How About A Grand Compromise?

Simple bargain.

Restore the 1976 federal tax rate structure.

Rescind all regulations promulgated after 1976.

Give a little, get a little.

 

There was a really interesting article on CNN during the shut down discussing how the art of the grand compromise is dead in modern American politics. So I fear your hope may remain just that

 

Please explain how progressive liberals have compromised in the past. Obviously a few data series are non-normalized

 

Stupid idea, but I am curious...

Do you have a link to the 1976 tax rate structure? I couldn't find anything except marginal rates.

 

Is compromise a stupid idea?

 

That's a lie. CNN never makes a good article.

 

This is true. I don't know what happened to CNN. Seems they've gone complete batsheet right wing any more. Murdoch must have large amounts of stock in the company.

 

which kinds of regulations?

regulations that protect our air, water, safety of our skies, food, transportation systems????

 

"which kinds of regulations?"

Taxcutter says:
All of them. Same with taxes. The Republic was getting by just fine in 1976.

 

even bans on dangerous chemicals?

bans on lead paint?

wow, you really want Americans to get sick and injured huh.

 

Nice light weight response

 

Right wing? I'm not sure. Have you seen there editorials and opinions page? Holy (*)(*)(*)(*). What a mess. Most of them are topics related to why *blah* is sexy or what *blah* shouldn't have sex with *blah*

It's becoming a tabloid, which sells, can't blame them

 

The biggest one I keep bringing up is ACA. Obama said "Let's do single payer". Didn't happen, Dems didn't fight. So they said let's do 'single payer as option'. Fought again. Dems presented the Republican health care plan, fought again, amended 170+ times by Republicans, then passed then was fought again.

The only thing that real compromise happens on is foreign affairs and drone strikes and such.

 

Frankly, Taxcutter's plan has merit.

I would be willing to substitute some other regulation to restore the ban on lead paint.

So if there are health and safety regs you think are absolutely essential, like the lead paint bad, let's trade it for a regulation that isn't essential.

 

If you're including Dodd-Frank and Gramm-Leach-Bliley I'm on board.

 

Re: Post #10

If you go picking and choosing regulation, you open the door for picking and choosing on taxes, too. By time the K Street boys weigh in, we'll wind up with more regulation and taxation
.


If you open it up to micro-negotiation, you give the special interests scope to pad their advantages.

Nobody will ever use lead paint or asbestos again.

People weren't dying in the street from the environment in 1976.

I picked 1976 because that year the "99%" held a big piece of the wealth in the US. If you want to make an attempt to get back to 1976 wealth distribution, you gotta restore the conditions of 1976.

 

Where are our board moderates? I thought they favored compromise.

 

"If you're including Dodd-Frank and Gramm-Leach-Bliley I'm on board."

Taxcutter says:
I'll come back with another one specifically for the financial sector.

 

Works for me, but then again I am neither rich nor poor. Earned Income Tax Credit was a very small amount, all personal loan interest would be deductible, and most of the personal and corporate freebies would go as well.

 

Personal and corporate welfare could be on the table - in another thread.

 

So you want to repeal the Clean Water Act so that corporations can again use our rivers and streams to dump their toxic waste.

So you would be good with allowing corporations to reintroduce PCB's into the enviroment with it's known dangers by repealing The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)

And several other major acts designed to save the lives and health of Americans.

 

Re: Post #21

Apparently restoring the 1976 distribution of wealth isn't that important to you.

You get what you pay for.

 

Don't kid yourself, If they thought they could make money from it, many companies would go back to using those in their products tomorrow and since the regulations requiring labeling would not exist, people would not know what is in their paint or other products.

 

So I repeat, you are good with allowing corporations the ability to pollute our air and water? I traveled in the 60's and 70's though a number of large cities, like Pittsburg and Gary, Ind., the air looked like the images we see today coming out of China. The water in the rivers was so toxic fish could not live in it and if you did catch something, it was totally unsafe to eat it. It's only been in the last ten years that seafood caught in most of the Delaware bay has been safe to eat in small amounts. And fish caught in the Delaware River is unsafe in any amount, but at least fish are returning, in 1975 the Delaware River below Trenton was dead as a doornail as were most of the Rivers and streams in the Northeast. Are you advocating that we return to those halcyon days f youre?

 

Even if we could roll back the tax rates and the regulations, we have no way to roll back everything else that has changed since 1976. I would have to see how trying to reverse THOSE changes would affect the country before I could make a decision one way or the other.

Just curious though, are you offering this compromise because you really want fairness? Or do you think that one side stands to lose more with this compromise? Which side do you think will lose more?