The Black Vault Message Forums

Discover the Truth!        

The War on Terrorism & Homeland Security

Where is the anti-war crowd?

Discuss the War on Terrorism, Homeland Security, Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea and other global terrorist concerns.

Postby Aquatank » Mon Sep 07, 2009 11:09 am

dang, you're right, now its going to be even harder to change things.

http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www ... 00505.html
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html

It looks like the mistake being made (and passed on by me too, grrrr) according to the first link is that the bad voter turnout numbers are being based elgibility to vote and not on registered to vote. With those registered voting over 80%. The other number is even more disturbing because it really shows the apathy 40% plus of of citizens have towards any sort of particpation. IMO if you aren't registered you shouldn't complain about how everything sucks.
Aquatank
 
Posts: 994
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Location: Midwest USA

Postby vulcan6gun » Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:00 pm

Um, Aquatank...don't forget, not everyone CAN vote. Our total population figures include both legal and illegal immigrants who don't have, and may not want, citizen status; also, last I checked you have to be 18 or over. So the (actual) apathy figure is lower than it appears. :)

Ahh, America the beautiful, where it's legal to die for your country one year before it's legal to vote or get laid, and four years before it's legal to get drunk. :oops:

Ladies and gentlemen, I propose that either the last two items be lowered, or the first one raised. If you keep it legal to enlist at 17, but make it illegal to fight on foreign soil until 21, it still solves the problem of losing kids in far away lands. 8-)

Except on vacation. :shock: :lol:
Vulcan6gun

"Would you like your scientific research grilled, or roasted?"--Unknown Japanese whaler
User avatar
vulcan6gun
 
Posts: 830
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 7:29 pm
Location: Grid DB82, 4 kts, -12 meters

Postby Tairaa » Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:16 pm

Ahh, America the beautiful, where it's legal to die for your country one year before it's legal to vote or get laid, and four years before it's legal to get drunk. :oops:

Ladies and gentlemen, I propose that either the last two items be lowered, or the first one raised. If you keep it legal to enlist at 17, but make it illegal to fight on foreign soil until 21, it still solves the problem of losing kids in far away lands. 8-)

Except on vacation. :shock: :lol:


YES! Whole heartedly agree.

It's similar here in Canada, at 17 you can fight and die for your country, but you have to wait until you're 19-21 to drink alcohol or smoke.

But you can have sex when you're 16 without risking that whole statutory rape thing. So a WHOLE year after you're allowed to have sex and a year before you're allowed to get drunk you can fight for, and die for, your country. Sickening. I agree, I think the order of progression is a bit wonky. I'm thinking those ages should be more like:
16-sex
17 military but no deployment
18-19 alcohol cigarettes and voting
20-21 eligible for deployment

But that's just my opinion I guess, a lot of people disagree with that order of progression.
"George Bush says he speaks to god every day, and christians love him for it. If George Bush said he spoke to god through his hair dryer, they would think he was mad. I fail to see how the addition of a hair dryer makes it any more absurd."
Tairaa
 
Posts: 2940
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby Aquatank » Mon Sep 07, 2009 8:20 pm

Unfortunately, even with a ballot revolution to displace the current parties, we'd still have to contend with the issue of corporate power on its own. If the parties were displaced a complete revision of the US Code could be enabled streamiling things like age limits and such but in the end the rich and powerful (the top 20%) will still be that unless they get a tax increase that puts them in their place. And this poses a problem, because as I noted Western civilization is geared in such a way that corporate and military connections are way too intertwined. That being said the way for the world to get off the war footing is to focus on local resources and restructure their economies to more peaceful pursuits. Factually this really should only be food, shelter, clothing, healthcare, education, emergency Response & law enforcement, and the infrastructure (both manufacturing & transport included) to support it all. If countries focused on these basic needs instead on vague concepts of "protecting their way of life" they might actually be able to avoid war at the very least by being non interesting.
Aquatank
 
