-
Aborting ‘Pro-Choice,’ Promoting ‘Nuance’
January 22, 2013 | 46 comments
-
Obama Comes Full Circle
May 11, 2012 | 261 comments
-
Family Deformation
April 8, 2011 | 47 comments
-
Obama Abandons Marriage
February 25, 2011 | 229 comments
-
He Won’t Be Moving to the Center
November 11, 2010 | 27 comments
A Further Perspective
Fiscal Crisis At Tipping Point
What kind of world are we leaving our children?
The outcry over deficit spending and the rapidly escalating national debt is reaching ear-piercing levels. Everyone but President Obama and the Democratic leadership seems to understand the fiscal crisis facing the nation. We hear dire warnings about the economy from every corner of the nation — economists, fiscal analysts, legislators, civic leaders, investment brokers, and financial commentators in the media. No wonder, a quick look at various aspects of the economy reveals a dark forecast.
Our debt now stands at more than $10 trillion. The situation was described dramatically by Yuval Levin in a Time magazine article. He wrote, “Our debt has doubled in the past five years and will double again by decade’s end. By the early 2030s, experts explain, it will be roughly twice the size of our entire economy (far larger than the largest national debt in our history, right after World War II) and still growing out of control, gravely threatening future growth and prosperity.”
The housing industry continues to tank, foreclosures are up, more homeowners are “underwater” and prices are falling. Unemployment is at 9.1 percent and the misery index is the highest it has been in 28 years. According to a CNN poll, almost half of Americans think another Great Depression is likely to occur with the next year. Negative whispers questioning the viability of the American economy have turned into wails of despair and the public’s approval of the President’s handling of the economy continues to drop — the latest Gallup Poll reveals that only 20 percent of Americans are satisfied with the way things are going and unemployment is at 9.2 percent.
In short, the current national fiscal crisis is devastating to the future of America. The only way out of this fiscal crisis is to go back to those historically-proven, time-honored principles that are the foundation of this great nation: individual freedom and responsibility, competition, opportunity, determination in the face of adversity, and a can-do attitude that leads to setting and reaching goals through hard work and personal accomplishment. Guided by these principles and ideals, the nation can come back from the brink of fiscal peril.
A recent Public Notice poll found that a majority of voters want Congress to accept its responsibility to tackle the spending problem that is threatening the nation’s economic stability. Congress simply must get the nation’s “fiscal house in order.”
To that end, tax increases would make the problem worse, as would any measure that would weaken the U.S. military, threaten national security or undermine national sovereignty. The “Cut, Cap and Balance” solution would immediately cut spending and slash the deficit in half next year. It would put in place statutes and enforceable caps that would align spending with average revenues by ratcheting total federal spending down to 18 percent of GDP. Passage in the House and Senate of a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution would include the aforementioned spending cap and provide a high hurdle for tax increases.
The nation’s citizens want to see principled, courageous action to reverse the crisis and bring back the kind of financial and economic stability that propelled America into the world’s superpower. That would include curtailing entitlements, reversing government expansion, and repealing Obamacare (with all the features — marriage penalty, payback to feminists, and taxpayer funding of abortion — that negatively affect women and families).
In short, Congress must make the hard choices necessary to stop our reckless pattern of spending and get the nation back on a sound fiscal foundation. Congress must reject any and all tax increases; they will only cripple families, devastate the economy and consolidate more power in government. The “Cut, Cap, and Balance” initiative is the best way to stop the cycle of endless deficits.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the great German philosopher, said something that is very applicable to the challenges we face today. He said, “The ultimate test of a moral society is the kind of world that it leaves to its children.” At this tipping point in America’s fiscal crisis, we have to ask ourselves: What kind of world are we leaving our nation’s children?
Letter to the Editor View all comments (102) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Janice Shaw Crouse
More Articles From A Further Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/07/11/fiscal-crisis-at-tipping-point
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The Great Train Robbery
- Wincing at Cumberbatch
- Her Unrequited Letter
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Melvin| 7.11.11 @ 7:06AM
"What kind of world are we leaving our nation's children?
The prevailing attitude is, "Why should I care, what shape this Nation is in, as long as I get mine."
I got into a mild pissing contest with all people, one of my neighbors in Sam's Club.
Oh, lordy his was unloading on the Tea Party. They want to cut Medicare and Social Securtiy and the check out lady who also was card carrying Democrat, was seconding the motion that no one, but no better touch her Social Security and Medicare.
"Why, why those Tea Party are just a bunch of Extremists." David, what on earth do you mean, name one extreme thing that the Tea Party has done?" As usual the he spoke in generalalities, with the stomp on bullfrog look and the arm and hand waving.
But what really got my attention was he kept repeating the mantra of, "We've got to do something about the Tea Party, the government has to do something about the Tea Party."
Now my neighbor of many years had that look in his eye of acutally of wanting come to blows with members of the Tea Party, because he felt that they were a danger to the Nation or his vision of what the Nation should be.
"David our Country is flat busted broke." but he wouldn't hear of none of it."
I have come to the conclusion that we no longer are a united Nation, but have been turned into a bunch of quarreling tribes. Hence my beginning comment of, The prevailing attitude is, "Why should I care, what shape this Nation is in, as long as I get mine."
chuck| 7.11.11 @ 8:05AM
We have been divided into tribes. The democrats are always playing rich against poor, blacks against whites, old against young, urban against rural, the coast against the heartland, the Godless against the faithful, gay against straight, labor against business, red state against blue state........
Divide and conquer.
Mike D.| 7.11.11 @ 8:15AM
Yep! And its not going to be reconciled.
Purpleguy| 7.11.11 @ 12:56PM
Interesting comment when all the "wedge issues" to divide us originated from the Karl Rovian type playbook. That "divide and conquer" attitude started with the "Southern Strategy" of Richard Nixon. Scorched earth politics was bad enough when the country had some problems. But now, with all of us in peril, our financial house being held hostage to the political agenda on either side, is not the time for "wedge" ... the preamble of the U.S. Constitution starts "We the people ... " , not "We the rich people" or "We the connected people" or "We the morally superior people" ... No, the U.S. Constitution is for all the people - "a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty ... "
I for one am more than willing to pay more taxes to support my country in a time of peril. Anyone who isn't ready to do that is just un-American and not a patriot. Remember, government spending goes to pay someone for something that they can then turnaround and spend in the economy. As a temporary measure we all need to pull tight and suck it up and follow the Simpson-Bowles suggestions - both sides have to give. So let's get 'er done.
