So what? Who believes that we are in the conditions of the 18th century with an enemy with primitive technology fighting from across the then near infinite ocean?

In addition, and more fundamental, the 18th century had something to count on that we don't: the philosophy of the Enlightenment emphasizing reason and individualism. Statism is taking over this country because it is progressively being voted into power as a consequence of the pragmatism, altruism and collectivism preached by intellectuals for a century.

If government can't be reformed by a tiny minority unable to win elections while they are still allowed, what makes you think that a tiny minority can prevail in a physical revolt against this government? Are you constantly dramatically promoting 'revolt' because you will intend to do it yourself or are you just trying to prod someone else into doing something stupid, sticking his neck out and getting it chopped off?

Medicare doesn't pay very much and a lot of good doctors won't take Medicare patients. But you will have to continue to pay into the system, automatically deducted from whatever you can still get back from Social Security. You can buy private 'insurance' to supplement Medicare but you can't buy private insurance without the Medicare.

As the whole system becomes more controlled with more bureaucracy, government subsidies, and rationing, and as Medicare reaches a crisis of bankruptcy, it will become worse.

Obamacare was never intended or expected even by its proponents to work; it was an attempt by Democrats to impose as much control as they could while they had control over Congress as a big step towards full socialized medicine, entrenching as many new precedents as they could, and knowing that it would be politically impossible to get rid of it. They expected it to result in such a mess that people would be begging for more comprehensive government control to solve the crisis as insurance companies are blamed for the problems. Clinton was expected to be there to put it over the top.

When Obama left office he said that he expected Republicans to change the names and twiddle with it but not repeal it -- which is what the Republicans are now doing (with less than even he expected) to help the Democrats' goal of complete government control. The Republicans unanimously voted against it, campaigned against it for seven years, and even won Kennedy's Senate seat in Massachusetts in the public outrage against Obamacare. Now they won't touch it.

Right again to freedomforall.

Less tax is getting closer.

No.

The Strike is the alternate title to Atlas Shrugged.

The writing of freedomforall is maybe resembling with Ragnar and direct. There are no superfluous misleading words, lean, and no brandying about.

The reply is to freedomforall at the top, 11/7/2017.

Correct. Believing nothing to correct of your correct words.

yes, stop the motor, by taking everything to a new world not part of theirs. When theirs fell apart, then they could talk about a new one...

Indeed, the term "fair" is often used, yet has no standard meaning. It depend oh who is using it and what values they have, which in government, consists of "how much can we squeeze".

The only solution they leave you is to do a Galt and stop producing and consuming beyond what sustains life

I feel I am an unwilling party in an evil system, forced to pay into a system and not allowed the freedom to avoid taking part in the spoils of that system.

I agree. Really good medical care will be available at a price cause the statists will demand it for themselves

That’s not what happened in AS. SHE SAID TO STOP THE MOTOR OF THE STATIST WORLD. By withdrawing your productive work from their grasp

It was an implicit aligning of self interests in the swamp, just like Obamacare wad

I always thought of taxes as a drag on the economy , so a reduction in taxes just reduces the drag- doesn’t grow the economy unless there is money printing

It is not a panecea, but it is an improvement. Getting rid of AMT is a tremendous success. Getting rid of government meddling via deductions is similarly good.

Still too much funding for the swamp, but this is better in the whole.

If the American revolution depended on "most people", we would still be in the Commonwealth.

"taking as much free medical care now that its government medical care doesnt seem like such a bad idea"
I personally believe in pay all taxes I'm legally required to pay, even if I don't agree with them, and I similarly take all benefits that I'm legally entitled to, even if I don't agree with them.

My neighborhood has been deemed historic, even though it's nothing special. As a result I get a tax credit for basic repairs like a new roof or furnace under the idea it's "restoring an historic home". It doesn't make much sense to me, but no way am I forgoing a tax credit on principle.

My only concern about free gov't medical care is quality. If it's Medicare, I think I'd find out if I can get the payments applied to high-end provider that I pay the rest for. I would be concerned they wouldn't tell me about some option because Medicare doesn't pay for it. If the program is there and I'm eligible, I'll milk it for all I'm legally entitled to and that I want.

There will be peaceful change when enough people understand the right premises. No wealthy or powerful will or can do it otherwise even if they wanted to.

You can estimate a constant withholding for income taxes as long as the total is some prescribed percentage of what you owe at the end.

No tax will replace all the others. They only accumulate them.

Get back what you can; you paid for it. Government medical care was always and still is a bad idea but not something you have a choice about. It's the system we live under. Disapproving of it does not mean you should choose to die.

Most people realize that starting a revolt against the government is senseless self sacrifice with no justification to 'pledge' to.