MikeWhitney wrote:
Hmm, guess that would be a "no".
Am I the only one worried about the projection of a 90% income tax rate in 30 years when Social Security goes bankrupt? Seems to me the only way to shore up the fed gov't is, well, to make it smaller. Paul's the only one I have heard from with a plan to do that and give more power back to the states. Hmm, maybe I'm a closet confederate.
(PS I know he's unelectable. I don't care about that, I'm going to write him in anyways. Eventually the parties will lose enough votes to people like me to be forced to pay attention)
Mike,
I didn't mean to make light of your original post...just thought that sticker on the tree was kind of funny.
In a nutshell, one of the main problems is this country has gotten big, fat dumb and happy. History is not kind to countries, corporations and people who have worked themselves into such. Paul rightly states some things that should have been done a long time ago by now. However, when we're big, fat dumb and happy, nobody wants to experience the relative pain required to right many years of largess. That will be forced on the system at some point, especially if we continue to be uncompetitive with other countries with tax rates on risk taking (some candidates want to raise taxes on such!) -- just look at how Germany has really reinvigorated their economy with significant cuts in tax rates in recent years (and I had almost given up on high corporate tax Europeans!).
Anyway, to "fix" a lot of the situation this country is in now will unfortunately not be something you can convince people to vote for...they'd rather roll the dice, push the pain further into the future and party some more on home equity I guess.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Oh well, we're all family here right? Wheeeee!
