It would have to be. I mean, honestly. I've seen you write these "gummint gone bad" threads for months and months and months now. But nothing is ever going to change as long as life continues in the comfort and convenience that it has these past decades. So while I, as John Q Public hear all this crap in the news, watch the wasteful spending, shake my head at the stupidity, I'm not about to rise up and threaten my way of life in a confrontation with the law because I have a lot to lose. It's only when we all have nothing anymore to lose that the real revolt will begin.
Yup. That's when enough of us will "get it". Most don't even recognize the threat. Of those who do, they're HOPING LIKE HELL it doesn't come to pass. Realists understand that the destruction is inevitable without major reform... and we're not going to get that "in time".
No we're not. But go back in history and show me a civilization that actually did. It is Human Nature to ignore and put off the difficult - even if it is the right thing.
Which civilizations had such a choice? Nearly all prior ones were government-centric from the get go.
We're not changing course, but not because it is difficult to do so. A large chunk of our society is economically el litter 8. They think the reason they are poor has nothing to do with their inability to drag their @$$ out of bed, get to work on time and do a honest days labor. Instead, they think they don't have any money because Whitey is keeping them down, or men, or rich people. They believe that if somebody gets a big paycheck, that means there's less money for them. Then there's the class warfare/jealousy thing, which is stronger than I would have believed (these people are #@*&ing insane, IMO). People in this group think that losing half their standard of living is a worthwhile price to pay to bring "rich" people down to their level. I've never understood this myself. To see where the growing trend of attitudes in this country, don't look to California. Look to Detroit. Watch a city council meeting on YouTube. And realize, this isn't some hick town meeting in the backwoods with a bunch of rubes. The leader of the city council is the wife of John Conyers, a United States Congress critter. Check into Detroit. You'll see 50 years of not "getting it". But they do "get it", they know the consequences of their actions - they've been living it for five decades! It's not about the American voter turning Idol off and suddenly noticing that his standard of living is going downhill. He knows this. But as long as he can soak "the rich", bringing them down even faster and get some stuff from them, he's cool.
The issue is that in a >70% consumer economy a dramatic increase in taxes would cause a dramatic decrease in consumption. Raising taxes to a great extent would just increase the debt-gdp ratio and break-up precious "confidence", so the situation may actually be worsened.
TGregg - neither myself nor anyone in my income class (not rich, but not by any means poor) could give a damned about any of it. Why? Because we know that in order to change it, we'd have to disrupt our families, risk all we have with the threat of jail or worse to actually make an impact. So we don't. Therein lies the issue. Until folks like myself lose everything (God forbid such a day) we will not risk what we have in order to change the country to what we KNOW inherently is correct.