It starts at home. When my daughter wants something. I tell how how many hours she has to workfor me to get it.
You Clinton lovers are FULL OF IT! He was LOUSY as a president... unfortunately, Bush is worse. (I find it difficult to like something just because it's less bad.)
I find this thread surprising in the level of agreement once the non-germane and cynical remarks are discounted. When considering tax level, the tax equivalent of inflation, i.e., currency devaluation, must be included. On a net basis it seems our tax level in the US is about as high as in the UK and Europe, but we get in return somewhat less than the European's do unless you consider expenditures for armaments and the presence of an impoverished class as an improvement in your standard of living, which i don't. (If you make your livelihood from the military-industrial-complex or serve in the armed forces, i don't expect you'll agree. ) The idea of a national consumption tax replacing the income tax has more and more appeal to me. So long of course as basics such as groceries, utilities, etc. are exempted (there could be caps in some instances) to protect those in the lowest economic strata, who would then actually benefit from such a tax structure. This,or a flat tax, will, of course, never happen unless we somehow reclaim our original form of representative democracy. And it might not happen regardless, unless we protect and strengthen public education. So it would seem that the very first step toward reform has to be elimination of the lobbyists' main tool, the ability to indirectly influence political campaign outcomes via money and the media. That would require two things: 1. a total ban on any and all contributions to any federal political campaigns, and 2. An elimination of all paid political advertising by any group or individual. The structure of political campaigns would have to change radically, and the first amendment would have to be modified. But neither of these are impossible. Short of those radical changes i suppose we will just continue to drift in the current direction until there is a crisis, or revolution. By the way i listened to Ron Paul on C-Span last night and was intrigued by his remedy for out of control healthcare costs, viz., bring back competition into healthcare, which i read as "deregulate". This is something that i have been a strong advocate of for years, but i have never before heard a politician champion this idea. (Perhaps that was the thrust behind the failed Hillary Clinton initiative which the insurance industry so effectively shut down.) Personally, I would much prefer deregulating to socializing medicine. (If Dr. Paul should become a serious candidate, expect the entire medical delivery-insurance industry to come down hard on him!)
Indeed so, But I will try and try again to persuade my fellow trader....to destroy the evil..and commence to reason and thinking.
read about the mellon tax cuts of the 1920's the kennedy cuts of 1964 and the reagan reforms of 1981 and 1986. these were all followed by tremendous growth in the economy I
The idea of Libertarians seems more and more convincing to me...rational thinking is the key and that one. ALthough I completely agree with the republicans on the idea of the economy...some of their thoughts on social interest are just ridiculous. To the gentlemen who stated that we should abandoned all of contributions to the candidates....this task will be hard to do...b/c only the rich will then be able to run for candidacy. What I propose (not that anyone in government would listen, until I will be running for a house of Representatives) is that we should let the markets do its business. ANd only interfere when there is a problem of monopoly or there is a jeopordy to the interstate commerce...of course we still need to have tariffs in this nation in order to protect the farmers....which are not that groom right now if they grow corn.
Moreaqr, were the Mellon and Kennedy cuts followed eventually by inflation and currency devaluation and permanently increased debt levels? I know the Reagan "supply-side" economy was followed by very large currency devaluation and recession. It would seem that tax cuts do "goose" the economy but might not have a net long-range benefit if they occur at the wrong time for the wrong reasons.
"Tax Cuts" normally disguise "bigger deficits". Bush keeps ragging about "making tax cuts permanent". Well, that also means "making deficits permanent [larger]. It's really a money pump, inflationary, currency debasement scheme for the Gummint to confiscate the wealth of the middle class in a sneaky way.
Hear hear!!! There is absolutely no reason to raise taxes on the US. Spend what you got smarter, and wala, problem solved.
Amerika is already the world's biggest debtor nation. So, we BORROW MORE so we can GIVE aid to someone else? That's just fargin' crazy!