Posts: 994
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Location: Midwest USA

Postby vulcan6gun » Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:45 am

Aquatank wrote:in the end the rich and powerful (the top 20%) will still be that unless they get a tax increase that puts them in their place
Whoa, Nelly! Easy there, big guy. I'm all in favor of fixing a lot of social ills, but if you give me half a chance, I'll BE one of the rich and powerful. :P

Um, make that rich. I don't care for the power thing, I have no want, wish or desire to run any life other than my own. 8-)
Vulcan6gun

"Would you like your scientific research grilled, or roasted?"--Unknown Japanese whaler
User avatar
vulcan6gun
 
Posts: 830
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 7:29 pm
Location: Grid DB82, 4 kts, -12 meters

Postby Aquatank » Tue Sep 08, 2009 1:53 pm

don't worry too much there are two things I'm advocating one is a tax on stocks, bonds and other esecurities like we used to have and going back to putting realistic protectionist tariffs on imports, combined that could make up enough to actually lower income taxes while recreating jobs here in the USA. However I also advocate getting rid of a large amount of tax breaks the top 20% that lower their taxes below or near to that of the middle and poor classes. I wouldn't mind if it was a flat 11% tax across the board, but I also see the problem of the multiples of pay over 10x & anti-unionism to be a form of feudalistic screwing over of the workforce and populace in general that must be reigned in. Generally most revolutions are violent and one of the first things that happens is wealth redistribution through violence, generally by ransacking thievery and murder. What I purpose is wealth redistribution through wage reform legislature and or voluntary pay increases, and taxation. Realistically at some point rich people have too much money and earn more than they can spend.
Aquatank
 
Posts: 994
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Location: Midwest USA

Postby vulcan6gun » Tue Sep 08, 2009 2:32 pm

Aye, Lord Robin! We be with ye! :lol:

(Now, if i can just hide these purses of gold from him, heh, heh...)
Vulcan6gun

"Would you like your scientific research grilled, or roasted?"--Unknown Japanese whaler
User avatar
vulcan6gun
 
Posts: 830
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 7:29 pm
Location: Grid DB82, 4 kts, -12 meters

Postby Aquatank » Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:38 pm

I get nailed for 15% by the feds alone but a rich big wig like Teresa Heinz Kerry worth 750 Million to 1.2 Billion paid 12% in 2003. When 90%+ of the wealth of the nation is locked in the hands 20% of the people who should be paying 35% by law get enough breaks to give them off with 12% there is something seriously wrong with the system.

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teresa_Heinz

Laugh if you want but STETS and Tariffs are what we need, and fair flat tax with far fewer breaks and only for the poor.
Aquatank
 
Posts: 994
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Location: Midwest USA

Postby gudskepteacal » Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:06 pm

Aquatank wrote:I get nailed for 15% by the feds alone but a rich big wig like Teresa Heinz Kerry worth 750 Million to 1.2 Billion paid 12% in 2003. When 90%+ of the wealth of the nation is locked in the hands 20% of the people who should be paying 35% by law get enough breaks to give them off with 12% there is something seriously wrong with the system.


The 'power elite' are not going to let any legislation pass that would take proportional more money out of their pockets than ours. Which goes back to what you were saying earlier about how we need to vote the cronies out; and FAST. They make the rules; the rest of us just have to live by them, right?
"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance." - James Madison
User avatar
gudskepteacal
 
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 1:16 am

Postby OneOfBillions » Thu Sep 10, 2009 5:17 am

Where is the anti-war crowd?


Valid question G2, and you damned sure are not the only one asking it.

Obama worship has completely derailed it near as I can tell.

And yes, it is wrather pathedic!
OneOfBillions
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

PreviousNext

Return to The War on Terrorism & Homeland Security

  • View new posts
  • View unanswered posts
  • Who is online
  • In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 10 minutes)
  • Most users ever online was 292 on Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:19 pm
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest