Soaking the Rich will not solve Spending Problem

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Congratulations...you've hand picked a drop-in-the-bucket item just like the media does (never mind that the item you picked doesn't come out of the FEDERAL budget...but we'll go with it...) and cut $700,000. Now where's the other 14,293,999,300,000 going to come from???

 

TAX the RICH...

 

Waste is waste period, and it needs to be cut everywhere and if it was, there would be no need to overtax anyone, be it rich, middle class or what have you. I don't get what's with you people wanting to pay more in taxes, yet you have folks b*tching and moaning about not having any money, so which is it??? Talk about oxymorons. I don't care what class I'm in, I want the gov't to keep their hands out of my pockets, period! :mad: :tdown: They collect enough taxes as it is. No investments are being made in infrastructure and many other basic necessities with the monies that they have so why do they need more of it to waste for???

[Roadcruiser1]

Then how do you suggest we take care of our national debt of nearly 14 trillion dollars without paying taxes? Look here we can print more money to pay off our debt, but that will lead to skyrocketing inflation. It will be so bad that our money would be practically worthless. Another way is to go back to the gold standard, but then you will make less money then you do now. In the end a nation can't exist if they don't pay taxes. Taxes are needed to create a functioning nation.

[Shortline Bus]

I did not see it 'live' as i was out all day yesterday. Anyone seen CNN Anchor Don Lemon's very tasty interview with Ky. Freshmen Sen. Rand Paul?

It was the most buzzed new clip from over the weekend. Here Lemon and Paul debating the debt crisis just hours before a tenative deal was reached.

 

 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Then how do you suggest we take care of our national debt of nearly 14 trillion dollars without paying taxes? Look here we can print more money to pay off our debt, but that will lead to skyrocketing inflation. It will be so bad that our money would be practically worthless. Another way is to go back to the gold standard, but then you will make less money then you do now. In the end a nation can't exist if they don't pay taxes. Taxes are needed to create a functioning nation.

 

You're not understanding me. I'm saying no more NEW taxes. Of course we need taxes, but why should any class shell out more monies for taxes when the gov't has done nothing but WASTE? That's my issue. If we were to call for more taxes and the gov't was using the funds wisely, okay fine, tax everybody more including me, but they're WASTING money on BS. I see nothing to justify raising taxes on ANYONE until the gov't gets its spending in order.

 

I live within my means and it is time that our gov't does the same, period.

[Roadcruiser1]

There is one thing I might agree with you here, and that is the wars that are going on must be ended.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

There is one thing I might agree with you here, and that is the wars that are going on must be ended.

 

If you want to talk about wasting money, we're spending BILLIONS and BILLIONS on those f*cking wars... There's a place right there to cut some fat. Like I said there is no reason to raise taxes on anyone. Bring the troops home and that would be a huge savings right there.

[SubwayGuy]

Waste is waste period, and it needs to be cut everywhere and if it was, there would be no need to overtax anyone, be it rich, middle class or what have you. I don't get what's with you people wanting to pay more in taxes, yet you have folks b*tching and moaning about not having any money, so which is it??? Talk about oxymorons. I don't care what class I'm in, I want the gov't to keep their hands out of my pockets, period! :mad: :tdown: They collect enough taxes as it is. No investments are being made in infrastructure and many other basic necessities with the monies that they have so why do they need more of it to waste for???

 

Because for the 1239071237981237th time in this thread...

 

we are 14 TRILLION DOLLARS in debt.

 

That's got to come from somewhere and it's not just going to come from cutting $700,000 here and $800,000 there.

 

It's ULTIMATELY going to come out of our pockets in the form of INFLATION due to borrowing or printing more money...or it's going to come out of our pockets in the form of TAXES

 

I would rather have it come out in TAXES because government has the ability to make that avoid hitting most of mainstream America by inflicting them on WEALTHY INDIVIDUALS.

 

It can also be used as a policy to encourage job creation by simultaneously LOWERING corporate taxes, which will broaden the tax base here (reducing deficits) by allowing more people to obtain work since the cost to companies hiring will be less here with lower US tax rates.

 

Those companies would be free to do the free market thing and create jobs. If they chose to hoard and reward their executives with out-of-line pay and NOT provide jobs, then their executives would see that money recaptured by the government anyway.

 

Either way, it's a policy that facilitates faster deficit reduction.

 

You are not going to make a dent in a 14 trillion dollar deficit by cutting tiny line items.

