TexasCHLforum.com

ScooterSissy wrote:Bloomburg said "we're simply forcing you to understand" - using that logic, are we safe to assume that NYC is going to start making purchases only in $1,000 increments, and that taxpayers will be encouraged to pay taxes using pennies?

He may be on to something, if he's consistent that is...

They need to accept state and city income tax (and property tax) payments in cash only and eliminate withholding and escrow. Then people will be forced to really understand Bloomberg.

puma guy wrote:If this jerk really cared about people's health he could recommend limiting tobacco sales to one cigarette at a time. There is WAY TOO MUCH tax revenue to do that.

I assume you were joking but you are closer to the truth than you realize. They started with smoking.

They placed outrageous taxes on cigarettes, enacted regulations and laws about smoking, sued cigarette manufacturers and went full bore with negative advertising against smoking. Only 30% of people smoke and people did not object because “smoking is bad for you” and “I don’t smoke, so making laws against it is a good thing” now a person can’t even smoke outside in some places. No one saw this as a violation of someone’s rights because “I don’t smoke and smokers should not have rights”.

They tried the exact same tactics with guns (if you can’t outlaw it, then tax and regulate it to death), but the NRA and other organizations so far has been able to block these tactics. Take a little time and think about all the laws that have been passed that take away just a little bit of your liberties each time.

“We are doing this for your own good” or “we are doing this for the children” has become the excuse to take away people’s liberties a little at a time. I might be wrong, it may have started with seat belts.

I hope this made sense because I am feeling bad (back problems). I think I need to go lay down.

VoiceofReason wrote:

puma guy wrote:If this jerk really cared about people's health he could recommend limiting tobacco sales to one cigarette at a time. There is WAY TOO MUCH tax revenue to do that.

I assume you were joking but you are closer to the truth than you realize. They started with smoking.

They placed outrageous taxes on cigarettes, enacted regulations and laws about smoking, sued cigarette manufacturers and went full bore with negative advertising against smoking. Only 30% of people smoke and people did not object because “smoking is bad for you” and “I don’t smoke, so making laws against it is a good thing” now a person can’t even smoke outside in some places. No one saw this as a violation of someone’s rights because “I don’t smoke and smokers should not have rights”.

They tried the exact same tactics with guns (if you can’t outlaw it, then tax and regulate it to death), but the NRA and other organizations so far has been able to block these tactics. Take a little time and think about all the laws that have been passed that take away just a little bit of your liberties each time.

“We are doing this for your own good” or “we are doing this for the children” has become the excuse to take away people’s liberties a little at a time. I might be wrong, it may have started with seat belts.

I hope this made sense because I am feeling bad (back problems). I think I need to go lay down.

No, you are 100% correct! The "Glass House" folks will not be concerned about the erosion of other peoples rights, whose behaviors they disagree with, until the "stones" start coming their way. Often, it's too late.

Land of the free, home of the brave.

I wonder if anyone remembers these lines, when the come up with all these new laws. Are we really free anymore. Where do you draw the line.

philip964 wrote:Land of the free, home of the brave.

I wonder if anyone remembers these lines, when the come up with all these new laws. Are we really free anymore. Where do you draw the line.

It’s like the Congress People that scoffed at the reading of the Constitution and some even walked out when Congress started their session last year.

I believe this is the appropriate quotation....

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
................ Martin Niemöller

And the updated version.....

First they came for the cigarettes,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a smoker.

Then they came for the trans-fats,
and I didn't speak out because I don't eat fast food.

Then they came for the sugary soft drinks,
and I didn't speak out because I only drink diet.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

"Refugees from the soda tyranny in New York will have sanctuary in London." (possibly NSFW, drug content)
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-j ... is-johnson" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;