DesertAttorney

Dammit, what New Orleans hooker takes plastic???

40-some odd years in power, and never got promoted past O-6. The Lybian promotion system really sucks. -or- He and Harland Sanders are now fighting over who gets to be "The Colonel" in the Afterlife...

The government is authorized by the Constitution to levy taxes on you. It is authorized to disburse those revenues according to the dictates of Congress. Claiming that what's yours is yours won't hold up very well with the IRS, Counselor. I'm not arguing law, Professor. If I was, I'd cite cases and statutes. We're debating fiscal/political theory. If it was the former, I'd bet my JD and AZ license against your Physics PhD...and I'd win. My question still stands. Try withholding your taxes on the grounds that what's yours is yours; the IRS has good attorneys too. My question Still stands: Is it your opinion that it is incumbent on Govt to take from those who have it earned it, and give to those who have not?

By the way, I refer you to your own post #16 in this thread by way of pointing out your own contradictions. I see nothing contradictory.

The government is authorized by the Constitution to levy taxes on you. It is authorized to disburse those revenues according to the dictates of Congress. Claiming that what's yours is yours won't hold up very well with the IRS, Counselor. I'm not arguing law, Professor. If I was, I'd cite cases and statutes. We're debating fiscal/political theory. If it was the former, I'd bet my JD and AZ license against your Physics PhD...and I'd win. My question still stands.

Ok, distilled once more, and this now borders on being pedantic: Is it your opinion that it is incumbent on Govt to take from those who have it earned it, and give to those who have not?

Wealth redistribution has moved money away from the middle class AND the rich to the poor. The problem is that the rich are better able to sustain the loss and adjust. The poor and middle class are not. . Nope. The rich got richer and the poor poorer over the past 30 years. www.nytimes.com/2011/09/15/us/poor-are-still-getting-poorer-but-downturns-punch-varies-census-data-show.html And? So it's now incumbent upon Government to take from those who have EARNED it, and give it to those who have not? What's mine is mine, not yours. Yet another strawman from a right winger. I haven't asked you for anything. Have you been taking debating lessons from mnealtx? Not a strawman. A Question. Sir: Given your disdain for the rich, Is it your opinion that it is incumbent on Govt to take from those who have it earned it, and give to those who have not? A simple yes or no would do, and if you wish, a bit of clarification would be nice also.

Tell that to Rick Perry. An estimated 40% of his touted "new jobs" went to illegals. So, you're saying that the States should be able to enforce immigration laws if Fed.gov won't? Live in Arizona or another Border state for awhile. No one who has personally seen the piss-poor job the Fed has done on the border would disagree with empowering the states....

Wealth redistribution has moved money away from the middle class AND the rich to the poor. The problem is that the rich are better able to sustain the loss and adjust. The poor and middle class are not. . Nope. The rich got richer and the poor poorer over the past 30 years. www.nytimes.com/2011/09/15/us/poor-are-still-getting-poorer-but-downturns-punch-varies-census-data-show.html And? So it's now incumbent upon Government to take from those who have EARNED it, and give it to those who have not? What's mine is mine, not yours.

I have ascertained that you, sir, are a Tenured Professor at a private University--easily a six-figure salary. You are better off than 90% of Americans. If you really want to pay what you believe is "your Fair share," please leave my tax rates alone, and send a fat check to the following address: United States Treasury 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest Washington D.C., DC 20220-0001 I'm sure they'll cash it with a smile.

I'm sure CPS will deem him a fit parent and return the child to him...

Meh, I'm enjoying a bit of Schadenfreude at the expense of those myopic unemployed dolts.

Looks like the folks in favor of redistributing things don't like it when it's *their* things being redistributed. Bwahahaha! Losers!

I see a lot of people with training/expertise in one discipline trying to pass said training/expertise off as constituting competence or authority on a completely different area. Examples being: -a person with no training in economics trying to authoritatively discuss the roots of the faults of the Economy; -someone with no criminology training trying to authoritatively discuss the roots of/solutions to crime; -A person with a liberal arts background trying to authoritatively discuss a hard science issue (and vice versa) Appeals to authority are such an arrogant debate tool, especially when one does not have the pedigree for said authority or tries to pass off a completely inappropriate pedigree as being authoritative...

Do you also have a car that drives drunk? Bought it used from a Mormon friend of mine, so I doubt it. :) Your sarcasm meter INOP today?

Still trying to convince Professor Kallend? Let it go, dude...

No, they actually DON'T kill people. I have a bunch of guns.... None of them have ever killed anyone. A gun is an inanimate object and can't do anything... I have a 1931 Soviet Mosin Nagant that's probably killed Nazis, an American M-1 Garand that's likely killed Nazis, and a Mauser K98k that has likely killed Soviets and Americans...

Antarctica, Easter Island, Kwajalein Atoll, and Liechtenstein.

No. you are a tard if you jump uninsured, and Actions should and do have consequences. If you are talking re jumping mishaps--Perhaps. With the waivers signed, it would be rather difficult to sue, much less collect from someone who hurt another through gross buffoonery. Absolutely. If someone was warned, but was a dumb shit notwithstanding said warnings--fuck them.

They simply lack sufficient Trout in their diets.

I still say she should be forced to visit a burn ward and speak with willing patients and the Nurses/MDs...

Most OOPs are issued ex parte. It's just easier. AZ allows for a hearing within 10 days of requesting one. Again, put yourself in the Judge's seat--you really want your name in the paper when the Plaintiff who was denied an OOP gets killed after you turn it down? Hell, even admitting to snatching something out of the Plaintiff's hands is enough to uphold it. The trick is getting it thrown out as to the minor child in common that one parent usually includes on it. That way they don't stack the deck in the ensuing custody battle by being the sole parent for months...

Sweet. No trial prep for me. Now this guy will once again re-define "Backpedaling" for us.

Given this (I shall assume that you have stats to back this claim up), are you suggesting we disregard the right to Due Process, the 2nd Amendment, and the Supreme Court's rulings in DC v. Heller and McDonald v Chicago to solve the problem as you perceive it? I am not trying to set up a straw man. I am paraphrasing what usually is the successive statement to "guns in the USA kill more than all other homicide weapons..." I've spent years arguing the Constitutions on here. To many people, the Constitution should be subservient to stigma, and in order to ensure the safety of the People, the People should be sterilized from prospective risk. The Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments should not be applicable to those "thought to be" risks. Fair enough, Counselor. I shall not pursue this issue further, as ineffectual arguments on the Net ought not be pursued once they are known to be ineffectual. We've all bigger fish to fry in this world than being an Online Rambo, Online Rush Limbaugh, or an Online Obama.

Given this (I shall assume that you have stats to back this claim up), are you suggesting we disregard the right to Due Process, the 2nd Amendment, and the Supreme Court's rulings in DC v. Heller and McDonald v Chicago to solve the problem as you perceive it? I am not trying to set up a straw man. I am paraphrasing what usually is the successive statement to "guns in the USA kill more than all other homicide weapons..."