I will say that if someone suggested a reasonable boundary and a buyback, it would matter to me how generous it is. Paying 150% of 2012 market price would seem pretty fair. It would not even hurt the economy if you printed money to do a lot of that. If money is traded for guns, and guns are destroyed, the wealth remains the same.
john personna
December 28, 2012
Comment to Taxing Ammunition
[He has no clue as to what wealth is.
And more generally he also has no clue as to the fundamentals of economics. As the supply goes down the price goes up. 150% of 2012 market price would be a buyers market when the supply is being forcibly set to zero. The people actually willing to sell their firearms and accessories at 150% of 2012 market price could get 200% or perhaps even 2000% on the black market.
I can only conclude liberalism is a mental disorder. This becomes a dangerous delusion that they are the superior ones and should be in charge.—Joe]
Wow…this is like a reverse Keynesian “broken window” fallacy.
Proving himself to be a complete imbecile,did take more than a few words. Let me point out that besides the the Second Amendment issue, the printing of additional dollars is never good for the economy. As the volume of a commodity increases in value decreases,you know supply and demand. How do these folks ever reach adulthood ? The laws of natural survival should preclude them reaching more than a few years of age.
“…the printing of additional dollars is never good for the economy. As the volume of a commodity increases in value decreases, you know supply and demand.”
The problem is, they view Currency as something magical, rather than just another commodity and thus just as subject to the laws of supply and demand and fluctuating value.
“But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy” — R. Kipling
Currency, unless it is made of precious metal or something, isn’t a commodity. Paper currency is a mere promissory note. Our pre federal reserve notes said something on them like; “This note is redeemable in lawful money…” Today they say, in essence; “This note IS money”. Big difference.
He must have been the financial advisor for the Weinmar Republic. You know when between the world wars the Germans had to have a wheelbarrow full of marks to buy a loaf of bread. A complete idiot.
Molon Labe!
Since liberalism IS a mental disorder, liberals can’t have guns, and by extension, shouldn’t be allowed to plan for their control or disposition, either.
How about I had him $30K in monopoly money, take his car, and enter it into a demolition derby?
Oh wait — that’d only be legal if the government did it. Never mind.
If they want a buyback, of course they can set their own specie, but then that specie has to be evaluated. I have turned in junk guns to buybacks, but only when the specie is redeemable at my choosing, not theirs. I don’t want movie tickets or day-spa coupons, but crap like that gets offered.
I could see the Feds setting up a “market-value buyback”, but I would only take it as something of value to me, say, a tax credit. Yes, I would take cash, but only if it was tax-free and on the barrelhead. You can bet that if the Feds set up, say, a 150% M/V buyback, they would tax a third of it as a capital gain.
I don’t trust the Feds on this. What’s to prevent them from printing and paying all that cash, taking names, then coming back later to claim you had to pay most of it back for some spurious reason like an Obamacare tax?
The gun-melter buybacks we have now are at least anonymous transactions.
Every “market solution” ever proposed by a leftist, on examination proves to be only a simulation. Take what is called CRV in California, a sort of deposit on beer and soda bottles. The CRV you pay in the store is set by the government, as is the crv you get if you save your bottles and take them to a redemption center (that tatty tractor trailer behind the supermarket) where you get scrip to redeem in the store.
May as well have a Bible buy-back, as long as we’re demonizing various fundamental rights. Some people would love seeing them recycled into toilet paper, so maybe I shouldn’t mention it. We could “buy back” the Vatican too, and turn it into an abortion clinic, but then that’s probably been thought of already.
How you can buy back something you never had in the first place is a question I suppose we shouldn’t ask. It’s a bit like the use of “recovered” as in, “multiple firearms were ‘recovered’ at the suspect’s home”. Government no longer confiscates things. It recovers them. Maybe the IRS should be renamed the Revenue Recovery Service. It sounds nice, no? Just takin’ back what belongs to them– what was taken from them unfairly.
But insanity isn’t funny, so why am I joking about it?