 |
|
This shows how convoluted and sidetracked your argument
Posted on: April 11, 2025 at 17:42:29 CT
JeffB MU
Posts:
72409
Member For:
21.47 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
has become.
In an earlier post you seemed to be arguing the opposite:
http://www.tigerboard.com/boards/view.php?message=19484968
You think tariffs are government regulation?
That's pretty dumb. Have a nice day
Let's get back to the crux of the disagreement.
My first post to which you objected was about the deleterious effects of government weaseling itself into the private sector, the example of which was the topic under discussion federal involvement in health care.
JeffB: That's the type of idiocy that happens when the government weasels its way into the private sector.
Seagull: Isn't that what tariffs are? (nm)
To a lesser extent, yes... and all taxation. But I am not an anarchist and believe that there are at least some minimal levels of government required for modern societies.
Not a lesser extent. You only say that because you're ok with them. It has nothing to do with anarchism, either. That's a deflection and quite a dishonest characterization of the issue.
Of course it is to a lesser extent, than all of the various regulations and ever changing tax laws that are currently in place.
An across the board 10% tariff for goods coming into the country does not get into the nitty gritty details of the decision making process for companies and individuals coming to terms on doing business together.
and it has a lot to do with anarchism. Governments need funding, and unless the government is run by volunteers and voluntary donations they rely upon taxes. I don't see tariffs as influencing transactions between citizens and businesses any more than any other tax, in fact I think they have less influence than most taxes.
But if you disagree, would you mind giving your opinion upon how governments should be financed in a way that does not impact the decisions of companies and citizens with respect to their transactions for goods and services.
Here is where it looks to me like you dodged the two issues under discussion, namely 1. tariffs are less intrusive than the laws and regulations we see in the health care system, and 2. that some form of taxation is necessary for the funding any government. Instead you diverted:
You think tariffs are government regulation?
That's pretty dumb. Have a nice day
I made the mistake of taking the diversionary bait by (correctly) claiming that "I didn't say that tariffs are government regulation." and by later challenging you to show where I had claimed that they were.
Interestingly, you argue exactly the opposite in the post that I am replying to you here:
Is a tariff not a rule or directive issued by a government agency that governs the conduct of businesses? The only difference here is that this is a government regulation that you like.
vs your earlier post as quoted above (I'll revisit your 2nd sentence momentarily):
You think tariffs are government regulation?
That's pretty dumb. Have a nice day
The only difference here is that this is a government regulation that you like.
Which brings us full circle to my earlier post which refuted your assertion and from which you diverted, and which is quoted above.
http://www.tigerboard.com/boards/view.php?message=19484964
I will repeat the question that ended that post, hopefully you can give an honest, direct answer this time:
But if you disagree, would you mind giving your opinion upon how governments should be financed in a way that does not impact the decisions of companies and citizens with respect to their transactions for goods and services.
In an earlier post you seemed to be arguing the opposite:
http://www.tigerboard.com/boards/view.php?message=19484968
You think tariffs are government regulation?
That's pretty dumb. Have a nice day
Let's get back to the crux of the disagreement.
My first post to which you objected was about the deleterious effects of government weaseling itself into the private sector, the example of which was the topic under discussion federal involvement in health care.
JeffB: That's the type of idiocy that happens when the government weasels its way into the private sector.
Seagull: Isn't that what tariffs are? (nm)
To a lesser extent, yes... and all taxation. But I am not an anarchist and believe that there are at least some minimal levels of government required for modern societies.
Not a lesser extent. You only say that because you're ok with them. It has nothing to do with anarchism, either. That's a deflection and quite a dishonest characterization of the issue.
Of course it is to a lesser extent, than all of the various regulations and ever changing tax laws that are currently in place.
An across the board 10% tariff for goods coming into the country does not get into the nitty gritty details of the decision making process for companies and individuals coming to terms on doing business together.
and it has a lot to do with anarchism. Governments need funding, and unless the government is run by volunteers and voluntary donations they rely upon taxes. I don't see tariffs as influencing transactions between citizens and businesses any more than any other tax, in fact I think they have less influence than most taxes.
But if you disagree, would you mind giving your opinion upon how governments should be financed in a way that does not impact the decisions of companies and citizens with respect to their transactions for goods and services.
Here is where it looks to me like you dodged the two issues under discussion, namely 1. tariffs are less intrusive than the laws and regulations we see in the health care system, and 2. that some form of taxation is necessary for the funding any government. Instead you diverted:
You think tariffs are government regulation?
That's pretty dumb. Have a nice day
I made the mistake of taking the diversionary bait by (correctly) claiming that "I didn't say that tariffs are government regulation." and by later challenging you to show where I had claimed that they were.
Interestingly, you argue exactly the opposite in the post that I am replying to you here:
Is a tariff not a rule or directive issued by a government agency that governs the conduct of businesses? The only difference here is that this is a government regulation that you like.
vs your earlier post as quoted above (I'll revisit your 2nd sentence momentarily):
You think tariffs are government regulation?
That's pretty dumb. Have a nice day
The only difference here is that this is a government regulation that you like.
Which brings us full circle to my earlier post which refuted your assertion and from which you diverted, and which is quoted above.
http://www.tigerboard.com/boards/view.php?message=19484964
I will repeat the question that ended that post, hopefully you can give an honest, direct answer this time:
But if you disagree, would you mind giving your opinion upon how governments should be financed in a way that does not impact the decisions of companies and citizens with respect to their transactions for goods and services.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
This shows how convoluted and sidetracked your argument - JeffB MU - 4/11 17:42:29