well said, the GOP can't stop the Dem's. there aren't enough. it's always us vs. them but in reality it's stupid people vs. stupid people and the more anyone believes that it's all black and white, republican and democrat, etc, the worse we get.
I think this is the most important point made on this thread. The Republicans spent much of their 8 years of basically uncontested power taking money from the American worker and using it to supplement shipping our jobs overseas. The Democrats want to give money to people too lazy to get up and work. I like the idea of a social safety net that helps those who were trying and got screwed by the system, but there needs to be a limit to this government "charity", or at least some conditions placed on it. My Mother lives next door to a small apartment building full of able-bodied people between the ages of 25 - 40, all of whom seem to have nothing to do other than wait for "their check" (= our $). Why couldn't these folks DO something, anything, to get this check? If they're unwilling to get out and cut the grass on the side of the highway, man the recycling stations, have their girlfriends take a Depo-Provera shot so as to avoid creating further drains on society, then they are free to decline the help. Make sense to anyone?
The Republicans spent much of their 8 years of basically uncontested power taking money from the American worker and using it to supplement shipping our jobs overseas.
interesting. the republicans want to lower taxes on corporations in the US. this would promote people keeping jobs here because it is cheaper to do business here. when the Dems raise the taxes on corporations to the point thay are at (some of the highest in the world) its no wonder why business leaves. ... not to mention the hostile climate in many other businesses with needless regulations that cost more money and make it harder to compete with industry overseas. I do agree that the republicans are entangled with business and that is a set up that is promoting the violation of rights. i understand that needs to stop. the problem is that the democrats are entangled as well. ... and neither of them have an answer.
i do agree also that there needs to be a limit on unemployment, and i also think there needs to be less "charity" from the government. maybe more strict criterion to receiving unemployment, or a shorter time you are able to be on it. countless studies have shown that as the unemployment checks run out people are more likely to go out and search for a job (probably because they arent getting paid to sit on their ass)
i also agree that the system is set up to reward irresponsibility. ("the more kids you have the more dis proportionate the welfare checks become" kinda thing) and that needs to stop. but when about half of the country is getting something for nothing, how do you get the people that are giving stuff away out of office? they have a loyal base that will vote for free stuff every time because if they dont, they lose their free stuff.
its the dependency class of america. it was created by big government on both sides of the isle. and it will be our downfall.
The Republicans spent much of their 8 years of basically uncontested power taking money from the American worker and using it to supplement shipping our jobs overseas.
interesting. the republicans want to lower taxes on corporations in the US. this would promote people keeping jobs here because it is cheaper to do business here. when the Dems raise the taxes on corporations to the point thay are at (some of the highest in the world) its no wonder why business leaves. ... not to mention the hostile climate in many other businesses with needless regulations that cost more money and make it harder to compete with industry overseas. I do agree that the republicans are entangled with business and that is a set up that is promoting the violation of rights. i understand that needs to stop. the problem is that the democrats are entangled as well. ... and neither of them have an answer.
i do agree also that there needs to be a limit on unemployment, and i also think there needs to be less "charity" from the government. maybe more strict criterion to receiving unemployment, or a shorter time you are able to be on it. countless studies have shown that as the unemployment checks run out people are more likely to go out and search for a job (probably because they arent getting paid to sit on their ass)
i also agree that the system is set up to reward irresponsibility. ("the more kids you have the more dis proportionate the welfare checks become" kinda thing) and that needs to stop. but when about half of the country is getting something for nothing, how do you get the people that are giving stuff away out of office? they have a loyal base that will vote for free stuff every time because if they dont, they lose their free stuff.
its the dependency class of america. it was created by big government on both sides of the isle. and it will be our downfall.
No real arguement from me on any of the points you've made, the subsidizing of exportation of manufacturing jobs was really the work of the combined parties, Republicans just happened to be at the helm. I personally think they're the same thing, putting on a show to keep us divided and distracted. For me, Libertarianism is the only thing that approaches my personal political philosophy, however, speaking of Philosophy, I was strongly influenced by early Existentialists such as Kierkegaard, and occasionally argue a point of view that I may not personally hold, because of the thought that it stimulates in the reader. (Uh-Oh, cat's out of the bag) My question is: (really, no fooling) How do we maintain the highest ideals of Libertarianism while remaining socially responsible and constitutionally coherent? I think I'm phrasing that right, but I'm hot and sweaty from pulling weeds in the garden and my faculties aren't at their peak right now. lol
.... and occasionally argue a point of view that I may not personally hold, because of the thought that it stimulates in the reader.
ive done the same thing here on a few occasions. its fun in my opinion
Amos Umwhat:
My question is: (really, no fooling) How do we maintain the highest ideals of Libertarianism while remaining socially responsible and constitutionally coherent? I think I'm phrasing that right, but I'm hot and sweaty from pulling weeds in the garden and my faculties aren't at their peak right now. lol
thats an interesting question. it really all depends on what you mean by "socially responsible" that phrase means very different things to a Statist than it does to a Libertarian. if you are trying to hold up Libertarian ideals then it is left to the individual to be responsible for themselves, and if they freely chose via charity, or independent programs, for those around them. of course this is an overly simple answer to the question...
as far as being constitutionally coherent.... libertarianism has its roots in some of the fundamental ideals set forth in documents like the constitution, the bill of rights, and the declaration of independence. ...Ideals like the individual rights of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. the constitution is not at odds with libertarianism, it as at odds with the government.
If they're unwilling to get out and cut the grass on the side of the highway, man the recycling stations, have their girlfriends take a Depo-Provera shot so as to avoid creating further drains on society, then they are free to decline the help. Make sense to anyone?
This is a scary idea with lots of government growth. In all reality if we stop the welfare of this country the problems would clear up themselves. I think we'd all be amazed at how the population in poverty fell. Of course there would be an uprising of the recipient class of citizens as you see in greece. I'm not sure about any of you but talking with my grand parents their families survived the depression on savings not welfare, hard to do that with the typical debt an american family has these days. I for one am tired of being taxed for other peoples failure to live up to their responsibilities. You're guaranteed the right to pursue happiness.
If they're unwilling to get out and cut the grass on the side of the highway, man the recycling stations, have their girlfriends take a Depo-Provera shot so as to avoid creating further drains on society, then they are free to decline the help. Make sense to anyone?
This is a scary idea with lots of government growth. In all reality if we stop the welfare of this country the problems would clear up themselves. I think we'd all be amazed at how the population in poverty fell. Of course there would be an uprising of the recipient class of citizens as you see in greece. I'm not sure about any of you but talking with my grand parents their families survived the depression on savings not welfare, hard to do that with the typical debt an american family has these days. I for one am tired of being taxed for other peoples failure to live up to their responsibilities. You're guaranteed the right to pursue happiness.
HMM, you may be right, I wasn't thinking of this as govt growth, just stop-gap measures, a way to get value on the money we're already spending. Welfare won't go away overnight, but maybe if people had to earn "their check" they'd be more willing pursue a more constructive path. Even maybe like Manpower, the people in need, who want help, have to work for it, could lead to jobs, would put the work ethic back into them. Time-limited, of course. I've been broke, I mean BROKE, no house, no job, 7 cents in my pocket, going from place to place looking for work, nothing to eat for 2 weeks, finally got a job and passed out after 6 hours. In college, as a single parent, living on my gi bill and 3 jobs, never took food stamps or welfare. Did collect unemployment for a few weeks once. My point is that people NEED to work, sometimes it's just not there. Still, I wouldn't want to see this notion of mine become a permanent way of life for anyone. We'll have to keep working on it, surely we can come up with something better than the jugheads in Congress.
If they're unwilling to get out and cut the grass on the side of the highway, man the recycling stations, have their girlfriends take a Depo-Provera shot so as to avoid creating further drains on society, then they are free to decline the help. Make sense to anyone?
This is a scary idea with lots of government growth. In all reality if we stop the welfare of this country the problems would clear up themselves. I think we'd all be amazed at how the population in poverty fell. Of course there would be an uprising of the recipient class of citizens as you see in greece. I'm not sure about any of you but talking with my grand parents their families survived the depression on savings not welfare, hard to do that with the typical debt an american family has these days. I for one am tired of being taxed for other peoples failure to live up to their responsibilities. You're guaranteed the right to pursue happiness.
HMM, you may be right, I wasn't thinking of this as govt growth, just stop-gap measures, a way to get value on the money we're already spending. Welfare won't go away overnight, but maybe if people had to earn "their check" they'd be more willing pursue a more constructive path. Even maybe like Manpower, the people in need, who want help, have to work for it, could lead to jobs, would put the work ethic back into them. Time-limited, of course. I've been broke, I mean BROKE, no house, no job, 7 cents in my pocket, going from place to place looking for work, nothing to eat for 2 weeks, finally got a job and passed out after 6 hours. In college, as a single parent, living on my gi bill and 3 jobs, never took food stamps or welfare. Did collect unemployment for a few weeks once. My point is that people NEED to work, sometimes it's just not there. Still, I wouldn't want to see this notion of mine become a permanent way of life for anyone. We'll have to keep working on it, surely we can come up with something better than the jugheads in Congress.
If we stopped all welfare IMO you would see america return to morality and the traditionally family would make a triumphant comeback, Work ethic would do the same. (amazing how hunger will make people appreciate an oppurtunity to eat huh?) Of course we'd be called inhuman for not propping up people so they can live outside of their means.
wwestern: you may be right, I'm just saying that given the climate it's not going to happen, so, why not get our moneys worth, which, by the way, I don't think is going to happen either, daydreaming I guess.
wwestern: you may be right, I'm just saying that given the climate it's not going to happen, so, why not get our moneys worth, which, by the way, I don't think is going to happen either, daydreaming I guess.
Gotta have hope brother... The teaparty people give me hope that america is coming out of this socialist stupper. Who know's maybe someday the kids'll say sir and ma'am again.
The Republicans spent much of their 8 years of basically uncontested power taking money from the American worker and using it to supplement shipping our jobs overseas.
interesting. the republicans want to lower taxes on corporations in the US. this would promote people keeping jobs here because it is cheaper to do business here. when the Dems raise the taxes on corporations to the point thay are at (some of the highest in the world) its no wonder why business leaves.
lol, dude your smarter than this... Most of you (not pointing at you Kuzi) are just so in the thick of it. I mean you bash the dems so very much and defend the hell out of the GOP and even applaud them for blocking everything. Well you sure got what you deserved over the last 9 years even futher. These polices do not work. Kuzi you say that corporations need lower taxes and thus they will hire more people... Yeah where have you been? Over the last 10, 20 years maybe more they have been getting less and less tax due. They have been given subsidies by the govt to go overseas and clean out millions of UNITED STATES jobs for people who live here which in turn destroys our economy as they do not have money to buy or sustain a home, or can give their families time (you remember the family). But hey it's okay to allow these huge companies to pay next to nothing in taxes (while everyone else - the bottom 98%- pay more, and give them more money to ship overseas, oh and let's not forget all the money that is being lost and paid to them goes against our deficit and our exports). You do realize that if no money is coming in (taxes) then the govt cannot pay for things (ah look at states all across the nation). Look at colorado springs, for example.. [http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_14303473] ...
Giving huge companies (transnational, and even are based overseas) tax breaks, subsidies, and incentives is really going to let them hire people? That argument has no merit and has been proven wrong. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/14/AR2010071405960.html
---Nonfinancial companies are sitting on $1.8 trillion in cash, roughly one-quarter more than at the beginning of the recession. And as several major firms report impressive earnings this week, the money continues to flow into firms' coffers. ----
These companies are littery making money by not hiring people but using their "surplus" to make more money. They can barrow money from the govt, for like almost 0% then invest it in things such as stock, annuities, hell anything really then make a killing, say even if it's 3%. WTF, why would they hire anyone, let alone an American who needs a decent wage (oh yeah why, you can survive making 8 bucks an hour...). But hell, the Republicans, (those who most of you defend so much - Kuzi not pointing you out bud) and some, hell a lot of democrats are in bed with these very businesses so much that OH NO, we can't do anything to hurt them. WTF!!!
We've killed our manufacturing by giving these leech of the world businesses our tax money, we are letting them kill our climate and water and land, we are letting them steal money by manipulating oil prices, we are FRAKIN doing it to ourselves and they are eating it up. The republicans have stopped or have stood in the way of everything, I MEAN everything that needs to be done. They have made the dems weaken every bill that has come forth and then still deny it from passing. The recovery act was only passed because the GOP had to have huge amounts of Tax cuts, the health care bill took what over a year because of the money in our system and what we got was a gift to insurance companies.
Giving these huge companies basically free reign will not give us jobs, in fact they don't even need to hire, they're making money just fine. Here's a pdf of the letter the Chamber of Commerce sent the White House---http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/chamberjobs.pdf--. As some of you won't read it, just some of the proposals are:
include deregulation of business, tax cuts for the wealthy, free trade agreements, a reduced corporate income tax, expanded offshore drilling and logging in national forests and the privatization of waterways and roads.
Specifically, the Chamber urges the president to extend Bush-era tax cuts in full and provide tax breaks for companies that move jobs overseas.
The Chamber simultaneously calls for a reduction in the deficit -- a gap caused largely by the tax cuts the Chamber wants extended, which are projected to add $3.4 trillion to the debt between 2009 and 2019.
