Taxes and force

The Tea Party is a good start. They need to expand to all the invasive federal programs (education, retirement, etc)

 I looked it up once. If the feds only did what the Constitution allows them to do they would only need the taxes the Constitution permits. This means all the ss taxes, income taxes, employee taxes, fees, etc are only necessary to allow the government to do what it isn't supposed to be doing anyway.

Let's look at an example: We recently had a fridge die on us. As in, the repair man said he would feel guilty fixing it because it just wouldn't do us any good. It would only buy us a couple of months at best.

So we went to the store to buy a new fridge. $1000 for a fridge!?!?

Well, no, not exactly. Yes, we paid more than $1000, but how much of that was to cover the property, employee, and income taxes for the store? How much to cover those same costs for the transportation company that brought the fridge from the factory? How much to cover the taxes for the factory itself? and the transportation of the raw materials to the factory, the production of the raw materials, and so on. Then of course, we had to pay sales tax after the purchase price. The truth is that the fridge itself only cost about $4-500. The rest of what we paid was taxes.

And this is AFTER they took a good chunk out of Hubby's paycheck!

Don't agree with everything, but I do agree with most of this. If you think your way is the right way, use words to persuade people, not the force of government to make them.

What I don't agree with in this video is that there is a proper place for government force; punishing wrong doers and protecting citizens from foreign invaders. This is the power given the government in the Bible. Nothing more.

If you think children should be educated (as do I) give your own money to the school you think does the best job (or some other resource, such as Khan Academy). Dont' force me to support your favorite method of education through property taxes. I just might disagree with you. I just might have a better idea. But I can't pursue my idea because I have to fund yours.

If you think the poor should be fed, buy a bag of groceries (as I do) and give it to them,  go work at a soup kitchen, donate to the Salvation Army. Don't take my money away to give it to the poor through food stamps and ADFC, or you just might find me standing that line, too. I am the better judge than you of whether I can afford to donate to the poor without becoming one of them.

If you want the elderly to be cared for, take them into your own home (as I will when my parents reach that place), donate to organizations that help them, or go take care of them yourself. Don't force me to give to them through Social Security, Medicare, etc, or, you know what? Visit the previous paragraph. I am the best judge of what I can afford to give. Not you.

Do you see the theme in these "helping people" taxes? It is someone forcing others to give to their pet projects, their passions, instead of giving of their own money.

Aren't they doing both? No. Studies show that Liberals (those who campaign the hardest for government programs) give less than 1% of their own money to charity. Conservatives (those who fight against government programs) give 7% plus their own time to charities. The conservatives are the ones putting their money where their mouth is.

If everyone was free to follow their own passions with their own money, I am convinced that the poor would be well cared for, better than they are today, and there would be far fewer of them, too.