1970s Bill Murray

I live in DC, but only this year changed licenses from Maryland to the District. I also have epilepsy and faxed over my forms to my doctors who said they would fax them to the MVA.

Apparently the fax didn't reach the doctors. I was caught in a speed trap and to my shock, found out I have been driving with a suspended license in Maryland.

I'm taking care of everything prior to the court date (along with registering my car in DC which I didn't do--no excuses).

My record is 100% clean. I also don't drink, smoke or use drugs. I am also on medication for epilepsy, which will be proven when I get the doctor/MVA thing straightened out.

Ballpark, what sort of fine am I likely to pay?

Thanks in advance.

Welfare is redistribution by will of the government while charity is self-voluntary distribution (I just wanted to establish this part first).

This isn't a rant or an attack, but simply a question. I'd love to hear both sides gives a reasonable, practical answer as to why one is better than the other, morally and fiscally.

Thanks in advance.

My title makes it sound like I'm a liberal/democrat. I'm not. I'm a libertarian...a registered Republican and an admirer of Barry Goldwater and Reagan. I think this question could be asked on the other side addressing the left, but I figured it would make more sense to ask the people I tend to agree with most.

While we disagree with liberals, I would still argue that for most of them, their hearts are in the right place, even when I feel the way they're going about it is wrong--I do think, in general, that they mean well.

Just out of curiosity, do any of you see it this way, too?

Also, do any of you democrats and liberals ever feel this way about the Republicans/Conservatives/Libertarians?

(choose only between these options)

Which political party is the most snarkiest? Which one is the least snarkiest?

-Republican

-Democrat

-Green

-Libertarian

-Socialist

I know it's tempting to choose your own in a positive light, but try and be as honest with your answer. Remember, it's not a question of which political party is the right one, just which one is the snarkiest and the least snarkiest.

To start, I'm not trying to make this out to be a rant--especially since I don't believe you folks on the other side really think that way. I do think there is an intellectual argument for you think we're wrong and you're right.

I get annoyed at Conservatives/Libertarians/Republicans/etc. who argue the same thing against Liberals and so on. The argument is that when enabling the poor with welfare programs and such, you allow them into a cycle of poverty. I don't really think you all want that--I think you want the poorer off to succeed and get out of poverty, I just think the advocates for the programs are going about it the wrong way.

So just for this one question (after this, go nuts on goofy answers and insults--addressing both the left and the right), do you believe the other side is actually evil, mean and selfish?

This question is actually directed are both the Left and the Right about the other side.

Thanks in advance for your answer.

What do these shows have in common?

List your favorites...

I usually wear the H&M David Beckham boxer-briefs or Calvin Klein boxer-briefs (or trunks) -- but is there sort of a mecca of guys underwear just as Victoria's Secret is the mecca of women's sexy underwear?

Would you have my baby?

I don't see a problem with opening the boarders--it's certainly not a matter of space. I also understand that this is meant to be the land of opportunity. That's one of the great things about this country once.

BUT, of course it isn't realistic to open the boarders and continue the government programs that are currently happening--we simply can't afford it. It's a bad idea to open the boarders and continue the programs. Unfortunately, the president isn't seeing the disconnect.

But why can't they cut all the welfare programs and open the boarders? 71% of illegal immigrants are on welfare, but what if 0% of them were (along with American citizens)?

Look, I know there's a bit more to it than just that (a third of federal prisons are made up of illegal immigrants from drug dealing charges--63% of illegal immigrants don't pay their income taxes--etc. etc.) but what if we addressed the allowances of these issues rather than the people?

Left-wingers: Try to avoid bringing racism into this--that's not the point.

Right-wingers: Don't worry about the principle of it being illegal--you're right, but the idea is to consider the root of the problem.

Thanks in advance for answering.

Guys: What's one item of clothing or accessory you always love seeing a girl wear?

Girls: What's one item of clothing or accessory you always love seeing a guy wear?

(Don't worry about trivial stuff like "how are their builds?" and so forth)

Libertarianism seems to rub people the wrong way. When they think libertarianism, some might think "anarchy." Of course it doesn't really mean anarchy as the mass majority of libertarians acknowledge that government is necessary--but where do we cut the cord?

I believe in social freedoms for people. I think gay marriage should exist just as straight marriage does as it doesn't violate anyone else's liberties. I don't have a problem with the legalization of drugs (specifically marijuana) as I feel the drug war has been a failure for 40 years, that it can be regulated as alcohol is and people have a right to decide what they want to put inside their own bodies.

I also believe in fiscal conservatism. I think the true essence of capitalism is that a business either sinks or swims and government has no place to throw a life raft at the expense of the public to save the business. I believe welfare programs do more harm than good to the people and that with will and a strong economy, people can live well and often better off without being having the government manage their lives.

So those are just the generals of libertarianism. It means I think people have a right to pursue their own lives as they see fit, that government should not regulate businesses and it should be the choices between the business and the consumer and that people succeed without government dependency.

