News & Politics

Rant

America 100 years ago

Posted 30 months ago|24 comments|944 views
Written by

This rant is another plagarism of another conservative email.

Here's my US History Lesson. 100 years ago our country started a reign as the most properous nation in the world. There was no national debt 100 years ago, and the middle class thrived.

None of the following were present in America 100 years ago.

Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax
Hunting License Tax
State Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Personal Property Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge T ax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Sales Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Well Permit Tax
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge=2 0Tax
Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Workers Compensation Tax

ETC.

Have you ever wondered why that was 100 years ago?

EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
Chris D
Chris D
Seattle, WA
30 months ago: Redstateguy, forwarded emails are typically full of lies. Do you also believe that President Obama is a secret Muslim?

Your assertion that "there was no national debt 100 years ago..." is absurd. In 1907, the U.S. national debt was approximately $2,457,188,000.

(http://www.swivel.com/graphs/spreadsheet/5836696)
30 months ago: Someone really needs to get redstateguy into a civics class. He's welcome to bring his own opinions to the argument. Not his own facts, though.
30 months ago: Ooops.
Thank you Chris.
I am wrong.

I should have said "There was no deficit spending".

Tell me if I am wrong:

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/downchart_gs.php?year=1903_2010&view=1&expand=&units=p&fy=fy10&chart=G0-fed&bar=0&stack=1&size=m&title=US%20Government%20Spending%20As%20Percent%20Of%20GDP&state=US&color=c&local=s


HEYNN.

I left out "INCOME TAX" on the list also.
30 months ago: Chris:
As far as Obama being Muslim, I did not think it was a secret that he was raised as a Muslim. What's the secret?
30 months ago: Psst: I'll whisper it for you if you like, you lovably wacky birther. Lean close now. Ready? OK, here it is, the big secret...

He wasn't raised as a Muslim. Yes, I know the nutball emails you C&P onto RantRave say he was - along with dozens of other things that aren't true - but you can't believe everything you read in a forwarded email.

Other things you've probably seen in email that might not be true:
* Herbal cures for erectile dysfunction really work
* That prince in Nigeria needs your personal information to make you a millionaire
* There's a virus out there that makes monitors explode
30 months ago: What's a "birther"? Is that something to do with beating hearts?

I know I'm a bit slow, but where in your response is a response?

Federal lawsuits equate with "nutball emails"?
30 months ago: Anyone can file a Federal lawsuit. If I wanted to, I could walk into a courtroom tomorrow and file a lawsuit claiming the CIA is hiding proof that the Earth is really oblong with little swirly bits sticking off the end, and demand that they release that proof. There. I now have the same claim to fame - and level of credibility - as Orly Taitz.
30 months ago: heynn.
With all due respect, you're dead wrong. "Frivilous" lawsuits are not allowed to be filed in any federal or state courts. Rule 11.

If the court determined you filed a fivilous lawsuit, the judge would make it sting.

Look at the records in these cases. These were not considered "frivilous lawsuits" by any presiding lawsuits.

But, if that does not fit into your little world, you can ignore it or sling insults (which are fun by the way.)
30 months ago: Oops.
I meant to say "presiding judges".
30 months ago: Chris!

If you don't correct me again, I'll think I was correct.
"There was no deficit spending 100 years ago".

What do you think?

(or do I have to make a mistake to rattle your and Noni's cages?)
Billyberoo
Billyberoo
Cedar Park, TX
30 months ago: I'll tell you something we did not have 100 years agothat are now ruining our nation...That is large Corporations that created a monopoly in the labor market, UNIONS. They somehow sneaked through our anti-trust laws for the past 100 years, put an end to them, and you put an end to big government and high taxes, high prices for goods and services, and big government.

And yest I know unions have existed in America for a lot longer 100 years but they did not exert any influence over government policy until the early 20th century.
30 months ago: @scotmanster

Oh, I think there are plenty of things to criticize Obama about. I just prefer them to be things that are actually true about him, not birther nonsense. As for my supposed use of ad hominems, I reserve them specifically for redstateguy, who spent considerable amounts of time engaged in adolescent namecalling instead of engaged in debate. It was bad enough that for some time, I thought he was a liberal pretending to be a conservative to make them look bad.

And although I may mock him in tone, you'll note I do respond to the content of his comments above. Obama was not raised as a Muslim; it's one of those birther myths for which the only actual "evidence" is some misunderstandings about where he went to school.
30 months ago: @redstateguy

You're half-right. Indeed, courts frown on frivolous lawsuits. Like the one Philip Berg filed... which was thrown out as frivolous.
Chris D
Chris D
Seattle, WA
30 months ago: @RSG Sorry for the delay, I don't lurk on RR all day and night. Just days :)

Your statement "there was no deficit spending 100 years ago" is factually correct.

I guess I disagree with the intent of your Rant. You're suggesting that all the mentioned taxes are wrong? Do you think that all schools, everywhere, should be privatized? How do you suggest we pay for interstate highways? Or taking care of national parks?

American society works because people like you and me are able to pay taxes for the good of everyone. It's not communism. Think of it as taking care of those that are less fortunate than yourself.

You may disagree, but I believe in the responsibility of the fortunate taking care of the unfortunate; the blessed taking care of the hurting people in our society. That's REALLY what the big issues (Medicare, the new health care, civil rights, and more) boil down to in the end.

As an aside -- my friend, if you are really defending Orly Taitz's "Obama's not a US citizen" lawsuits, you should rethink it. She's a nutter. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orly_Taitz)
30 months ago: Chris:
You are perceptive.
I agree government is necessary, but an evil necessity. I agree some taxes are also therefore necessary, but an evil necessity.
Government should only be useful for circumstances where large amounts of money are needed, I guess grudgingly roads, and.....

Funny how schools worked just fine before the dang Government stuck its nose in where it didn't belong. I mean, our country prospered perfectly before Uncle Sam started spreading it's ugly wings.

I agree completely that the fortunate should take care of the unfortunate, and the blessed taking care of the huring people. THE POINT: I don't see "government" anywhere in that equation. And government should not be sticking its nose into the fortunate helping the unfortunate. It worked fine until FDR came along.

(And it does not work with government either. Great Society my hindquarters. It's worse.)

Obama's citizenship is a dead issue, and supporting the notion, however true, is a complete waste of time.....other than piling on.
30 months ago: @redstateguy

I've noticed something. You tend to hearken back to the supposed "good old days." Back when everything worked right, and things weren't complicated. I saw that in this post, and I see it in your comments on my competing 100 year post.

But the good old days weren't. At least, not for the majority of people. Life expectancy 100 years ago topped out at 49 years for American males, 51 years for women. Most of the population - women and all African-Americans, a combined majority - were second-class citizens with far fewer rights and privileges compared to white males, including the right to participate in democratic processes. Children had no right to school; school did *not* work perfectly until government stuck its nose in, because children were treated as slave labor.

Unless you were white, male, and well-off, your life in the United States in 1908 was neither pleasant nor very long.

You seem to long for a time that never existed, except on television.
30 months ago: Yes heynn.
I long for a time before FDR started the destruction of our society. Where people took care of themselves and government was only there to get impediments out of the way. I've heard stories, and I do not watch television.
30 months ago: @redstateguy

Then you long for a time that was very difficult for most of the people living in this country. When you say "our society," please remember that a hundred years ago, most of the people in the United States were not capable of being - or allowed to be - part of that society. There were the well-to-do, and there was everyone else. And the well-to-do set all the rules.

Things were bad enough if you were white and poor. With no labor laws in place, you could be hired for manual labor, and had to hope that you'd actually be paid for your work. There was nothing in the law that required an employer not to lie to you.

If you were black, you were one step, barely, above being a slave. If you were Chinese, you might as well have been a slave. If you were a woman, you couldn't work where you wanted to, and in the few places you could work, you would be paid less than half of what any man would be.

The rose-colored glasses through which you view this time period literally makes me feel a little ill. When you talk about how much better it all was back then, I am compelled to ask, "better for who, precisely?"
30 months ago: Not only do we think on different waive lengths, we read on different waive lengths.
My point is FDR permanently ruined our society, and I wish he had never been.

If FDR had never been, there would be fewer poor, overworked Chinese women. Freedom would have been much better.
JAK Gladney
JAK Gladney
Saint Albans, WV
30 months ago: My greatest wish, when I feel more spiteful, is that conservatives could live in a United States governed by every debunked conservative notion, completely unfettered by "evil unions". Child labor, wage slavery, ridiculously long work days, toxic work environment. You write as though conservatism was born with Ronald Reagan: conservatives at the turn of the last century fought tooth-and-nail against every one of these modern conventions, used police and military power to break strikes for what are now considered basic human rights.

HNN is of course right--we need a return to the fundamentals. And don't skimp on details like Coolidge and the Boston Police Strike; McKinley and the Bisbee, AZ strikes; the Homestead Strike; the Ludlow (CO) Massacre. Union activism didn't grow in a vacuum.
Billyberoo
Billyberoo
Cedar Park, TX
30 months ago: And it is that type of violence the unions use in order to get their point across. Conservatives fought tooth and nail against the things you point out because they did not want labor power going to Unions, because as we see today that power corupts even the most noble ambitions.
And use of force against the unions who were violently attacking people that wanted to work, agreeing with free market principles of not creating a monopoly of labor, in my eyes is justified.
If people are so worried about child labor, why is it accepted in Hollywood???
Unionizing is not a basic human right, not in this country, not according to the Constitution I read
30 months ago: Billyberoo, that was violence *against* unions.

JAK, thanks for reminding folks about the Homestead strike and the Pinkertons.

Another "benefit" of pre-FDR days: Company stores! This is for redstateguy:

"You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store"

Read up on truck systems and debt bondage, both common in the United States before all those pesky liberal laws came around.

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.