|
|
| Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) (1307758) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (1307758) | |
Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Aug 13 21:09:45 2014  |
|
|
| (1307759) | |
Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Aug 13 21:11:33 2014, in response to Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Wed Aug 13 21:09:45 2014.  |
|
|
| (1307762) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Aug 13 21:30:42 2014, in response to Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Wed Aug 13 21:11:33 2014. And the government, giving free land to railroads, put THESE guys out of business. Technology trudges on ...
|
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1307764) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Aug 13 21:52:45 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Aug 13 21:30:42 2014. Bullshit. The railroads didn't receive taxes from the people via the government. And most railroads didn't need land grants; the ones that did paid them back.Nice try, though. |
|
|
| (1307768) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Aug 13 22:22:28 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Wed Aug 13 21:52:45 2014. And the airlines paid fees for use of those airports and other services. But all that aside, the railroads put the stage coach companies out of business because they got you there faster and had better amenities. The public voted with their wallets and their feet.And THAT all said, it wasn't the airlines that put the railroads out of business, it was the automobile industry and the whole "What's good for GM is good for America" thing. People no longer had to take a train when the railroad felt like it and arrive at their destination in the middle of the night. They could just get up and go whenever they felt like it. That's the smell of FREEDOM you're whiffing. It's what made America great. :) |
|
|
| (1307770) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Wed Aug 13 23:21:31 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Aug 13 21:30:42 2014. Well, technically, Wells Fargo still exists as a bank and investment company. I think they even got a bailout. :-) |
|
|
| (1307771) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Aug 13 23:29:39 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by 3-9 on Wed Aug 13 23:21:31 2014. Sure did ... just doing my little contrarian thing, everybody return to your homes. :) |
|
|
| (1307773) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Aug 13 23:42:27 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Aug 13 22:22:28 2014. Bollocks. The airlines have to tax passengers for those so-called "fees". All that tax revenue goes in the general fund and gets transferred "on paper" to the so-called "trust funds"—which is why they're all going broke.We do know the story of GM by rote right now—the first "crony capitalist" in-bed-with-government story. |
|
|
| (1307774) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Aug 13 23:56:08 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Wed Aug 13 23:42:27 2014. And to challenge it in ANY way is pure communism, my friend. See what those you associate with are selling yet? |
|
|
| (1307776) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Thu Aug 14 00:05:22 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Wed Aug 13 23:42:27 2014. No the PRR, Erie Canal, B&O, and several others were given favors by the various governments from the get go. B&O paid zero tax in MD as long as it maintained Baltimore in the corporate name and HQ there. PRR had the PA gov't trying to obstruct B&O's extension toward Pittsbburgh. BTW GM's major investor early in the game was DuPont which in turn got all of the paint business for those cars and locomotives. |
|
|
| (1307778) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 14 01:06:53 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by Jackson Park B Train on Thu Aug 14 00:05:22 2014. Your sense of history is a bit marred.And what's wrong with paying zero tax? All it goes towards is the country-destroying welfare state. |
|
|
| (1307779) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 14 02:40:18 2014, in response to Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Wed Aug 13 21:09:45 2014. Well, if this thread has proven anything, it's that liberals hate trains. |
|
|
| (1307780) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Thu Aug 14 02:56:17 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 14 02:40:18 2014. I love and have loved trains most of my 70 years on this planet and as oft stated before describe myself as a socialist far to the left of merely liberal. |
|
|
| (1307781) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Thu Aug 14 03:13:25 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 14 02:40:18 2014. Name three people you believe are not liberal. |
|
|
| (1307782) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Thu Aug 14 03:19:09 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 14 01:06:53 2014. And what's wrong with paying zero tax? All it goes towards is the country-destroying welfare state.Yeah, like the military, federal law enforcement, national park system, etc. |
|
|
| (1307783) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Aug 14 03:30:13 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 14 02:40:18 2014. No, liberals hate taxes and guess what ... tag, you're it. :) |
|
|
| (1307784) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Aug 14 03:31:12 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by 3-9 on Thu Aug 14 03:19:09 2014. I would have jumped on that but doing so would only turn this into OT as he twirls and invites lions to feast on gazelles. :)So to keep it real for here at least, he hates Amtrak. ;) |
