I, too, got my degrees in the hard sciences. But I also got to spend some time working with lawyers on patents and, trust me, law is hardly the "simplest liberal arts degree".
It's a simple liberal arts degree. One proof of that is most law students take political science or history as their undergraduate program. Good grades are everything in getting into a law school. Knowing actual 'stuff' isn't required.
Law, for the most part, is paperwork and filling it out correctly. A well-trained secretary or clerk can do that.
I'm OK with higher taxes. I am one of those people who believes in paying for a good value. Being able to live in the richest country on earth is a real value for me so I'm willing to pay for it. I understand a lot of Republicans think there's a free lunch. There isn't.
You're a rarity then. The vast majority of people would not want their taxes raised. I also don't think I'm getting a good value for the money spent in many cases. Sure, there are things the government does that need doing, but a lot of what government does is useless and stupid. I don't think there's a "free lunch." Instead, I think government, like any other entity should justify what it does by showing it is doing it without incurring undue loss.
As an example of that, light rail systems, in particular, and mass transit, are usually run with horrible inefficiency by government. Taxpayers shouldn't tolerate that, but government usually bulldozes objections. Here in Phoenix, it's been proven that it'd be cheaper to give each daily rider of the light rail system a new Prius than run the light rail system.
I also object to higher government using bribery--tax money--to fund something they want in part done, or not done, by more local portions of government. That usually goes badly.
Form your mouth to God's ears. Regulations are fine. Sure they need to be rational, but most of the regulations you guys want eliminated were put in place because people EXACTLY LIKE YOU marched and fought for them decades ago when you were still shitting your diapers.
No, most regulations were put in place because of a litigious society--we have far too many lawyers around--or because government wants to act paternally, and finally because bureaucrats have to justify their existence.
On that last, let me provide this analogous example: The March of Dimes, a non-profit dedicated to eradicating polio, grew into a large corporate bureaucracy. Well, about twenty years ago or so, polio was eradicated leaving the March of Dimes no further purpose. Did they just fire everyone and have a celebratory party, going out of business? Hell no! They cast around and found new things to be dedicated to eradicating! It's all explained in
Parkinson's Law. Bureaucrats will never find a place to rest and stop expanding the bureaucracy.
Usually the deficit INCREASES under Republicans.
The deficit increased under virtually every administration since the 1940's.
How do you figure? The Dem proposals all include the rich having to pay MORE. YOUR guy is the one trying to help the wealthy with this republican delusion of "Trickle down".
The Democrat proposals are idiocy. France and the UK have both recently tried EXACTLY that. The rich moved. They left. They went somewhere they didn't have to pay what they saw as unfair taxes. Both nations suffered a net LOSS in tax revenues. The wealthy have choices, and if you think you can ass rape them out of their wealth at anything short of gunpoint, you are fool.
Advisers report that wealthy clients are considering moving to more tax-friendly countries
www.ft.com
Look at New York and California. They're already doing exactly what you propose. The rich are leaving. They won't pay.
In a reversal from past decades, more college graduates and professionals are moving out of California than coming into it to escape the higher taxes and cost of living.
www.latimes.com
The rich didn't get to be rich by being stupid. They won't put up with what they see as "unfair" tax rates. The Cackler's plan is a fool's errand.
So the fact that Trump openly (and in earshot of MANY witnesses) expressed admiration of Hitler we are not allowed to invoke Hitler in the discussion?
Until you read articles by others, like John Kelly's staff, that say it never happened. I'm not buying it after the letter by the "Top intelligence officials" saying Hunter's laptop was disinformation. Kelly is a lying sack of shit in my opinion. He said it two weeks before the election because his candidate is floundering like a fish out of water.
Do you guys think Hitler was a good guy? It's so hard to tell from your rhetoric. It kinda feels like the answer is "yes" for you.
Hitler was evil. That doesn't mean everything the guy did was evil. It isn't a binary thing, even if you want it to be.
Except in the Great Depression.
Oh yeah and in ending the excesses of the Gilded Age in the early 20th Century.
And the greatly reduced deficit under Clinton which Bush then exploded again
Actually, FDR's lurch to the Left with the New Deal prolonged the Great Depression, and even made it worse.
Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt. After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian...
www.historynewsnetwork.org
Franklin Roosevelt "did bring us out of the Depression," Newt Gingrich told a group of Republicans after the recent election, and that makes FDR "the greatest
mises.org
What HASN'T happened is:
1. Leftists gonna take my precious guuuuuuunz
Not for want of trying...
2. Leftists gonna make my baby gaaaaaay
WTF?
3. Leftists gonna cut my boy's penis off after 4th Period Geography class
WTF?
4. Leftists gonna set up a Marxist utopia!
Yes, they are going to try and do that, at least some of them.
