Night Strike wrote:GreecePwns wrote:Because
willingly shutting down the government, which would sent government employees home without pay, stop Social Security and Medicare payments, excuse the powers that be from once again dealing with the problems facing the average American person - not that they would anyway, all they care about is whichever corporation or think tank their campaign funding comes from - is unamerican unless you seriously believe that's how the government should be run.
When their only solution to "dealing with the problems facing the average American person" involves growing the government to give handouts, then no, that's not actually dealing with anything. Decreasing the size of the government will take care of people's problems, not growing it.
A lot of things have to happen before this government even begins to resemble one of the people. The first is proportional representation, which is already a pipe dream but something I'm sure you would agree too. Another thing I would add as an electoral reform measure is preferential voting where you mark first choice, second choice, etc (I'm not sure what the technical name is for it). One would assume this would lead to less attacking in campaigns and more presentation of ideas. Going further, I would say full public financing of campaigns takes money out of the question in elections and makes politicians more accountable for what they say since their opinions are not tied down by the donations of others.
We'll start with taxation. A more progressive tax system would lower taxes for the poor and middle class, which would be good for the economy since these people spend a much higher percentage of their money than they do save it. Raising taxes on the rich, who tend to have money just sitting there accumulating and not contributing to the economy, would help the government balance the budget. History has shown us that cutting taxes and spending creates large income disparities and shrinks the middle class. These two effect are near perfect indicators of an oncoming recession or depression.
Even though Social Security as it stands is stable for at least the next 25 years, it can do better. Currently, a cap on Social Security taxes is essentially saying the poor should help aid the poor. Extending Social Security taxes to all Americans would not only increase the profits Social Security is making - which could then be passed on to the taxpayers, something you would support - it would free up the $2.5 trillion dollar trust fund we have in the program, which could serve the same purpose. Heck, with that sweet deal we could even afford to lower the retirement age.
People can come on here and talk about government takeovers or what have you, but the fact is that Medicare is more efficient than private insurance. I really strongly suggest, if you really want to hear the jist of this argument, you should see the arugment made by my congressional hero Anthony Weiner on the subject which left (admittedly a punching bag) Fox and Friends
contradicting themselves,
Joe Scarborough "speechless", Keith Varney
absolutely FOOLISH (and once again yelling socialist, a point he was proven wrong on as well), Neil Cavuto
asking why he didn't run for New York City Mayor, among other examples.
You cannot beat Anthony Weiner. He has too much intellect and dignity, and even gets Republicans to like him for this alone.
Medicare requires a 1 to 4 percent overhead, while private companies often take 30 percent of overhead and profits. Just by this fact alone, one can state with certainty that public insurance lowers costs to the consumer since the company isn't in it for the profit. Extending Medicare to all Americans may take away your "choice" of to have insurance or not or to have private insurance or not. But when your choice is a clear drain on the nation's economy as a whole, whether it is through going to taxpayer funded emergency rooms for care or having a company pocket the profits which would alternatively be passed entirely on to taxpayers, you shouldn't really have that choice. I could extend this argument to the government-approved local energy monopolies and oil companies and banks too (and a communist would extend it to anything really), but let's stay on topic.
And simply put, end the warfare. Shut down our international military bases. This is something you and I can agree is wasteful I would hope.
Another simply put argument, legalize marijuana. Increasing the tax base can lower taxes from other areas, like the middle class.
The point is this: you can't cut your way out of this problem. These measures alone would produce government profits (which would tackle the growing deficits in this nation), use excess revenues to lower taxes or the national debt, and get our nation focusing on the myriad of social issues in our nation. If that's not what you want in the first place, then I don't know what to tell you.
Never once put it on the line. Never risked sit. A life spent sitting comfortably on his biscuit. This guy's inspiring?