Dean| 7.11.11 @ 1:39PM
There is nothing that prevents you from paying more taxes. Just right a check and send it to Washington. They will eagerly cash it and spend the money.
Drunken Sailor| 7.11.11 @ 2:04PM
Notice it says to "Promote the general welfare", not to legislate a equal risk free outcome based on fairness to general welfare. And last I checked it was the left dividing the country into classes of black, hispanic, gay, transgender, rich, middle class, poor, etc, etc.
Al Adab| 7.11.11 @ 2:46PM
Purp is always very generous with other people's money. Apparently he doesn't see a person's income or wealth as a form of property. Government is enjoined to protect, not confiscate, property.
Drunken Sailor| 7.11.11 @ 3:37PM
Al,
It's kind of like our income. They see it as theirs first and they so kindly give us what they think we deserve, once they siphone off what they want.
TrueBlue| 7.11.11 @ 2:52PM
Yes, but the question's should be; Why is the government spending that money? Could that be better accomplished by a private industry filling the need? If the entire process isn't already filled by a private company, why is the government involved? Obviously nobody was concerned about it, or it would already be covered by an entrepreneur.
Any time the government gets involved the process is inherently ineffecient and costly. Let private industry and the states deal with it, not the federal government. I have no real issues with paying more in taxes (to a point), the problem is that as it stands now I KNOW that money isn't being used correctly, so why should I give them more money to waste?
No, what needs to be done is to massively downsize the federal government, balance the budget, and get the hell out of the way of private industry. THEN they can talk about raising taxes a little bit to pay off the national debt faster.
masly | 7.12.11 @ 1:57AM
Now ya see, what we have here. Its one of those there ELITE brilliant, intellectuals who has come down from on high and graced us with his wisdom and enlighting presence. Full of self proclaimed compassion.
I am a 28 years old doctor, mature and beautiful.and now I am seeking a good man who can give me real love , so i got a username Andromeda2002 on--s'e'ek'c'ou'ga'r.c óm--.it is the first and best club for y'ounger women and old'er men, or older women and y'ounger men,to int'eract with each other. Maybe you wanna ch'eck 'it out or tell your friends!
chuck| 7.11.11 @ 3:01PM
You know Purp, you quoting the Constitution reminds me of the quote from Pelosi, "are you serious, are you serious?" Your side's only use for the Constitution is to see how many ways you can ignore it.
cesium62| 7.21.11 @ 10:46PM
Nah, the prevailing attitude is "Let's screw everybody." Societies were created so that groups of people could help each other. Excess grain from a thousand farmers could be collected in the good times as insurance against the bad times. A farmer who got sick and couldn't work for a few months could still get help from the village to tide him over until he got back on his feet. Now the prevailing attitude is: screw you if you get hit by a hurricane -- use your individual responsibility and rebuild your house with your own two hands. Screw you if you get laid off because Wall Street didn't have proper oversight and you can't afford medical insurance -- use your individual freedom and responsibility to just die without troubling me. Screw you if you're old: you should be dead anyways. Screw you if you can't afford college: a nation of uneducated competitive people is better off than a nation of well-educated cooperative people can ever be.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 7.11.11 @ 7:41AM
Many of the recipients of government largess are too stupid to realize it's a house of cards and it could easily crumble.
The government is playing a dangerous game with inflation and all those recipients could wake up one day and find themselves flattened by inflation.
As long as the free government cheese comes many won't care.
Purpleguy| 7.11.11 @ 1:22PM
"free government cheese .. "? u mean like TARP that bailed out the banksters who then uncerimoniously gave huge bonuses and spent on lavish "retreats", or the Medicare Part D giveaway to Big Pharma forcing Medicare to pay the going market prices without using the combined market force of Medicare to bring drug prices down? Or perhaps you meant the no-bid contracts given to Halliburton and KBR in Iraq and such?
Or did you mean the Social Security recipients and Medicare recipients that depend on what the government (us) promised them and that they paid into? Or do you mean the elderly seniors that are in nursing homes that Medicaid pays for?
Perhaps you meant the veterans that came home maimed or harmed in some way after serving their country in war? Maybe you meant the unemployed who are on unemployment insurance after the jig was up on Wall Street and the economy came crashing down on them?
Just think about it - where do the billions go the government spends - it doesn't fall off the cliff - the businesses that serve the government circulate it, the poor circulates it, everyone circulates it - and it helps the economy and all of us.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 7.11.11 @ 1:47PM
You know what free government cheese is and thanks for those examples. However, if you paid into a system like Social Security that does not qualify as free government cheese.
As far as your comment that the circulating of government money helps everyone I suggest you look at this chart. The chart is based on reports directly from the U.S. Treasury and shows the diminishing returns associated with government spending. We are now at a negative 50 cents for every dollar spent.
Wake up from your delusion!
http://financialminorityreport.....y-of-debt/
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 7.11.11 @ 1:48PM
By the way, bringing veterans into the discussion was a low class move, even for you.
Drunken Sailor| 7.11.11 @ 2:12PM
Nope, he meant the millions to protect a snail darter, study the flow rate of ketchup, teach chinese prostitutes save sex practices and english, support Hamas, or my personal favorite, Nancy Pelosi's drive to save endangered" salt marsh harvest mouse at the tune of $30 Million
Al Adab| 7.11.11 @ 2:47PM
And they tell us there is nothing to cut.
Fairbanks99| 7.11.11 @ 3:13PM
Or spend 2.7 million dollars to repave a few miles of perfectly good pavement at Naval Base Bangor, Washington. This is being paid for by the so-called "stimulus." The same kind of Gomer Pyle paving jobs are also going on at Fort Lewis, but I haven't seen any signs with the stupid "stimulus" logo there.
What do you want to bet the paving companies are Union?
Drunken Sailor| 7.11.11 @ 3:39PM
Must be the same fund being used to replace/ promote grass growth at Ft. Hood.
Bob Grant| 7.11.11 @ 7:54AM
"...Now my neighbor of many years had that look in his eye of acutally of wanting come to blows with members of the Tea Party,..." ----
I too have recently experienced "that look" from a brother-in-law. What's puzzling to me is where does one develop such rage: From their own thought process?...television?...education?...pop
culture?...peers?
How can people with such similar socio-economic, cultural, and ethnic backgrounds have polar opposite views of the world?
Is Michael Savage right when he says liberalism is a mental disorder? .........I can't think of another explanation.