 

You want to make a serious dent in 14 trillion dollars? Cut the government budget by close to 10%. How? Simple: pay off the debt and get rid of debt service costs. OK so you need to raise some startup capital to start paying that down. Great - tax the rich.

 

Aw, they'll have to give up that expensive vacation to the Bahamas. Boo f*cking hoo.

 

NOTHING I've suggested in this thread suggests raising taxes on the working or middle classes.

[SubwayGuy]

If you want to talk about wasting money, we're spending BILLIONS and BILLIONS on those f*cking wars... There's a place right there to cut some fat. Like I said there is no reason to raise taxes on anyone. Bring the troops home and that would be a huge savings right there.

 

Sounds wonderful in dreamland.

 

Where are the jobs for those people when they come back?

 

Where are the jobs for those people who they displace from employment upon returning?

 

I am all in favor of bringing the troops back and getting the hell out of the Middle East, but veterans deserve better than to be brought back into a shit hole economy with no job prospects that pays them peanuts and allows the corporate cocksuckers they risked their lives for to continue hoarding wealth on the backs of them and every other law abiding American.

 

Or are you seriously advocating taking the savings from ending the wars and investing in another so called "stimulus" and/or "bailouts"...? I sure as hell hope not.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Sounds wonderful in dreamland.

 

Where are the jobs for those people when they come back?

 

Where are the jobs for those people who they displace from employment upon returning?

 

I am all in favor of bringing the troops back and getting the hell out of the Middle East, but veterans deserve better than to be brought back into a shit hole economy with no job prospects that pays them peanuts and allows the corporate cocksuckers they risked their lives for to continue hoarding wealth on the backs of them and every other law abiding American.

 

Or are you seriously advocating taking the savings from ending the wars and investing in another so called "stimulus" and/or "bailouts"...? I sure as hell hope not.

 

Seems like you don't think the government is supposed to cut anything. We wouldn't be nearly as far in debt as we are now if it wasn't for these wars and you can't put that all on Bush either... You folks seem to think TAXING is the only way out, but we can tax until the cows come home and if the gov't continues to SPEND it won't make a difference. What part of that don't you understand???

[Urbanfortitude]

Seems like you don't think the government is supposed to cut anything. We wouldn't be nearly as far in debt as we are now if it wasn't for these wars and you can't put that all on Bush either... You folks seem to think TAXING is the only way out, but we can tax until the cows come home and if the gov't continues to SPEND it won't make a difference. What part of that don't you understand???

 

Really? I've read plenty of his posts on the political scale and I'd never draw that conclusion. He recognizes taxing to be a factor towards the problem ultimately being solved and has proposed PLENTY of other things that can be done in the way of cutting and proper spending.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Really? I've read plenty of his posts on the political scale and I'd never draw that conclusion. He recognizes taxing to be a factor towards the problem ultimately being solved and has proposed PLENTY of other things that can be done in the way of cutting and proper spending.

 

Yeah really. He's been yelling incessantly about taxing the rich but the point is you can tax them and anybody else to death and that still won't solve anything unless the gov't caps its spending. Everything that I suggest be cutback on he comments about it not being enough as if we dug ourselves into this hole over night. Give me a break. This reckless spending has been going on for years and you can't just expect to get it all back suddenly by whacking the rich over the head and demanding that they empty out their accounts because of wreckless spending. The American people should expect their gov't to do more and they should be setting the example instead of looking to its people to bail them out.

[SubwayGuy]

Seems like you don't think the government is supposed to cut anything. We wouldn't be nearly as far in debt as we are now if it wasn't for these wars and you can't put that all on Bush either... You folks seem to think TAXING is the only way out, but we can tax until the cows come home and if the gov't continues to SPEND it won't make a difference. What part of that don't you understand???

 

I don't give a f*ck about assigning blame. When people stop viewing this like a god damned soccer match and look at POLICY instead of POLITICS it will make sense to them if they open their eyes and read the words that I'm writing instead of interpreting whatever I say as they see fit.

 

I've said the government needs to cut a lot of things in just about every post here. BUT THAT ALONE IS NOT GOING TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM BECAUSE 14 TRILLION DOLLARS IS AN INSURMOUNTABLE AMOUNT OF MONEY and you cannot simply "cut" your way back to prosperity without getting rid of things that Americans NEED in the process.

