Taxes as a % of GDP? A dumb preposition. Because GDP in general increases, we will forever be locked into tax increases.
Taxes should be broad (inclusive) and as low as possible. They should be enough to fund government, the size of government is the issue.
Medicare and S.S.? Should they exist?
Dumb.
Now let's take a moment to remember the left's eternal protest about how Conservative never liked the "entitlements". Well yes and no, when created there were warnings about how they would eventually break us...Hummmmm. Not exactly outrageous.
A safety net is a good idea. Obligating us to pay for life after 65 for every senior is not.
Folks who paid into S.S. deserve their $. It would be better out of the government's hands and Bush's idea of private accounts sounds good. It would also keep the legislators from stealing current contributions.
Medicare is another issue. It, like private health care, needs to be consumer driven. There are no cost constraints and there must be if the system is to survive.
funny Baxter, I/we have answered these questions many times before. Not afraid.
What does not work is Socialism. What does not work is class warfare. What is not working is the economic management of our country by our Out Of His League President.
My solution? Reduction of marginal tax rates. Reduction of Capital Gains. Repeal of Obamacare.
We would be better in a week.
And the laugher about the reduction of economic activity from the paltry spending reductions?
If we cut taxes and leave the $ in the economy, it will grow gangbusters and the deficit will go away and the economic activity of the government will be irrelevant.
3 comments:
Taxes as a % of GDP? A dumb preposition. Because GDP in general increases, we will forever be locked into tax increases. THIS COMMENT FITS IN WELL WITH THE IGNORANCE THEME. AS ANY ECONOMIST WILL TELL YOU, MEASURING TAXES AND SPENDING AS A PERCENTAGE OF GDP IS THE BEST, MOST COMPLETE MEASURE. OTHER APPROACHES DO NOT ACCOUNT FOR POPULATION AND INFLATION. IF GDP INCREASES AND TAX COLLECTIONS MAINTAIN THEIR RELATIVE PORTION OF THE ECONOMY, THAT IS NOT A TAX HIKE. TALK ABOUT DUMB!
Taxes should be broad (inclusive) and as low as possible. They should be enough to fund government, the size of government is the issue. IN OTHER WORDS, RAISE TAXES ON THE POOR AND LOWER THEM ON THE RICH...
Medicare and S.S.? Should they exist?
Dumb.
Now let's take a moment to remember the left's eternal protest about how Conservative never liked the "entitlements". Well yes and no, when created there were warnings about how they would eventually break us...Hummmmm. Not exactly outrageous.
A safety net is a good idea. Obligating us to pay for life after 65 for every senior is not.
Folks who paid into S.S. deserve their $. It would be better out of the government's hands and Bush's idea of private accounts sounds good. It would also keep the legislators from stealing current contributions.
Medicare is another issue. It, like private health care, needs to be consumer driven. There are no cost constraints and there must be if the system is to survive. I AGREE WITH COST CONSTRAINTS AND SO DOES OBAMA. HEALTHCARE REFORM CREATED AND EMPOWERED OVERSIGHT PANELS TO THAT END
funny Baxter, I/we have answered these questions many times before. Not afraid.
What does not work is Socialism. What does not work is class warfare. What is not working is the economic management of our country by our Out Of His League President. WE ARE DIGGING OUR WAY OUT OF THE BUSH DITCH WITH ONE HAND AND FIGHTING OFF THE GOP WITH THE OTHER.IT IS HARD WORK, BUT IT WILL GET DONE
My solution? Reduction of marginal tax rates. Reduction of Capital Gains. Repeal of Obamacare. LIKE I HAVE SAID MANY TIMES BEFORE, YOU OBVIOUSLY DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE DEFICIT. YOUR CURES CAUSED THE PROBLEM AND WOULD MAKE IT WORSE. I PREFER CLINTON'S APPROACH TO THE DEFICIT RATHER THAN REAGAN AND GW BUSH'S
We would be better in a week.
And the laugher about the reduction of economic activity from the paltry spending reductions?
If we cut taxes and leave the $ in the economy, it will grow gangbusters and the deficit will go away and the economic activity of the government will be irrelevant. JUST LIKE UNDER REAGAN? JUST LIKE UNDER BUSH? NO - THE DEFICIT WENT AWAY UNDER CLINTON AFTER HE RAISED TAXES AND CONTROLLED THE GROWTH OF SPENDING. THE DEFICIT EXPLODED UNDER REAGAN AND BUSH - I AM SURPRISED YOU DID NOT REALIZE THAT. IF YOU DID, YOU WOULDN'T OFFER THE SAME FAILED PRESCRIPTIONS
U.S. stocks tumbled as part of a broad global selloff, wiping out gains of the past week, amid disappointing U.S. economic news and Europe's ongoing sovereign debt problems.
Hows is that "infrastructure" and "tax the rich" working so far?
What infrastructure and tax the rich? I'd like to see it...
Post a Comment