Mike D.| 7.11.11 @ 8:17AM
Liberalism is an addiction, a resort to pure emotionalism and its application to every phase of life.
Bob Grant| 7.11.11 @ 8:35AM
Yes, but how do you explain the true believers with money? And no, I'm not talking about the Warren Buffets or T Boone Pickens of the World. They are simply wanna-be players of an Obama Corporatist system.
I'm talking about the ones who want to take away the benefits of a free market, the same that provided the conditions for their own wealth, from future generations.
Evil, insidious, pathological, and unethical.
Ken (Old Texican)| 7.11.11 @ 8:51AM
Bob G,
Sometimes I get a dark thought. What if these "upper middle class"...comfortable liberals do have a plan in effect...but only for THEIR CHILDREN as the next generation of would-be aristocrats?
The rest of the population can be allowed to be their servants.
You know, there are only two alternatives. Either these "liberals" are idiots... or they want their kids to run a banana republic.
Purpleguy| 7.11.11 @ 1:32PM
And yet, isn't it interesting how our country has faltered since the years of Reagan, culminating in the disaster of Bush II? Income has increased, but increasingly gone to the upper class at the expense of the middle class. A large, prosperous and powerful middle class is what made this country great and it has been systematically dismantled little by little by the would be Reagan's of the country's leaders. If we don't reverse that trend we are all doomed.
Bob Grant| 7.11.11 @ 2:08PM
Purp Twit,
And if your union heros didn't destroy the manufacturing industry - and, thus millions and millions of jobs - during that period, maybe this recession could have been weathered.
At the same time, your heros in Washington like Carter, Fwank, Doodd, and Clinton pushed Fannie May and Freddy Mack on banks, and thus forcing them to 'turn chicken s**t into chicken salad' (companies tend to do those kind of things; you know, rational self interest, a.k.a., profit motive), dealing a one/two punch at the long-term health of the country.
You know why private union membership is at an all time low. It's because said unions destroyed millions of middle class jobs. It's called killing the golden goose.
Look at your heros and in the mirror for answers on why we are facing this economic calamity!!!
Purpleguy| 7.11.11 @ 5:46PM
You are completely offbase. So where did those manufacturing jobs go, hmmmm? Oh, that's right - chasing cheap labor to China, Mexico and India. That wasn't caused by unions but by unscrupulous, un-American, disloyal CEOs as a way to get around and rid of unions and the good paying jobs that Americans deserve. Think about that the next time you by Chinese goods.
Moreover, stop blaming the people with the least power - do you have a job, and do you have a boss? Who has the power to hire/fire/promote you? Not a union you twit. It's always management that has the power and 85% of all problems derive from management decisions. From the time of Henry Ford on, company management fought against unions that wanted fair wages and benefits. And, now you want to downgrade the very people that got you any employment benefits you currently have - talk about biting the hand that feeds you... .
As far as the current economic crisis - you don't think Wall Street and Banking that were allowed to take huge risks were not at fault, when they clearly new better and did it anyway? No, you want to blame the millions of people who bought subprime mortgages thinking they would not be allowed to if they couldn't afford it? Perhaps they should have been more careful - but it wasn't their JOB to know better - the banks and Wall Street let them do it. And on top of it you want to blame the government for removing the regulations y'all gripe about? You're facts are twisted and your conclusions are just as much a fantasy as your belief that the Corporate World will take care of you - they won't - caveat emptor baby.
Mike D.| 7.11.11 @ 10:31PM
Oh yes, Unions have been the salt of the earth. Ford had the highest wage in the auto industry with the 5 dollar day(revolutionary) long before Unions came on the scene. Heres another one dolt, management has the power because they run the company, good or bad, thats how it works in a free society. In 1959, steel customers walked away from the US steel industry and started inporting steel after the long strike(unions again) because they grew tired of the constant strikes and supply interuptions. The steel industry had the highest rates of feather bedding(i.e. union jobs that contributed nothing to productivity) and lowest of worker productivity in any industry. Bethlehem Steel ceased to exist because of excessive legacy costs brought on by the typical Union situations.
D. Singh| 7.12.11 @ 4:28AM
'Perhaps they should have been more careful - but it wasn't their JOB to know better - the banks and Wall Street let them do it.'
I thought they were pressurised by Carter and Clinton.
Bob Grant| 7.11.11 @ 8:58PM
Your timing is perfect as just today President Banana Republic accused Republicans as running one.
More projecting from our dictator-in-chief.
(P.S. I wonder if he sent a get well card to his soul mate down in Venezuela.)
Purpleguy| 7.11.11 @ 1:24PM
And conservativism is reality? Seriously?
axbucxdu| 7.12.11 @ 12:34AM
Prog, something for nothing defines your philosophy and now you've run out of other people's money to hide that fact. We've reached the point where everyone can see that your views and economic reality are two different things. I suggest that you and your fellow travelers learn how to master rudimentary arithmetic. Seriously.
tsd| 7.11.11 @ 7:55AM
So now after all the intelligent people and even may who would not even be considered intelligent have figured out the terrible shape we are in... why do the so called leaders in Washington with all they're Phd's, facts and figures do more harm than good??? They are either really dumb or really evil. As they say, figures don't lie.... but lairs sure figure.
POST American| 7.11.11 @ 7:58AM
Milking this LONG engineered, entirely scripted economic
fold down for 'suspense' is getting lame.
What's NOT lame is talking about that 1.4
quadrillion in FAKE derivatives debt ---OR ending
and warmly, warmly, warmly prosecuting the
ILLEGAL, debt serf generating, fake currency
issuing, private 'Federal' Reserve.
Big Tony| 7.11.11 @ 8:10AM
I think its simply the fact that most people do not realize that inflation is another of the many hidden taxes that are paid by most all american people. As long a congress and the Federal Reserve Bank can contiune to get away with the game they are playing they will continue to destroy the purchasing power of the dollar. A "MODEST" 5 % inflation rate will destroy about 99% of the purchasing power of the dollar in only 70 years. That's not a tax on just your children or your children's children that's a tax on you!
martin j smith| 7.11.11 @ 8:19AM
Its not Liberalism its more insideous ideology close to Naziism and Communism. A people who have been fed a notion of the world that has been digested without refute. I know of such people in my family and it is NOT POSSIBLE --let me repeat--It is NOT POSSIBLE--to have any meaningful conversation with such individuals.
