[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [pct-l] PCT and politics

I agree and have no problem, as long as they decrease taxes a corresponding 
amount. The current trend is to charge each individual user for the things 
used, gasoline tax for highways and park entrance fees for park users being 
great examples. The only thing that bothers me is that more and more use 
fees are put in place and taxes don't seem to go down that much if at all! I 
have to admit, I'm not sure which is worse, a moron politician or an 
economics challenged one. Thank god neither one of them will have the power 
to actually screw all that much up with a balanced Legislature. The 
important races were for the Senate and Congress. They are the boys that tax 
and spend, increase taxes and make laws. Clinton used his executive powers 
to create NMs but only Congress can make them Wilderness or NPs, as I 
remember it. I suppose, when you get right down to it, they are all 
scoundrels and thieves just some of them are OUR scoundrels and thieves. 
Except for their stance on public lands and abortion, I pretty much agree 
with the Republicans on all the rest of their policies. But I am 
diametrically opposed on those issues. They would much rather have a nice 
new Nuki carrier to deploy some place that probably isn't any of our 
business, and the Democrats would rather have a larger welfare state, 
creating more poor people, than either would have a fully funded public 
lands policy. If we'd just quite playing World Cop we wouldn't need a large 
military. The one we have right now is incredibly deadly. It is probably 1/3 
the size and 10 times as deadly as the military we had in Viet Nam and we 
managed to kill 4.5 million people with that one. It is very easy to commit 
troops to an area when you know you won't have to go. If we'd quite playing 
Guilty, Condescending Mother we'd need a lot smaller welfare state and would 
actually help people instead of trap them in a system with all most no way 
out. Both of the candidates are GREAT trade offs. I assume that's why it was 
so close. Both of them have a serious downside. I guess it got down to a 
matter of which you prized most at the the cost of that which you hated 
But what do I know

>From: "Reynolds, WT" <reynolds@ilan.com>
I believe that the best way to preserve these national
>treasures is to charge for their maintenance.
>* From the PCT-L |  Need help? http://www.backcountry.net/faq.html  *

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 

* From the PCT-L |  Need help? http://www.backcountry.net/faq.html  *

To:            pct-l@edina.hack.net