All of these things have worked so well for the United States. But those of you who bash Pelosi, or democrats who are trying to move out of this FAILED, and proven to F things up policy(s) are just feeding the fire and are the ones who maybe should do some reading. If you all were right and no, or little govt worked (now mind you govt needs to be done well and have people who actually do their jobs), tax cuts to these huge businesses, little or no regulation on wall street (worked so very well), Banks (yeah that worked out well), business practices (working splendidly), FREE TRADE (yeah, we have really made this country stronger and wealthier), and finally TAX CUTS (so how's that working... yeah the rich get richer and the poor get poorer). There's a lot more in there but hell, it's just a few. The GOP and those who are in it are the biggest Hippocrates. You people say you want smaller govt and that socialism is the devil however you people are doing the biggest form of it, YOUR giving these huge bilion-multi billion companies and firms untold amounts of money to buy our elections, buy our land, buy our way of life and take our jobs to enslave the American People. Yeah, with all that money, with all the trillions of dollars that is being used against our very system due to the huge amounts of tax cuts and subsidies it's unreal. BUT if, and I know this is so horrible we give people in this country health care, education, fast rail, improved bridges/roads, fuel that isn't ruining the environment, and leading the world in technology then it's wrong to spend money. But it's okay to spend money on WARS (wars based on lies mind you), it's okay to give these companies bilions of dollars to take our jobs, our homes, crash our system, and bleed us dry and buy our govt.
Small business's make up most of the job creation in this country and due to the banks freezing lending (of which they said they'd do after stealing our tax money) are giving them the Finger. http://www.mybudget360.com/small-business-loans-credit-card-contraction-banks-stick-it-to-small-business/
Oh and they are taking homes, and in huge numbers... And people that are in the middle of this, yeah those who can't find work (and are lazy according to the GOP) are being destroyed thus in return is breaking down our country. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66D0LB20100714 For the GOP and those who they represent, giving money to people who can't find work because places wont hire them, and because we can't spend any money on the deficit... they don't matter. It's their fault, they make too much money off it and should get a job. Yeah... A couple of hundred bucks a week is really a lot of money, well worth it to stay home (oh wait there is no home) and sit on the couch. But hell, let's spend more money in WARS and give money to big corporations because they'll hire people... yeah that's working really well. But hey it's Obama's fault, it's Pelosi's fault.. Sure you people are pigs.
Squirrel, I vowed to try to stay out of alot of this stuff, and will continue to do it because I dont think its worth my energy much anymore...construstive or not. But I am proud to read your post here and couldnt find a better place to put out my 1,000th post on the forum.
Pheebs, you know how I feel about this stuff. But like Vulchor said... it really isn't worth your energy bro', they are so indoctrinated they just CAN'T see it, Spend your time more productively... let's work out another trade .
The Republicans spent much of their 8 years of basically uncontested power taking money from the American worker and using it to supplement shipping our jobs overseas.
interesting. the republicans want to lower taxes on corporations in the US. this would promote people keeping jobs here because it is cheaper to do business here. when the Dems raise the taxes on corporations to the point thay are at (some of the highest in the world) its no wonder why business leaves.
lol, dude your smarter than this... Most of you (not pointing at you Kuzi) are just so in the thick of it. I mean you bash the dems so very much and defend the hell out of the GOP and even applaud them for blocking everything. Well you sure got what you deserved over the last 9 years even futher. These polices do not work. Kuzi you say that corporations need lower taxes and thus they will hire more people... Yeah where have you been? Over the last 10, 20 years maybe more they have been getting less and less tax due. They have been given subsidies by the govt to go overseas and clean out millions of UNITED STATES jobs for people who live here which in turn destroys our economy as they do not have money to buy or sustain a home, or can give their families time (you remember the family). But hey it's okay to allow these huge companies to pay next to nothing in taxes (while everyone else - the bottom 98%- pay more, and give them more money to ship overseas, oh and let's not forget all the money that is being lost and paid to them goes against our deficit and our exports). You do realize that if no money is coming in (taxes) then the govt cannot pay for things (ah look at states all across the nation). Look at colorado springs, for example.. [http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_14303473] ...
Giving huge companies (transnational, and even are based overseas) tax breaks, subsidies, and incentives is really going to let them hire people? That argument has no merit and has been proven wrong. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/14/AR2010071405960.html
---Nonfinancial companies are sitting on $1.8 trillion in cash, roughly one-quarter more than at the beginning of the recession. And as several major firms report impressive earnings this week, the money continues to flow into firms' coffers. ----
These companies are littery making money by not hiring people but using their "surplus" to make more money. They can barrow money from the govt, for like almost 0% then invest it in things such as stock, annuities, hell anything really then make a killing, say even if it's 3%. WTF, why would they hire anyone, let alone an American who needs a decent wage (oh yeah why, you can survive making 8 bucks an hour...). But hell, the Republicans, (those who most of you defend so much - Kuzi not pointing you out bud) and some, hell a lot of democrats are in bed with these very businesses so much that OH NO, we can't do anything to hurt them. WTF!!!
We've killed our manufacturing by giving these leech of the world businesses our tax money, we are letting them kill our climate and water and land, we are letting them steal money by manipulating oil prices, we are FRAKIN doing it to ourselves and they are eating it up. The republicans have stopped or have stood in the way of everything, I MEAN everything that needs to be done. They have made the dems weaken every bill that has come forth and then still deny it from passing. The recovery act was only passed because the GOP had to have huge amounts of Tax cuts, the health care bill took what over a year because of the money in our system and what we got was a gift to insurance companies.
Giving these huge companies basically free reign will not give us jobs, in fact they don't even need to hire, they're making money just fine. Here's a pdf of the letter the Chamber of Commerce sent the White House---http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/chamberjobs.pdf--. As some of you won't read it, just some of the proposals are:
include deregulation of business, tax cuts for the wealthy, free trade agreements, a reduced corporate income tax, expanded offshore drilling and logging in national forests and the privatization of waterways and roads.
Specifically, the Chamber urges the president to extend Bush-era tax cuts in full and provide tax breaks for companies that move jobs overseas.
The Chamber simultaneously calls for a reduction in the deficit -- a gap caused largely by the tax cuts the Chamber wants extended, which are projected to add $3.4 trillion to the debt between 2009 and 2019.
All of these things have worked so well for the United States. But those of you who bash Pelosi, or democrats who are trying to move out of this FAILED, and proven to F things up policy(s) are just feeding the fire and are the ones who maybe should do some reading. If you all were right and no, or little govt worked (now mind you govt needs to be done well and have people who actually do their jobs), tax cuts to these huge businesses, little or no regulation on wall street (worked so very well), Banks (yeah that worked out well), business practices (working splendidly), FREE TRADE (yeah, we have really made this country stronger and wealthier), and finally TAX CUTS (so how's that working... yeah the rich get richer and the poor get poorer). There's a lot more in there but hell, it's just a few. The GOP and those who are in it are the biggest Hippocrates. You people say you want smaller govt and that socialism is the devil however you people are doing the biggest form of it, YOUR giving these huge bilion-multi billion companies and firms untold amounts of money to buy our elections, buy our land, buy our way of life and take our jobs to enslave the American People. Yeah, with all that money, with all the trillions of dollars that is being used against our very system due to the huge amounts of tax cuts and subsidies it's unreal. BUT if, and I know this is so horrible we give people in this country health care, education, fast rail, improved bridges/roads, fuel that isn't ruining the environment, and leading the world in technology then it's wrong to spend money. But it's okay to spend money on WARS (wars based on lies mind you), it's okay to give these companies bilions of dollars to take our jobs, our homes, crash our system, and bleed us dry and buy our govt.
Small business's make up most of the job creation in this country and due to the banks freezing lending (of which they said they'd do after stealing our tax money) are giving them the Finger. http://www.mybudget360.com/small-business-loans-credit-card-contraction-banks-stick-it-to-small-business/
Oh and they are taking homes, and in huge numbers... And people that are in the middle of this, yeah those who can't find work (and are lazy according to the GOP) are being destroyed thus in return is breaking down our country. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66D0LB20100714 For the GOP and those who they represent, giving money to people who can't find work because places wont hire them, and because we can't spend any money on the deficit... they don't matter. It's their fault, they make too much money off it and should get a job. Yeah... A couple of hundred bucks a week is really a lot of money, well worth it to stay home (oh wait there is no home) and sit on the couch. But hell, let's spend more money in WARS and give money to big corporations because they'll hire people... yeah that's working really well. But hey it's Obama's fault, it's Pelosi's fault.. Sure you people are pigs.
The squirel really made some good points! Especially about taxing the piss out of buisness not destroying US jobs.... absolute fact... not sure where it's documented but proof is of little need right?
Oh and the fact that the goverment decides which charities to force me to donate to I ABSOLUTELY LOVE THAT any time I can pay for housing and electricity for someone with a lincoln navigator it makes me feel righteous. Or forcing banks to loan people money due to race weither or not they have a hope repaying that's also a great idea and could never lead to catastrophic events... and of course global warming! (if it's winter and your reading this I mean "climate change") because it's really scary that the tempature changes with the seasons, this is an attrocity that began with big buisness.... right? Some really solid and well founded ideas indeed this will in no way destroy america since it's worked out so swell for europe.... right? k I'm all riled now I need to go find my hammer and sickle so we can get this shin dig going!
The squirel really made some good points! Especially about taxing the piss out of buisness not destroying US jobs.... absolute fact... not sure where it's documented but proof is of little need right?
Oh and the fact that the goverment decides which charities to force me to donate to I ABSOLUTELY LOVE THAT any time I can pay for housing and electricity for some with a lincoln navigator it makes me feel righteous. Or forcing banks to loan people money due to race weither or not they have a hope repaying that's also a great idea and could never lead to catastrophic events... and of course global warming! (if it's winter and your reading this I mean "climate change") because it's really scary that the tempature changes with the seasons, this is an attrocity that began with big buisness.... right? Some really solid and well founded ideas indeed this will in no way destroy america since it's worked out so swell for europe.... right? k I'm all riled now I need to go find my hammer and sickle so we can get this shin dig going!
Kuzi you say that corporations need lower taxes and thus they will hire more people... Yeah where have you been? Over the last 10, 20 years maybe more they have been getting less and less tax due.They have been given subsidies by the govt to go overseas and clean out millions of UNITED STATES jobs for people who live here which in turn destroys our economy as they do not have money to buy or sustain a home, or can give their families time (you remember the family).
...and if you notice over the EXACT same time frame the US has had lower unemployment than almost any other country in the world. we also have had a higher level of home ownership.
when the bush tax cuts too effect, the economy took off. the very next quarter the economy grew 8.5%
phobicsquirrel:
But hey it's okay to allow these huge companies to pay next to nothing in taxes (while everyone else - the bottom 98%- pay more, and give them more money to ship overseas, oh and let's not forget all the money that is being lost and paid to them goes against our deficit and our exports).
next to nothing? are you serious? we have some of the highest corporate tax rates in the world AND almost half of the individuals in the US right now dont even pay income tax. where are you getting your numbers? they are flat wrong and there are countless charts backing me up. just look at the IRS website or the tax foundation. it is the opposite of what you are saying. the people that make the most money are paying the most... by a lot. the top 5% of wage earners pay 53.25% of all income taxes the top 10% pay 64.89% the top 50% pay 96.03% this leaves a tiny percentage left for the bottom 50%.
phobicsquirrel:
You do realize that if no money is coming in (taxes) then the govt cannot pay for things (ah look at states all across the nation). Look at colorado springs, for example.. [http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_14303473]
GOOD!! the government shouldnt be paying for as much stuff as they are. spending is out of control. trillion dollar deficits ?? how is that ok for ANYONE? ...not to mention TAX FLIGHT. people dont wanna pay taxes. rich people move out of your town when taxes get too high. this capitol leaving towns (colorado springs), cities (Dtroit), and states (California), is the reason why they have the problems they have.
they raise taxes to get more money to do more stuff.
People dont like the taxes so they move out, taking their money/business with them
there is less money in the area to tax tax revenue goes down so what do they do? ... they raise taxes to make up for it. now those above mentioned places have come to a head. if they cut their spending by "X" percent and then cut their taxes by "X-5" percent then they could attract more business from the lower taxes (creating a pool of money/business to create revenue) and they would be spending less so there would be less of a deficit if any at all.
phobicsquirrel:
Giving huge companies (transnational, and even are based overseas) tax breaks, subsidies, and incentives is really going to let them hire people? That argument has no merit and has been proven wrong. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/14/AR2010071405960.html ---Nonfinancial companies are sitting on $1.8 trillion in cash, roughly one-quarter more than at the beginning of the recession. And as several major firms report impressive earnings this week, the money continues to flow into firms' coffers. ----
that article does not prove that wrong at all because taxes arent the reason why nobody is hiring at the moment. people are not hiring at the moment because there is so much unknown in the markets right now that businesses are not willing to take the risk. the health care bill impact and increasing regulations on almost all fronts of the economy are two major factors that are so overwhelming and unknown that its enough to scare away hiring. heck, the VERY ARTICLE you linked me to says the EXACT SAME THING and i quote:
The Washington Post:
" If corporations are sitting on so much money, why aren't they hiring more workers?
The answer to that question has become a political flash point between the White House and big business groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which held a jobs summit Wednesday and accused the Obama administration of dumping onerous regulations on businesses. That has created an environment of "uncertainty," which is causing firms to hold back on hiring as the unemployment rate has hovered near 10 percent, the Chamber said. "
i wouldnt hire someone unless i knew EXACTLY how much it was gunna cost me in the long run. right now, companies dont know that.
phobicsquirrel:
These companies are littery making money by not hiring people but using their "surplus" to make more money. They can barrow money from the govt, for like almost 0% then invest it in things such as stock, annuities, hell anything really then make a killing, say even if it's 3%. WTF, why would they hire anyone, let alone an American who needs a decent wage (oh yeah why, you can survive making 8 bucks an hour...). But hell, the Republicans, (those who most of you defend so much - Kuzi not pointing you out bud) and some, hell a lot of democrats are in bed with these very businesses so much that OH NO, we can't do anything to hurt them. WTF!!!
that is actually the exact problem. every time the government interjects their policy into a market, the market will use that to their advantage. there are very few (im not sure any) members on this forum that are for the bailouts as they happened.
what? people taking advantage of a corrupt system? that NEVER happens!! HA!