The thing that goes thru my mind, if the opportunity arises is this; WE are not on the same page,book,library,city,state,country,continent or even Planet. I give up on this conversation, --if a famly memmber --I love you and wish you well but I fear for all of us --thank you and good nite.
Stan REdmond| 7.11.11 @ 8:45AM
"individual freedom and responsibility, competition, opportunity, determination in the face of adversity, and a can-do attitude that leads to setting and reaching goals through hard work and personal accomplishment."
This is the antithesis of liberalism, democrats, and democrat constituents. They have an army of uneducated dependant idiots for their muscle. Look at ACORN and SEIU. Look at the gangs of blacks attacking "whitey." It's scary what this president has done and sad how many people suck on uncle Obama's gov't funded teet.
Mike Rogers| 7.11.11 @ 9:13AM
It is time for the sovereign states to dissolve and reconstitute the Federal government so that it acts as the agent and servant of the states and We the People.
Sherman rides again!| 7.11.11 @ 3:58PM
Mike, I agree. If you look at the fall of Rome, the land owners and unemployed military banded together to take care of there own property and people.
C Smith| 7.11.11 @ 9:42AM
Christine Lagarde, new head of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), predicted "real nasty consequences" for the global economy if the U.S. fails to raise its debt ceiling. So? What about the even "nastier" consciences for America if she does? It has become a fore-drawn conclusion that the "savior of the world" must once again be the "sacrificial lamb" that allows the economies of the world to flourish as her own lifeblood slowly ebbs away.
Why? America is the last bastion of free enterprise not under international control. This cannot be allowed to continue. The foundation is now being laid for a new monetary policy that will require the economic systems of the world to come under singular control. Surprisingly, this convergence was predicted two millennia ago:
"And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name" (Revelation 13:16-17).
http://the-day-of-the-lord.blo.....-fund.html
PolishKnight| 7.11.11 @ 9:50AM
Housing continues to tank because of (expensive) government subsidies propping prices above reasonable market value.
The housing bubble was a populist policy because a majority of people owned houses so prices going up was an artificial wealth generator. It seemed real enough similar to another type of boom: oil. If a country has oil underneath it, they can sell this asset to foreigners to prop up the economy (that's Canada's and Saudi Arabia's secret. Shhh!)
Except for one thing: real estate is a local commodity. You can only sell it to investors when they move/vacation in the area or rent the asset out to locals at market price. So there's a natural limit how high real estate values can rise to. When sales plummet but prices are still rising because Donald Trump bought a 30 million dollar mansion, it can appear that the "wealth" of a nation has doubled overnight.
Until buyers stop showing up with buckets of cash. I'm one of them. I refused to buy a home that suddenly doubled in price for no good reason. I still refuse to.
There were negative effects of the bubble as well including higher assessed taxes and rents and ultimately paid for via higher prices on services that require space. Restaurants and stores had to pay more for their rent and they passed that expense onto the consumer but the consumer didn't mind since they cleverly, seemingly, doubled their worth in 3 years.
Want to see the banks fail again? Prop up another bubble! Real estate should not gain ANY value beyond regular inflation and, in the absence of monetary inflation, should remain constant.
D. Singh| 7.11.11 @ 9:52AM
A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government.
Thomas Jefferson
Purpleguy| 7.11.11 @ 6:20PM
Who's talking about taking "from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned" ? We're talking about taxing the wealthy, not the laborer ...
PolishKnight| 7.12.11 @ 11:09AM
Sadly, the left is quite clever about defining whose wealthy. They largely start at the upper middle class ($250K which is certainly that category in their red states.) Income is also an arbitrary concept. If someone shelters their property and it's generated wealth away from them, then they can effectively have a zero income. Bill Gates Sr. is an expert at the concept and defends the laws that helped to provide him job security.
It would be smarter to consider a property tax. This way, there is no sheltering or moving around ownership. A plot of land owned by X trust, even if it's losing money, would need to have it's taxes paid or it would be taken by the state. This goes for bank accounts as well. However, income taxes would need to be abolished for the system to work otherwise it would be double taxation. Your bank account would be effectively LOSING interest and principle while your income would be ineffective at adding to it due to taxes so why save?
Unfortunately, certain exemptions and IRS oversight would be required. What about farmland that generates too little income to justify it's taxes? What about retired seniors who paid income taxes their whole lives and now are "wealthy" and paying higher net taxes?
I have a reluctant admiration for the left and the various shell games they have played over the years. The income tax is now so established in American psyche, that we don't give it a second thought. The VAT proposal is the same in principle but from the reverse end. They both also have a side effect that the government can regulate people's behavior via the complex tax scheme due to the aforementioned complexity of defining income.
PolishKnight| 7.11.11 @ 10:10AM
"The nation’s citizens want to see principled, courageous action to reverse the crisis and bring back the kind of financial and economic stability that propelled America into the world’s superpower. That would include curtailing entitlements, reversing government expansion, and repealing Obamacare (with all the features -- marriage penalty, payback to feminists, and taxpayer funding of abortion -- that negatively affect women and families)."
News flash: Most women don't really care about abortion that much. They worry that they won't get a breadwinner husband to pay the bills and support them and their children.
Conservatives running up like a knight in shining armor to rescue the damsel in disdress from the abortion dragon don't "get it" that she's turn on by "bad boy" dragons and plans to help the dragon cook him in that armor all the while screaming "Help me! Come quick! Help me!"
And these schmucks never learn.
Sadly, the left has cleverly played a ruthless political game to bribe voters and government workers via entitlements while dehumanizing demographics that don't vote for them (working class white males and their families.) Obama and Carville dismiss them as ignorant hillbillies while praising the cultural contributions of inner city misogynistic rappers. They don't care about the worker or intellectual nobility. It's all about a naked power grab and all the better if you happen to be a politician or party member government worker. The remaining white males who work in private industry and still worship leftism are useful chumps. Yet they, and their wives and even children are still showing up to the ballot to vote for "change" and the dream of a Swedish utopia. Whose more stupid? A plumber who knows he's being shafted by power hungry monsters and expresses it in simple terms or the college educated and indoctrinated snob who drinks cool aid while reciting Shakespeare?
OK, enough about defining the problem. Let's address it. For starters, gentlemen, the wealthy demographic are now either crony capitalists who would sell us out for cheap workers from third world countries or hunting for ethanol subsidies and other government contracts. So why are we drinking that cool aid? Let the left have their precious tax increases but keep them in the high income range. That will mostly hit the blue states anyway. Call their bluff! They're PRAYING you don't! (Praying to Lenin, but praying nonetheless.)
Then in combination with that, call for tax decreases for married couples. That alone will cause them to really sweat. It will certainly heighten the gay marriage issue and create a form of class warfare they're on the losing side of! hehe! Can you imagine?
And keep in mind that the mess they made (with the right's complacency) of the so-called family courts will come home to roost. Judges will make one lesbian into the "man" of the dissolved marriage and ordered to pay the other one child-support and alimony. Expect a lot of murders to be profiled on "The Forensic Files".
Guys, they're bringing their A-game to the knife fight. Here are the ground rules:
1) Recognize your demographic and take care of them both to earn their votes AND their numbers.
2) Use your opponents' rhetoric against them. They claim to care about the working guy. Well, they don't due to number 1 above (the working guy is the one least likely to vote for them.) So stop worrying about the tax breaks for blueblood millionaires with factories in China, NYC hedgefunds, and ethanol subsidies players and take care of your blue collar electorate.
3) Charity begins at home. The left says the personal is the political. They will not hesitate to blackball conservatives. Tell your lovely daughters to not marry commies and your hard working sons to not provide an easy out for a campus feminist to quit a job she hates to become a housewife. Part of the reason why feminism is becoming a dirty word is because more women are working and don't have spare time as housewives to march around griping about how oppressed they are. Nothing like 60 hour work weeks to make you appreciate the value of a provider husband!
Purpleguy| 7.11.11 @ 1:38PM
Spoken like a true bigot and male chauvinist pig .. !
PolishKnight| 7.11.11 @ 3:22PM
Flattery will get you nowhere!
Purpleguy| 7.11.11 @ 5:23PM
As if ...
martin j smith| 7.11.11 @ 10:13AM
We are in a Political ( so far ) Civil War. Better believe that. Republican leaders had better gear themselves up for the fight of our ( and for ) our lives. In the near future Politically there may well be talk of impeachment regarding Obama. There will be wide spread voter fraud and violence on the streets when efforts are made to combat this.
The republican Party better be ready --fasten your seat belts we are in for a very bumpy ride.
PolishKnight| 7.11.11 @ 10:25AM
Martin, imagine a civil war where it's not North versus South but rather a blueblood Republican politician from a university who was friends with all of his leftist colleagues and still lives next door to them in Washington? (Or at least, Northern Virginia and Georgetown?)
Even in civil wars, they don't take breaks from the war BBQ'ing in each others' backyards. In addition, while the left sticks by their comrades who refuse to sign off on compromise legislation (look at how Obama did so well despite voting against the Iraq war or not showing up, etc.), the right will toss true conservatives under the bus in a heartbeat if they don't "play with the team." The left worships big government corruption and perhaps they have a point: It certainly is a good team to be on compared to a lone outsider trying to stand up against it.
We need to clean house. That means being ready to stay home, if necessary, if another McCain is put up for the presidential election. All the non-conservatives put up, since Reagan, have been a signal to corrupt Republicans that it's ok to party in Washington. Nobody is going to hold them to account. The chumps will vote for anything with a Republican label on it.
If moderate Republicans lose elections, that means no kickback corporate jobs for their daughters, wives, and friends. They won't get those offers if there are no congressional votes waiting for their approval. We need to cut them off and throw them to the wolves: earning a living in the private sector.
Purpleguy| 7.11.11 @ 1:39PM
So true ...
Purpleguy| 7.11.11 @ 12:45PM
"A recent Public Notice poll found that a majority of voters want Congress to accept its responsibility to tackle the spending problem that is threatening the nation’s economic stability." - Yes and 75% of the public wants the Bush tax cuts on the wealthiest (>$250,000.00) repealed. Cuts are fine and should be done, but without revenue increases at 50% the shortfall at a time of peril, you're just not serious about it. You have a different agenda covered in the debt crisis sheep's clothing ... austerity measures includes raising taxes on those that most afford it when cuts to spending will affect those that can least afford it. Period.
KennesawJack| 7.11.11 @ 2:10PM
Maybe we should consider distinguishing between various types of capital gains for tax purposes. Purely fungible gains, i.e. income from commodity speculation, currency speculation, derivitives would be taxed as ordinary income. Capital gains in the form of profits from productive industry or service, i.e. manufacturing, made tax free. Capital gains from appreciation in equities remains at 15%. Soros and Buffet should love it. They could both increase their contributions to Obamaland by close to 300 percent.
Al Adab| 7.11.11 @ 2:56PM
What I would truely like to know is when we decided that all earnings, income and wealth in this country belongs to the government (to redistribute) except for what they allow us to keep? Is it not the other way around? Our incomes and wealth are our property except for what we voluntarily choose to remit to fund the (limited) State and Federal governments.
KennesawJack| 7.11.11 @ 3:53PM
Al, we have never decided that. The Socialist elites, when they're in power, simply act like we have. And please, don't kid yourself, there is nothing voluntary about the transfer of income from the productive class to the parasite class. If the left was really about "fairness" and not power, they would champion the most progressive tax of all, a consumption tax on everything but food, clothing, and shelter. Certainly, the wealthy buy more than the poor. The problem with that, though, is a consumption tax is wholly voluntary and that the left could never accept. Without the coercion of the state they are powerless and their means of coercion is our confiscatory tax code.
Purpleguy| 7.11.11 @ 5:23PM
The 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is where the authority came from - it's called income tax ... passed by 3/4 of the States and 2/3 of both Houses of Congress - it is the law of the land ... so argue with the Constitution not me about whether you can decide to volunteer to pay taxes. As far as the States go, their Constitutions are probably where you'll find that authority. Moreover, the Declaration of Independence voices that you are entitled to "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" ... not property. In any case, the whole purpose of taxes has always been redistribution of funds ... to what was needed for the COMMON good. What you consider is the COMMON good is what everyone is always arguing about.
KennesawJack| 7.11.11 @ 11:27PM
So, you're saying the 16th Amendment is where the authority comes to declare all earnings, income, and wealth belong to the government which is what Al was asking. Pathetic. Further, are you saying pursuit of happiness doesn't include my desire to acquire my personal propery? Even more pathetic. Where is it written that the whole purpose of taxes is the redistribution of wealth?The "common good" means roads, bridges, education, defense, etc. Not to transfer my money to some shiftless bastard so he/she can have a new flat screen tv. God! You leftists are simply insufferable. (not to mention intellectually bankrupt).
TrueBlue| 7.11.11 @ 3:12PM
Taxes should never be raised until the government can create a budget that is balanced on the funds they already get. It's this little thing your common man has to work with called REALITY. If we can't continue to live off infinite credit (and why should we?), then the government sure as heck shouldn't either. They have an established income based on current tax rates. The budget should NEVER get any higher than that, anything that goes above it should be cut, end of story.
Al Adab| 7.11.11 @ 3:38PM
Any years budget should equal the previous years net. That way there is always a balance and always a surplus.
buckeyeman| 7.11.11 @ 12:53PM
"Everyone but President Obama and the Democratic leadership seems to understand the fiscal crisis facing the nation"
You left out the Republican "leadership".
KennesawJack| 7.11.11 @ 4:10PM
True, that.
diviz| 7.11.11 @ 1:05PM
"You can't save your way out of a recession," Intel Chairman Craig Barrett.
Slash welfare, farm subsidies, development, transportation, etc and focus more on basic science research.
Every war has been won (ie nukes & planes) and recession ended (ie computers & chemistry) because of superior science and technology.
Al Adab| 7.11.11 @ 3:00PM
What works as proven in the past is simple:
1. Cut spending
2. Cut taxes
3. Allow wages to seek their own level
4. Encourage business expansion.
That ended it in 1921. It eneded it in 1983. The opposite, increase taxes and spending failed in 1930, 1933 and now since 2009. "When will they ever learn"?
diviz| 7.12.11 @ 12:08AM
The key to prosperity is worker productivity. Low taxes permit more investment in productive capital which enables higher worker productivity. High technology and advanced science result in superior capital which results in more productive workers.
As long as the technology horizon stays ahead of what's need things are OK. Right now too much is diverted to bread, medicine, and circuses to keep the masses fed and the elite entertained; this will result in collapse when there aren't enough resources to come up with the next solution.
Tired Taxpayer PRM| 7.11.11 @ 1:15PM
Here is what should be the next RNC TV, radio and print ad.
There is a Democrat plan and there is the Ryan plan for Medicare.
Under the Democrat plan today, Grandma has her Medicare. Under the Ryan plan today, Grandma has her Medicare.
Under the Democrat Plan 10 years from now, Grandma has her Medicare but it is difficult if not impossible to find a doctor to accept it. Under the Ryan plan 10 years from now, Grandma has her Medicare.
Under the Democrat plan 15 years from now, Grandma does not have Medicare because it and the country have run out of money. Under the Ryan plan 15 years from now, Grandma has her Medicare.
Under the Democrat plan 20 years from now, Grandma is dead, the country is broke, there are no doctors and no one has Medicare. Under the Ryan plan 20 years from now, Grandma has her Medicare.
There, the moral and political dilemmas are solved. Now, get to work and save the country.
Substitue Medicaid and Social Security for Medicare as necessary.
Third rail my ass.
Tired Taxpayer PRM| 7.11.11 @ 1:17PM
Fiscal crises solved!
Purpleguy| 7.11.11 @ 1:36PM
Tough if you're tired of paying taxes. What fairy told you that you don't have to? You forgot to mention that under Ryan's plan, the deficit continues to grow until 2080!!! You also didn't mention that giving Seniors a voucher or "premium support" to "help" them pay for Medicare is not the same as a government guarantee of assistance. If the voucher isn't enough, Grandma will have no Medicare under Ryan's plan - it's just a Health Savings Account under a different name - when it's gone, it's gone lady - Grandma jump off a cliff if you don't like it. What nice people you have elected...
Al Adab| 7.11.11 @ 3:04PM
We are taxed by consent of the people, not by a tryanical power of government n'est ce pas?
chuck| 7.11.11 @ 3:08PM
It's easy to be "nice" without other people's money.
TrueBlue| 7.11.11 @ 3:19PM
Except for the fact that it's never been stated that his plan is the be-all-end-all. It has only been put forward as a START to get things fixed. Don't see any plan to fix it coming from anyone else that doesn't include taxing us all to death (and none of those even fix spending in the slightest).
cicero| 7.11.11 @ 1:45PM
If the congress fails to raise the debt ceiling, the govt. will not be able to borrow any more money. So far, so good.
If the congress fails to raise the debt ceiling, the govt. may default on some of the bonds it has already sold to the banks (either foreign or domestic). Of course, these bonds were sold so the govt. could get money to bail out those same banks. So far, so good.
If the congress fails to raise the debt ceiling, it may have to shut down parts of the govt. Maybe they can just get id of the 110,000 new federal beaurocrats that have been hired since 2008, and roll back the wage increases given to government workers in the past 3 years. So far, so good.
I really don't see too many downsides to not raising the debt ceiling.
TrueBlue| 7.11.11 @ 3:22PM
You forgot that we'd default on a few of our debts to other countries... but since most of those countries owed us money until an idiot in the White House forgave them their debts (Clinton anyone?) I'm still not seeing the problem.
Even if it made countries not want to invest in us in the future I'm not seeing an issue. People used to invest in us because we actually produced something, now we're a nation of consumers. So we'd have to go back to making our own stuff? Sounds like local jobs to me... Sure it'd suck for awhile, but if the government won't do what it needs to do to fix it, better to let it break and pick up the pieces than keep trying to pass it down the road, making it worse in the long run.
Bill S| 7.11.11 @ 8:54PM
Our foreign creditors will see that we're not serious about debt reduction. They'll know the Fed will just print it's way out. That will cause a sudden loss in confidence in both government bonds and the dollar. When gas is $10 a gallon you'll see why the default was a very serious thing.
axbucxdu| 7.12.11 @ 10:28PM
Bzzzt. Try again. The whole globe is already awash in debt that's likely to go unpaid, if not directly through a series of sovereign defaults, then indirectly through monetary inflation. The fiat currency experiment has run amok everywhere, we are not alone. Thus foreigners will have the opposite impression my friend.
They'll see the first effort by a major western country to abandon impossible prog spending with its synthetic finance and an attempt at fiscal reality. Besides, wishful thinking is not confidence.
Alan Brooks| 7.11.11 @ 2:05PM
You will end up selling everything from the Wshington monument to... you name it. China will own everything-- even White Nationalist websites: funny, Asians effectively owning white nationalism!
Bob Grant| 7.11.11 @ 2:16PM
Your pathetic race-bating, class-warfare rhetoric is as pavlovian as my dog licking his b**ls at the first sensation down there.
