Government functions by taking stuff from some and giving stuff to others. What principles should guide governments in their redistributing assets?
Redistribution of assets
Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by billwald, Jul 12, 2011.
Page 1 of 2
-
Non-involvement.
-
Ditto//////////////// -
Then you are anarchists?
-
-
Government funds itself through taxes. These taxes should go only to fund the costs of government. The government should not use tax money for welfare, health care, etc. That should all be privatized, and those private institutions should run on donations and have very stringent requirements for (even interest free) loans, such as mandatory monthly drug testing, etc.
In my opinion, unemployment should not be paid out to anyone. The economy isn't great right now, but everyone can work two full-time jobs at a fast food place like many have done in the past. Right now, I know of soldiers who got out of the military and are sitting at home pulling unemployment simply because they can. (I believe they are eligible to receive it for a year, no questions asked.)
Now, with all that being said, the problem is the only people who will donate to these institutions (as a general rule) are people looking for a tax break. With enough money in the bank, an institution would be self sustaining (due to loan paybacks and investments), but it would be hard to get an institution to that point. So my idea wouldn't work, simply because of the selfishness of man. -
-
Then please explain how a government should raise funds or acquire the man hours needed for accomplishing whatever the government is to accomplish.
Besides national defense, exactly what is the purpose of government? -
Not welfare, social security, medicaid, or health care. -
ANYWAY, the Treasury functions buy collecting/taking money from one party (call it taxing, bond sales, user fees. Doesn't matter what you call it) and giving it to another party (call it salary, social security, bond redemption, commodity price supports, unemployment, highway funds. Doesn't matter what you call it).
There are only two kinds of book keeping entries - debits and credits.
There are basically only two kind of book keeping systems, single entry and double entry. Only a double entry system can give an honest evaluation of the big picture. A single entry system is nothing more than a check register, only shows cash flow. Which system does the government - all governments - use?
A single entry system only represents the company, not the owners or the creditors. In the same way, the government accounting system only represents what the government owns and owes. It does NOT represent the taxpayers, the citizens.
It is only a cash account and doesn't list assets and liabilities which is why no one knows what the national debt is! It only knows two year projected cash flow. -
-
However, as far as I know, the government does not do an annual statement of net worth which would include non-cash assets and liabilities. And a budget is not an accounting system, but is a form of a report on cash flows. -
>When I took accounting in college, I saw the government list of accounts. It was a DE system.
>However, as far as I know, the government does not do an annual statement of net worth which would include non-cash assets and liabilities. And a budget is not an accounting system, but is a form of a report on cash flows.
OK! YOU ARE RIGHT. I WAS WRONG.
Mandym wrote:
>It is not redistribution of wealth until you get to unconstitutional entitlement programs.
There ARE NO unconstitutional entitlement programs because every one has been vetted by The Supreme Court as the Constitution requires. Your complaint is against the Constitution.
As noted in another thread, every part of government pledges to obey the Constitution. -
-
If not the Supreme Court then who has the final say if this is a country of law?
If people think various programs are not constitutional then there is a court suit. A refusal to hear a case is a decision that the new law is constitutional or that the the decision of a lower court stands. -
And along that line I had once determined to become expert in Government accounts so I could report their shenanigans to the world. I quickly learned that the Federal Government Accounts are so numerous and interwoven that only a team of professionals could understand them. -
Mr. Obama should be given all funds and allow him to distribute at his will, can't you see that this is the only way? We all know now that 80% of people want higher taxes. This means 80% of America want the Pres. to control their lives--all we need to do is sit back and ride the tide, don't worry be happy.
-
http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx -
The result of public polls depends upon how the questions are asked. Sort of like, "Have you stopped beating your wife?"
-
I wonder without all the Obama swooning lefties will Barry stand a chance in 2012. He truly rode a tide of "Hope & Change" that many liberals and some conservatives bought into. I don't see that tide anymore. People aren't goo goo gaa gaa over him anymore, except Chris Matthews.
Page 1 of 2