Are you Liberal or Conservative or somewhere in between?

[Gravekeeper]

I will support a tax increase (even though I don't think we need it). I say tax those who have publicly stated that their taxes are too low, at 75%. This includes Warren Buffet, and others. They can put their money where their mouths are.

Well, you've already proven yourself uninformed. So congrats there I guess. The best approach right now would be a mixture of budget cuts and tax increases + closing tax loopholes. The reason Buffet said he pays too low of a tax rate, is because he does. His taxable income rate is 17.4%. What's yours? =p

The reason is because of capital gains tax on investments. The rate was slashed in 2003 as part of the Bush tax cuts ( You know, those things Obama has been trying to let expire, but the GOP would strangle a kitten to keep ) under the theory it would lead to more capital investment and thus boost the economy + job creation. Obviously it hasn't done jack and shit save make the rich even richer, so he's calling to have it restored to the previous rate.

I totally believe that we should phase out Medicare, Social Security, and the welfare state. They have proven disastrous for this nation, and these programs are bankrupting us.

What's bankrupting you is fighting two wars and keeping them off the books until Obama took office and put them back on. As for the welfare state, you obviously know nothing about the term, what it entails, or the effect it has had on the modern world. This is why the rest of us in the modern world outside of the US are always in such awe. We don't understand how you don't have things like free healthcare. Something which practically every modern country in the world has except for you. Countries which are happier and healthier than yours at the moment. -.-

Welfare and social programs directly reduce poverty, and reducing poverty reduces all sorts of social ills. The only one with a counter argument seems to be half of America, and that counter argument amounts to "Fuck you, I got mine already".

I believe that we shouldn't use military force, unless it's in our national interest. Libya is a perfect example - there's no reason we're over there, except to try to make President Obama look good. It was a civil war and we should have let them take care of themselves, just like the US did in the Civil War/War between the States.

It has nothing to do with making Obama look good, it's a UN action and thus a joint mission. It is also people rising up against evil, which is a worthy cause which I for one support and my country has followed suit ( We're over there too, you know. Hell we're bombing them. >.> ). How far would they have gotten by themselves without air support? Not too far I imagine. The UN action was taken to protect Libyan civilians from Gaddafi.

We're not talking two armies clashing here. It was an army vs civilians.

[Andara Bledin]

We're not talking two armies clashing here. It was an army vs civilians.

But you forget - in his world, whoever has the army is in the right.

^-.-^

[mikoyan29]

Here's what I don't get about the tax code. If I decide I want to start a business and that business makes a profit, that profit is basically taxed like income. IF I instead decide to invest that money in stocks and I keep those stocks for a while before I sell them, they are taxed at a much lower rate. The reason I've heard for low capital gains is to spur on investment, how is me starting a business any different?

[Andara Bledin]

The reason I've heard for low capital gains is to spur on investment, how is me starting a business any different?

Rich people who have lobbyists invest in the market... poor people and those who want to dabble start businesses and actually contribute to society.

^-.-^

[Crazedclerkthe2nd]

This is why the rest of us in the modern world outside of the US are always in such awe. We don't understand how you don't have things like free healthcare. Something which practically every modern country in the world has except for you. Countries which are happier and healthier than yours at the moment.

Welfare and social programs directly reduce poverty, and reducing poverty reduces all sorts of social ills. The only one with a counter argument seems to be half of America, and that counter argument amounts to "Fuck you, I got mine already".

Universal health care. Not free healthcare. There may be limited out of pocket costs, BUT many developed nations have higher tax rates than the U.S. does. Having come from Canada to the U.S. I can see how much higher the tax rates were there compared to here.

Now I don't necessarily mind that. Single payer saved my ass (and my bank account) several times while I was in college and had no other insurance. If I had been born in America, I'd probably have some medical debt to pay off right now and I'm a reasonably healthy guy.

It never fails to boggle my mind that in the United States we pay more per capita for healthcare than just about any other country in the world, including most major developed nations that have single payer!

That right there ought to tell you the system is seriously broken.

I think the main explanation for this is that the U.S. government and political system is heavily tilted to favor the wealthy and privileged and the vast majority of things they do are meant to do nothing else make life easier for the rich and the corporations they run. If they fuck over the rest of us, who cares?

It's amazing to me to see some of things being suggested by Presidential candidates so far:

- Eliminating the EPA (dirty water and air FTW!)
- Eliminating the Federal Reserve
- Eliminating Obamacare (Perry has promised to repeal it on day one with an executive order)
- Cut taxes
- Eliminate the department of education
- Eliminate and/or seriously curtail social security/medicare
- Restoring DADT and Federally mandating marriage to be between one man and one woman
- Further abortion restrictions

I could go on, but tell me, how many of these measures do you think will create jobs or boost the economy. Other than the tax cuts notion (which, with the deficits we have is a really bad idea right now) there are none.

