The BEST Question Ever:Who can answer it?

If you're working now and paying 15% in FICA and then pay whatever in income tax and then pay the plethora of other federal taxes and then pay state taxes and then pay local taxes and then pay special improvement district taxes, you are already a sharecropper. Liberals want you to be a slave.

 

Isn't it the same principle that drives a businessman to seek lower costs for labor, materials, etc., that entices people to seek as much as they can get for as little as they have to give?

This isn't a "liberal problem" it's human nature.

 

Like a mushroom governments and dictatorships can not stop growing, with new spores like suckers constantly attaching themselves.
Systems/kingdoms only corrupt and become meaningless, at which time a new movement must rise. No one has faith in American government, NO ONE.

 

Totaly irelevant buddy

 

If people are inherently bad, then government is to since it is controled by people.

 

For a start Governments don't need to "cut spending". If you have properly constructed welfare systems, their cost decreases as private employment increases and people get off welfare.

As for Government staff reductions. All you need to do is stop hiring, and natural attrition will reduce staff numbers for you.

Furthermore, as the economy picks up, tax revenue increases.

All you need then to reduce your deficits is a treasury and politicians with the balls to say "No".

Keynes sorted all this out in the Nineteen Thirties. Governments should spend to take up the slack in private demand when the economy falters. As the economy picks up, Government spending must decrease to allow the private sector to expand without stimulating inflation.

Maybe you would like to borrow our Mr. Peter Costello? He was Australia's treasurer for Ten years, he ran surpluses every year and paid off all Government debt.

 

Government stops growing and starts contracting after four terms of a successful Presidency- after 16 years of growth and prosperity. Because it is only then that Americans feel safe and warm in America and the government does not need to spend hundreds of billions of the military anymore.

Yes- I would point out the military as the bellweather for the growth of the government.

 

No, that's really not what we believe. We believe that people are good and should be supported by each other.

 

You believe most people are good, so they should have guns pointed at them and be forced to support each other.

 

Sorry, I should have explained. Liberals see the world only through their one-dimensional glasses. If you buy the cheapest raw materials your shoddy products might not make you money. If you hire the cheapest labor you might not be able to compete.

When you simply take what you want by force the dynamics are quite different.

 

Indeed, and that applies to international business interests as well.

 

Not really. But I do think that the laws (every law is a case of the government pointing guns at people whether you approve or disapprove of that law) should be determined democratically, for the benefit of everyone, rather than financially, for the benefit of the few.

You can make that sound authoritarian if you try hard enough. But reality doesn't bow to political ideology. We make the laws, the laws do not make us.

 

It doesn't.

The size and scope of the state is impossible to control.

 

...Therefore, the only solution is to eliminate the state.

 

It's not a matter of nominal growth. It's a matter of relative growth.

If the economy is growing quickly, government growth is fine as long as it doesn't outpace the economy.

If the economy is faltering, government must shrink.

I don't subscribe to the idea that government stimulus plans pull countries out of recession, if overall government spending increases faster than the economy.

Stimulus plans have to be designed to encourage the enrichment of the labor force and the repair of infrastructures. In other words, funding should be explicitly limited to improving the education of the workforce and improving roads, bridges, etc.

The problem is that we aren't willing to cut the fat out of the government. All pork barrel spending must end. All corporate subsidies must end. The military must be cut, and our international presence must be decreased.

We must also realistically reform SS and Medicare regardless of the screams of the older voting bloc. Much of our older population is in denial about our budget situation, and because they vote regularly, politicians are afraid of touching either of these programs.

We must also reform the tax code to eliminate most deductions. Changing nominal tax rates won't accomplish much when you can simply deduct most of your taxes anyway.

So, overall, government must shrink during bad times, but that doesn't rule out stimulus plans.

 

Really? I make laws?

 

Good luck with that...

 

Technically, anybody can create a law. Besides government officials, lobbyists are the primary creators of legislation. However, only government officials can introduce legislation.

 

He's just going to eventually enter another of his fantasy rants about not needing any government at all, while people get along without any authorities to keep the peace.

If only...

 

I don't know if you do, but you can.

 

That definition of liberalism is entirely incorrect. If you wan't to look at it in those kind of terms:

Authoritarians (including, but not limited to, socialists) believe that people are 'bad' and must be 'controlled' by the government (that's an overly simplistic way of describing it, of course!).

Libertarians don't care what people are as long as there's no government to control anyone or anything, even if what they are doing is actually bad!

Conservatives believe that the people should control each other by enforced social conformity (through religion or other means), and that government becomes largely irrelevant in the face of that.

Liberals believe that the government should be controlled by the people at as local and effective a level as possible, and should only provide a legal framework to ensure that 'bad' people aren't able to destroy the freedom of everyone else in society by their actions.

Ensuring freedom for the individual, and control of the government by the people, is exactly what liberalism is all about.

 

Only in theory..the 'peoples' control is marginal at best.

 

Yet the military is about the size it was when Clinton left office...

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004598.html

 

Yet military spending has increased 133% from $295 billion to $689 billion. And that is not counting the wars.

Makes you wonder what the hell they are spending that extra $400 billion a year on.

 

I suspect a majority of the extra $400 billion is being funneled into the hands of major corporations as a means of paying back those that finance electoral campaigns and lobby so generously.