You Fix The Budget

are you incorporated with at least two employees

and a traceable corporate revenue stream

tax cut

are you a person

who receives a paycheck from a company you do not own

and making 250k+

no tax cut

i don't think that's idealistic

I didn't create the term.
If you read whom I quoted you'd know who created it :/
I just think that people should be thinking logically rather than emotionally.
Sadly a good deal of the time it is the latter :/

that's where emotional response comes into play.
since a good deal of politics work in emotion a plan such as that which is going to essentially "take things away" from individuals just isn't going to work for the sheer fact taht we as a people don't like the government specifically taking out certain price brackets(not that I don't agree with your idealism), they want everyone to be happy and the general public doesn't happen to be a fan of large corporations as much so sticking it to them would be supported and helping small business would be supported as well.
You have to tiptoe around your words and make everything look like it has flowers and glitter on the cover of the plan for people to like it or you have to strong arm a large document that is convoluted and unreadable like they do now and further complicate things.
Obamacare was done in such a methodology, not that I know much about how good or bad it is, people will complain about it regardless.

i am one of the 3 or 4 least idealistic people on these boards and very likely the least

if people just won't stand for unpopular measures that take something away, i'd be interested to hear your take on how we went from no income tax outside of emergencies

to the Wilson-Gorman tariff at a 2% income tax

to our current tax plan

it's very possible that it's late and my skimming skills are subpar but i did not see that term anywhere in the four pages before you mentioned it

before I hit on what your post said i do have one more thing to add.
the reason why my idea wouldn't work is because these large corporations pay for these politicians to get where they are and that does influence how their ideas go into play :P

how did it happen?
I dunno.
The gov't does what it wants to do in the end.
I'm just saying that politically it wouldn't be the most popular method :/

you're skimming skills suck.
my post before the post with the said quote, I replied to the post I quoted in the first place :/
So yeah you must be tired lol.

and?

ex asked me what i thought would encourage job creation, not what would keep me in hypothetical office

the incumbents in greece are not getting reelected, but sometimes that's better than facing insolvency

nothing idealistic about it, in any case

I suppose you're tired too then.

you beat me :p

nope.
I'm high :D

well you gotta balance a lot of things in the magical hypothetical world to make it parallel with the real world don't you?
making these ideas just so we can say! "hey let's make an idea that won't work in reality because we forgot about politics!"
you need all the pieces to say you have finished the puzzle my friend.

what the *** are you talking about

the whole job creation thing.
maybe you should read my post as a reply to your post :/

maybe you should read it when you're sober

don't make unrealistic suggestions such as that :P

i'll try to simplify it for you then.
you say that you were just making a solution that would create jobs yes?

regardless of how fantastical and awesome the products of this super-tastic solution could be you see it has to pass through the eyes of people other than yourself and be taken into consideration as to how a collective group of individuals may feel about it.
for this example you can call them the house of representatives.
can you kind of get where I'm going with this?
regardless if you want to include politcs or not...this document has to be processed through a bunch of politicians...
meaning that regardless of how awesome your idea is...it's impractical because you aren't acknowledging the emotional beast called politics.

maybe my last post confused you because I tend to use unconventional terms of reference when I'm hanging out in what-if land.

Teddy Roosevelt was a leader of the progressive movement and presided over increases in business regulation. Not really bastions of small government ideology.

When I asked who in the last 100 years has been a small government hero I was wanting to see if anyone could name an actual small government president that has been elected in the last 100 years. I was trying to prove that the small government, large government argument is a wedge issue. Government for at least the last 100 years has been large no matter who was elected president.

SSI was self-sustaining and would currently be so if we wouldn't have taken money out of it to pay for other things. The baby boom population was doing well enough to pay for their parent's SSI and their own. But SSI was not and isn't now in a lock box separate from other funds. I agree that it should have been.

essentially

your solution is not practical because the house would have to have the idea first and the senate would have to approve it!

that's 5th grade civics.

this could be said for any political suggestion on this board.

you are absolutely correct and i should have known that. no idea what made him come to mind when i was trying to think of small government heroes.

i do believe that at least as far as literal number of government employees, clinton reduced the size of the government. that said, you are correct. it's been a choice between big government and bigger government for the past 100 years or more.

i don't think this automatically qualifies big government as the automatic best solution. i think that our expectation of and imagined entitlement to the services a big government provides is a leading reason for our national debt.

if your point is simply that we haven't experienced a lot of small government in the past 100 years, i agree with you entirely.

that's exactly why you have to take something like that into account :/

i just have a long time beef with hypothetical concepts so I am mean to them pretty much.

by that standard

there is no point in discussing any political ideas that are not already proposed as official bills in the house or senate

eliminating almost all political discussion just about...

well...

anywhere

it's a silly standard to hold informal political debate to

the ideas you expressed earlier in this thread don't meet

your new arbitrary standard of political practicality

stop being such an idealist

We had a balanced budget under Clinton even with entitlement programs. So I'm not too swayed by the big government is the leading reason for our national debt argument. The dot com boom helped considerably, but then again who created the internet?

With big governments we've been very successful.

I don't know if big governments are automatically the best solutions, but for an imperial power I believe them to be a solution with a good track record.

Who wants to go back to the US of the 1800s? Probably not women, blacks, or labor workers.

i have to go to bed like super bad it's 315 am and i have an a+p exam tomorrow

that said i'll do my best to get back to this, it's an interesting discussion

(essentially my argument would be that the economic conditions of the last century are different than the economic conditions we will be facing in the next and that the policies required in the 2000s would likely be as different from the last century as the 1800s were from the 1900s, and that the women and blacks arguments deal with social policies, not economic ones, but i'd like to support it properly with some basic research)

Have a good night, and good luck with your exam.

that's why I didn't argue the validity of my idea.
i said that it "could work" and taking away something from a generation that doesn't exist isn't really taking anything away from anything in the reality that i live in since well..babies that haven't been born yet...still haven't been born.
that idea in regard to social security would be more believable IMO :/

but my idea that was brought up while I happened to be on the same tangent as you that was a counter idea did fit my guidelines and hell I even shot it down myself too.
:D
we aren't really going to gain much headway on this though.
but I am flattered that you cared to look a few pages back and bold a few things that you felt were relevant.

i find there to be a bit of a difference between hypothetical arguments and hypothetical statements.
specifically the word argument..or if you want to sue the word discussion you may.
what i said was a statement...or did I have anyone reply to that up until now?
unless you can tell me who's toes we are stepping on with my hypothetical statement i fail to see the lack of consistency that you are trying to point out. Except for the idealist part :/
That's spot on with what I said since it was a what if situation.
The statement I was going against was your small business/individual tax idea not being so sellable on it's foundation.
my idea about SSI idea at least had the "not taking anything from anyonee alive" selling point available.


but hell.
conversational posturing and not really coming to a general consensus...quite a reflection on some things at the capital :P

I agree that we will be seeing a very different global economy then we saw during the previous century. It's common knowledge that China and India are coming on strong. However China's economy is tied extremely tightly to positive GDP growth in the double digits. If they experience a slowing in job growth they will have social unrest similar to 1989. If many Central and South American countries get their governments stable they will have rapid job growth from international companies investing heavily in their work forces.

Labor has long been the export of the US, but in an increasingly competitive global market we will be outpaced. The US needs a new export.

lol

Altho i'm not from the USA, here is what I crossed:
- Withdraw Military from around the world. (You are not the World Poliece)
- Return to Clinton Era !