The only place the government has is protecting our rights and making sure these things don't get violated.

I'd love to hear why you don't agree with these things and where you feel it's wrong.

All thoughts are welcome.

I despise racism--don't you? I certainly believe that all men WERE created. So of course the end of Jim Crow was a good thing. After all, Government can't take our natural rights which stem from our humanity away from us.

But why not private industries restricting who their customer base is?

Naturally, government owned establishments and services belong to the people--ALL people. Therefore, it can't be selective. But when a private clothing store or restaurant owned by an individual has a sign that says "Whites only," "Blacks only," "Asians only" or "Gays only" don't they have that right? Besides, it is private property.

Naturally, if I did come across an establishment that was bigoted against people, I'd boycott it and hope it would fail. But, isn't it still their right as a private business?

Feel free to pick this apart and explain why perhaps I'm wrong.

Keep in mind--I'm with you when you say it's racist. It's not a question of "Is it racist" or "Is racism bad" so much as "Do people have a right to exclude certain people if it's their own private establishment."

All thoughts are welcome.

Whether you like him, love him, hate him, don't care about him.

Whether it be on his political views, his style of journalism or his mustache.

Of course there's an infinite back-and-forth between Liberals and Conservatives--makes sense to me. I see the argument on both sides.

At one point, I considered myself a legitimate conservative republican until I spent time with many of them. Social conservatism was really bringing me down. Over time, I realized I'm actually a Libertarian.

This is certainly not my attempt to try and convert anyone (as it's not strictly based on social politics--much more than that), but I am curious about something.

Is the main thing that turns you away from conservatism Social Conservatism?

All thoughts are welcome.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on this subject. To me, capitalism is a system where one has a good or service and the other has currency to exchange for that good. An agreement is made and both parties walk away satisfied. Capitalism (in its purist form) has allowed countries, regardless of political set-up, to thrive economically. America was once totally free-trade and we're a Republic. China is free-trade and their Communist. However, countries like India are not free-trade and they're a Democracy. It doesn't seem to be a matter of political set-up.

Crony-Capitalism (aka, Corporatism) is bad of course. It's government taking money from the public treasury and giving to its favorite companies without concent of the people. The essense of capitalism is that you either sink or swim, and if you sink, it's because you aren't delivering to the consumer what they're asking for.

So let's keep in mind that I'm not addressing crony-capitalism. Simply capitalism.

When a business does well, it means more job creation, more goods and services for the people, and wealth and wages ramps up. When the CEO benefits, he isn't stealing from anyone--in fact, the Invisible Hand (Adam Smith), or law of nature if you will, allows everyone to benefit financially.

I'd love to hear reasons why maybe I'm wrong. I often hear why Capitalism (again--not Crony-Capitalism) is actually a bad thing.

All thoughts are welcome.

I already believe health care is not a Right, but I'd love to hear your argument on the subject.

Judge Napolitano once said:

"A right is a gift from God that extends from our humanity...We own our bodies, thus we own the gifts that emanate from our bodies. So, our right to life, our right to develop our personalities, our right to think as we wish, to say what we think, to publish what we say, our right to worship or not worship, our right to travel, to defend ourselves, to use our own property as we see fit, our right to due process — fairness — from the government, and our right to be left alone, are all rights that stem from our humanity. These are natural rights that we are born with. The government doesn't give them to us and the government doesn't pay for them and the government can't take them away, unless a jury finds that we have violated someone else's rights.

What is a good? A good is something we want or need. In a sense, it is the opposite of a right. We have our rights from birth, but we need our parents when we are children and we need ourselves as adults to purchase the goods we require for existence. So, food is a good, shelter is a good, clothing is a good, education is a good, a car is a good, legal representation is a good, working out at a gym is a good, and access to health care is a good. Does the government give us goods? Well, sometimes it takes money from some of us and gives that money to others. You can call that taxation or you can call it theft; but you cannot call it a right..."

Feel free to pick apart the quote.

The idea of saying that health care is not a Right tends to sound almost mean or harsh to people, but is it true? It seems to me that it is. I have further reasons as to why I don't want government to dip into it, but I'll avoid getting into that as that's not the argument at hand.

All thoughts are welcome.

Unfortunately, it's not a simple fuse replacement. What could be the issue and how much do you estimate it could cost to repaire/replace?

I work as a graphic designer on the side and did business with an apparel company last year. I contacted them asking if they would provide me with the 1099 form. They asked me to provide the full amount that they paid me in 2011. I always create an invoice, but they have underpaid me quite a lot, so my invoice doesn't match what I really earned.

I reviewed the IRS requirements for 1099 forms and it first states that it is the business's resposibility to issue the form to the individual and not the other way around. I'm concerned that even though I told them this and sent them the info that they are shady enough NOT to send it over.

If a business doesn't send over a 1099 form, what would be the next legal step to get everything corrected?

Thanks in advance.