"criminal?"

Criminal dude?!?


That's rather over-the-top...don't ya think?

I really don't. Giving away my money or my tax dollars like dan is suggesting (to just anyone who wants to live off my payroll for the rest of their lives for no good reason) is very near to theft. Taking my money against my will. Giving it to someone else who hasn't earned it. see where i'm coming from?

As a wise man once said: There is no such thing as a free lunch. If we were having anyone who was on the take perform a meaningful and necessary service for their money i wouldn't have much of a problem with it at all. But giving it away for free is retarded.

Corporations are also found in the private sector.

In any event, what I am advocating is literal compliance with an existing and existing state at-will employment laws; and compliant with our Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

What would you do with recourse to an income that is above the official poverty rate? Would you also, do nothing? In my opinion, anyone can be pursuing Happiness, as enumerated in our Constitution.

If it is only a matter of equity, allowing the employee to pay fifty percent of the unemployment tax could be considered fair.

Your argument would only apply to those individuals who never provided labor input to the economy. Those individuals would likely be the best candidates for a social safety net. I don't mind paying taxes on legal recreational drugs like alcohol, tobacco or pot if it will help provide for the general welfare of the populace of our State.

However, since you object, Hoover Dam could be paying your share of that money that is intended to help real persons in poverty, for you.

With more public sector means of production, we could be lowering our tax burden such that we could end direct and invasive income taxation.
Reply With Quote

I only agree with you with our current and socialized, welfare as we currently know it.

Unemployment compensation, at-will, would simply comply with existing at-will employment doctrine and state at-will employment laws.

I think it is more criminal to pay taxes on for the corrupting influence of the drug war. Yet, many of the opposing viewpoint don't really mind paying a drug war tax since it does not involve the morals or ethics of providing for the general welfare for ourselves and our posterity.

What would you do with recourse to an income that is above the official poverty rate? Would you also, do nothing? In my opinion, anyone can be pursuing Happiness, as enumerated in our Constitution.

If it is only a matter of equity, allowing the employee to pay fifty percent of the unemployment tax could be considered fair.

Your argument would only apply to those individuals who never provided labor input to the economy. Those individuals would likely be the best candidates for a social safety net.

I don't mind paying taxes on legal recreational drugs like alcohol, tobacco or pot if it will help provide for the general welfare of the populace of our State. I can even consider it a form of moral and ethical behavior since it conforms to our supreme law of the land.

And Corporations are NOT the Government. See how that works?

EHHHHH Wrong. If it was literal it would be written out plainly. its not. In fact from what youve read off to me at will UNemployment is not provided for at all in those statutes. Only at will EMPLOYMENT is.
swing and a miss

awwww you can copy and paste! thats adorable.
Go up about 3 or 4 posts. the one that begins with sure they can but not on my dime or some such.

except it doesn't. and it would be EVEN MORE socialist than what we've got. No thanks.

What would you do with recourse to an income that is above the official poverty rate? Would you also, do nothing? In my opinion, anyone can be pursuing Happiness, as enumerated in our Constitution.

How do you reduce taxes by expanding the government? I'm not sure how your logic fits together.

__________________
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
- George Bernard Shaw

Can you elaborate on how complying with existing at-will employment doctrine and state at-will employments will accomplish what you say if it is also compatible with our Ninth Amendment?

In my view, unemployment compensation, at-will, is as easy to administer as minimum wage laws are now; and much simpler than our current social safety net. Simply simplifying our social safety net will result in lower costs.

Why do you consider it an expansion of government? It is a simplification of government and thereby increases the efficiency of government and it reduces our tax burden.

I have recourse to an income that is above the poverty line. Its called a job. If i got fired from my current job i'd go get another one. Whether that job was the same as what I do now, or picking up trash or cleaning toilets. I'd get a damn job to earn my keep.