In fact these measures combined will probably kill more jobs than they will create.

Also, did you know the U.S. is losing significant ground to the Chinese and other nations when it comes to science and innovation, not to mention educating our kids?

I think medicaid/social security/etc. should be kept, but they should have more stringent rules and be more tightly regulated.

Also can we do something about stagnating wages already? Working full time at minimum wage is simply not enough to get by on in just about every city in America.

[mikoyan29]

I remember when Clinton became President and the declaration was with much fanfare that we were moving to a service economy. Basically saying that we would let other countries produce our goods while we reap the benefits (or something like that). I also remember thinking that was a bad idea for a number of reasons. Now that I'm a little more experience and am starting to see the effects of that, my suspicions were concerned.

1. If we ever get into a full blown war with someone, we will not have the manufacturing capacity to replace our weapons. Sure, we still build our weapons here but what about all the computer chips and other things that go in them. Ever since the Civil War, the scope of industry has pretty much determined the outcome of a war between nations.
2. Manufacturing drives innovation. In order to design things, you need to make things. When you stop making things, you start losing the ability to design them because you don't quite get to see how they work. I mean you can get a rough idea but in order to do the nitty gritty, you really have to see how they are made.
3. Manufacturing moves people into the middle class. One of the reasons why we had a large middle class in this country was because mass production enables you to pay your workers alot better. Any time I've ever looked at production costs, labor costs were a pretty low percentage of the total cost, so I can never understand why we use China as our factories because transport and materials are usually larger cost factors. I can't believe that materials in China are cheaper than here...unless there is some other things going on.

It seems like about the only thing we've been making here for the past 20 years is more money and that is not going to last, I think. It's only a matter of time before other countries realize they don't need the United States to back their manufacturing efforts. Now I realize that even if we opened up every factory that existed again, they wouldn't employ nearly what they used to. So what do you do with those folks that would have been otherwise employed?

I do not think our country is heading in the right direction. When you start seeing the wealth discrepancies that are being seen now, bad things happen.

[HYHYBT]

Why is it that people who promise blatantly unconstitutional acts (such as "repealing" a law with a mere executive order) remain viable candidates?

[Andara Bledin]

Because bigots and religious fanatics don't care if they screw over people who aren't their kind.

^-.-^

[Panacea]

Here's what I don't get about the tax code. If I decide I want to start a business and that business makes a profit, that profit is basically taxed like income. IF I instead decide to invest that money in stocks and I keep those stocks for a while before I sell them, they are taxed at a much lower rate. The reason I've heard for low capital gains is to spur on investment, how is me starting a business any different?

It shouldn't make any difference at all. Income is income, regardless of how it is derived.

It never fails to boggle my mind that in the United States we pay more per capita for healthcare than just about any other country in the world, including most major developed nations that have single payer!

That right there ought to tell you the system is seriously broken.

The system IS seriously broken. We in the US pay more for our health care than anywhere else in the world.

We DON'T have better outcomes based on what we pay into the system. We actually have worse. We don't have the best health care system. We just have the most expensive health care system. We waste huge amounts of money on unnecessary care that is not supported by medical evidence because we have a "right" to demand whatever we want from the system, because we lack the knowledge to know what to ask for and when to stop asking, and because we insist on the right to shift the costs of those unreasonable demands on everyone else so insurance will "pay" for the unnecessary care we demand.

But heaven forbid if we actually extend these rights to the poor. The world would come to an end!

1. If we ever get into a full blown war with someone, we will not have the manufacturing capacity to replace our weapons. Sure, we still build our weapons here but what about all the computer chips and other things that go in them. Ever since the Civil War, the scope of industry has pretty much determined the outcome of a war between nations.

Be afraid. Be very afraid. Bush Jr. allowed a Chinese company to take over manufacturing of a highly classified magnet system that controls our advanced missle systems and drones. Guess what government now has that advanced technology?

2. Manufacturing drives innovation.
3. Manufacturing moves people into the middle class.

There's some good news here. Businesses are starting to realize the high cost of doing business with China and are moving manufacturing back to US soil where they can control quality. They're tired of replacing or refunding money for poor quality Chinese goods because the managers of those factories have so much work they don't give a shit if they do a good job or not anymore.