 

To eliminate a deficit of that size, you must ALSO, as in "in addition to" "additionally" or "as well", increase revenues and the only way to do that is to broaden the tax base by finding more people employment, which can be done through lowering corporate tax rates, and taxing those who can afford to pay, which can and must be done by raising HIGH INCOME INDIVIDUAL tax rates.

[SubwayGuy]

The current system is failing miserably and those who propose rearranging deck chairs on the titanic (saving $700,000 at a time), or giving the rich tax breaks...FAIL TO RECOGNIZE THIS HISTORY IN FRONT OF THEIR VERY EYES.

 

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/06/20/249061/chart-taxes-economic-growth/

 

Back in the 1950s, when the top marginal tax rate was more than 90 percent, real annual growth averaged more than 4 percent. During the last eight years, when the top marginal rate was just 35 percent, real growth was less than half that. Altogether, in years when the top marginal rate was lower than 39.6 percent — the top rate during the 1990s — annual real growth averaged 2.1 percent. In years when the rate was 39.6 percent or higher, real growth averaged 3.8 percent. The pattern is the same regardless of threshold. Take 50 percent, for example. Growth in years when the tax rate was less than 50 percent averaged 2.7 percent. In years with tax rates at or more than 50 percent, growth was 3.7 percent.

 

...

 

As Linden put it, “these numbers do not mean that higher rates necessarily lead to higher growth. But the central tenet of modern conservative economics is that a lower top marginal tax rate will result in more growth, and these numbers do show conclusively that history has not been kind to that theory.” Indeed, these numbers put the lie to the common Republican refrain that Obama and Democrats in Congress are trying to implement a “job-killing tax hike” by putting the top tax rate back to where it was under President Clinton.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I don't give a f*ck about assigning blame. When people stop viewing this like a god damned soccer match and look at POLICY instead of POLITICS it will make sense to them if they open their eyes and read the words that I'm writing instead of interpreting whatever I say as they see fit.

 

I've said the government needs to cut a lot of things in just about every post here. BUT THAT ALONE IS NOT GOING TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM BECAUSE 14 TRILLION DOLLARS IS AN INSURMOUNTABLE AMOUNT OF MONEY and you cannot simply "cut" your way back to prosperity without getting rid of things that Americans NEED in the process.

 

To eliminate a deficit of that size, you must ALSO, as in "in addition to" "additionally" or "as well", increase revenues and the only way to do that is to broaden the tax base by finding more people employment, which can be done through lowering corporate tax rates, and taxing those who can afford to pay, which can and must be done by raising HIGH INCOME INDIVIDUAL tax rates.

 

Wait, now you're calling for lowering corporate tax rates (which I've called for in previous posts with the caveat that they support creating American jobs and making goods on American shores in order to receive said tax breaks) and yet you're asking for taxes to raised on the rich. Wouldn't corporations fall in the rich category? As far as the 700,000 goes, quit it already. You're harping on one example I gave as if I'm that ignorant that I'm not aware of the massive amount of cutting back our gov't needs to do. Aside from that you talk about raising taxes on the rich as if we're going to get out of this mess over night. The gov't spent years spending like crazy and it will take years to get out of this mess, assuming that the gov't can stop spending.

[Shortline Bus]

Being fair, there so much fraud going on costing the feds billions it's not even funny. Whether it's General Electric getting tens of millions in unpaid taxes to a street hustler in the hood scaming for medicad fraud they both creating to this mess.

 

I don't know the answer but changes to the entire tax/money system by the feds needs to take place asap period.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Being fair, there so much fraud going on costing the feds billions it's not even funny. Whether it's General Electric getting tens of millions in unpaid taxes to a street hustler in the hood scaming for medicad fraud they both creating to this mess.

 

I don't the answer but changes to the entire tax/money system by the feds needs to take place asap period.

 

This is why the TAX THE RICH tirade WON'T work.

[Roadcruiser1]

This is why the TAX THE RICH tirade WON'T work.

 

We have to tax companies like Apple whom refuses to build their products in the US. Just make a tax law that would give lower taxes to companies building their products in the USA. Greatest solution. Another idea is to create a better tax law, and to not give US Citizenship to anyone unless if their parents have immigrated here legally, or as long as they are US Citizens, because there are people that come here to have their kids so they can take advantage of the system.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

We have to tax companies like Apple whom refuses to build their products in the US. Just make a tax law that would give lower taxes to companies building their products in the USA. Greatest solution. Another idea is to create a better tax law, and to not give US Citizenship to anyone unless if their parents have immigrated here legally, or as long as they are US Citizens, because there are people that come here to have their kids so they can take advantage of the system.

 

I seriously will NOT buy any Apple products, as they are all Made in China. I really don't see what the hype is about a company that sells out the American people and overcharges for products that are made of inferior quality.

[MHV9218]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Read a book.

 

I didn't expect you would, so I grabbed an OED and read it for you:

 

 

Communism

A theory which advocates a state of society in which there should be no private ownership, all property being vested in the community and labour organized for the common benefit of all members ; the professed principle being that each should work according to his capacity, and receive according to his wants.

 

Ignorant posts lower the credibility of these forum.

 

Since we're on the topic of definitions, here is one:

 

com·mu·nism noun /ˈkämyəˌnizəm/ 

 

 

A political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.

 

Based on that definition you could certainly argue that it is communism.

 

I expect you mean you're not defending, so continuing with that.

 

To make it clear, I have revised my post.

 

There is nobody in this country who is overtaxed. You could argue that legal immigrants who currently lack citizenship go through a difficult financial process, but there is no overtaxation in this country.

 

The tax rates are incredibly low, especially on the rich.

 

What is your defintion of taxes being low??

 

There is also no money robbed from you. If you think it's being robbed from you, god knows what you'd call a robbery.

 

The point of taxes is to provide services and so forth for the people, not to waste it on nonsense, so from that point of view we are certainly being robbed and robbed big time.

 

When you call paying a small amount of money that helps improve the collective good with services and provide a safety net for those in hard times, when you call that robbery, you are a selfish fool. And when you suggest that the wealthiest individuals in our country shouldn't be asked to bear as much of a burden as the less wealthy, then you are deranged.

 

No, I'm not a selfish fool, nor am I deranged. I'm just hip on a government that spends well beyond its means, which you seem to want to overlook REPEATEDLY.

 

I like how you just proved you are indeed that ignorant, as you skewed SG's correct point that you need a thing called revenue to being a call to cut even more.

 

Listen up a bit and stop hearing what you want to hear. Some of us make a bit of sense.

 

Oh whatever... You liberals and Democrats think you have it all figured out. LOL Believe it or not there is a whole big world out there that doesn't necessarily see things the way you folks do. I'm just glad I'm an Independent. :cool:

 

You wanted a Democrat in the White House and now you got one and things are still f*cked up, but of course the excuse will be to blame Bush and the Republicans as if the Democrats walk on water.

 

We had a huge stimulus that overall didn't work out. Why?? Because it's Bush's fault!! It's raining outside. Why? The Republicans did it. LOL It's all their fault.

[SubwayGuy]

Wait, now you're calling for lowering corporate tax rates (which I've called for in previous posts with the caveat that they support creating American jobs and making goods on American shores in order to receive said tax breaks) and yet you're asking for taxes to raised on the rich. Wouldn't corporations fall in the rich category?

 

Are you illiterate or just obstinate? Read this again. Carefully. Twice if you have to.

 

To eliminate a deficit of that size, you must ALSO, as in "in addition to" "additionally" or "as well", increase revenues and the only way to do that is to broaden the tax base by finding more people employment, which can be done through lowering corporate tax rates, and taxing those who can afford to pay, which can and must be done by raising HIGH INCOME INDIVIDUAL tax rates.

 

Make sure you read that last sentence carefully...

 

As far as the 700,000 goes, quit it already. You're harping on one example I gave as if I'm that ignorant that I'm not aware of the massive amount of cutting back our gov't needs to do. Aside from that you talk about raising taxes on the rich as if we're going to get out of this mess over night. The gov't spent years spending like crazy and it will take years to get out of this mess, assuming that the gov't can stop spending.

 

OK, well I'm looking for specifics. You've cited $700,000 in cuts, which isn't even a federal item. So now you're grandstanding and speaking in sweeping generalizations and platitudes, just like the a**holes on TV. Great, now get your hands dirty and let's see some of those things to cut. Specific line items. Who are YOU suggesting bears the brunt of the deficit? Which groups are you prepared to hurt with the specific programs you are going to de-fund or eliminate altogether???

 

Here is why taxes need to be raised on rich individuals. Let me put the budget deficit another way to you:

 

Let's pretend that the government does not spend ONE CENT from now on. Every federal employee is laid off, social security and welfare are abolished, the states get no aid, the postal service shuts down, government watchdog agencies like the FDA do nothing whatsoever, and the interstate system is allowed to fall into disrepair on its own. All wars and war efforts end, and the US disbands all of its armed forces, and ends every single expenditure, right on down to ending the judicial system as we know it. Even the national parks close, and every federal government employee is laid off.

 

And, as you requested, the tax rates will stay the same. Despite the massive spike in unemployment this would cause, we'll assume that the employment rate will stay constant, for the sake of argument...even though it won't. To make this scenario work, a handful of people will work for FREE as tax collectors, and collect all of these taxes from around the country, even though in reality there is no IRS or tax enforcement since you've de-funded that too. We'll also assume people are as honest as they're going to be, and they'll continue reporting income with the same degree of truth they do now, even though there'd be limited enforcement of tax compliance.

 

Well...when you account for debt service costs, which would not go away just because the government shut down, it would still take more than 7 years of this anarchy to eliminate the deficit with the government's current revenue base of approx 2 trillion per year.

 

So no, cutting expenses is not sufficient, when it would take more than 7 years of ZERO expenditures (which would, i might add, DESTROY this nation) just to get back to even.

[SubwayGuy]

ah yes the classic argument for labeling something communist - the "class warfare" argument.

 

yet somehow it's not class warfare when the top 1% has given themselves exponential raises over the past 30 years, outsourced many of the 99%'s jobs, caused a financial crisis, and now that the chickens have come home to roost, they want the other 99% to "sacrifice" so they can keep what they have.

 

but it somehow IS class warfare when the 99% stands up and demands accountability from the 1%, and demands that THEY reap what they sow...instead of the 99% suffering EVEN MORE so that the 1% can jerk off in their yachts.

 

Double standards are the f*cking bane of society.

[SubwayGuy]

We have to tax companies like Apple whom refuses to build their products in the US. Just make a tax law that would give lower taxes to companies building their products in the USA. Greatest solution. Another idea is to create a better tax law, and to not give US Citizenship to anyone unless if their parents have immigrated here legally, or as long as they are US Citizens, because there are people that come here to have their kids so they can take advantage of the system.

 

The problem is the 14th amendment. It's a terrible amendment when you think about it. Originally it served a noble purpose by intending to give the descendants of slaves US citizenship.

 

However, it's been twisted to become the "anchor baby" law.

 

IMO, US citizenship should only be granted to a child of a US citizen (whether born here or abroad), OR to the child of a foreign national born in the US while said foreign national was here on a LEGAL and CURRENT VISA.

[engineerboy6561]

Since we're on the topic of definitions, here is one:

 

com·mu·nism noun /ˈkämyəˌnizəm/ 

 

 

A political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.

 

Based on that definition you could certainly argue that it is communism.

 

 

 

To make it clear, I have revised my post.

 

 

 

What is your defintion of taxes being low??

 

 

 

The point of taxes is to provide services and so forth for the people, not to waste it on nonsense, so from that point of view we are certainly being robbed and robbed big time.

 

 

 

No, I'm not a selfish fool, nor am I deranged. I'm just hip on a government that spends well beyond its means, which you seem to want to overlook REPEATEDLY.

 

 

 

Oh whatever... You liberals and Democrats think you have it all figured out. LOL Believe it or not there is a whole big world out there that doesn't necessarily see things the way you folks do. I'm just glad I'm an Independent. :cool:

 

You wanted a Democrat in the White House and now you got one and things are still f*cked up, but of course the excuse will be to blame Bush and the Republicans as if the Democrats walk on water.

 

We had a huge stimulus that overall didn't work out. Why?? Because it's Bush's fault!! It's raining outside. Why? The Republicans did it. LOL It's all their fault.

 

I already posted this in another thread, so sorry for the double post, but I figure it needs to be said here as well:

 

At this point the tax codes do need reforming, but "reforming the tax code" and "cutting taxes" are not the same thing. What we have right now is essentially a maze of Swiss cheese comprised of differing federal, state and local taxes. I choose that analogy because the ordinary guy who plays by the rules and pays his taxes when they come due no matter how onerous gets lost in the maze and finds his bank account half empty by the time it's over with because of burgeoning property taxes, obscure little rules, etc. while the millionaire or large corporation hires a lawyer (or posse thereof), finds every single hole in the tax code, and proceeds to drive an Abrams M-1 through it. This cannot continue.

