Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Californians being es(cheated) according to Senator Tom McClintock

  1. #1
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    521
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Californians being es(cheated) according to Senator Tom McClintock

    The link to the senator's article from another mb,

    http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/pr...4-office-years

    The interesting thing is, California isn't the only state which engages in the practice of swindling its citizenry out of financial assets. For all I know, it might be all fifty.

    Time to recall every last state legislator who permits this practice to continue! Or at a minimum, a successful initiative campaign to have this practice permanently outlawed in California! Preferably, though, a federal law passed by the U.S. Congress, so all the state governments can be permanently stopped from swindling their citizens!

  2. #2
    BrunetteGoddess
    Guest

    Default Re: Californians being es(cheated) according to Senator Tom McClintock

    It should be outlawed. Fucking money hungry state, it's ridiculous how much money this state wants to take from you.

  3. #3
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Californians being es(cheated) according to Senator Tom McClintock

    ^^^ this has been going on for decades, and California is certainly not alone in doing it. Just one more example of the state(s) trampling on private property rights.

    However, where California in particular is concerned, the private property rights issue will likely get worse instead of better. The reason of course is that most Californians appear to support the concept of trampling on private property rights ... but it's usually for different reasons i.e. laws preventing homeowners from clearing brush / fallen trees from around their houses, laws preventing certain construction on private property within the 'coastal zone' etc.

    It seems they only support the principle of private property protection from the state when it is THEIR private property that will be affected ... as long as it's someone else's private property that is being affected then this is apparently justifiable use of gov't power. But like every other example, once the original principle is compromised, events tend to slide down a 'slippery slope' and eventually everyone is affected.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-11-2009, 03:41 PM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-17-2009, 12:02 PM
  3. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 01-05-2009, 04:09 AM
  4. Replies: 29
    Last Post: 08-26-2007, 03:31 AM
  5. ? for Senator Durbin
    By montythegeek in forum Political Poo
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 07-02-2005, 09:59 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •