Oh, I see. So the argument is that anything you advocate as public policy, you should voluntarily do yourself. If you think going to war in Iraq is a good idea, for instance, you should join the army. barfo
LOL, you want regulations, you prove they prevented disaster. How about the stock market crash and financial meltdown of 2008/09? Enron was a product of regulations. What regulations did we have ALREADY IN PLACE to prevent a company from making too big a bet on something (Internet, in Enron's case). Accounting firms and lawyers. EDIT: I see BrianFromWA set you straight in an earlier post.
It's really not. I'm in favor of limited government, as I think freedom and the individual responsibility that it requires make for a better society. When people need help, I'm fine with the government stepping in as a last resort and I'm more than happy to fund a social safety net with my taxes. More often, however, private charities and local organizations are better equipped to help, which is why most of my charitable donations go to those entities. Fiscally, I'd be considered quite "conservative" (and not a "compassionate conservative"). However, socially, I'm quite liberal in terms of issues of equality and freedom. I don't fit in any party or any characterization.
Strawman. But I'll fix your analogy for you since you're playing dumb... If I'm a strong supporter of going to war in Iraq, then yes, I should be willing to pay more tax to do so. And yes, I should be willing to give more money beyond the minimum.
So, are you a strong supporter of ANY government service? And do you donate extra money to pay for it? barfo
Then do it. You can provide several people with the health insurance you want them to have so badly. And the answer to your question is: yes.
Really? You donate extra money to the treasury in addition to your taxes? Very interesting. So what is the service that motivates you to do this? barfo
Do you? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/1684503.stm http://www.chron.com/business/enron/article/Enron-internet-division-in-disarray-witness-1517211.php
The problem with Enron was not that they made 'too big of a bet on the Internet'. If that was all they did, none of us would know the name today, anymore than zillions of other dotcom busts. It was the accounting fraud that was the problem. barfo
I don't think he's an Obama supporter, but here is one person who paid more than required on their taxes: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8fc4288e-03f9-11e2-b91b-00144feabdc0.html#axzz278z2Yqbb
Their internet trading platform was a giant money loser. In the $billions a year. Otherwise, it'd be a successful oil and gas trading company to this day.
So what? There's nothing special about that. Enron is of interest because of the accounting fraud which led to Sarbox. barfo
Do donations have to go directly to the treasury? If I'm donating to public education, I have to direct it through the treasury first?
Not so far as I know. Tis true, I did say government, not federal government. Although we were implicitly talking about federal government, I didn't specify. So a point for you. barfo