 

If you want to reform the tax code, consider adding three additional brackets, starting at $250,000 annual income, $500,000 annual income, and $1,000,000 annual income, taxed at 45%, 55%, and 65% respectively. Considering that there are around 13 million individuals making $100,000 or higher and a fair number of them would fall into at least one of the new brackets, that alone could easily bring in a couple billion or more. Also, close as many loopholes as possible that corporations and the wealthy can use to shelter or avoid reporting income (including taxing stock options, capital gains, and other nonmonetary forms of compensation as income) and restore the estate tax. Finally, instead of giving tax breaks to corporations who manufacture in America, start subjecting offshore goods to tariffs and set up a second corporate tax code with much higher rates and fewer opportunities for deductions for any company headquartered in America that manufactures goods elsewhere.

 

Also, while we're on the topic of tax reform, how about this: cut the FICA rates to 5% and 1.2% (roughly 20 percent) but have it apply to all personal income over and above the first $25,000 instead of only the first $106,800 earned, and then allow 25-30% of the available surplus to be applied toward debt reduction each year. That should guarantee a continued surplus for Medicare and Social Security, but because the government is only allowed to apply a percentage of each year's surplus to anything else and then only to reducing the national debt we can count on Social Security and Medicare being fully self-supporting.

 

Finally, if you want to really reduce spending to government programs such as welfare, Food Stamps/TANF, WIC, etc. you need to restructure how those programs are administered rather than simply cut funding. During and after the Reagan administration, federal programs such as these were removed from the hands of the federal government and given to states and localities, with the Feds providing the funding. I'm not going to argue about whether or not it worked then because it's beside the point, but the fact is that it's hardly working out now, largely because a lot of state governments are incredibly corrupt and either disconnected from their constituents or connected in all the wrong ways (a la Boss Tweed). This means that everything costs way more than it should and takes way longer than it should. Cutting funding to the states will only cause higher state and local taxes (including the hated property taxes), and cutting funding while capping taxes will lead to California because the state politicians' piece of the pie comes before services to the residents of that state.

 

If you allow the Feds to actually administer the programs themselves you'll probably cut costs by a very sizable amount without having to cut services at all, first because you'll have dropped an entire layer of beaurocracy in one fell swoop, and second because you won't have men like Efrain Gonzales and Vic Kohring lining up in front of Congress demanding blank-check grants anymore.

 

I also agree with you that we do need to cut down on government waste, and your $700K fish tank is the perfect example of that sort of waste. That said, "entitlement programs" such as the ones listed above are not inherently wasteful, and lumping them into the same category as the above boondoggle is an insult to all of our intelligence. Keeping as many people as we can off the park benches at night and out of the soup kitchens during the day is at its core the right thing to do and you can hardly argue that it's unnecessary. Changing the way in which it is administered to make it more efficient and slashing the intermediate bureaucracy is completely acceptable. Gutting the program and slashing funding while accusing dissenters of class warfare is not and I think it's about damn time we made that distinction.

 

Finally, if you really want to cut spending the Defense Department and Homeland Security should no longer be immune to budget overviews and restrictions, especially given the fact that a number of their development projects (including the Lockheed Martin F-35 project in particular) have a nasty habit of coming in way late and way over budget. Also, the TSA should be divested from DHS and disbanded; the responisbility to protect our nation's airports should be traded off to state troopers where possible; given the number of odd and quite frankly baseless grants given to random locales in the name of terrorism prevention after 9/11 it might be a good idea to demand that that money be put to use in a way we can all see and measure.

 

Now, as to your generalized argument that the GOP knows what's best for the country and that the Democrats are petty spin doctors with no real conception of fiscal responsibility, listen to this: In 1932, when the country was on the brink of falling to pieces, FDR managed to bring it partially around. How did he do it? Creation of a social safety net to put the floor back under the American people, drawing up industry-wide codes of fair play and putting the force of law behind it, and increasing taxes on the wealthy. Guess what? It worked. The only reason this country took a dip in 1937 was because conservatives then demanded the same thing the Tea Party "patriots" are demanding now: deficit and debt reduction at all costs. To those who claim that this is Obama's mess because he didn't get anything done, what would you have him do? Unless Congress listens to him (which they won't because the regular GOP thinks he's too far to the left to listen to and the Tea Party people think he's the reincarnation of Joseph Stalin) he can't do anything.

[MHV9218]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters