read a story recently that said that an anti-war religious group

[Fresh_Start]

(I think it was Amish or Mennonites) reduced their incomes to poverty level so that they didn't contribute tax dollars to support a war.
If its true, how incredible is that!

How about a variation on that, on our tax returns we allocate how we want our tax dollars spent. I'd say no foreign military aid, no money to fund a war, no corporate welfare and yes to children/elderly/arts/sciences/healthcare/labor/diplomacy/education/infrastructure

[fenriswolf]

1. thats great

except people who have mortgages, kids, lifes that revolve around money and their jobs. you can't expect people to give up on a house they have been working to pay off for ten years or so.

[Fresh_Start]

2. I didn't suggest poverty level

I said we get to chose on our tax return how we want our tax dollars spent....

[water]

3. What's the difference...

... between your plan and the free market? I'm not saying that's a bad thing.

[Fresh_Start]

4. I truly don't understand

do you think we have free market on how our tax dollars are spent?

[water]

5. No, I don't.

I was talking about your proposed plan. :)

[Fresh_Start]

6. my proposed plan is to extend taxpayer choice

into how tax dollars are allocated.

There is no free market in that today

[water]

8. I know! :)

Sorry, I was probably being confusing.

I was alluding to the following: If you are going to allow people the liberty to choose where they spend their money, why even bother use the government as the middle man? Why not just have a free market?

The current system is insane (why force an anti-war activist to fund wars?).

[Fresh_Start]

9. I guess this is how BS Coke/Pepsi happens

two people agreeing in concept just cannot make themselved understood.
Peace!

[redwitch]

7. I understand what you posted. Not that hard really!

I would love the chance to say yes to environment, children, elderly and no to war and Halliburton. :hug: