Nancy Pelosi, Communist?

[otisotisotis]

Originally Posted by joeydb

It's the Democrats that want two classes: Providers and Recipients. Which group are you in?

lol........i guess the Republicans are structuring a plan for a one world utopia...

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by otisotisotis

lol........i guess the Republicans are structuring a plan for a one world utopia...

Utopia, as written by Sir Thomas More, is a work of fiction, and was meant as a parody when it was written.

I get your point -- but I do think that the Republican point of view is more universally applicable. I would paraphrase it as "those who work for the money should get to keep as much of it as possible. As a result, government is obligated to spend as little as possible. In this way freedom is maximized and the burdens of taxation would be minimized."

There is nothing in that kind of sentiment that screams "for the rich only", despite all the extreme comments from the left.

[Princess Doreen]

Nancy Pelosi a communist? Hmmmm! One does not necessarily have to be an idiot to be a communist.

[otisotisotis]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Utopia, as written by Sir Thomas More, is a work of fiction, and was meant as a parody when it was written.

I get your point -- but I do think that the Republican point of view is more universally applicable. I would paraphrase it as "those who work for the money should get to keep as much of it as possible. As a result, government is obligated to spend as little as possible. In this way freedom is maximized and the burdens of taxation would be minimized."

There is nothing in that kind of sentiment that screams "for the rich only", despite all the extreme comments from the left.

i read that and think 'Let them eat cake!".

[gales0678]

it's not been working washington for many years

harry reid and pelosi are part of the swamp

it's time for it to be drained

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by otisotisotis

i read that and think 'Let them eat cake!".

I don't see how you draw that from my comments. We would want the little guy to be able to keep as much of his as possible too.

Even with a flat tax rate, which we'd never see, the amounts would be fair. 10% tax is 10% tax, whether on $100,000 , a million, or 100 million.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

I don't see how you draw that from my comments. We would want the little guy to be able to keep as much of his as possible too.

Even with a flat tax rate, which we'd never see, the amounts would be fair. 10% tax is 10% tax, whether on $100,000 , a million, or 100 million.

Yes, but the tax rate would have to be more around 20-26%, to equal what is taken in now with taxes.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

Yes, but the tax rate would have to be more around 20-26%, to equal what is taken in now with taxes.

That's where the spending cuts come in. But at least we're agreed that there would be no need for income "brackets".

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

That's where the spending cuts come in. But at least we're agreed that there would be no need for income "brackets".

I wish the flat tax was put into effect 30 years ago, when we could have afforded it and it was far more doable.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

That's where the spending cuts come in. But at least we're agreed that there would be no need for income "brackets".

I have seen the entire GOP talk about "spending cuts", but I have never seen a list of specific items to be cut, adding up to a specific amount. They refuse to answer that one.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

As a result, government is obligated to spend as little as possible. In this way freedom is maximized and the burdens of taxation would be minimized.".

So you like what the new conservative leadership of England just did? It is virtually exactly what the current ultra-conservative GOP is asking for in the US.

If so, how do you reconcile that when England did the same previously, in the early part of the last century, it was a massive economic failure?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,1227957.story Britain unveils radical austerity plan

http://www.tampabay.com/news/world/c...the-us/1129353

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann..._b_770748.html

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

So you like what the new conservative leadership of England just did? It is virtually exactly what the current ultra-conservative GOP is asking for in the US.

If so, how do you reconcile that when England did the same previously, in the early part of the last century, it was a massive economic failure?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,1227957.story Britain unveils radical austerity plan

http://www.tampabay.com/news/world/c...the-us/1129353

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann..._b_770748.html

They had to cut expenses. HAD TO. Soon, when China refuses to loan us another nickel, we will do the same.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

They had to cut expenses. HAD TO.

Yes. I'm not saying it's easy or black and white. But history - and many economists - predicts their economy will completely crash now. We'll see (the last link above talks about the negatives). Of course, the good thing is that they will be in a far more stable financial position in the next 5 years. But let's see what is also being predicted now from this (the second link, above)

• About 490,000 public sector jobs likely to be lost

A half-milllion unemployed thrust into an economy that's already fragile.

• Over $11 billion in additional welfare budget cuts

So, will these guys just starve on the streets? It's not like they can go to work, there are no jobs

• Police funding cut by 4% a year

Hopefully they can continue to fight crime.

• Retirement age to rise from 65 to 66 by 2020

Keep working another year in that economy with no jobs.

• National Health Service budget in England to rise every year until 2015

And healthcare costs skyrockets.