Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A VAT is a great way to jump from the frying pan right into hyper-inflation.
Do away with the federal income tax (and IRS) and use a consumption tax instead. That way everyone who is in this coutry pays for services.
And CUT the frigging federal SPENDING down to the bare bones. NO NEW ENTITLEMENTS. No pay-raises for Congress. A federal hiring freeze. Remove over-burdensome regulatory restrictions that impede out ability to develope/produce our own energy resources as well as those that deter businesses and the jobs they bring to the US. We are not tax-freindly to private equity.
you are right, but I can't rep you, have to spread it around. I thought I did.
Although I would have much rather him speak on the need to invest in domestic infrastructure and renewable energy development or even better: how the disastrous war is taking their toll on the economy, at least this cat does not follow partisan talking points.
"Mark Zandi, chief economist with Moody's Economy.com and a former adviser to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), said Friday that Congress needs to hurry up and reauthorize expired jobless aid or risk derailing the nascent economic recovery."
"The top economic adviser to John McCain's presidential campaignacknowledged on Monday that the U.S. would be running a historic deficit this year even if the Arizona Republican had won the White House."
McCain would also have done a stimulus bill himself.
"But the former Congressional Budget Office director did acknowledge that, even with these changes, the country "probably would still have a record deficit" as is projected under the Obama administration."
"The acknowledgment by Holtz-Eakin is a blow of sorts to the GOP argument that the record-breaking $1.56 trillion projected deficit is solely Obama's responsibility.
The very term, "Fiscal conservative" is laughable when referring to contemporary Republicans. Denial of unfunded wars having an economic impact and the only single response to any situation is "lower taxes".
Personally, I'd like to see the term, "Fiscally responsible" used by either party, but then again, when the overwhelming majority of people who elect our government measure a persons value by what they own, you reap what you sew.
The very term, "Fiscal conservative" is laughable when referring to contemporary Republicans. Denial of unfunded wars having an economic impact and the only single response to any situation is "lower taxes".
Personally, I'd like to see the term, "Fiscally responsible" used by either party, but then again, when the overwhelming majority of people who elect our government measure a persons value by what they own, you reap what you sew.
Never say never Tn, looks like the dying breed hasn't become extinct just yet.
"The left-wing instinct, when faced with high-rolling irresponsibility, is usually to call for tax increases on the rich. But the problem, here and elsewhere, isn’t exactly that we tax high rollers’ incomes too lightly. It’s that we subsidize their irresponsibility too heavily — underwriting their bad bets and bailing out their follies. The class warfare we need is a conservative class warfare, which would force the million-dollar defaulters to pay their own way from here on out.
In case after case, Washington’s web of subsidies and tax breaks effectively takes money from the middle class and hands it out to speculators and have-mores. We subsidize drug companies, oil companies, agribusinesses disguised as “family farms” and “clean energy” firms that aren’t energy-efficient at all. We give tax breaks to immensely profitable corporations that don’t need the money and boondoggles that wouldn’t exist without government favoritism.
But conservatives need to recognize that the most pernicious sort of redistribution isn’t from the successful to the poor. It’s from savers to speculators, from outsiders to insiders, and from the industrious middle class to the reckless, unproductive rich. "
Never say never Tn, looks like the dying breed hasn't become extinct just yet.
"The left-wing instinct, when faced with high-rolling irresponsibility, is usually to call for tax increases on the rich. But the problem, here and elsewhere, isn’t exactly that we tax high rollers’ incomes too lightly. It’s that we subsidize their irresponsibility too heavily — underwriting their bad bets and bailing out their follies. The class warfare we need is a conservative class warfare, which would force the million-dollar defaulters to pay their own way from here on out.
In case after case, Washington’s web of subsidies and tax breaks effectively takes money from the middle class and hands it out to speculators and have-mores. We subsidize drug companies, oil companies, agribusinesses disguised as “family farms” and “clean energy” firms that aren’t energy-efficient at all. We give tax breaks to immensely profitable corporations that don’t need the money and boondoggles that wouldn’t exist without government favoritism.
But conservatives need to recognize that the most pernicious sort of redistribution isn’t from the successful to the poor. It’s from savers to speculators, from outsiders to insiders, and from the industrious middle class to the reckless, unproductive rich. "
Myself I will not vote for any {R} that claims he is a conservative and supports subsidies and bail outs.I was LMAO when I heard Bush say " I had to bail out the banks to save the free market" He is a big hypocrite the free market is you rise and fall on your own accord.
Then you have these {R} in the forum saying to the effect the banks have payed us back it is no big deal.The way the banks paid us back is buying treasuries and collecting interest on the money that we loaned them.In other words we were paid back with are own money that we still owe.Of course with the market down I am sure they scooped up some cash there.
Myself I will not vote for any {R} that claims he is a conservative and supports subsidies and bail outs.I was LMAO when I heard Bush say " I had to bail out the banks to save the free market" He is a big hypocrite the free market is you rise and fall on your own accord.
Then you have these {R} in the forum saying to the effect the banks have payed us back it is no big deal.The way the banks paid us back is buying treasuries and collecting interest on the money that we loaned them.In other words we were paid back with are own money that we still owe.Of course with the market down I am sure they scooped up some cash there.
This is the cat that Simon Johnson wanted to replace Bernutty.
I don't mind calling him a Republican.
"In prepared remarks in front of the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Thomas Hoenig, the president of of the Kansas City Fed, bemoaned the "competitive disadvantage" that large banks enjoy and called community banks "essential" to local and regional economies.Community banks, generally defined as having less than $10 billion in assets, account for all but 83 banks in the U.S, he said. Large banks, however, had the privilege of higher levels of risk and more explicit government backstops. Here's Hoenig:"
Absolutely. The notion that all you have to do is support decreasing spending to be a fiscal conservative was born in January 2009 when the Republicans took their spot in the minority/without the presidency.
Obviously decreasing government spending is gonna be popular. It's not quite so popular to say we have to increase taxes. But a true fiscal conservative would take an unpopular stance. Someone who just wanted to get the congressional majority back would accuse Obama of loving the deficit while simultaneously lambasting Obama for wanting to end the Bush tax cuts.
If by fiscal conservatives, you are referring to those who believe that an unregulated economy supplemented with low taxes for the rich are key to economic prosperity, then by all means I hope that they are a dying breed. Of course any economic module is practical in thought, but mistakes are made to be learnt from, and using the best of both worlds (a mixed economy) has proven to be very beneficial to this country. I am hoping that these TRUE fiscal conservatives you speak of are ones who acknowledge that there are successful policies on the other side of the isle.
"Joining the backlash against House Minority leader John Boehner's (R-Ohio) economic speech yesterday, Mark Zandi, Moody's chief economist, said Boehner was "just wrong" to call the $787 billion stimulus spending "a failure."
If there was no stimulus at all, Zandi said, unemployment would be at around 11.5% rather than 9.5%."
No, true fiscal conservatives are not a majority. They just are in GVT, specifically at the federal level. Don't worry, the revolution is not being televised. Every friend I have is a fiscal conservative, and fed up with the feds.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