|
|
| (1307788) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Thu Aug 14 03:55:16 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Aug 14 03:31:12 2014. Good point, I should try to keep it more rail-oriented in the future. |
|
|
| (1307789) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Aug 14 04:01:01 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by 3-9 on Thu Aug 14 03:55:16 2014. Yeah, let the righties whine about law and order and then break the rules. :) |
|
|
| (1307790) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Thu Aug 14 04:14:25 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by Nilet on Thu Aug 14 03:13:25 2014. i'm not liberal.chud1. |
|
|
| (1307791) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Aug 14 04:29:14 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by chud1 on Thu Aug 14 04:14:25 2014. I think Olog will chalk you up as one though. That's how he works. :) |
|
|
| (1307800) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 14 09:47:51 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by chud1 on Thu Aug 14 04:14:25 2014. Good for you. That means you're against the railroads being destroyed. |
|
|
| (1307805) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Thu Aug 14 10:18:43 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Aug 14 04:29:14 2014. understood.chud1. :).... |
|
|
| (1307807) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 14 11:28:27 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by chud1 on Thu Aug 14 10:18:43 2014. He didn't tell the truth. |
|
|
| (1307808) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 14 11:28:50 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 14 02:40:18 2014. As does their reactions so prove. |
|
|
| (1307818) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 14 12:54:19 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by 3-9 on Thu Aug 14 03:19:09 2014. The military is among the only valid functions of government, so stop comparing apples and oranges. Just what does road construction/maintenance have to do with it, and how does it compare, especially when it attacks private business?Please explain. |
|
|
| (1307819) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Thu Aug 14 12:58:20 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 14 12:54:19 2014. They all require tax money to operate, esp. something as large as the military. So "zero taxes" just promotes very large, wealthy leeches. |
|
|
| (1307820) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Thu Aug 14 13:00:15 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by Jackson Park B Train on Thu Aug 14 00:05:22 2014. Does that mean that after B&O merged with Conrail(?) the zero tax disappeared? |
|
|
| (1307823) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 14 13:38:08 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by 3-9 on Thu Aug 14 12:58:20 2014. Roads do not require tax money. The road networks of California and Nevada were built by very many private toll companies, just for one example; plenty of parallel examples in other states, even extending to the eastern US.So "zero taxes" just promotes very large, wealthy leeches That's Marxist propaganda. Nobody out-leeches a politician in big government. |
|
|
| (1307831) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Thu Aug 14 15:16:54 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 14 13:38:08 2014. You might be able to afford roads that way, but they still have to be organized and regulated by an overarching entity like the federal government Plus, they cost a fraction of what the military costs. How do you intend to pay for the military, among other govt functions, with zero taxes? |
|
|
| (1307848) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Aug 14 18:05:08 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 14 11:28:27 2014. So is Chud a conservative in your eyes? This'll be a first. :) |
|
|
| (1307857) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Thu Aug 14 18:54:30 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 14 11:28:27 2014. Neither did you.What's wrong, Olog, pleading the fifth? |
|
|
| (1307877) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by menJop on Fri Aug 15 00:59:17 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Aug 13 21:30:42 2014. And the government, giving free land to railroads, put THESE guys out of business.Well, I don't know if it was the free land thing, but they lost me at "walk three miles over the summit". I love the frankness. Obviously they hadn't yet invented microprint-on-back-of-ticket. |
|
|
| (1307879) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Aug 15 01:06:49 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by menJop on Fri Aug 15 00:59:17 2014. Heh. Lots of folks had guns back then ... to kill the lawyers. So you had to be up front when you sold tickets. :) |
|
|
| (1307883) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Aug 15 03:10:58 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by 3-9 on Thu Aug 14 15:16:54 2014. but they still have to be organized and regulated by an overarching entity like the federal governmentHogwash. The feds didn't even get involved in such roadbuilding via abuse of the Interstate Commerce Clause. Plus, they cost a fraction of what the military costs. How do you intend to pay for the military, among other govt functions, with zero taxes? It's only you that inserted the unrelated military canard. Were you aware that the federal government used to run on tariffs in the past? That is aside from what little borrowing used to occur. Then along came the Sixteenth Amendment, for no reason other than to facilitate the expansion of government and attack free enterprise. Better learn the country's history. |
