The politicians are never going to enact a truly flat tax, their versions of the flat tax so far have been of the progressive variety. They also will never go for elimination of the income tax. If they substituted a VAT for the income tax, consumers would start to demand that the government spend less because they would feel directly the effects of any tax increase.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Economy In Crisis
- Thread starter ktmexc20
- Start date
The politicians are never going to enact a truly flat tax, their versions of the flat tax so far have been of the progressive variety. They also will never go for elimination of the income tax. If they substituted a VAT for the income tax, consumers would start to demand that the government spend less because they would feel directly the effects of any tax increase.
These are some very good points, thanks for your comments.Quote from let it run:
I'm not an economist just a concerned observer to this vast paradigm shift we're undertaking, which I actually feel is inevitable anyway. It's just that I wonder if there isn't some degree of recklessness in the current policies; If there isn't a lack of oversite.
As I've mentioned elsewhere, I think globalization is very good globally as well as for Americans. It's just apparent hastyness in our policies that has me somewhat concerned.
Again, thanks for your comments.
Calculated guess, that's not as hard to figure out as you might think, you voted for tax cuts. Then again I did not mean you personally, I am not even sure if you're of voting age. I meant gullible people like you who hate Clinton, Gore, Dean despite their multiple and prominent accomplishments, love Bush who has not done a single thing right during his life, and then turn around and arrogantly suggest that presidential candidates should be judged based on their achievements and not party affiliation. Duh!Quote from futures_shark:
How do you know who I voted for?
Actually when the dems overwhelmingly vote against CAFTA or the bankruptcy bill I do believe they are working in the best interest of the country. The democrats are not perfect of course by any stretch of imagination, simply better than the alternatives.Quote from futures_shark:
If you think that the democratic & republican parties are working in your best interest then you really are as stupid as you make yourself sound.
You mean the Clinton military that easily defeated the Taliban with virtually no losses? You're not attributing these successes to the genius of donald rumsfeld, do you? I am not sure what specifically you mean by "infrastructure" that Clinton ignored in order to balance the budget but whatever it was it is still ignored now, yet the budget is not balanced.Quote from maxpi:
Clinton balanced the budget at the expense of the military and infrastructure.
Quote from dddooo:
...I meant gullible people like you who hate Clinton, Gore, Dean despite their multiple and prominent accomplishments, love Bush who has not done a single thing right during his life, and then turn around and arrogantly suggest that presidential candidates should be judged based on their achievements and not party affiliation. Duh!
...Actually when the dems overwhelmingly vote against CAFTA or the bankruptcy bill I do believe they are working in the best interest of the country. The democrats are not perfect of course by any stretch of imagination, simply better than the alternatives.
The ONLY politician I respect is Ron Paul. If you think Clinton was so great then you are obviously the gullible one. If he was so financially responsible why was he against the constitutional amendment to balance the budget. Also his so called balanced budget still raided social security funds to do it. In addition I don't call raising taxes a solution to government overspending but we obviously disagree on that.
The democrats and republicans have the same goal of increasing government power and getting relected. They only care about the special interests that donate to their campaign funds. The only way to break their stranglehold on the political process is for people to vote for independent and/or third party candidates. If you blindly vote demo/repub then you are a sheep.
Quote from futures_shark:
...They only care about the special interests that donate to their campaign funds.
The only way to break their stranglehold on the political process is for people to vote for independent and/or third party candidates.
If you blindly vote demo/repub then you are a sheep.
Quote from dddooo:
We're selling our industries to sustain our spending habits, we're deep in debt as a country and individually, the savings rate is below zero, more an more people are uninsured, more and more households live below poverty level, real wages are flat at best, the median income is not growing and is probably falling. An average american is worse off today than he was 5 years ago.
PS I hope you don't buy that low inflation crap - food, healthcare, gas, education, houses have virtually doubled in price in the last few years.
What I really like is the WE in the Quote. Who is the WE? Is it the
1% that pays all the taxes, controls all the wealth and flow of info
in this country? Are they in trouble or even concerned? They want feudalism and damit let's give it to em and all these flag waving morons can join us in the soup lines when they can't afford their pdas anymore. Then we can get a real nice Fascist leader to attack china or sumtin da, good luck to your kids.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0227/p01s04-usec.html
Quote from futures_shark:
If you think Clinton was so great then you are obviously the gullible one.
Why, what was wrong with the economy during the 90s that I missed, what specific Clinton's economic policies bad for this country did I overlook?
Also his so called balanced budget still raided social security funds to do it.
So I suppose you voted for Gore who proposed to keep social security funds in a lockbox, right? Or you hypocritically supported Bush's tax cuts at the time when SS funds were used to balance the budget.
The democrats and republicans have the same goal of increasing government power and getting relected. They only care about the special interests that donate to their campaign funds. The only way to break their stranglehold on the political process is for people to vote for independent and/or third party candidates.
Typical red herring in a political/economic discussion - condemning all politicians and offering a very "realistic" and practical solution of voting for third party candidates (usually naive/idealistic extremists whether they are libertarians, socialists or the green party members). Never mind the simple fact that they can't possibly get elected without the support of special interests and if they ever do get that support they will care as much about keeping it and being reelected as the current crop of politicians.
Quote from dddooo:
If you think Clinton was so great then you are obviously the gullible one.
Why, what was wrong with the economy during the 90s that I missed, what specific Clinton's economic policies bad for this country did I overlook?
Also his so called balanced budget still raided social security funds to do it.
So I suppose you voted for Gore who proposed to keep social security funds in a lockbox, right? Or you hypocritically supported Bush's tax cuts at the time when SS funds were used to balance the budget.
The democrats and republicans have the same goal of increasing government power and getting relected. They only care about the special interests that donate to their campaign funds. The only way to break their stranglehold on the political process is for people to vote for independent and/or third party candidates.
Typical red herring in a political/economic discussion - condemning all politicians and offering a very "realistic" and practical solution of voting for third party candidates (usually naive/idealistic extremists whether they are libertarians, socialists or the green party members). Never mind the simple fact that they can't possibly get elected without the support of special interests and if they ever do get that support they will care as much about keeping it and being reelected as the current crop of politicians.
The problem I see it, albeit living in the fantasy world, is that our 2 party republic system is the problem.
I am starting to think we would be much better off with a parliamentary system than this republic. If we had parliament , I believe it would open the door to more candidates.
Having done a cursory study parliament, it is representation based upon percentage of popular vote one.
Oh and let's get rid of electoral college, what a load of crap! Since I was able to vote, I feel as though I simply vote for the lesser of 2 evils, that's it.
Sadly this is so true. Dominant special interest groups influence our representation in Washington. This has to change for "the people's" representation to be meaningful. Unfortunately, the law makers are the ones influenced, so change for the better is not very promising.Quote from dddooo:
...Never mind the simple fact that they can't possibly get elected without the support of special interests and if they ever do get that support they will care as much about keeping it and being reelected as the current crop of politicians.
A "revolution" is in order to drive home our displeasure with elected representation. It will take "the people" getting very pissed off to actually affect a change.
The Senate, this past week, has demonstrated that "it's politics as usual" in refusing to have an independent body (Office of Public Integrity) oversee the Senate's ethical practices. How can a body effectively and impartially regulate themselves? What a crock of shit!
Declaring oneself as being an Independent, does not strictly mean voting for third party candidates (though more choices are needed, imo). It means NOT voting along party lines, but being an INFORMED participant in the election process. Hence, KNOW who you are voting for.
kt
ps. Yes the electoral college is an outdated and defeating concept, and needs to go. One person, One vote.