

Our government is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. We have elected that our own government secure, protect and redistribute our wealth to the areas which require the most assistance in development for the greater good of our society. The currency is our own, and at action, guided by another's hand for our own benefit.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top