Pat| 7.11.11 @ 2:59PM
A funny thing happened while Americans were throwing each other "high fives" and telling ourselves every day just how "exceptional" us Americans truly are, the world changed and in a not so humorous way - and with a "change" definitely not to our advantage. As Europe, during recent decades, spiraled into an economic and cultural death wish, new economic powers emerged, older nations previously mired in one man or "party" rule threw off their shackles and adopted a hybrid form of capitalism and market based economies.
Acknowledging our clear-cut American "exceptionalism", these nations deliberately tailored their products to Americans and the vast American markets for any and all consumer products. In short order, these 3rd World wannabe American industrialists outperformed their acknowledged idol - they dominated many markets Americans had originally created and began to build better and cheaper cars, trucks, televisions, ships, cameras - a depressingly endless list of products and with a seeming uncanny ability to outperform their American competitors at will and with very little effort.
Meanwhile, back in the USA, our sense of entitlement grew to immense proportions - we even felt we were entitled to short, relatively painless recessions with a preordained life span of 18 months, 20 at the most. Now, after 3 years of recession, we're officially in "recovery" mode, although you wouldn't know it from looking at the numbers. But even Conservatives believe we're somehow entitled to some form of redemption - we constantly publish Conservative Manifestos to one and all - hoping Americans will suddenly wake up and return to those values which once made us great. Although, deep down, we know that won't happen. Something is vitally wrong within this country, we can feel it in our bones and the road back will be a long and tedious one, assuming the rest of the world will allow it.
Repeated "calls to arms" by both Conservatives and Liberals alike is creating no perceptible remedy - and the obvious reason is words alone can't erase decades of foolishness on our part. Kids in Singapore, Korea and India have proven to be just as smart as and better educated than American children. American workers, with their "exceptional" work ethic and unique skills, have proven no better than their foreign counterparts in creating prosperity. We have squandered the immense material capital our ancestors willed us, gave away our wealth to any and all in the name of cultural enlightenment, decided we alone were destined to enforce world peace through force of arms and have counted on our "exceptionalism" to perform like a magic charm, always possessing the mystical ability to keep us on top or provide a road back.
Now, today, it seems less likely the road back will be an easy one - or even attainable. We need to count on the fact other countries will likely stumble along their own path to wealth and power - giving us a chance to win back some of our former glory. But we haven't reached rock bottom yet where that tactic would prove even workable, we don't collectively possess the necessary state of mind wherein we give up our "exceptionalism" fantasies to accept a new and harsher reality. To paraphrase the words of American poet Robert Frost: "we have once glorious and former promises to keep and miles to go before we sleep".
PolishKnight| 7.11.11 @ 3:31PM
It's useful to remember that American exceptionalism used to mean factories dumping PCB's in the water and poisoning people and that's the kind of attitude that's behind the "genius" of third world manufacturing economies. Watch Slumdog Millionaire for an idea of how they do business.
The Soviet style Party Member elite status largely means that government jobs are untouchable for oursourcing while private industry jobs, and their non-party voting members, are easy targets for over-regulation, taxation, and outsourcing with the capitalist cronies telling the workers "You aren't working hard enough!" and then quietly hanging out with leftists to get cushy government contracts and favorable regulations to keep upstart companies from competing with them.
Anyone who says that Americans are lazy and inferior workers should be forced to eat Chinese cat food.
gary siebel| 7.11.11 @ 3:12PM
Once again you manage to incontrovertibly demonstrate that the Repubs favor the wealthy, the only group the Dems are targeting for a tax increase. Favoring the wealthy is not a crime, and it does not always translate into political disfavor, but it will in 2012. It will cost the Repubs the election because the economy is still their tar baby. Right now Repubs don't care about the people, they only care about --as McConnell foolishly proclaimed months age -- preventing Obama from getting re-elected.
If those time-honored principles you cite are so wonderful, why didn't you espouse them back when Bush wit was in office? The fact of the matter is that Repubs have not honored those principle for a very long time. Where was the outcry when Reagan busted the budget and ran up a huge deficit? Clinton -era, the deficit was eliminated, but the Repubs hypocritically went after him for sexual activities they were practicing themselves, and then Bush squandered everything, and the Repubs went right along with it.
If the Tea Party crashes the government, the blame for the wreckage will fall squarely upon them. They are misreading the public if they think it will lead to political gain.
PolishKnight| 7.11.11 @ 3:34PM
The left argues that any bad economic results go back to Herbert Hoover. To their credit, though, most of their voters don't even know who Herbert Hoover was. The NYT is a dead newspaper because most young leftists can't read anything longer than a 128 character twit.
Reagan's deficit was tiny compared to Obama's both historically and literally even adjusted for inflation. In addition, Reagan's budget brought more money in via supply side economics. Gotta love 'em.
Al Adab| 7.11.11 @ 3:42PM
Interestingly enough it was Hoover who opposed the Conservatives and began trying to work out of the recession following the 1929 crash by increasing spending and debt. Add to that the Smoot-Hawley tarrif and Roosevelt's "New Deal" and we got the depression. If only Mr. Obama had been schooled in America he might (although I doubt it) understand the nation's history.
PolishKnight| 7.11.11 @ 4:38PM
Agreed. Calvin Coolidge certainly was no fan of his VP and regarded him as a political moderate.
This is the lesson of the voting in one moderate RINO after another hoping things to get better. Rather than worship Reagan, conservatives should be looking to succeed him.
weaverofdreams_2000| 7.11.11 @ 5:49PM
Now let's see...Reagan came to office and cut taxes and then things went deeper into the toilet.
Then he raised taxes and revenues went and the economy got better.
Clinton raised taxes and the economy boomed, revenues went up and the deficit disappeared.
When George Bush II came into office, things were swimmingly good. Federal government revenues were 20% of GDP.
The George II cut taxes and surpluses magically disappeared and revenus declined steeply down to about 16% at the end of George II's reign of terror. Now they are at 15% of GDP.
In short, federal government revenues are down by 25% (in GDP terms).
Leaving aside the spending problem (which clearly does exist), I would say the objective evidence suggests that there is also quite clearly a revenue problem.
Anyone who can't see that clearly is unable to do simple math.
But never let your partisan/ideological/hate blinders stop you from carrying forward over the cliff.
Cheers!
Purpleguy| 7.11.11 @ 6:30PM
You are exactly right - but they don't pay attention to history or facts when they don't fit their ideology. Everytime taxes are raised the economy booms because market forces are not all that is in effect. Aversion to taxes and the multitudinal methods to get around them always increases capital spending and investment which leads to what? Economic growth. They just won't listen.
