Do You Think The Rich Should Be Taxed More?

Hello Mott,

Mott the Hoople said:
Not neccessarily. There are a lot of reforms to both Medicare/Medicaid and Defense spending which are the two biggest drivers of our debt. Eventually the political will we have to be found to curb the cost of those two programs. Social Security isn't a driver of our national debt as it's self funded and though projected to begin paying out more than it takes in in the not to distant future, is a relatively easy fix.
Click to expand...

What would help greatly would be the imposition of true universal health care.

Agreed on the easy SS fix. End the cap on maximum contributions.
 
Book Reviews and Endorsements
"The four most dangerous words in finance are 'this time is different.' Thanks to this masterpiece by Carmen Reinhart at the University of Maryland and Kenneth Rogoff of Harvard, no one can doubt this again. . . . The authors have put an immense amount of work into collecting the data financial institutions needed if they were to have any chance of making quantitative risk management work."
- Martin Wolf Financial Times, September 28, 2009
"This is quite simply the best empirical investigation of financial crises ever published. Covering hundreds of years and bringing together a dizzying array of data, Reinhart and Rogoff have made a truly heroic contribution to financial history. This single marvelous volume is worth a thousand mathematical models."
- Niall Ferguson, author of The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of the World
"This Time is Different is terrific, for it gives just the perspective we need on the current world economic crisis. People can't expect to understand the current crisis without some in-depth look at past crises. That is exactly what this excellent and timely book provides."
- Robert J. Shiller, author of Irrational Exuberance and coauthor of Animal Spirits
"The research that went into this book has established Reinhart and Rogoff as leading authorities on crises, routinely cited by policymakers, academics and journalists (including me). Everyone working on economic policy should own "This Time is Different" and open it for a bracing blast of sobriety when things seem to be going well."
- Greg Ip, Washington Post, October 25, 2009
"This Time Is Different is a splendid book. One has to go back a long time to find another book that develops new data and that illuminates old problems in new ways. Burns and Mitchell\'s work at the National Bureau comes to mind."
- Allan H. Meltzer, author of the two-volume History of the Federal Reserve, AEI Book Forum, October 29, 2009
"The list reminds one of Cole Porter. Moroccans do it and Greeks do it, Thais do it and Koreans do it. Some Argentines without means do it. Even Finns, Brits, Yanks and Swedes do it.--No, I'm not talking about falling in love.
As "This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly," a valuable new book by Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff, makes clear, what these and dozens of other nations do is produce financial crises that devastate their own economies. Moreover, they explain, we are somewhere in the middle of a big such crisis right now, and it is far from clear how it will play out before it is all over."
- Idaho Statesman, Edward Lotterman, November 2, 2009
 
Hello good people,

I've got to go get some things done.

Thanks to all for the spirited conversation.

Please continue on. I will check back later.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello evince,



It has often been said that Debt/GDP should be under 90%.

I think it is better to get it lower, but it is not realistic to try to pay off the debt. Trump said he could pay it off but now I think he's learning that is not happening.
Click to expand...

did you come to that number on your own?
 
PoliTalker said:
I don't think it is an either / or kind of a thing.

Why can't we take steps such as overturn Citizens United, and implement new rules regulating the big money influence over government?

Crony capitalism is our big problem.

We should try to deal with it.
Click to expand...

overturning citizens united.....you have two ways of doing that. 1) Amend the Constitution, because the case was decided based upon a constitutional right to free speech, free expression, and political involvement.....or 2) stack the court with judges who don't like constitutional rights. Now, i'm all about constitutional rights, so stacking the courts is not a good idea IMO, however, if you want judges that will strike down rights of corporations to participate in political speech, then you must include public sector unions or make laws that prohibit public sector unions.
 
evince said:
its a government run by the people you evil racist
Click to expand...

you're still a fucking moron. you bitch about money in politics and how politicians are bought and paid for by corporations, yet still fucking stupidly believe that it's a government by the people? pull that bowling ball you call a head OUT OF YOUR ASS!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Hello Sirthinksalot,

Sirthinksalot said:
True, but the government spends an awful lot of money on things that have nothing to do with governing.
Click to expand...

Well, that's the difference between having a mediocre (minimal government that does as absolutely as little as possible) country, and having a great one.

Some say income tax should be flat. Same rate for all incomes. Those same people complain that the rich pay over half the taxes, but are far fewer than half the population. That's true, but if we cut their taxes back to the same thing everybody else can afford? That is going to cut the government revenue in half. That means half of what the government does would have to end. This would result in a massive lay-off of government workers, and leave a lot of outside workers out of work also, because their work comes through government contracts. Many services would be cut, negatively impacting millions. Things that helped make the difference in people's lives would no longer make that difference. Many would become homeless, others would have no heat. Landlords would be hurt because everybody who got government rent controls would have to vacate. Our economy would be severely negatively impacted. A recession would be swift and deep. It could even become a depression because the changes would cascade through the economy. People who used to be able to buy things would no longer be able to. Businesses would close. Mortgages would be lost. A wave of foreclosures would sweep the nation.

The government would be as small as possible, a conservative dream.

The economy would be a shambles.

And the nation would definitely not be great. It would be a place of widespread suffering and despair. Starvation, looting, disease would reign. Not great. Pitiful. Life expectancy would plummet.

Doing what hard line conservatives want would make America pitiful again.
 
Hello SmarterthanYou,

SmarterthanYou said:
overturning citizens united.....you have two ways of doing that. 1) Amend the Constitution, because the case was decided based upon a constitutional right to free speech, free expression, and political involvement.....or 2) stack the court with judges who don't like constitutional rights. Now, i'm all about constitutional rights, so stacking the courts is not a good idea IMO, however, if you want judges that will strike down rights of corporations to participate in political speech, then you must include public sector unions or make laws that prohibit public sector unions.
Click to expand...

We need the amendment. I agree Unions should be subject to the same rules.

SmarterthanYou said:
just like china......what are they again?
Click to expand...

No, not exactly like that.

China has become a mixture of communism and capitalism.

The USA is a mixture of socialism and capitalism.

We've actually been socialist for a long time.

We just need to be constantly adjusting the balance between the two to get it right.

And here's the metric:

As capitalism causes wealth inequality to become more extreme, we must increase the amount of socialism. No two ways about it.
 
PoliTalker said:
We need the amendment. I agree Unions should be subject to the same rules.
Click to expand...

put together a proposed constitutional amendment because you can be assured that you will have to fight billions of dollars worth of lobbying by thousands of corporations and at least 500 congress critters, along with most state legislations, to put together an amendment that will clearly state what is to be done and that leaves zero room for reinterpretation by pissed off jurists on the bench who will seek to undermine it every step of the way......then the lawsuits to stop it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top