It seems like about the only thing we've been making here for the past 20 years is more money and that is not going to last, I think. It's only a matter of time before other countries realize they don't need the United States to back their manufacturing efforts. Now I realize that even if we opened up every factory that existed again, they wouldn't employ nearly what they used to. So what do you do with those folks that would have been otherwise employed?

You're on to a truth here. We like to brag about American exceptionalism, but truth is that doesn't exist anymore. We did so well after WWII because we had the manufacturing capacity and NO competition. Now we have loads of competition. We Americans need to get used to the fact we can't run roughshod over the rest of the world economically anymore. We are actually going to have to be competitive on a level playing field, for the first time in decades.

Why is it that people who promise blatantly unconstitutional acts (such as "repealing" a law with a mere executive order) remain viable candidates?

Silly rabbit. Rules only apply to Democrats, not Republicans!

[Boozy]

1. If we ever get into a full blown war with someone, we will not have the manufacturing capacity to replace our weapons. Sure, we still build our weapons here but what about all the computer chips and other things that go in them. Ever since the Civil War, the scope of industry has pretty much determined the outcome of a war between nations.

That's the single best part about global free trade. Two nations who trade with each other are unlikely to ever go to war. Two superpowers that rely on each other willl never go to war.

It's only a matter of time before other countries realize they don't need the United States to back their manufacturing efforts.

The machines and technology that countries like China use to make our shoes and toys and appliances are made and developed in the US. The market for selling their goods is in the US.

I know there's been a lot of talk about the sky falling and the rise of China as the new economic superpower, but the fact remains that China needs the US more than the US needs China.

The Chinese economic threat is being used as the new Red Scare to get voters to back isolationist and dangerous economic policies proposed by hayseed politicians who don't know any better. Don't fall for it.

[Gravekeeper]

I know there's been a lot of talk about the sky falling and the rise of China as the new economic superpower, but the fact remains that China needs the US more than the US needs China.

Yep. Not only is their economy more dependent on the US than the other way around, but their propping their economy up by artificially keeping GDP growth up. Mainly through constant, pointless construction. Plus they're going to suffer the same worker decline the US is currently in as the Babyboomer's retire, but at a much much faster pace. So they'll kinda be double fucked in another 20-30 years.

[mikoyan29]

That's the single best part about global free trade. Two nations who trade with each other are unlikely to ever go to war. Two superpowers that rely on each other willl never go to war.



The machines and technology that countries like China use to make our shoes and toys and appliances are made and developed in the US. The market for selling their goods is in the US.

I know there's been a lot of talk about the sky falling and the rise of China as the new economic superpower, but the fact remains that China needs the US more than the US needs China.

The Chinese economic threat is being used as the new Red Scare to get voters to back isolationist and dangerous economic policies proposed by hayseed politicians who don't know any better. Don't fall for it.

At some point they are going to realize they have the knowhow to produce those machines on their own.

And to your first point...If I remember correctly, Germany's largest trading partner was France...

[Andara Bledin]

I know there's been a lot of talk about the sky falling and the rise of China as the new economic superpower, but the fact remains that China needs the US more than the US needs China.

It's actually getting to the point where enough industry is putting money into the hands of the Chinese people that they're starting to become their own best customer. I get a lot of electronics-related trade publication emails for work, and things are slowly shifting out of the US having as much economic power.

However, they still need the rest of the world to keep them producing their gadgets for them. They don't do a whole lot in the way of creating things, just producing them.

^-.-^

[Gravekeeper]

And to your first point...If I remember correctly, Germany's largest trading partner was France...

Global economies and industries are much much more deeply entwined these days then they were in WW2 and there are vastly more "virtual" assets in play that you can't just loot from a building because they are not physical assets and may not even be in the city or country that owns them.

France's markets crashing because its being invaded would have a catastrophic ripple effect throughout Europe now. Germany was rather self sustained at the time hence being able to manufacture their own army and what not. Remember, WW2 as a massive industrial war machine where entire countries devoted everything they had to weapon production. These days most countries have purchased at least some of their military equipment from the US.

Also, they could walk to France. -.-

[Panacea]

Yep. Not only is their economy more dependent on the US than the other way around, but their propping their economy up by artificially keeping GDP growth up. Mainly through constant, pointless construction. Plus they're going to suffer the same worker decline the US is currently in as the Babyboomer's retire, but at a much much faster pace. So they'll kinda be double fucked in another 20-30 years.

Another thing China does is artificially keep the value of its currency low by pegging it to the US dollar, making their exports cheap, and our imports expensive. That cheap money is driving their economic engine. If they were to actually do what we (the US that is) want them to do and allow their current to reflect its real (higher) value, their economic engine would slow.