phobicsquirrel:
We've killed our manufacturing by giving these leech of the world businesses our tax money, we are letting them kill our climate and water and land, we are letting them steal money by manipulating oil prices, we are FRAKIN doing it to ourselves and they are eating it up. The republicans have stopped or have stood in the way of everything, I MEAN everything that needs to be done. They have made the dems weaken every bill that has come forth and then still deny it from passing. The recovery act was only passed because the GOP had to have huge amounts of Tax cuts, the health care bill took what over a year because of the money in our system and what we got was a gift to insurance companies.
so you are arguing for huge government and regulation on all fronts in a system that is similar to the European model? ...thats falling apart right now.
phobicsquirrel:
Giving these huge companies basically free reign will not give us jobs,
as much as i hate to splice up one sentence ... i feel i must here nobody is saying "give them free reign." businesses, corporations, individuals, groups, non-profits, and any other way you can gather people and do any type of business, cannot, and should not be able to violate the rights of the individual. nor should their rights be violated. if we live under the structure of freedom, then THAT will give us jobs. ... back to the show...
phobicsquirrel:
in fact they don't even need to hire, they're making money just fine.
but they arent growing. Again, because of the unknown factor.
phobicsquirrel:
Here's a pdf of the letter the Chamber of Commerce sent the White House---http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/chamberjobs.pdf--. As some of you won't read it, just some of the proposals are:
include deregulation of business, tax cuts for the wealthy, free trade agreements, a reduced corporate income tax, expanded offshore drilling and logging in national forests and the privatization of waterways and roads.
all of that promotes business and job creation
phobicsquirrel:
Specifically, the Chamber urges the president to extend Bush-era tax cuts
that spurred the economy ...
phobicsquirrel:
provide tax breaks for companies that move jobs overseas.
i didnt see that in you linked article.
phobicsquirrel:
The Chamber simultaneously calls for a reduction in the deficit -- a gap caused largely by the tax cuts the Chamber wants extended, which are projected to add $3.4 trillion to the debt between 2009 and 2019.
history has proven that tax increases have never fixed a deficit. history has also shown that tax Cuts spur the economy. when there is more wealth being created, the tax revenue will come.
phobicsquirrel:
All of these things have worked so well for the United States. But those of you who bash Pelosi, or democrats who are trying to move out of this FAILED, and proven to F things up policy(s) are just feeding the fire and are the ones who maybe should do some reading.
the policies that i am looking for are not here, nor have they been here for well over 100 years. id say the bigger government policies have failed. yes we need to move away from what we are doing, but moving to what is currently failing in Europe is just as stupid.
phobicsquirrel:
If you all were right and no, or little govt worked (now mind you govt needs to be done well and have people who actually do their jobs), tax cuts to these huge businesses, little or no regulation on wall street (worked so very well), Banks (yeah that worked out well), business practices (working splendidly), FREE TRADE (yeah, we have really made this country stronger and wealthier), and finally TAX CUTS (so how's that working... yeah the rich get richer and the poor get poorer). There's a lot more in there but hell, it's just a few.
im sorry, that just isnt a finalized thought.
nobody is arguing for no government. and quite frankly the bush era didnt work because it wasnt little government at all. it was huge. he expanded the government more than any president had since Nixon. his spending was out of control and his policies failed. Now Obama wants to make Bush's out of control deficit spending look like chump change. youre right, the path that the last few administrations have led us down is failed. every administration keeps making government bigger. at what point do people see that more government is the problem. its becoming easier to see here in the US and its glaringly obvious in Europe.
phobicsquirrel:
The GOP and those who are in it are the biggest Hippocrates. You people say you want smaller govt and that socialism is the devil however you people are doing the biggest form of it, YOUR giving these huge bilion-multi billion companies and firms untold amounts of money to buy our elections, buy our land, buy our way of life and take our jobs to enslave the American People. Yeah, with all that money, with all the trillions of dollars that is being used against our very system due to the huge amounts of tax cuts and subsidies it's unreal.
yes, the GOP bought the last two elections... thats why they kept the house and senate in 06 and thats why McCain won in 08. ... oh wait...
however, i will agree with you 100% that the GOP is not for small government. not at all.
phobicsquirrel:
BUT if, and I know this is so horrible we give people in this country health care, education, fast rail, improved bridges/roads, fuel that isn't ruining the environment, and leading the world in technology then it's wrong to spend money. But it's okay to spend money on WARS (wars based on lies mind you), it's okay to give these companies bilions of dollars to take our jobs, our homes, crash our system, and bleed us dry and buy our govt.
ill agree on the war thing. i believe that the only justifiable war is a defensive war. we can debate if we are in one now all day but thats not really what im looking to do.
as far as the other things you mentioned (health care, education, fast rail, improved bridges/roads)...
the problem with these things is that it is unsustainable. it is a very good set of intentions. there is no argument on your intentions at all. its how we get to that "solution" that is the problem.
for one, infrastructure is not and shouild not be the federal governments problem. this is a state issue.
health care is an issue that we have discussed at length and making my case that the socialized system that has passed will TAKE AWAY FREEDOM will not change your European Democratic Socialist point of view, even though that system is just as messy as a private system (and some will argue it has more problems) and for sure just as expensive (and again some will argue more expensive). again, its a spending problem, not a taxing problem.
they are freezing lending because they cant risk not. they are freezing spending because of recent financial reform regulations. this again is a problem created by the government.
phobicsquirrel:
Oh and they are taking homes, and in huge numbers... And people that are in the middle of this, yeah those who can't find work (and are lazy according to the GOP) are being destroyed thus in return is breaking down our country. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66D0LB20100714
they are taking homes still because people cant pay for them because they dont have jobs because companies arent hiring because of HUGE amounts of uncertainty in the market brought on by GOVERNMENT
phobicsquirrel:
For the GOP and those who they represent, giving money to people who can't find work because places wont hire them, and because we can't spend any money on the deficit... they don't matter. It's their fault, they make too much money off it and should get a job.
wrong. the idea here is that if you give a man a handout, you break their will. paying people to sit on their butt and not get a job is not productive. getting them a job IS productive. its the "give a man a fish and he eats for the day, teach a man to fish and he eats for the test of his life" thing. give a man a handout and he pays his bills today, give a man a job and he pays his bills for the long haul, while creating wealth and goods that others can enjoy adding to the economy.
the policies that need to be in place are ones that create jobs and stability in the market. right now we are creating uncertainty and paying people to be unemployed.
phobicsquirrel:
Yeah... A couple of hundred bucks a week is really a lot of money, well worth it to stay home (oh wait there is no home) and sit on the couch.
youd be surprised. i know your point here. i see it. a friend of mine is on unemployment right now. and i asked her if she had any bites on a job. she responded by saying that it wasnt a concern right now, she has a few months of unemployment to live off of. then she insisted that she pays for dinner for myself and my wife.
phobicsquirrel:
But hell, let's spend more money in WARS and give money to big corporations because they'll hire people... yeah that's working really well. But hey it's Obama's fault, it's Pelosi's fault.. Sure you people are pigs.
ah... name calling. that always works. i just notice that the larger the government, the more spending on anything, and the more taxes that are imposed, the more we start to look like Greece. They are falling apart, and we are heading down that very same road, making the same mistakes that they made.