Bob Grant| 7.11.11 @ 8:51PM
Hogwash!. Give us a time period when marginal taxes were increased resulting in economic booms.
When you tell me the 50's or 90's I will tell you the fundamentals were well in place before the tax increases occurred.
DREd| 7.11.11 @ 9:33PM
The 80s? At any event Bob, you have to at least conseed that it's possible to have an economic boom following an increase in marginal tax rates. Right now we have a surplus of well educated labor and high corporate profits. Taxes, historically speaking are fairly low. Those are conditions conducive to economic growth. What we lack is demand. The private sector isn't failing to create jobs because they lack money, or because they suffer from excessive taxation. They're not hiring because they can squeeze their current employees harder, and because there aren't enough consumers to buy additional products.
DREd| 7.11.11 @ 9:34PM
Argh-concede, obviously.
Bob Grant| 7.11.11 @ 10:36PM
The corporate tax rate relative to other countries is considered extremely high. How about we make our workforce competitive to others around the globe...
...how about we tell the NLRB to back off and allow business to set up shop at locations of their choosing.
...how about the tell the EPA to shove off and allow a true energy policy to take hold, thus stabilizing energy costs.
Most people are more interested in opportunities in the private sector than waiting for Sugar Daddy handing out little cubes.
The never ending cycle of stimulus and QE4, 5, 6, and 7 are killing the currency and dollar.
Low taxes, regulation, strong dollar = Animal Spirits.
BTW, even Keynes and FDR later on admitted Keynesianism was flawed.
DRed| 7.11.11 @ 11:28PM
Oh come on, Bob. No serious economist considers the American corporate tax rate high in relation to any other first world country. Our corporations actually pay about an average amount of taxes. It's skewed so that the largest corporations pay the lowest tax rates-I think that's backwards, because it stifles entrepreneurship, but that's a different issue, and it's certainly not one that you can blame Obama for. At some point, you people have to confront the facts that your economic solutions aren't working. Under W, we needed to lower taxes to create jobs, right? Well that didn't work. Then you said that we needed to keep those tax rates low to create jobs, because we were in a recession. So Obama, who you think is a marxist, did. And what happened? No jobs were created. So now you say we need to lower those taxes even further. You've been wrong twice now-why should I believe you again?
Keynes died in 1946. When did he admit he was wrong?
skip| 7.12.11 @ 10:41AM
"After the Bush investment tax cuts in 2003, tax revenues were $786 billion higher in 2007 ($2.568 trillion) than they were in 2003 ($1.782 trillion), the biggest four-year increase in U.S. history." (Wall Street Journal)
Johnny| 7.12.11 @ 6:46AM
Right on Bob! Finally someone broached the subject that gets left out of these discussions about our economy, over regulation. How many regulations have been put into effect by the appointees of late? How have all of these new regulations affected the start up of new businesses and the continuation of other small businesses? Stop all the government interference and people will invest and hire. Before you go there libtards, no I don't mean let the industries run wild and dump pcbs and such.
Bill S| 7.11.11 @ 8:55PM
The only revenue problem is the fact that the government always increases spending after it raises taxes.
weaverofdreams_2000| 7.11.11 @ 5:39PM
This is always a fascinating place to drop into on a rainy, do nothing, day off.
The reality that those of you in this small world created by TAS inhabit is truly wondrous.
It provides such clear insight into the sociopathy of some 25% of the American people.
Cheers!
Mike D.| 7.11.11 @ 9:56PM
And the collective stupidity of remaining 75% of the barnyard herd you dropped in to visit us from.
Your going on the same ride dreamboy as the rest of us. Just keep telling yourself, its all going to be OK, its all going to be OK, its all going to be OK. Now we'll see ya down the line.
Bill S| 7.11.11 @ 8:51PM
We don't have to worry about what the country will be like in twenty years. The Federal Reserve is monetizing the debt. Food prices have increased 30% in the last year. In time we'll see hyperinflation and a total economic collapse. The country will, in effect, default on all it's debts.
weaverofdreams_2000| 7.11.11 @ 9:20PM
Stock up on ammo and canned beans.
Or just go kill yourself now and get it all over with.
Cheers!
Mike D.| 7.11.11 @ 10:04PM
Now ya see, what we have here. Its one of those there ELITE brilliant, intellectuals who has come down from on high and graced us with his wisdom and enlighting presence. Full of self proclaimed compassion....er.... kill ourselves? I detect a little of that emotionalism there droopy. Now maybe you need to go back and play with the rest of the mental mastubators and the historically retarded you seem to pride yourself on being a part of. Oh, forgot,
Cheers!
POST American| 7.12.11 @ 1:21AM
--Everyone RELAX!
Thanks to the bisphenol A is ALLL the plastics,
the CHEM-trails saturating the skies, the fallout pumping out of Fukishima, the GM foods,
the fetal tissue sourced soft-kill vaccines,
--to say nothing of the Oprah-Rockefeller
implemented culture of exterminating the
unborn ---there very soon won't be ANY
children. SO RELAX!
"No people --NO problem."
-JOSEF STALIN
--------Uncle Joe once again.
weddingdress | 7.12.11 @ 5:14AM
Full of self proclaimed compassion....er.... kill ourselves? I detect a little of that emotionalism there droopy. Now maybe you need to go back and play with the rest of the mental mastubators and the historically retarded you seem to pride yourself on being a part of.
Richard Baker| 7.12.11 @ 1:45PM
I guess the Baby Boomers and the career politicians don't much care as long as they get theirs NOW.
axbucxdu| 7.12.11 @ 9:47PM
If higher income taxes are great, then even higher income tax rates must be greater yet. Confiscating all the income of the citizenry must surely result in Shangri-La. Sociopathy anyone?
Now Zero income taxes would be greatest for me. If your Leviathan is hard up for cash, let it scrounge from the Chinese mercantilists, not us.
It's no coincidence that the U.S. economy did best absent income taxes while the Feds were forced to sponge off foreign industry. A fixed income also served to keep Sammy Swindle in his box. Hell, were we still relying on tariffs, I might even become a prog. These revenues, after all, are truly other people's money.
cesium62| 7.21.11 @ 10:35PM
Lemme see if I understand what you're saying. Bush, his cronies, and the republican leadership pile on massive amounts of debt by increasing defense spending, engaging in two wars, and handing a trillion dollars to wall street. And now we're supposed to listen to the Republican plan on how to fix the problems they created? Yeah, that makes sense.