|
|
| (1307884) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Fri Aug 15 03:23:44 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Fri Aug 15 03:10:58 2014. Then along came the Sixteenth Amendment, for no reason other than to facilitate the expansion of government and attack free enterprise.Actually, it was to create a consistent framework for the income taxes that already existed. But I wouldn't expect you to know that. Here's another candidate for the List of Questions Olog Can't Answer: How, exactly, does an income tax attack free enterprise? |
|
|
| (1307885) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Fri Aug 15 03:29:50 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by chud1 on Thu Aug 14 04:14:25 2014. Olog thinks you are. |
|
|
| (1307886) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Fri Aug 15 04:49:18 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by Nilet on Fri Aug 15 03:29:50 2014. i am a conservative.chud1. :).... |
|
|
| (1307994) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Fri Aug 15 21:28:39 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by chud1 on Fri Aug 15 04:49:18 2014. Olog can't name three people he considers conservatives. Not even you. Sorry about that.Welcome to the left! Here's your free health care. Economic prosperity is right in front of you and human rights are on the table by the cookies. |
|
|
| (1308016) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Sat Aug 16 03:09:50 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by Nilet on Fri Aug 15 21:28:39 2014. oh cookies.chud1. :).... |
|
|
| (1308027) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Sat Aug 16 06:31:07 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by chud1 on Sat Aug 16 03:09:50 2014. We have chocolate chip cookies, peanut butter cookies, and also brownies (both normal and special).Please note that even if you baked all of the cookies yourself, you will be obliged to obliged to hand over a percentage of them in "tax" in order to support handouts of free cookies to the people who brought you the ingredients, the kids who can't bake yet but will once they're older, and the people who have baked many batches of cookies but are now too old to continue. Some of them will also be used for welfare, to support handouts of free cookies to support people too destitute to bake, but who will bake in the future once their circumstances have improved. |
|
|
| (1308059) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Sat Aug 16 11:57:16 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by Nilet on Sat Aug 16 06:31:07 2014. those are my favorite's.chud1. :).... |
|
|
| (1308106) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun Aug 17 04:41:27 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Fri Aug 15 03:10:58 2014. It's only you that inserted the unrelated military canard. Hardly unrelated, considering that your "zero tax" affects ALL government services, not just roads. Were you aware that the federal government used to run on tariffs in the past? That is aside from what little borrowing used to occur. Then along came the Sixteenth Amendment, for no reason other than to facilitate the expansion of government and attack free enterprise. And also to provide a higher and more stable form of revenue in order for our military to keep up with the world powers, of which the United States was NOT. |
|
|
| (1308107) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Aug 17 04:54:38 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by 3-9 on Sun Aug 17 04:41:27 2014. You're confused.The income tax, for one, was never to fund the military. It was imposed during peacetime. It was pure Marxism, being pushed by the old Socialist Labor and Populist Parties, and finally imposed by populist Democrat William Jennings Bryan (which undermined his "religious" credentials). Furthermore, stop taking my "zero taxes" phrase out of context repeatedly. It was in reference to taxing rails and roads, and punitive capital gains, to put things back in context. |
|
|
| (1308143) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun Aug 17 11:57:20 2014, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-roads, back in the day (1960), posted by Olog-hai on Sun Aug 17 04:54:38 2014. The income tax, for one, was never to fund the military. It was imposed during peacetime. It was pure Marxism, being pushed by the old Socialist Labor and Populist Parties, and finally imposed by populist Democrat William Jennings Bryan (which undermined his "religious" credentials).Arms races can happen during peacetime, or did you already forget how we were never at war with the USSR? And the B&O didn't pay ANY taxes to Maryland, which BTW, like any state, also has its own set of government services it had to pay for. Unless otherwise specified, all that tax money still goes into the same pool. |
|
|
| (1444994) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Alan Follett on Fri Jul 28 00:43:58 2017, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by Nilet on Thu Aug 14 03:13:25 2014. I first realized that the term "liberal " had fallen through a sort of semantic event horizon into the universe of content-free pejoratives during the 1994 California Republican senatorial primary, when one of John Dannemeyer's campaign ads called Michael Huffington a liberal.Alan Follett Hercules, CA |
|
|
| (1445011) | |
Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Jul 28 09:16:25 2017, in response to Re: Federal government vs. railroads, and pro-airlines, back in the day (1960), posted by Alan Follett on Fri Jul 28 00:43:58 2017. It's not content-free. Reagan warned Nixon back in 1960 that "(n)o Republican, no matter how liberal, is going to woo a Democratic vote", but Nixon ultimately didn't listen. |
|
|