I need to go find my hammer and sickle so we can get this shin dig going!
that is freaking funny...
however gentlemen, i would like to remind you that name calling is not what a productive debate is about.
Sorry kuzi I just thought it would be easier on him than if I destroyed his ideaology sentence by sentence ;p
if you did read through that you will notice that there are several point that i did agree with him on. not only that, i do realize that the squirrel has good intentions. he has drive. he cares. that is more than i can say about a good part of the population.
i look at debate as fun. i understand that pheebs gets frustrated with things and will rant a bit about it. often times his frustration is justified. though i dont agree with his point of view 100% of the time, i still respect the man.
and for the record, the only reason why i break down his posts like that is because if i just quoted the entire thing and tried to reply to that there would be good points missed on both sides. it is easier to read when it is broken down because that paragraph he posted was a monster. im not trying to disassemble every single word, im trying to read it and get a grasp on what he is saying. thats easier to do when taken apart.
I have to throw this out there. Just who do our liberal bros think pays the "Corporate Income Taxes"
Answer: Consumers purchasing goods and services from those corporations in the form of higher fees and prices!
So just how is this a great idea?
I have to throw this out there. Just who do our liberal bros think pays the "Corporate Income Taxes"
Answer: Consumers purchasing goods and services from those corporations in the form of higher fees and prices!
So just how is this a great idea?
Arguing economics with liberals is like arguing sports with women... they have no need for logic or proof.
I have to throw this out there. Just who do our liberal bros think pays the "Corporate Income Taxes"
Answer: Consumers purchasing goods and services from those corporations in the form of higher fees and prices!
So just how is this a great idea?
Arguing economics with liberals is like arguing sports with women... they have no need for logic or proof.
So was it good economics then that put the US in such a good financial position that it is in today? Those good ole non Liberal policies have done wonders, shaking my head and LMAO. Too Funny !!!
I have to throw this out there. Just who do our liberal bros think pays the "Corporate Income Taxes"
Answer: Consumers purchasing goods and services from those corporations in the form of higher fees and prices!
So just how is this a great idea?
Arguing economics with liberals is like arguing sports with women... they have no need for logic or proof.
So was it good economics then that put the US in such a good financial position that it is in today? Those good ole non Liberal policies have done wonders, shaking my head and LMAO. Too Funny !!!
Yeah cause it's obviously the republicans fault banks made these loans. Pushing banks to make loans that people can't afford because they are all about entitlements of poor people! good point.
I have to throw this out there. Just who do our liberal bros think pays the "Corporate Income Taxes"
Answer: Consumers purchasing goods and services from those corporations in the form of higher fees and prices!
So just how is this a great idea?
Arguing economics with liberals is like arguing sports with women... they have no need for logic or proof.
So was it good economics then that put the US in such a good financial position that it is in today? Those good ole non Liberal policies have done wonders, shaking my head and LMAO. Too Funny !!!
Yeah cause it's obviously the republicans fault banks made these loans. Pushing banks to make loans that people can't afford because they are all about entitlements of poor people! good point.
it was the republicans fault. it was also the democrats fault. the banking policies that were put in place that lead to this were put there by both parties. each party wanted to claim that their policies were the ones that caused home ownership to skyrocket. they wanted to have the statistics on their sides that said a higher percentage owned homes during their time in office.
all this policy didnt "force" banks to make loans to those who couldnt afford it, but it did let them get away with it without risk because they would just sell it to Fanny or Freddie and not worry about it. then this house of cards fell down because of all the bad policy. now the democrats are looking to double down on the bad policy of the past and we are setting ourselves up for another crisis by "regulating out risk "
it was bad policy in the 70s, the 80s, the 90s, the 00s and now the 10s. when will the people learn that there is no way that a government (especially one as bloated, fiscally irresponsible, corrupt, and arrogant as the one we have put in power) can regulate risk out of a complex and constantly fluctuating market while still retaining the fundamental concept that created this nation: Freedom
I have to throw this out there. Just who do our liberal bros think pays the "Corporate Income Taxes"
Answer: Consumers purchasing goods and services from those corporations in the form of higher fees and prices!
So just how is this a great idea?
As I suspected, not one argument to refute my observation, only more it was the Republicans fault.
I have to throw this out there. Just who do our liberal bros think pays the "Corporate Income Taxes"
Answer: Consumers purchasing goods and services from those corporations in the form of higher fees and prices!
So just how is this a great idea?
As I suspected, not one argument to refute my observation, only more it was the Republicans fault.
i agree whit what you are saying. this, however, was not the cause of the financial crisis we are in now. i dont know if you were directing this at me at all but even if you were not i wanted to clarify.
I would venture to say the lack of a true free market has lead to this crisis. Saving idiots from themselves only leads to the thriving of bad buisnesses. The government involvement in private enterprise is just poison.
I would venture to say the lack of a true free market has lead to this crisis. Saving idiots from themselves only leads to the thriving of bad buisnesses. The government involvement in private enterprise is just poison.
If what you mean by this is that we (taxpayers) should never have had to bail out the pyramid schemers that brought their companies to ruin, I'm definetly with you. Some, however, seem to think the only rule should be Let the Buyer Beware, and that's not so good.
I would venture to say the lack of a true free market has lead to this crisis. Saving idiots from themselves only leads to the thriving of bad buisnesses. The government involvement in private enterprise is just poison.
If what you mean by this is that we (taxpayers) should never have had to bail out the pyramid schemers that brought their companies to ruin, I'm definetly with you. Some, however, seem to think the only rule should be Let the Buyer Beware, and that's not so good.
thats a good point.
though the buyer SHOULD beware, it is still the job of the government to uphold the rights of the individual. things like fraud, bait and switch schemes, etc that clearly violate the rights of the individual should be illegal. however, if you buy a house you cant afford, buy stocks and watch them go down, accumulate more debt than you can handle, or make a poor investment but are fully aware of your risk then there is no problem. the housing crisis did have a lot to do with bad policy, but there was a good portion of stupidity of the people out there as well. the banks should have let these stupid people know that they could not afford to buy a house. the banks however did not care if they could or not because we had Government agencies (Freddie and Fanny) that would come in and buy up toxic assets (an attempt to regulate out risk and stupidity) . if toxic assets werent going to be bought then its a fairly decent argument that the banks would have been more careful about who they lent to thus preventing this crisis.
it is not possible to protect people from their own stupidity. it is more reasonable to protect the peoples rights from fraud, theft, corruption, etc.
Comments
... not to mention the hostile climate in many other businesses with needless regulations that cost more money and make it harder to compete with industry overseas.
I do agree that the republicans are entangled with business and that is a set up that is promoting the violation of rights. i understand that needs to stop. the problem is that the democrats are entangled as well. ... and neither of them have an answer.
i do agree also that there needs to be a limit on unemployment, and i also think there needs to be less "charity" from the government. maybe more strict criterion to receiving unemployment, or a shorter time you are able to be on it. countless studies have shown that as the unemployment checks run out people are more likely to go out and search for a job (probably because they arent getting paid to sit on their ass)
i also agree that the system is set up to reward irresponsibility. ("the more kids you have the more dis proportionate the welfare checks become" kinda thing) and that needs to stop. but when about half of the country is getting something for nothing, how do you get the people that are giving stuff away out of office? they have a loyal base that will vote for free stuff every time because if they dont, they lose their free stuff.
its the dependency class of america. it was created by big government on both sides of the isle.
and it will be our downfall.
that phrase means very different things to a Statist than it does to a Libertarian. if you are trying to hold up Libertarian ideals then it is left to the individual to be responsible for themselves, and if they freely chose via charity, or independent programs, for those around them. of course this is an overly simple answer to the question...
as far as being constitutionally coherent....
libertarianism has its roots in some of the fundamental ideals set forth in documents like the constitution, the bill of rights, and the declaration of independence.
...Ideals like the individual rights of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. the constitution is not at odds with libertarianism, it as at odds with the government.
But hey it's okay to allow these huge companies to pay next to nothing in taxes (while everyone else - the bottom 98%- pay more, and give them more money to ship overseas, oh and let's not forget all the money that is being lost and paid to them goes against our deficit and our exports). You do realize that if no money is coming in (taxes) then the govt cannot pay for things (ah look at states all across the nation). Look at colorado springs, for example.. [http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_14303473]
... Giving huge companies (transnational, and even are based overseas) tax breaks, subsidies, and incentives is really going to let them hire people? That argument has no merit and has been proven wrong.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/14/AR2010071405960.html
---Nonfinancial companies are sitting on $1.8 trillion in cash, roughly one-quarter more than at the beginning of the recession. And as several major firms report impressive earnings this week, the money continues to flow into firms' coffers. ----
These companies are littery making money by not hiring people but using their "surplus" to make more money. They can barrow money from the govt, for like almost 0% then invest it in things such as stock, annuities, hell anything really then make a killing, say even if it's 3%. WTF, why would they hire anyone, let alone an American who needs a decent wage (oh yeah why, you can survive making 8 bucks an hour...). But hell, the Republicans, (those who most of you defend so much - Kuzi not pointing you out bud) and some, hell a lot of democrats are in bed with these very businesses so much that OH NO, we can't do anything to hurt them. WTF!!!
We've killed our manufacturing by giving these leech of the world businesses our tax money, we are letting them kill our climate and water and land, we are letting them steal money by manipulating oil prices, we are FRAKIN doing it to ourselves and they are eating it up. The republicans have stopped or have stood in the way of everything, I MEAN everything that needs to be done. They have made the dems weaken every bill that has come forth and then still deny it from passing. The recovery act was only passed because the GOP had to have huge amounts of Tax cuts, the health care bill took what over a year because of the money in our system and what we got was a gift to insurance companies.
Giving these huge companies basically free reign will not give us jobs, in fact they don't even need to hire, they're making money just fine. Here's a pdf of the letter the Chamber of Commerce sent the White House---http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/chamberjobs.pdf--. As some of you won't read it, just some of the proposals are:
include deregulation of business, tax cuts for the wealthy, free trade agreements, a reduced corporate income tax, expanded offshore drilling and logging in national forests and the privatization of waterways and roads.
Specifically, the Chamber urges the president to extend Bush-era tax cuts in full and provide tax breaks for companies that move jobs overseas.
The Chamber simultaneously calls for a reduction in the deficit -- a gap caused largely by the tax cuts the Chamber wants extended, which are projected to add $3.4 trillion to the debt between 2009 and 2019.
All of these things have worked so well for the United States. But those of you who bash Pelosi, or democrats who are trying to move out of this FAILED, and proven to F things up policy(s) are just feeding the fire and are the ones who maybe should do some reading. If you all were right and no, or little govt worked (now mind you govt needs to be done well and have people who actually do their jobs), tax cuts to these huge businesses, little or no regulation on wall street (worked so very well), Banks (yeah that worked out well), business practices (working splendidly), FREE TRADE (yeah, we have really made this country stronger and wealthier), and finally TAX CUTS (so how's that working... yeah the rich get richer and the poor get poorer). There's a lot more in there but hell, it's just a few. The GOP and those who are in it are the biggest Hippocrates.
You people say you want smaller govt and that socialism is the devil however you people are doing the biggest form of it, YOUR giving these huge bilion-multi billion companies and firms untold amounts of money to buy our elections, buy our land, buy our way of life and take our jobs to enslave the American People. Yeah, with all that money, with all the trillions of dollars that is being used against our very system due to the huge amounts of tax cuts and subsidies it's unreal. BUT if, and I know this is so horrible we give people in this country health care, education, fast rail, improved bridges/roads, fuel that isn't ruining the environment, and leading the world in technology then it's wrong to spend money. But it's okay to spend money on WARS (wars based on lies mind you), it's okay to give these companies bilions of dollars to take our jobs, our homes, crash our system, and bleed us dry and buy our govt.
Small business's make up most of the job creation in this country and due to the banks freezing lending (of which they said they'd do after stealing our tax money) are giving them the Finger.
http://www.mybudget360.com/small-business-loans-credit-card-contraction-banks-stick-it-to-small-business/
Oh and they are taking homes, and in huge numbers... And people that are in the middle of this, yeah those who can't find work (and are lazy according to the GOP) are being destroyed thus in return is breaking down our country.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66D0LB20100714
For the GOP and those who they represent, giving money to people who can't find work because places wont hire them, and because we can't spend any money on the deficit... they don't matter. It's their fault, they make too much money off it and should get a job. Yeah... A couple of hundred bucks a week is really a lot of money, well worth it to stay home (oh wait there is no home) and sit on the couch. But hell, let's spend more money in WARS and give money to big corporations because they'll hire people... yeah that's working really well. But hey it's Obama's fault, it's Pelosi's fault.. Sure you people are pigs.
Pheebs, you know how I feel about this stuff. But like Vulchor said... it really isn't worth your energy bro', they are so indoctrinated they just CAN'T see it, Spend your time more productively... let's work out another trade .
This makes no sense.
Western, you've just been signaturized.
we also have had a higher level of home ownership.
when the bush tax cuts too effect, the economy took off. the very next quarter the economy grew 8.5%
next to nothing? are you serious?
we have some of the highest corporate tax rates in the world
AND
almost half of the individuals in the US right now dont even pay income tax.
where are you getting your numbers? they are flat wrong and there are countless charts backing me up. just look at the IRS website or the tax foundation. it is the opposite of what you are saying. the people that make the most money are paying the most... by a lot. the top 5% of wage earners pay 53.25% of all income taxes
the top 10% pay 64.89%
the top 50% pay 96.03%
this leaves a tiny percentage left for the bottom 50%. GOOD!!
the government shouldnt be paying for as much stuff as they are. spending is out of control.
trillion dollar deficits ??
how is that ok for ANYONE?
