[MD] On taxation

[Platt Holden]

[Arlo]
I've renamed the thread, since it far deviated from Indian values.

[Arlo previously]
You make some valid attempts at substance here, too bad you had to mar 
this with the usual "fear-distort-ad hominem". I'll try to seperate out 
the legitmate dialogue points, and respond to them. As for the rest, it 
continues to speak volumes.

[Platt]
More innuendo, insults and childish cheap shots.

[Arlo]
Describing your "fear, distort, ad hominem, Wurlitzer, Pee Wee" tactics 
is simply stating the obvious. When you've responded with substance, 
I've addressed that straightly.

So look who determines what is "substance" and what isn't, the great 
Marxist critical thinker. "Pin a rose on me."

[Arlo]
But, here you use nothing more than another "Pee
Wee", to try to pretend that you are the victim, rather than the 
attacker Interesting, but obvious.

So look who determines who is "pretending," the great Marxist thinker. 
"Pin another rose on me."

[Arlo previously]
Ad hominem, nothing more. Well, the usual boring "Marxist" fear label.

[Platt]
Fear label? Aren't you proud to be a Marxist thinker? In some circles,
especially in academe, to be labelled a Marxist is considered a badge 
of honor (though I admit some will deny their political agenda since 
the fall of the Soviet bloc.)

[Arlo]
I am not a Marxist thinker. Any more than I am a Kantist thinker. Or 
any of the many other people I've read that I think made some valid 
points and erred on others. Your use of it is simply to paint my as 
some "gulag favoring Stalinist". You know this, of course. Yet you do 
it and act all innocent and astonished when called on it. Typical, and 
obvious.

Do you agree or not with the general proposition, "From each according 
to his abilities, to each according to his needs?" All your plans to 
improve society call upon those with ability to pay to alleviate the 
pain and suffering of those in need. Right?

[Platt]
I favor cutting all taxes, income, consumption or whatever.

[Arlo]
And how do we pay for the military and the police and the courts that 
use their guns to protect "property ownership"? How do we pay for the 
roads, and the public library, and the EMT services (fire, police, 
ambulance)? How do we pay for the scores of diplomats whose job is 
(supposedly) to ensure foreign nations stay friendly to us?

I said "cut," not "eliminate." So much for answering "substance." 

[Arlo previously]
do you favor bankruptcy for individuals (and, if so, why did the 
conservatives pretty much gut it), and do you favor bankruptcy for 
companies?

[Platt]
No. Do you?

[Arlo]
Umm.... no. But when *I* said to get rid of it, you said that was 
"Marxist". If you don't favor it, and getting rid of it is Marxist, 
what's your plan?

When did I say getting rid of it was Marxist? The whole country goes 
bankrupt under Marxism.

[Platt]
A legitimate use of police powers is to enforce contracts since a free  
market, property ownership and individual freedom depend on performance 
of contractual obligations.

[Arlo]
Who determines what is "legitimate"? Democratic vote? Conservative 
ideologues? Philosophers? Dare I say, "intellectuals"?

We the people through our elected representatives under our 
Constitutional government. You want an intellectual elite to rule?. 

 [Platt previously]
Since I have no idea what you mean by "conservative orthodoxy" I can't  
answer. Why don't you define what you mean (be sure to cover all the  
bases), and why you think it's important that I answer such a really  
weird question?

[Arlo responded]
Evasive. But let me say it this way, is there anything you agree with 
on Pirsig, that Limbaugh would disagree with? Or do you feel that ZMM 
and Lila are simply books arguing for conservatism?

Since I don't know what Limbaugh would disagree with I can't answer. 
Pirsig argued for freedom within a framework of order which is what 
conservatives argue for. But he argues for other things, too, like how 
intellectuals having taken over society have screwed up. Do you agree?

 [Arlo]
Hardly, although your response is. (Note the expected "Pee Wee" here) 
Pick up your copy of Lila (if I have time tomorrow, hell, I'll do it 
for you), and find the sections where he discusses Victorian and Indian 
values (you must be familiar with them, since you were SO quick to 
point out that many of the Indian values Pirsig advances are "unfitted 
for modern life"), and tell me which, if any, of the Victorian values 
are unfitted for modern life. Again, I'll list them tomorrow, or as 
soon as I get a chance.

Still waiting.

 [Platt]
Tax cuts are not Marxist. Tax increases are Marxist.

[Arlo]
You said any attempt to use tax relief (cuts) to foster certain 
behavior is Marxist. Reaganomics uses "tax relief" for the wealthy to 
encourage certain behaviors. Marxist?

Enabling citizens to keep more of their own money encourages what
behaviors?

 [Platt]
Police powers used to guarantee individual property rights on which  
liberty is based are legitimate.

[Arlo]
"Liberty" has nothing to do with property ownership. The Indians were 
quite "free", and had no property. Using police powers to protect 
property ownerships is a social contract. It's "legitimacy" derives 
only from the power it gets from our willingness to submit to the 
contract. Or, can you tell me who determines what is "legitimate"? Ayn 
Rand?

In a civilized society, a person who cannot keep the product of his 
labor is a slave. Do you think slavery is legitimate? 

[Arlo]
Who should govern our society?

[Platt]
We the people with a minimum of government interference.

[Arlo]
Who determines what constitutes a "minimum"?

We the people with constitutional protections against government 
interference. 

[Arlo]
Should the government provide
public roads? Public lands? EMT services? Public libraries? A military? 
Park rangers? Highway patrol officers? School?

Roads, parks, libraries, schools, police, military OK. EMT 
questionable. 

 [Platt]
More innuendo, insults and childish cheap shots.  The Marxist thinker
just can't help himself. I look forward to his next slander.

[Arlo]
Just stating the obvious. As in pointing out your use of another "Pee 
Wee" here. Demonize, demonize, demonize, and then complain about being 
demonized. Typical, and obvious.

Oh, so you don’t demonize? You are pure and innocent because you, the 
great Marxist critical thinker, just state the obvious? "Pin another 
rose on me."

Platt