Anti-Tax Tea Parties Held Across U.S. - Page 11 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-20-2009, 03:06 PM   #151
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 02:19 AM
You're right, I took it a step too far and I apologize.

__________________

__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2009, 03:14 PM   #152
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,420
Local Time: 03:19 AM
can't we just get back to sophomoric teabagging jokes?
__________________

__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2009, 03:18 PM   #153
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,492
Local Time: 03:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
can't we just get back to sophomoric teabagging jokes?


eh? i can't hear you when your mouth is full.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2009, 01:11 PM   #154
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 01:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
This isn't a plan, this is a suggetion. Government can't do anything to control or regulate this.
I know. I'm refering to the public on this forum reading these posts. The government can't do anything without being elected by voters. Since the public elects the government they need to walk the walk before any politicians can have any sense that there are enough numbers willing to elect plaforms that fit with this kind of culture of self-discipline. If the public doesn't have it then where is the motivation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
You are just downright laughable at times...
I used to worry about what people think of me but I realized that in order to put up an opinion you have to be able to withstand ridicule. I'm sure no matter what opinion I put up someone somewhere will find issue with it.

Aesop's Fables, by Aesop; The Man, the Boy, and the Donkey Page 1

You need to learn this lesson.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
So your plan is to eliminate all other parties. I think there is a word for that...
A ha! Putting words in my mouth. Nice try! Is there a problem with having electoral preferences? Democrats want to defeat Republicans and vice versa. I think my post is very clear that I love democracy. If Democrats want to do the proper fiscal management (as opposed to what they are doing now) I would be for them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Ok, but how? You aren't answering this. The question is what plan would those tea partiers want in place of what is going on now? Your answer is "fix it", this is worse than the Republican budget that had no numbers.
I've talked about this many times. Spending must come under control and that means standing up to special interests to make those cuts. In order to preserve the programs we want it's important to rein them in to avoid currency sell offs and in extreme instances, bankruptcy. Instead of spending more on mediaid/medicare how about allowing insurance competition between states? That could save people health costs without increasing taxes. Do I personally have to come up with numbers? There are plenty of people in the Republican party that can do that if they get enough balls. If the public is changing their tune and support this action then the politicians will get more courageous. If the public asks for low taxes and more spending there will be no political strengh to rest on that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Give me a real life example of how you stand up and to who that would fix the situation right now...
My list is in order. Without the first two steps you can't fund a military properly. Certainly continuing to ban bad Chinese products is one step to continue. Also creating as many improved trade relations with as many democracies will create competition for China so we rely less on their products. I don't perceive this as an instantanous solution but we can slowly do this over time. Embargo pressure can happen once we are less dependent on them. Until then they can constantly pressure us with their trade surplus leverage. Canadian conservatives were harder on China in the past and just some small threats from them made Stockwell Day pant like a dog and lick the face of the bureaucrats there. Everything is about leverage when dealing with dictators.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Same as above...
Free trade agreements. They do exist. Just negotiate more and more with democracies as often as you can. The reason why China is so open to us is precisely because of the leverage they can attain. It's no different in business that when a business relies too much on one supplier the supplier can raise prices beyond competitiveness because of that leverage. China also likes to force their currency downward so their products are always cheaper and then they buy U.S. treasuries. Without steps 1 and 2 we are going to go in the same direction as before with no leverage. We also need to have competitive corporate tax rates so production doesn't just fly to China and India all the time. The U.S. can't just rely on service jobs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
None is this has anything to do with the situation at hand and what the tea parties were apparently about...
I feel it's all connected. If you can't have a robust productive economy then your defence goes and then your freedom goes. If you look at all past civilizations they had some advances over prior ones but there always was this problem of decadence that comes with success where institutions are taken for granted and the public supports less and less lifestyles that are conducive to preserving their freedom and then it becomes a "surprise" when they fall.

