patrick.net

I thought the discussion was how to achieve prosperity. BTW - "taxing the rich" is a false promise. The rich always seem to find ways to dodge the taxes. Government always seems to find ways to raise the revenue - like raising the cigarette tax, the alcohol tax, the gas tax...wait a minute, those taxes fall on everyone. TRICKED YET AGAIN.

Taxes is the largest expense item for most families...taxes are more than food, more than rent, more than auto expense. I SAY CHANGE ELECTION DAY TO APRIL 16 th. That way people would still remember their pain and vote accordingly. Limited government plus freedom will lead to prosperity.

thunderlips11 says

Only a moron would invade a country with 500M Firearms in private hands. It would make Afghanistan look like Mr. Roger’s Land of Make Believe. The Gun Nuts would have a field day.
“Hey Elmo, just like Red Dawn. How many Ruskies you didja prang, good buddy? I gots me 5 last night.”

I would like to see how your "Gun Nuts" would fair against Tanks. Although I agree the sheer size of the military should be reduced, to eliminate it would be a major mistake.

No question, the gun nuts would get crushed. You can't put up an effective resistance against a technologically superior opponent. At best, it would be harassment tactics like we're suffering in Iraq and Afghanistan. But harassment tactics also rely heavily on the honor of the conqueror. Americans aren't just going to start blasting buildings---adversaries like the old Soviets have no qualms about absolutely crushing a resisting populace.

I'd like to see us have a mostly defensive military. Our ICBM nukes are a pretty big deterrent to large adversaries. A real missile shield would round that out nicely. It's certainly important to protect ourselves in space, and probably to have credible air strike capability. But we're projecting massive force around the world with fairly questionable results.

To the point about fair taxation, I think the conversation is getting pointed in the wrong direction. It should never be the purview of government to deliberately redistribute wealth from one party to another. That's a titanic moral hazard, especially in a democratic society. People are fundamentally petty, so creating a situation of jealousy and gain is extremely unwise. It's true that a few billionaires made their fortunes through corrupt means, but that corruption would be diminished if we removed the moral hazards in the first place. The simple fact is that the vast majority of millionaires in this country built their own fortunes by intelligence and hard work. It's unfair that their wealth should be asymmetrically confiscated by their fellow citizens.

Citizens should vote for government benefits and services as if they had to pay for it themselves. It should likewise be illegal to roll massive debts forward, because you are simply foisting the bill onto future generations. Responsibility has fallen out of fashion in this country, but that's not a fault of our government. Any elected government is a reflection of the voters.

elvis says

The worker puts in just enough labor so he doesn’t get fired and the boss pays just enough that the worker doesn’t quit. But the millionaire above works his butt off. One hardly works, the other works hard. The American dream is alive and well but its not the government that will provide a standard of living which people desire.

If only that were the case.... There is a LOT of "luck" involved in becoming wealthy. Right place, right time. For example, does the secretary at Microsoft who got stock options work harder than the secretary at Enron? or at GM?

I would be interested to see the correlation between hard work and income. I suspect it is very weak. A lot of people work very hard in crappy jobs for crappy pay

@elvis--

I think you missed the point of my post. LOTS of self employed people work 16 hours a day and see no benefit. LOTS of small business owners work their butts off and still go under. Like I said--the correlation between long hours, hard work, and becoming a millionaire is probably very weak.

I think you live a different world than I do. Everything is very simple, black and white there. My world is full of many grays...

tatupu70 says

@elvis–
I think you missed the point of my post. LOTS of self employed people work 16 hours a day and see no benefit. LOTS of small business owners work their butts off and still go under. Like I said–the correlation between long hours, hard work, and becoming a millionaire is probably very weak.

Some people can eat a ton and not get fat. That doesn't mean there is no correlation between overeating and obesity. The same goes for finacial success. There is a direct connection between hard work and financial prosperity. Of course, luck plays an enormous role for all of us.

That is somewhat besides the point though. The government is enormously wasteful, and their programs typically hurt all americans (via taxes) or is used to kill brown people around the globe, while only helping a tiny fraction of the politically well connected.

People that argue for higher income tax rates, even if it only for the "rich", can only morally justify themselves by discussing how many people those taxes are helping. If the US government were actually a successful charity, there would be some individuals that donate to the US government rather than to charities. Empirically, private charities are a much more efficient method of wealth distribution than the US government. Besides, it is beyond the scope of the government's role to legislate vague, corruptible concepts like fairness.

tatupu70 says

CBOEtrader says

Progressive taxation hurts all wage earning individuals (99% of americans) and helps those that are politically well connected (.00001% of americans).

How do you figure? I don’t think you understand what progressive taxation is…
And noone is claiming that capitalism is bad. This discussion is about the fairest way to collect revenues for the government.

Try to stay with us tat. The discussion is about "how to achieve prosperity." Nomo suggested that a progressive income tax is necessary to have a vibrant middle class. I disagree. I feel that any income tax has much more potential to hurt the middle class than help it, and is only guaranteed to help a small fraction of the super rich.

I would like to add if we want to increase the opportunities, then we must bring manufacturing jobs back to the United States and reduce government spending. Who cares how much we are taxing when we will only spend more than we take in....we could tax 5 trillion dollars and still find a way to spend 5.1 trillion.

The bull-mooose rears its ugly head once again....Hope, Change and Progress should come in the form of social reform..

I am still waiting to see how things turn out.

1. Pull our troops from Iraq, Afghanistan
2. Cut government spending
3. Reduce national defense spending by 1/2
4.Re-enact regulations of 1929
5. Reform social programs as a for profit entity in order to force them to be accoutable for their spending.
6. Increase educational spending
7. Regulate the negative imagery on television
8. Lock up all the gangbangers (KKK, Crips, Blood, Mexican Mafia) that transport dope
9. Bring manufacturing jobs back to USA

Lets quit being silly, attacking each other is not going to do anything for our country.

Brand says

No question, the gun nuts would get crushed. You can’t put up an effective resistance against a technologically superior opponent. At best, it would be harassment tactics like we’re suffering in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Really? Not true. What about the russians in afganastan, america in vietnam, the french in vietnam, the chinese communists against the nationalists, fidel castro against batista, albanians against the turkish ottomans, marathas against the mughals in india, robert the bruce in scotland, tito against the nazi's in yugoslavia to name a very few of the successful guerrilla wars fought against technological superior opponents in history. It helps for the technologically superior opponent to be massively stupid like america in vietnam, but not totally necessary.

Even with that said, I totally agree we could easily reduce the military by half or more which would do a lot to balance the budget. There are no countries in the world capable of directly attacking america since the war of 1812 other than with ICBM's or through terrorists. That kind of reduction will never happen though. The military is a huge cash cow to allow politicians to buy votes at home and the military budget is a honey pot of power and prestige for the politicians who have control over it. No politician in the world is going to give up that kind of power voluntarily.

CBOEtrader says

Try to stay with us tat. The discussion is about “how to achieve prosperity.” Nomo suggested that a progressive income tax is necessary to have a vibrant middle class. I disagree. I feel that any income tax has much more potential to hurt the middle class than help it, and is only guaranteed to help a small fraction of the super rich.

Where did I lose you? I was stating that I think you must not understand what a progressive tax is because it is specifically designed so that the rich(and super rich) pay more taxes. I don't see how it would benefit the super rich. Now--if it is bastardized like our current system with a million loopholes, then I see your point. The solution is to get rid of the loopholes, not to change the system...

I think that all non-profits work the same way, spend it or lose it....this is why the government has trouble spending less.

What is the issue with #17?

Michael Savage is occasionally amusing, but he's not intelligent. He's well-educated, to be sure, but he's just plain stupid when it comes to certain things, most notably his support for Homeopathy. Anyone who believes in Homeopathy is either a complete moron or is just woefully ignorant.

The stuff he talks about is mostly him talking out of his ass. He knows a whole lot about very little, and the only reason a lot of people seem to think he's intelligent is because they themselves know very little about the topics he's discussing.

And his personal life is not "ultra liberal". He's an environmentalist, and that's about it. If you think that's what makes someone "ultra liberal", I fear what you think is a conservative.

In many ways he's the right wing version of Bill Maher. Superficially intelligent, occasionally funny, but arrogant as all hell and a real moron under the veneer.

Clarence 13X says

No, conservative christians are:

Lynching black people
Dragging black people behind their pickups
Waving the Rebel flag to signify their support of southern slavery
Calling black people monkeys
Voting against civil rights
voting against women rights
Claim Obama is not a citizen
Claim Obama is a muslim
Challenge Obama birth rights

Conservative Chrisitians do whatever it takes to keep the ***** man in power. You fill in the blanks with your stupidity.

OK Mr. Jeremiah Wright, er I mean Clarence...

"I think I was unprepared for war." –on the biggest regret of his presidency, ABC News interview, Dec. 1, 2008 GW Bush How can one not be able to formulate a sentence or thought, yet be elected president? It happens

Nomograph says

elliemae says

Your dirty little secret is that you like AM talk radio? That’s it?

That and parading around the house in a pair of Blahnik stilettos. Not a pretty sight

It depends upon whether you have kankles or not. Can you post a pic? (Please don't shave first, it'd distract from the whole pic).

elvis says

13. Eliminate subsidies, tariffs and so called “foreign aid”.

I'm not going to bother to comment on some of your other crack pot ideas, but I can agree with this one. Do you realieze that the United States provides millions, sometimes billions of dollars to aid to contries that are hostile agaisnt us. In 2006, we provided over $2.5 billion in AID to Isarel, at the same time we provided $1.7 billion to Egypt, didn't Egypt invade Isarel several times before? Why we playing both sides? Pick a side already.

4X says

I would like to add if we want to increase the opportunities, then we must bring manufacturing jobs back to the United States and reduce government spending. Who cares how much we are taxing when we will only spend more than we take in….we could tax 5 trillion dollars and still find a way to spend 5.1 trillion.
The bull-mooose rears its ugly head once again….Hope, Change and Progress should come in the form of social reform..
I am still waiting to see how things turn out.
1. Pull our troops from Iraq, Afghanistan

Although I never agreed with getting involved with invading Iraq, pulling out without some kind of withdraw plan could be disaterous. Terrorists have show the kind of damage they can inflict with a complacent government.

2. Cut government spending
3. Reduce national defense spending by 1/2
4.Re-enact regulations of 1929

I'm not even sure what your referring to. Many of the stock market / banking regulations were issued AFTER the 1929 crash. Repealing those laws would be disasterous.

5. Reform social programs as a for profit entity in order to force them to be accoutable for their spending.
6. Increase educational spending
7. Regulate the negative imagery on television

What does regulating the television have to do with anything in reguards to jobs and government spending?

8. Lock up all the gangbangers (KKK, Crips, Blood, Mexican Mafia) that transport dope

I strongly disagee with this point. The government has been trying to stop the drug flow for the last 40 years, and victory is no where in sight. Drugs should be leagalized, making it legal will put all the gang and mobs out of business. Tax drugs, the money generated can be a great benifit to society. Despite all the drug enforcement drugs are easily obtains on almost any drug corner, why not just move them from the corners and into the drug stores.

9. Bring manufacturing jobs back to USA

Noble cause, but just like a politician, without a plan to accomplish this, your just full of hot air.

2. Cut government spending
3. Reduce national defense spending by 1/2
4.Re-enact regulations of 1929

I’m not even sure what your referring to. Many of the stock market / banking regulations were issued AFTER the 1929 crash. Repealing those laws would be disasterous.

I am referring to the GLB act which opened the floodgates for all those Alt-A loans to be distributed.

8. Lock up all the gangbangers (KKK, Crips, Blood, Mexican Mafia) that transport dope

I strongly disagee with this point. The government has been trying to stop the drug flow for the last 40 years, and victory is no where in sight. Drugs should be leagalized, making it legal will put all the gang and mobs out of business. Tax drugs, the money generated can be a great benifit to society. Despite all the drug enforcement drugs are easily obtains on almost any drug corner, why not just move them from the corners and into the drug stores.

Good point, I just didnt want to be the one to say legalize crack cocaine.

I would like to add if we want to increase the opportunities, then we must bring manufacturing jobs back to the United States and reduce government spending. Who cares how much we are taxing when we will only spend more than we take in….we could tax 5 trillion dollars and still find a way to spend 5.1 trillion.
The bull-mooose rears its ugly head once again….Hope, Change and Progress should come in the form of social reform..
I am still waiting to see how things turn out.
1. Pull our troops from Iraq, Afghanistan

Although I never agreed with getting involved with invading Iraq, pulling out without some kind of withdraw plan could be disaterous. Terrorists have show the kind of damage they can inflict with a complacent government.

We can simply setup a DMZ around the country, shoot down anyone entering or leaving without our permission...then get back to sucking all the oil out of the ground.

Do you know the answer to the question? If it's so basic, answer it. You see, Holder knows that this is a highly nuanced question that you can't possibly answer correctly. If he mentioned Padilla, someone would point out that Padilla was no longer an enemy combatant at the time of his trial, or that his citizenship made him somehow different (hey, if the SCOTUS is a bunch of pussies too afraid to stand up to Bush on the issue, I guess it doesn't matter). If he said "never", people who criticize him for ignoring all of those people that we tried (and executed) back before the term "enemy combatant" got the bizarre and twisted interpretation that we have today. Furthermore, the Obama administration doesn't use the term "enemy combatant" anymore, because they know it's bullshit. Before Bush decided that anyone they felt like arresting could be called an "enemy combatant", that term essentially meant Prisoner of War. The people being discussed for trial now are not prisoners of war. They are not members of any nation that we're at war with. They are "unlawful enemy combatants" according to the geneva convention -- little more than organized crime, and that's why civilian trials are what they should get. It's a damn shame that we don't explain the geneva convention to people young enough that they might understand why it exists before they drop out. I really don't understand the mentality of people who are OK with breaching the conventions. It's almost like WWII never happened.

Before I listen to anyone complain about Obama / Holder and these trials, I would like to see evidence from during the Bush administration of them complaining about how Bush hasn't done anything to put these bastard in the electric chair. If you didn't complain for the years Bush did nothing to get these guys sentenced to death you can wait a few more years and see what this president gets done.

"How many children have died because of the incompetent decisions by thyis admin? " Probably about 1/10th or less of those kids that have died of the garden variety "Influenza" this year.

"Katrina pales in comparison." Are you kidding?? This post is laughable.

@elvis: "The Millionaire Next Door" is one of my all-time favorite books. It statistically debunks the myth that most American millionaires inherited their money. For those living with illusions, the vast majority of American millionaires (defined as assets - debt, not including house) are first generation business owners, and a large number are recent immigrants. There's no corruption or generational wealth involved, just a lot of elbow grease.

@CBOEtrader: Nice analogy with overeating and obesity. So many people try to argue the negation of assertions like "most wealthy people work hard". Why? Because the statement is so obviously true that it's almost impossible to attack directly. If we diagrammed Hardworking vs. Lazy, Rich vs. Poor, then we wouldn't find many people in the Rich/Lazy category (especially pre-retirement).

@tatupu 70: Hard work is a prerequisite to wealth. That doesn't mean hard work is an automatic entitlement to be wealthy---it's just the price of admission. We live in the Land of Opportunities, not the Land of Guarantees. Also, I was puzzled by your "Microsoft secretary" theory. So let me get this straight. She gets lucky by receiving Microsoft stock that eventually makes her a millionaire. And... what? Is she somehow less entitled to the profits of her good luck? Does that make her morally inferior to the heart surgeon who built his own practice? Or do we somehow become entitled to confiscate wealth from lots of people just because the occasional wealthy person got lucky? Bottom line, it's their money, not ours.

@all: I've found some of the arguments on this thread enlightening, but others are just abjectly ridiculous. The assertions that luck counts more than skill or work ethic for building wealth were particularly appalling. It's like someone read Gladwell's "Outliers: the story of success" with a cynical filter. It's true that you can find plenty of examples were hyper-rich (not just ordinary wealthy) people got lucky with either their initial conditions or their ideas. That doesn't invalidate the fact that most wealthy Americans busted their butts to attain their modest wealth, and they did it though average means available to anybody. Every Bill Gates and Warren Buffet is outnumbered 10000:1 by "small" millionaires like surgeons, chief engineers, senior partner lawyers, small business owners and others who attained wealth via education, savvy or pure hard work. I can't imagine that anyone could reasonably believe that there are more lucky millionaires than self-made millionaires, especially in the face of empirical proof.

Brand says

@all: I’ve found some of the arguments on this thread enlightening, but others are just abjectly ridiculous. The assertions that luck counts more than skill or work ethic for building wealth were particularly appalling. It’s like someone read Gladwell’s “Outliers: the story of success” with a cynical filter. It’s true that you can find plenty of examples were hyper-rich (not just ordinary wealthy) people got lucky with either their initial conditions or their ideas. That doesn’t invalidate the fact that most wealthy Americans busted their butts to attain their modest wealth, and they did it though average means available to anybody. Every Bill Gates and Warren Buffet is outnumbered 10000:1 by “small” millionaires like surgeons, chief engineers, senior partner lawyers, small business owners and others who attained wealth via education, savvy or pure hard work. I can’t imagine that anyone could reasonably believe that there are more lucky millionaires than self-made millionaires, especially in the face of empirical proof.

You forgot to mention "Tenacity" because sure you can work hard to make money or develop your ideas. But if you are not tenacious you will either fail, or lose it all shortly after success.

If you don't have Tenacity then you better hope for the Luck route.

Tenouncetrout: Agreed. I'd go one step further, and suggest that if someone lacks Tenacity, all the Luck in the world won't help them. Easy come, easy go. How many lottery winners just blow it all and end up back in their original circumstances?

"...and two to take him"

Wow staynumz you are very trusting of this administration. You should listen to Glenn Beck sometime, he asks a lot of good questions about the safety of taking a drug from this administration. I guess you are one of those liberal elites that can't stand someone like GB asking questions though.

@Brand-

My point--which I didn't do a very good job of making--was that I thought Elvis greatly simplified what it takes to be a millionaire(or successful in general terms). I got the impression that he was implying that all it takes is hard work. And if you're not successful, it's because you're just not trying. Or lazy.

I just wanted to make the point that it takes more than hard work to be successful--but I agree that it is a prerequisite.

fredMG says

Wow staynumz you are very trusting of this administration. You should listen to Glenn Beck sometime, he asks a lot of good questions about the safety of taking a drug from this administration. I guess you are one of those liberal elites that can’t stand someone like GB asking questions though.

Seriously, people are questioning the vaccine just because it was released under the Obama administration?! So what's wrong with it? What are are the side effects that are so prevalent that it's got people talking?

I also liked the Millionaire Next Door. Other good reading include: The Richest Man in Babylon, Think and Grow Rich. The Power of Positive Thinking. Tough Times Never Last but Tough People Do, and the book with the longest title I've ever seen: All You Can Do Is All You Can Do But All You Can Do Is Enough.

I believe individual prosperity is within the grasp of most individuals. It starts with a "can do" attitude. Its a mind-set that says 'no one can stop me.' It means stretching yourself. It means pushing yourself. It means outworking other people. It means doing more than your job requires. It means telling that little voice we all have in the back of our minds "SHUT UP - I'm not listening to you anymore." It means making a committment to yourself that failure is not an option. Your new "fight sone" is going to be that popular song a couple of years ago "I get knocked down, but I get up again, you're never going to keep me down." Stay away from negative people and small thinkers. Think big. "Big plans stur the souls of men." Always be positive. When someone asks "How's it going?"...smile and say "UNBELIEVABLE" !!! (that covers it both ways), and notice the reaction you get. Others will be positively affected by your new enthusiasm.

Some young people identify successful people and pattern themselves after the successful person. Dress for success, look the part, fake it till you make it. Night school, tech school, self study, digging, scratching, doing whatever it takes. No one can stop someone who is DETERMINED to succeed. As I've said in the past "who is it up to?"

Darn - I'M GOOD....I just might start Honest Abe's School of Success !!

What the hell?! The virus grows slower under a democrat than a republican administration?!!! What the fuck?! This is the most insane blog entry I've seen in a while. Especially considering that the vaccine was contracted through private companies, which is what Republicans would have wanted anyway.

It's a conspiracy! I knew it! I just realized that Obama is responsible for the housing crash, TARP, the H1N1 flu vaccine not being available, and he's the reason the timer on my oven doesn't work. Heckuva Brownie job, Obama!

If you want prosperity do this:

Teens
1. Graduate Highschool, participate in athletics and scholastic activities...enjoy the last few moments you have with being pampered by your parents.

20's
2. Attend College, Trade School, Apprenticeship or even get a job to build up expertise in a skillset that has a large potential for future profits
3. Save 25% of your earnings during this period
4. Do not get involved with credit card debt, buy with cash
5. Do not get involved with financing a new car, buy at an auction

30's
6. Take your skillsets learned during your 30's and apply them to an entreprenurial effort, c-level position....increase your earning power.
7. Start a family, buy your first home
8. Invest in rental income in areas where you will gain a profit
9. Continue to save 25% of your income
10. Continue to drive the car that you bought at the auction, or go pay cash for another.

40's onward
11. Save, Save, Save
12. Raise your kids
13. Grow your business, earning power and family.
14. If you have equity in your house, and/or see that housing is at the peak of its next bubble......sell, sell, sell.

staynumz says

Nomograph says

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will be tried, convicted, and executed with near 100% certainty. New York City is the most appropriate place for justice to be served. It’s perfectly simple. Other than “Holder is a loser” or other AM talk radio arguments, why shouldn’t a trial and execution take place? New Yorkers don’t seem afraid of it, so why is the AM crowd so scared? The answer is simple: the Obama administration is finishing up more of Bush’s loose ends, and folks like staynumz are having a hard time with that. They want him to fail. Stay numb my friend, stay numb.

Haha…more scared of AM rhetoric. So predictable. I wouldnt call him a loser, I would call him stupid. he obviously was not prepared for basic questions that might be asked. Graham: Where would you try bin laden if captured tomorrow. Holder: (stutter, stutter…..uhm, we would follow protocal. LOL Dummy, protocal is guantanamo. You are changing protocal. WHERE WILL YOU TRY HIM? Yeah, tough question.

It seems you will do whatever it takes to discredit, insult and bombard the Obama administration with your rhetoric. This is very similar to the rhetoric surrounding Bush when he was in office and I am wondering when will it cease?....its not productive.

staynumz says

Wrong. He is still classified as an enemy combatant. And if military tribunals are not a good option, why is owebama still having them as we speak? Why do you think the hairy guy should be tried here and not all enemy combatants that are picked up around the world?

If someone is picked up on non-US soil, attacking our military specifically, then I don't have a major issue with them being tried in a tribunal, at least in regions where there is no stable local government. The US civil system has no authority over crimes committed outside of our borders. Even the conventions are somewhat vague on this, since these paramilitary organizations weren't much of an issue back then. It was either "you're a member of an enemy army" or "you're a criminal". For someone who is accused of attacking civilians, or civilian infrastructure, it's a civil matter. Very simple. Please give one argument for why KSM shouldn't be tried in a civilian court. Did he attack our military? Is he a member of the military of a country that we're at war with? It seems to me that he planned an attack on our civilian infrastructure. Do you think Timmy McVeigh should have gotten a military tribunal? How about Jeffrey Dahmer? Where do you even draw the line? Why are you so in favor of giving so much power to the military anyway? Isn't that the sort of big government crap you people are usually against (well, that and railing about the "unconstitutionality" of taxes or health care or something, ignoring things that are actually in the constitution like habeas corpus).

I really don't understand this assumption that tax rates have anything to do with prosperity. The world is full of countries with wildly varying tax rates, and there is little to no correlation with economic prosperity.

You'd pay about the same amount in taxes in Switzerland as you would in Bosnia (both much, much lower than the US).

Most of sub-saharan africa has little to no taxes (the government, or local warlods, just confiscates everything else)

Please cite some actual arguments for how lower (or higher) taxes would make much of a difference at all. History shows us that it does not.

If tax rates are too high, people simply don't pay them, and prices / wages tend to be offset to cover the difference anyway.

If tax rates are too low to cover expenses, governments just borrow (there are very few "prosperous" countries that don't have an enormous debt).

Factors that actually affect prosperity are:

1. Governmental stability. Bitch about our government all you want, but would you prefer a dictatorship or a bunch of warlords?

2. Infrastructure. You need good power grids, clean water, and adequate roads to support business development.

3. Security. If your country is constantly at war and being invaded, it's difficult to prosper (and this usually affects both 1 and 2).

Find a country that has all three of those things and you will find a prosperous nation. Find a country that is severely lacking in any of them and you'll find a country that is not that prosperous.

Hmmm. I don't know. There is another group out there taking another tact, arguing that the vaccination was produced too quickly. Shoved out the door without proper testing. I brought my daughter to a clinic just yesterday. In and out, no waiting at all. Personally, I think the hype is way of line with the reality. Bird-flu, SARS, Swine, et cetera, et cetera.

I don't know reniam, I work in a major metro hospital, I don't recall seeing so many kiddos die from the regualr flu as I've seen with H1N1. And the number of admissions are tapering off, is it just a coincidence that the vaccine is now available and has been for over a month. Maybe people are fnally being more cautious, staying home when ill, washing hands, etc. Watch a normally child or young adult die of H1N1 and tell me it's hype...

Actually, the original premise put forth by elvis is that we need a much smaller government, which in turn would require less taxes. I'm a little skeptical about his number that the government consumes 45% of GDP---if that corresponds to the $1.2T/year stat, then I'm surprised that our economy is so small.

But to elvis' point, if you take Kevin's #1-3 (stability, infrastructure, security), then our government has taken on a rather huge array of supplemental duties. I wouldn't mind if we got our federal government back towards defense, justice and basic Constitutional functions.

Brand says

Actually, the original premise put forth by elvis is that we need a much smaller government, which in turn would require less taxes. I’m a little skeptical about his number that the government consumes 45% of GDP—if that corresponds to the $1.2T/year stat, then I’m surprised that our economy is so small.
But to elvis’ point, if you take Kevin’s #1-3 (stability, infrastructure, security), then our government has taken on a rather huge array of supplemental duties. I wouldn’t mind if we got our federal government back towards defense, justice and basic Constitutional functions.

I would love it!