She asked me what I thought and I said I had nothing to do with any
of
the major parties. I was a Libertarian. She said: less taxes - less
spending - less government. She certainly knows the Libertarian
mantra.
It's unfortunate that people don't as frequently associate the LP with
social freedom as they do with a desire for no taxes.
-- Steve
Steve, I disagree. No taxes is the key to liberty.
It stops the state dead in its tracks.
Michael
www.ThreeMinuteTherapy.com
If most people understood that, then the association might be useful. Do you think everyone understands that? In my experience, the principle association formed by the "no tax" stance is that the LP represents middle/upper class folks whose principle political motivation is greed.
Effective politics(or communication in general) requires seeing things from the perspective of others.
-- Steve
I've found that poorer people are MORE enthusiastic about eliminating taxes.
Taxes change their lifestyle a lot more than more well off people.
They can't get out of taxes as easily, not being able to afford attorneys,
accountants and tax advantaged investments.
Them spending $100.00 on taxes might mean no new clothes for a month.
For a better off American, it means eating out one less time per month.
Less taxes resonates MORE with poor people.
Just try telling a Spanish-speaking voter:
"Menos Impuestos con El Partido Libertad!"
They will LOVE it!
I know, I have done it 1000 times!
Bruce Cohen
WWW.GetBruce.Com
Dear Bruce; ( And an indirect rebuttal to Steve DeKorte )
You have a valid point. Especially when you consider the class of people who can be categorized as the working poor. They have both state and federal taxes and payroll taxes hit them from all sides. Someone earning $25000 a year can expect to face 25% of their income going to the government before they see a penny. The estimated $6,000 would give someone $500 extra a month for their family's benefit. Instead it goes towards a bloated salary and pension and health benefits to some legislator in Sacramento or Washington. The same type of benefits the working poor can't have because they can't afford to have those benefits there's no extra income left to buy it.
As a side note to this. Congress was asked to reconsider the standards for poverty. The standards currently used have been in place for the last 50 years. The basic premise is a family spends 50% of its income on food and the rest for shelter and clothing. The old standards do not take into account how much comes off the top in income and payroll taxes.
Congress failed to act on this request. It was all too apparent that Congress could not adjust the poverty levels to reflect what income was left over after all income and payroll taxes. Plus the fact familes are spending 50% towards shelter not 50% towrads food. If those two things were adjusted then an extremely significant number of Americans would be considered to be living in poverty. OOOPS!!! Can't have that there's an election year coming up.
Ron Getty
SF Libertarian
P.S. Bruce - What the heck does "Menos Impuestos con El Partido Libertad!" mean? I got the Libertarian Party thing but my Hispanic failed me on the first couple of words.
brucedcohen <brucedcohen@...> wrote:I've found that poorer people are MORE enthusiastic about eliminating taxes.
Taxes change their lifestyle a lot more than more well off people.
They can't get out of taxes as easily, not being able to afford attorneys,
accountants and tax advantaged investments.
Them spending $100.00 on taxes might mean no new clothes for a month.
For a better off American, it means eating out one less time per month.
Less taxes resonates MORE with poor people.
Just try telling a Spanish-speaking voter:
"Menos Impuestos con El Partido Libertad!"
They will LOVE it!
I know, I have done it 1000 times!
Bruce Cohen
WWW.GetBruce.Com
Less taxes resonates MORE with poor people.
Who said I was talking about the poor?
Just try telling a Spanish-speaking voter:
"Menos Impuestos con El Partido Libertad!"
They will LOVE it!
Are you suggesting that all Spanish-speaking voters are poor?
-- Steve
> It's unfortunate that people don't as frequently associate the LP
with
> social freedom as they do with a desire for no taxes.
>
> -- Steve
>
> Steve, I disagree. No taxes is the key to liberty.
> It stops the state dead in its tracks.If most people understood that, then the association might be
useful.
Do you think everyone understands that? In my experience, the
principle
association formed by the "no tax" stance is that the LP represents
middle/upper class folks whose principle political motivation is
greed.
I don't see this as reason to obscure our position on taxes,
but rather as reason to do a more effective--and bolder--
job at communicating it.
Effective politics(or communication in general) requires seeing
things
from the perspective of others.
Agreed. Also recognize "others" are not of one perspective,
but rather of many.
Michael