Now we live with nuclear weapons and the pentagon has fears that China is trying to nulify the Mutually Assured Destruction scenario by researching ways they could attack quick enough so the U.S. has destroyed capabilities before they can retaliate. When you couple that with Nationalist Socialist ideas of this century being the "Chinese century" it's cause for concern and with rampant social spending in the West its hard to see the military really being able to stay on top of things. The irony is that even Obama mentioned this in regards to Bush's overspending and how that affects the financial feasibility of reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan. With no control on social spending (health care/education) it provides plenty of distraction so people fear less any U.S. retaliation to stop them. It happened during the Carter era (Soviet Union/Central America/Afghanistan) and I don't see why challenges won't happen now. Eg. Iran/China/Russia.

It starts with individuals saving money and getting more financially secure to handle economic changes. Then next electing people that preserve that economic freedom and also try to expand it with trade negotiations with democratically elected countries. (Not with fake democracies like Russia and Venezuela). Once we have more economic freedom and less economic leverage against us we are then in a position to embargo those countries that partake in human rights abuses. If Obama wants to take these ideas for real (yeah right!) then he can by all means do so. To me only the conservatives in the Republican party will have realistic political chances to enact any of these policies.

It starts with step 1. If people don't pay their mortgages ASAP and prefer consumerism instead they will be in situations where they will demand more government spending on themselves and vote accordingly. Democracies always get the government they deserve. Bush talked about "compassionate conservatism". Why? Because he only won the election against Al Gore because of the electoral college and felt he had no real mandate to be hardcore conservative on economics so he split the difference between tax cuts and increased social spending. I would prefer him to be more brave and simply do what he thought was right but politicians like to hedge their bets. Politicians reflect public demand. Face it. The ignorance of the public in regards to how an economy works and politics is astounding. This ignorance will be reflected in our institutions. I wish more people would get some curiosity like I have. I learned more on my own studying than relying on agenda driven university courses.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2009, 01:21 PM   #155
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 01:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
i know, i know .... you'll get into the whole "but they weren't *real* conservative Republicans," but we know that's garbage in the same way that free market capitalists sound exactly the same as utopian communists who both say, "well, our system would be perfect if it was properly implemented."
That would be SOME libertarians that look to perfect systems. I don't go that far but I do feel that the public sometimes forgets that the market is where most of the production is and if we want programs we will have to be able to pay for them. It's not utopia but what works better. If I get cancer I can't be so selfish as to assume the entire GDP of the country should automatically stop what they are doing and try to cure me because I'm so important. I agree no system is all perfect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
bottom line: conservative Republicans in this country have proved themselves to be incompetent. they were booted out of office in 2006 and 2008, and the Republican Party is now the party of white southern christian males. that's not a base upon which to build any sort of future.
The only problem with this is that I agree that Republicans (and Democrats; are we forgetting already?) were incompetent but electing Democrats everywhere to continue that incompetence is viewed by me and other conservatives as "two wrongs equal a right". The Democrat base is just basically special interest groups that want to compete for command of taxpayer dollars. As long as the public thinks that organizing into 1,000 special interest groups to compete on how they can pass the buck onto someone else we will consume faster than we produce which leads to the current problems we have.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2009, 01:33 PM   #156
Refugee
 
Cactus Annie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: The Mighty Jagrafess of the Holy Hadrojassic Maxaroedenfoe
Posts: 2,146
Local Time: 08:19 AM
Everyone has to pay tax, unless you think the police and those who keep your streets clean should do their jobs for nothing. Still, any excuse for a get-together
__________________
Cactus Annie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2009, 01:53 PM   #157
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,492
Local Time: 03:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
That would be SOME libertarians that look to perfect systems. I don't go that far but I do feel that the public sometimes forgets that the market is where most of the production is and if we want programs we will have to be able to pay for them. It's not utopia but what works better. If I get cancer I can't be so selfish as to assume the entire GDP of the country should automatically stop what they are doing and try to cure me because I'm so important. I agree no system is all perfect.

when it comes to actual goods and services, the market is a better judge of quality than the governments are. but it's absolutely utopian to think that the market is better at everything. look at what's just happened. when Ponzi products are traded back and forth -- subprime mortgages just to begin with -- only the government can step in and regulate before the market goes on to ruin lives and the entire economy.



Quote:
The only problem with this is that I agree that Republicans (and Democrats; are we forgetting already?) were incompetent but electing Democrats everywhere to continue that incompetence is viewed by me and other conservatives as "two wrongs equal a right". The Democrat base is just basically special interest groups that want to compete for command of taxpayer dollars. As long as the public thinks that organizing into 1,000 special interest groups to compete on how they can pass the buck onto someone else we will consume faster than we produce which leads to the current problems we have.

you have such an uninformed view of the "democrat base" and it's so ridiculously biased that it's hard to know where to begin.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2009, 04:45 PM   #158
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 02:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
A ha! Putting words in my mouth. Nice try! Is there a problem with having electoral preferences? Democrats want to defeat Republicans and vice versa. I think my post is very clear that I love democracy. If Democrats want to do the proper fiscal management (as opposed to what they are doing now) I would be for them.
Then you should have stated that people should vote in fiscally responsible canidates no matter what party, instead of saying "conservatives" or "Republicans" because it just weakens your stance. Look around conservatives aren't being that fiscally responsible at all...

Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Instead of spending more on mediaid/medicare how about allowing insurance competition between states? That could save people health costs without increasing taxes.
We've talked about this before I'm not sure why you keep bringing it up. Certain limited insurance companies can and do compete across state lines, but the problem is the standards change over state lines; what's defined as podiatry in Texas is different than what is defined as podiatry in Arizona. Plus insurance companies "compete" within state lines and it doesn't help much because honestly most of the insurance companies are in cahoots with each and set the prices collabortively. So none of this is going to work...

Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Do I personally have to come up with numbers?
No, but the point is theory can only go so far, and so far not one person has come up with any real alternative plan. Fox, Hannity, Beck, Rush, Republican politicians none of them have any room to bitch or throw these tea parties unless they honestly have a real alternative.

Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
There are plenty of people in the Republican party that can do that if they get enough balls. If the public is changing their tune and support this action then the politicians will get more courageous. If the public asks for low taxes and more spending there will be no political strengh to rest on that.
I think you just answered your own question here...

The rest of the post meanders... Some of what you say makes sense the rest is way out in left field(I guess right field in your case), but none of it is an alternative plan. It's long term goals, but the question is for all those partiers is what would they have wanted their canidate to do right now in this paticular climate?

