Vanity: what is a democracy?

World Idiologies Explained by Reference to Cows

FEUDALISM
You have two cows. Your lord takes some of the milk.

PURE SOCIALISM
You have two cows. The government takes them and puts them in a barn with everyone else's cows. You have to take care of all the cows. The government gives you as much milk as you need.

BUREAUCRATIC SOCIALISM
You have two cows. The government takes them and puts them in a barn with everyone else's cows. They are cared for by ex-chicken farmers. You have to take care of the chickens the government took from the chicken farmers.The government gives you as much milk and eggs the regulations say you should need.

FASCISM
You have two cows. The government takes both, hires you to take care of them, and sells you the milk.

PURE COMMUNISM
You have two cows. Your neighbors help you take care of them, and you all share the milk.

RUSSIAN COMMUNISM
You have two cows. You have to take care of them, but the government takes all the milk.

CAMBODIAN COMMUNISM
You have two cows. The government takes both and shoots you.

DICTATORSHIP
You have two cows. The government takes both and drafts you.

PURE DEMOCRACY
You have two cows. Your neighbors decide who gets the milk.

REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY
You have two cows. Your neighbors pick someone to tell you who gets the milk.

BUREAUCRACY
You have two cows. At first the government regulates what you can feed them and when you can milk them. Then it pays you not to milk them. Then it takes both, shoots one, milks the other and pours the milk down the drain. Then it requires you to fill out forms accounting for the missing cows.

CAPITALISM
You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull.

PURE ANARCHY
You have two cows. Either you sell the milk at a fair price or your neighbors try to take the cows and kill you.

SURREALISM
You have two giraffes. The government requires you to take harmonica lessons.

The NRST slices, dices and makes julienne potatos.
It cures baldness, athlete's foot and even removes mildew stains.

Actually it doesn't do any of the above, nor does it cure cancer, balance the national budget, remove ten million alphabet soup agencies disappear over night.

And seeing as you clearly got the first totally wrong, it is obvious as to why the latter is a pile as well:

Posing as "tax reform", the NRST (HR 2525) also represents a "land grab"

A family purchasing their own new ~~home~~ house(residential land is not taxed) for $200,000 pays NRST at a tax-included 23% rate. This means that of the $200,000 paid, $154,000 goes to the seller, and the Gov't receives $46,000 in tax.

And a family purchasing their own new house today has 24.2% of their gross income extracted by the Federal government before they even think about buying a new house. That is not even counting the tax costs and costs of compliance placed on businesses of an additional 20 to 30% and embedded in the price of the new house.

A landlord/investor can exploit the business exemption of NRST and purchase the same new single family dwelling tax free as a rental investment for only $154,000. Tenants pay NRST on rent and Landlords act as tax collectors for the government

Of course that landlord/investor also pay the same tax on the house he lives in or rents before he can ever become an "investor/landlord" in the first place. Or do you figure such folks live in NY allies and sleep on park benches.

Additionally, a buyer of an older home, is not charged the NRST, which is the case of most first time buyers of homes.

The $154,000 vs. $200,000 purchase price advantage that landlord/investors enjoy over individual personal homebuyers can be expressed two ways:

Landlord/investors enjoy a 23% discount compared to the individual personal home buyer.

Actually not, as the Landlord/invester pays the 23% tax on the home he lives in whether rented or purchased in the same manner as any other individual.

Individual personal home buyers must pay 29.87% more than landlord/investors.

Again untrue, the landlord/investor pays the same tax on the home he rents or buys new. All individuals are treated the same under the NRST. Infact, because the individual receives the full benefit and control of his gross income, as opposed to merely after tax income under the current system. That plus the NRST prebate paid to ALL households provides an enhanced opportunity for everyone to become investors.

Under the current Income/Payroll tax system, the total contribution of the federal tax system(including taxes in gross wage/salaries) to the price of retail consumption goods and services is 36% for taxes alone. Including cost of compliance at around $600billion/year, increases that percentage to about a 47% total burden with respect to current family consumption expenditure caused by the federal tax system as it exists today.

I'll be happy to pay 23% of the total payment for new goods and services, or as you would put it (30% added on) to the tax free price any day.

Compared to what we are hit with now, 47% of payment or as you would characterise it, (90% added on) to the tax free price of new goods and services.

A true "Democracy" as a form of government would entail a plebescite--voting by all eligible citizens--for every law or change of law that came down. We obviously don't have that, nor is there any threat of it.

Do you wanna bet there is no threat of it?

Americans are lucky. At least you can discuss the varieties. Canada has no democracy.

Democracy in Canada

But do you believe there is no threat of it here in America? That is my question.

This is a great thread because I believe there are certain people in this country that want a pure democracy here in America.

The United States is currently a democratic republic not the aristocratic republic the founders gave us.

For an excellent explanation of democracies, democratic republics, monarchies (as well as a great history and economics lesson) pick up a copy of "DEMOCRACY-The God That Failed" by Hans-Hermann Hoppe.