...not to mention TAX FLIGHT. people dont wanna pay taxes. rich people move out of your town when taxes get too high. this capitol leaving towns (colorado springs), cities (Dtroit), and states (California), is the reason why they have the problems they have.
they raise taxes to get more money to do more stuff.
People dont like the taxes so they move out, taking their money/business with them
there is less money in the area to tax
tax revenue goes down
so what do they do? ... they raise taxes to make up for it.
now those above mentioned places have come to a head. if they cut their spending by "X" percent and then cut their taxes by "X-5" percent then they could attract more business from the lower taxes (creating a pool of money/business to create revenue) and they would be spending less so there would be less of a deficit if any at all.
that article does not prove that wrong at all because taxes arent the reason why nobody is hiring at the moment. people are not hiring at the moment because there is so much unknown in the markets right now that businesses are not willing to take the risk. the health care bill impact and increasing regulations on almost all fronts of the economy are two major factors that are so overwhelming and unknown that its enough to scare away hiring.
heck, the VERY ARTICLE you linked me to says the EXACT SAME THING
and i quote:
i wouldnt hire someone unless i knew EXACTLY how much it was gunna cost me in the long run. right now, companies dont know that.
that is actually the exact problem. every time the government interjects their policy into a market, the market will use that to their advantage. there are very few (im not sure any) members on this forum that are for the bailouts as they happened.
what? people taking advantage of a corrupt system? that NEVER happens!!
HA!
so you are arguing for huge government and regulation on all fronts in a system that is similar to the European model?
...thats falling apart right now. as much as i hate to splice up one sentence ... i feel i must here
nobody is saying "give them free reign."
businesses, corporations, individuals, groups, non-profits, and any other way you can gather people and do any type of business, cannot, and should not be able to violate the rights of the individual.
nor should their rights be violated.
if we live under the structure of freedom, then THAT will give us jobs.
... back to the show... but they arent growing. Again, because of the unknown factor. all of that promotes business and job creation
that spurred the economy ... i didnt see that in you linked article. history has proven that tax increases have never fixed a deficit.
history has also shown that tax Cuts spur the economy. when there is more wealth being created, the tax revenue will come.
the policies that i am looking for are not here, nor have they been here for well over 100 years. id say the bigger government policies have failed. yes we need to move away from what we are doing, but moving to what is currently failing in Europe is just as stupid. im sorry, that just isnt a finalized thought.
nobody is arguing for no government. and quite frankly the bush era didnt work because it wasnt little government at all. it was huge. he expanded the government more than any president had since Nixon. his spending was out of control and his policies failed.
Now Obama wants to make Bush's out of control deficit spending look like chump change. youre right, the path that the last few administrations have led us down is failed. every administration keeps making government bigger. at what point do people see that more government is the problem. its becoming easier to see here in the US and its glaringly obvious in Europe. yes, the GOP bought the last two elections... thats why they kept the house and senate in 06 and thats why McCain won in 08.
... oh wait...
however, i will agree with you 100% that the GOP is not for small government. not at all.
ill agree on the war thing. i believe that the only justifiable war is a defensive war. we can debate if we are in one now all day but thats not really what im looking to do.
as far as the other things you mentioned (health care, education, fast rail, improved bridges/roads)...
the problem with these things is that it is unsustainable. it is a very good set of intentions. there is no argument on your intentions at all. its how we get to that "solution" that is the problem.
for one, infrastructure is not and shouild not be the federal governments problem. this is a state issue.
health care is an issue that we have discussed at length and making my case that the socialized system that has passed will TAKE AWAY FREEDOM will not change your European Democratic Socialist point of view, even though that system is just as messy as a private system (and some will argue it has more problems) and for sure just as expensive (and again some will argue more expensive). again, its a spending problem, not a taxing problem.
they are freezing lending because they cant risk not. they are freezing spending because of recent financial reform regulations. this again is a problem created by the government. they are taking homes still because people cant pay for them because they dont have jobs because companies arent hiring because of HUGE amounts of uncertainty in the market brought on by GOVERNMENT wrong.
the idea here is that if you give a man a handout, you break their will.
paying people to sit on their butt and not get a job is not productive.
getting them a job IS productive.
its the "give a man a fish and he eats for the day, teach a man to fish and he eats for the test of his life" thing.
give a man a handout and he pays his bills today, give a man a job and he pays his bills for the long haul, while creating wealth and goods that others can enjoy adding to the economy.
the policies that need to be in place are ones that create jobs and stability in the market.
right now we are creating uncertainty and paying people to be unemployed. youd be surprised. i know your point here. i see it.
a friend of mine is on unemployment right now. and i asked her if she had any bites on a job. she responded by saying that it wasnt a concern right now, she has a few months of unemployment to live off of.
then she insisted that she pays for dinner for myself and my wife.
ah... name calling. that always works.
i just notice that the larger the government, the more spending on anything, and the more taxes that are imposed, the more we start to look like Greece. They are falling apart, and we are heading down that very same road, making the same mistakes that they made.
however gentlemen, i would like to remind you that name calling is not what a productive debate is about.
that is more than i can say about a good part of the population.
i look at debate as fun.
i understand that pheebs gets frustrated with things and will rant a bit about it. often times his frustration is justified.
though i dont agree with his point of view 100% of the time, i still respect the man.
and for the record, the only reason why i break down his posts like that is because if i just quoted the entire thing and tried to reply to that there would be good points missed on both sides. it is easier to read when it is broken down because that paragraph he posted was a monster. im not trying to disassemble every single word, im trying to read it and get a grasp on what he is saying. thats easier to do when taken apart.
it was also the democrats fault.
the banking policies that were put in place that lead to this were put there by both parties.
each party wanted to claim that their policies were the ones that caused home ownership to skyrocket. they wanted to have the statistics on their sides that said a higher percentage owned homes during their time in office.
all this policy didnt "force" banks to make loans to those who couldnt afford it, but it did let them get away with it without risk because they would just sell it to Fanny or Freddie and not worry about it. then this house of cards fell down because of all the bad policy.
now the democrats are looking to double down on the bad policy of the past and we are setting ourselves up for another crisis by "regulating out risk "
it was bad policy in the 70s, the 80s, the 90s, the 00s and now the 10s.
when will the people learn that there is no way that a government (especially one as bloated, fiscally irresponsible, corrupt, and arrogant as the one we have put in power) can regulate risk out of a complex and constantly fluctuating market while still retaining the fundamental concept that created this nation:
Freedom
?
the housing crisis did have a lot to do with bad policy, but there was a good portion of stupidity of the people out there as well. the banks should have let these stupid people know that they could not afford to buy a house. the banks however did not care if they could or not because we had Government agencies (Freddie and Fanny) that would come in and buy up toxic assets (an attempt to regulate out risk and stupidity) . if toxic assets werent going to be bought then its a fairly decent argument that the banks would have been more careful about who they lent to thus preventing this crisis.
it is not possible to protect people from their own stupidity. it is more reasonable to protect the peoples rights from fraud, theft, corruption, etc.