Can someone please answer this!!!
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2009, 04:46 PM   #159
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 02:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
you have such an uninformed view of the "democrat base" and it's so ridiculously biased that it's hard to know where to begin.
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2009, 09:32 PM   #160
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 01:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Then you should have stated that people should vote in fiscally responsible canidates no matter what party, instead of saying "conservatives" or "Republicans" because it just weakens your stance. Look around conservatives aren't being that fiscally responsible at all...
No it doesn't. Democrats don't support fiscal responsibility. Look at them now. In actions they don't. Unless I see an about face there is no evidence that Democrats are really doing anything about fiscal responsibility. They are following the Krugman template which is about spending our way out of a recession. Isn't this over spending what got us into the problem in the first place?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
We've talked about this before I'm not sure why you keep bringing it up. Certain limited insurance companies can and do compete across state lines, but the problem is the standards change over state lines; what's defined as podiatry in Texas is different than what is defined as podiatry in Arizona. Plus insurance companies "compete" within state lines and it doesn't help much because honestly most of the insurance companies are in cahoots with each and set the prices collabortively. So none of this is going to work...
Why do we have anti-trust laws then? Just because there is some complexity in standards it doesn't mean that it wouldn't improve competition. It's easier to collaborate with other insurance companies when there are more border restrictions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
No, but the point is theory can only go so far, and so far not one person has come up with any real alternative plan. Fox, Hannity, Beck, Rush, Republican politicians none of them have any room to bitch or throw these tea parties unless they honestly have a real alternative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
The rest of the post meanders... Some of what you say makes sense the rest is way out in left field(I guess right field in your case), but none of it is an alternative plan. It's long term goals, but the question is for all those partiers is what would they have wanted their canidate to do right now in this paticular climate?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Can someone please answer this!!!
- No cap and trade. Support more nuclear power plants. (Some military are pushing for fusion over fission for a long-term plan 30 years on). Cap and trade or carbon taxes = higher energy costs for all.
- Don't increase health-care coverage. Do the U.S. have to rely on Chinese bondholders for this too?
- Lower corporate taxes. Both the U.S. and Canada are uncompetitive in this area.
- Cut wasteful spending in all departments (including non-essentials in the military). Both McCain and Obama know there is wasteful spending in all areas. Most politicians tolerate it because it's a way to buy votes. Obama basically admited that when he attempted to look at spending on government workers having a "trickle down" effect. Use line-item veto on earmarks like promised.
- Don't shake hands with Chavez (which is quickly undermining Democracy in his own country).
- I don't know what the best timing for this suggestion is but at some point critical areas of Iran's nuclear program will have to be destroyed. If there are critics of this, who cares? See link on Aesop's fables.
- Finish off the Taliban with or without the help of Pakistan (obviously with is better than without). Set a timetable to withdraw in Iraq and Afghanistan in stages (some of this is already in the works). Some Iraq vetrans can move to Afghanistan (Obama is working on this).
- Continue supporting more free trade in South America. Brazil is a bit two-faced on this but with more negotiations it could turn around. If Stephen Harper in Canada can do this so can Obama.

I'm sure there could be more suggestions but doing half of this would be an enormous achievement. Some of these suggestions can be done quickly and others cannot. Trying to improve productive capabilities in the U.S. will take YEARS. The west relies too much on services for their economy.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2009, 09:59 PM   #161
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 01:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
when it comes to actual goods and services, the market is a better judge of quality than the governments are. but it's absolutely utopian to think that the market is better at everything. look at what's just happened. when Ponzi products are traded back and forth -- subprime mortgages just to begin with -- only the government can step in and regulate before the market goes on to ruin lives and the entire economy.
Yeah but when the government pushes banks to increase risky loans it's the same thing as telling investors to take more risks. Investors in a normal mindset wouldn't invest in low yield investments with high risk. The banks pretty much had to lie to the public to get the money to lend. Banks are intermediaries. They won't loan their own money but make money by being the go-between of investors and borrowers. I do feel disappointed that they didn't fight back against the government and raise hell but ACORN political correctness and the race card was used to shame bankers into making these loans. I mean would you personally save and invest in risky investments knowingly for low yields? Increases in risk should have an increase in reward to be worth it. When the government makes regulations to protect investors but pushes for more investment in risky borrowers it sends a mixed message.

Government should regulate but we all know that there are loopholes and just plain bad regulations that don't work (SOX didn't prevent private equity firms from hiding toxic assets). It's not more regulation but smart regulation. Unfortunately that means we have to rely on the "right" people at the "right" time scenario which is usually disappointing. I believe that most managers in the market aren't all that into free markets and feel that they can take any risks they want because they feel they are too big to fail. This is a narcissistic cultural element that I don't know the cure for. I've been studying narcissism for a while now and having big egos = entitlement behavior and that seems to be the popular zeitgeist of today in western democracies. Couple that with a reliance on special interest groups. Everyone wants to receive but how many want to pay?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
you have such an uninformed view of the "democrat base" and it's so ridiculously biased that it's hard to know where to begin.
There are some responsible Democrats who voted against much of the stimulus so I applaud those guys but they are not even close to the majority of that party. Most of the stimulus money is going to special interest groups for buying votes (not a new concept in either party though there is a difference in degree). Most left-wing parties throughout the western world believe that organizing into special interest groups is the only way to get what people want. Yet getting tax payers to band together (hence unorganized temporary tea parties) has something left to be desired. Everyone is splitting into these NGO's and other groups like unions and want to get special benefits but fail to realize that much of the same population in these groups will have to pay taxes for it.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2009, 12:21 AM   #162
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 02:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
No it doesn't. Democrats don't support fiscal responsibility. Look at them now. In actions they don't. Unless I see an about face there is no evidence that Democrats are really doing anything about fiscal responsibility. They are following the Krugman template which is about spending our way out of a recession. Isn't this over spending what got us into the problem in the first place?
Look at Republicans now. What did they do the last 8 years? I'm sorry did they have control of house, senate and white house recently how responsible were they then? Give me a break.
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Why do we have anti-trust laws then? Just because there is some complexity in standards it doesn't mean that it wouldn't improve competition. It's easier to collaborate with other insurance companies when there are more border restrictions.
The complexity leads to the reasons why so many can't cover multiple states at a time. We've talked about this. There would have to be a complete overhaul of the industry as a whole.


Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
- No cap and trade. Support more nuclear power plants. (Some military are pushing for fusion over fission for a long-term plan 30 years on). Cap and trade or carbon taxes = higher energy costs for all.
- Don't increase health-care coverage. Do the U.S. have to rely on Chinese bondholders for this too?
- Lower corporate taxes. Both the U.S. and Canada are uncompetitive in this area.
- Cut wasteful spending in all departments (including non-essentials in the military). Both McCain and Obama know there is wasteful spending in all areas. Most politicians tolerate it because it's a way to buy votes. Obama basically admited that when he attempted to look at spending on government workers having a "trickle down" effect. Use line-item veto on earmarks like promised.
- Don't shake hands with Chavez (which is quickly undermining Democracy in his own country).
- I don't know what the best timing for this suggestion is but at some point critical areas of Iran's nuclear program will have to be destroyed. If there are critics of this, who cares? See link on Aesop's fables.
- Finish off the Taliban with or without the help of Pakistan (obviously with is better than without). Set a timetable to withdraw in Iraq and Afghanistan in stages (some of this is already in the works). Some Iraq vetrans can move to Afghanistan (Obama is working on this).
- Continue supporting more free trade in South America. Brazil is a bit two-faced on this but with more negotiations it could turn around. If Stephen Harper in Canada can do this so can Obama.
You're still missing the point. Some of this is just political garbage. But you're ignoring the issues of the very current problems with AIG, Detroit and the American auto industry, the rising unemployment, etc... Can you try and address these specifically? Otherwise you're just as confused as the tea partiers. In other words what would you have wanted McCain to do within his first 2 months to try and solve this problem?
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2009, 12:35 PM   #163
The Fly
 
Turn up the AC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 243
Local Time: 03:19 AM
The "Tea Party" in Memphis was a total joke. Organizers claimed they were "protesting out of control spending in Washington", but I think it was just an excuse for religious kooks and closet bigots to come out without fear of reprisal. I saw signs that were opposing gay marriage, affirmative action, city-county consolidation (that is a major racial/political issue going on now in Memphis & Shelby County), and social programs designed to help the underprivileged in West TN. Aside from the social programs, what do the other issues have to do with Washington spending? There were also signs opposing abortion and gun control. Again, I don't see the connection here.

I think the Tea Party participants would have had more supporters if their main goal was to speak out on Washington spending. Instead, they saw this as an opportunity to promote their own social and moral agendas.
__________________
Turn up the AC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2009, 11:21 AM   #164
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 01:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
You're still missing the point. Some of this is just political garbage. But you're ignoring the issues of the very current problems with AIG, Detroit and the American auto industry, the rising unemployment, etc... Can you try and address these specifically? Otherwise you're just as confused as the tea partiers. In other words what would you have wanted McCain to do within his first 2 months to try and solve this problem?
- End subprime loans.
- Bailout AIG and only allow bonuses when there is success. AIG insurance supports 80% of banks. No bonuses for Fannie Mae and Freedie Mac employees.
- No earmarks.
- Let investment banks fail. Only support commercial banks.
- Let American auto companies go into bankruptcy protection. Apparently they will probably go that way anyways because without restructuring (ie. letting go of employees that are not needed) they can't sell cars that people don't demand. Losses of jobs will happen anyways.
- Companies and banks that did the right thing will expand and take up some of the employees who lost their jobs.
- Extend employment insurance benefits and welfare benefits where applicable. This is obvious.
- I'm okay with an increase in monetary production during deflation but I don't want interest rates to stay too low for too long because we need people to save again or else we'll go into stagflation. High inflation can kill jobs. Wages have a hard time keeping up with inflation.
- Instead of a 6% reserve ratio the Canadian 9% seems more robust. If and when there is a run on the banks enough cash should be made available so panic dies down. Raise the ratio higher if necessary. (This is really important and the main thing that will keep a depression from occuring).
- Regulations preventing the packaging of risky securities with safe securities should be banned and it should be clear who the investor is and who the borrower is.

Some of these ideas are good. Especially getting the government to stop pushing for high risk loans:

Republican Bailout Ideas | The Political Bear

- The corporate tax rate being lowered is important now. Increased trade is important now. Even a 1 year tax holiday would be a good idea since companies with losses would not pay tax anyways.
- Government can train where applicable so those who have to move to other industries have opportunities to do so.
- The other long-term approaches I mentioned in other posts are important such as no cap and trade schemes or carbon taxes since they just raise costs
- Freeze health and education expenses. If Americans want more government control of healthcare they are going to have to wait until a proper balanced budget is possible in the future before going down that path.
- No personal tax increases or decreases. No social security tax credits. Social security has enough problems down the road to deal with.

This decade may be a lost decade because there is no quick fix. People over-leveraged for years and it will take years to deleverage. The most important thing is to get Americans producing products again and to attract as much investment as possible. Once the toxic assets are sold back onto the market (when there is real demand again), the government can pull back more. At this point the government should never allow inflation to increase as high as it has in the past and should measure real inflation for their interest rate moves instead of ignoring food and energy. Too much inflation leads to more booms and speculative investments that distort the market.

If the public wants to gamble on the stock market and wants to get into flipping again there will be more booms and busts in the future. The west shouldn't pursue 0% savings rates and not expect over-leveraging. Sadly the government can't do anything about stupid behaviour. It's up to the public to keep their freedom. If they saved more people would have a buffer to deal with economic changes much easier. The most the government can do is what I mentioned regarding keeping inflation at a reasonable low level to reduce the temptation for gambling or at least to prevent too much borrowed money going into day-trading speculation. This also helps preserve value of savings so people will have some incentive to save. Increased production increases our purchasing power.

I'm not an expert yet I can figure out some obvious solutions. I mean if there are any other conservatives that have other solutions I'm all ears. Obama should be focussing more on banks, credit, and military than health-care and education. There's only so much that debt that can be racked up so priorities should be made.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2009, 11:32 AM   #165
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 02:19 AM
Finally...

Thank you for addressing the question.

But if the tea parties were really about spending and principle even your plan would have pissed them off.

But you're white and conservative so they probably would have praised the plan.

I appreciate you attempting to answer my question.

I think it's sad that those that came in here and praised the tea parties couldn't do the same, I think it just goes to show the failure of these tea parties.

It will be interesting to see what history says about them, my guess is history will call them a joke, but we'll see...
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com