Originally Posted by Regret$
MD, respectfully, they are taking the money now and spending to enrich themselves. It is not physically possible for them to have less money taxing us than if they don't get any of our money at all...
Yeah but its their system, its their status-quo. They are spending their money to gridlock any change in their system. If they are able to create a situation where it needs a super-majority to change their system instead of a majority, they have just made it that much harder
to do the things you want to do.
It is not politically possible for them to have less money taxing us if they make it harder for us to stop* them with super-majorities.
I mean, ZOMG, if the King was oppressing you, giving the King more power to stop you from changing his system, isn't going to help you make him stop oppressing you, now is it?
I mean, ZOMG, if the richest people are oppressing you, giving the richest people more power to stop you from changing their system, isn't going to help you make them stop oppressing you, DUCY?
I mean think it through, if the richest people were able to create a situation where a 99.9% super-majority was effectively necessary, they would be able to veto any changes at all in their system. They would have all the power, and you would have none. And then you couldn't stop them from oppressing you at all.
The bigger the super-majority needed, the more power the richest people have, and the harder it is for you to change their system. This is just common sense, is it not?
Or have I run into another nugget of "Austrian" logic here?