You really can't develope coalitions on politics if all you have are 2 diametrically opposing viewpoints. The current 2 part system needs to be expanded if you ever expect any form of cooperation in DC during your lifetime. The middle needs to be represented instead of just the 2 extremes. BTW, when the Senate Majority Leader says he will never bring any bills to the floor for consideration that has Republican fingerprints on it, tell us how THAT is not obstructionist.
Agree completely. I never heard that about Reid. I know he said he would not bring an immigration bill to the floor unless it contains a citizenship proviso.
while I do not agree with everything you wrote. I would vote for your omnibus bill / restructure over what we have now... all day long.
Quote from L-Kabong: A win is if something gets done with an obstructionist Repubican party. Bad tax policy to raise taxes just for the rich. They should raise taxes on the middle and lower middle classes (Bums are getting a free ride), scrap the farm bill, cut food stamps in half, make welfare an emergency measure only and not a way of life, cut the defense budget by 50%, bring back the BEOG, repeal the dangerous substances act, eliminate the DEA, repeal the asset forfeiture act, quintuple funding for the NEA, repeal the prescription drug care act BUsh passed, repeal the idiotic No Child Left Behind act, and pass a new stimulus bill. And lower the corporate tax rate and devise a sensible tax structure that encourages the corporations to repatriate the foreign holdings and stop using foreign entities as tax loopholes. And raise the estate tax deduction to 100 million. After 16 (maybe 24) years of divisive figures in the White House let's hope we can get a moderate effective manager in the Oval Office who can realize my policy prescriptions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>. The scary thing is I agree with much of what you propose. About taxes, it's a measure of how effectively the republican low tax message has been accepted that even a left wing extremist like Obama rejected the Clinton rates for the bulk of taxpayers. My point is that this should have been seen as a gigantic victory for the republicans. Instead, the outcome is seen as at best a draw. Obama "won" an almost totally symbolic increase on a small segment of the population, and one that probably voted for him on balance.
No one likes high taxes or unfair taxation schemes. We could get better tax and spending laws if we could see candidates that have views on taxes that are not necessarily packaged with other views in the way they traditionally have been. For example why can't low taxes, welfare reform, entitlement reform, and pro choice be on the same platform for a viable national candidate. I'd love to see, for example, a socially liberal republican who is fiscally conservative run for office in 2016.
One thing that the republicans fail to address is the fact a policy that doesn't tax the rich ends up with a society of few people with all the money. Morally I believe you should reward those who work hard, but the system will fail as all the one goes to the a select few.. That is how the Roman Empire fell. I'm not a democrat my any means, but I do believe it is the correct strategy to tax the wealthy. I understand doing so inpeeds growth, innovation... But the outcome of a society with $ all concentrated to a select few, it's just the better alternative
And a socialist society wind up with an elite class of cronies. I believe that the bigger the govt the bigger the bigger the corruption and the bigger the stratification. Although it is a very tough call.. Trust busting or a Central bank. Glass Steagall Too big too fail. Its a fine line be between too much regulation and too litt.e =============== with high taxes... There will not be and entrenched underclass and crony class. Competition and innovation... result in the accumulation of capital and there for constantly changing opportunity. high taxes... make it very difficult to accumulate capital... and therefore restrict class movement and business opportunity and eventually innovation.