Obama's DOL Secretary Hilda L. Solis: You Have the Right to Be Paid Fairly Whether Do

[JakeStarkey]

Solis needs to be fired since she cares more about illegals than US workers. Then again, if the unions are so stupid as to support the "let em in" democrats the unions deserve what they get, no jobs and low wages.

So speaks, eagle beak, one of the marginalized males that America has passed by.

Any worker deserves fair pay, period.

 

[kyzr]

Solis needs to be fired since she cares more about illegals than US workers. Then again, if the unions are so stupid as to support the "let em in" democrats the unions deserve what they get, no jobs and low wages.

So speaks, eagle beak, one of the marginalized males that America has passed by.

Any worker deserves fair pay, period.

Duh. If the illegals are let in, the "fair pay" scale goes to minimum wage. Enjoy working your ass off for nothing moron. The best way to breakn unions is to allow cheap labor in. Than you dems, all the CEOs and their bonuses thank you too. Cheap labor is the answer, Thank you Ms Solis.

As for being "marginalized", you're about to see what the "majority" is all about. Enjoy your "whiney minority" status.

 

[Foxfyre]

Solis needs to be fired since she cares more about illegals than US workers. Then again, if the unions are so stupid as to support the "let em in" democrats the unions deserve what they get, no jobs and low wages.

So speaks, eagle beak, one of the marginalized males that America has passed by.

Any worker deserves fair pay, period.

Duh. If the illegals are let in, the "fair pay" scale goes to minimum wage. Enjoy working your ass off for nothing moron. The best way to breakn unions is to allow cheap labor in. Than you dems, all the CEOs and their bonuses thank you too. Cheap labor is the answer, Thank you Ms Solis.

As for being "marginalized", you're about to see what the "majority" is all about. Enjoy your "whiney minority" status.

Or you can have an Administration who supports and is actively working hands on to encourage as many illegals as possible to come here and suppress those wages which makes the unions, supported and employed by the government, much more attractive as they command above-market wages.

And when they change the laws to expedite making citizens out of all those illegals, and don't think that plan isn't right around the corner, they have millions and millions of grateful new voters who will keep them in power in perpetuity. Or at least long enough to complete dismantling America as we know it.

 

[kyzr]

So speaks, eagle beak, one of the marginalized males that America has passed by.

Any worker deserves fair pay, period.

Duh. If the illegals are let in, the "fair pay" scale goes to minimum wage. Enjoy working your ass off for nothing moron. The best way to breakn unions is to allow cheap labor in. Than you dems, all the CEOs and their bonuses thank you too. Cheap labor is the answer, Thank you Ms Solis.

As for being "marginalized", you're about to see what the "majority" is all about. Enjoy your "whiney minority" status.

Or you can have an Administration who supports and is actively working hands on to encourage as many illegals as possible to come here and suppress those wages which makes the unions, supported and employed by the government, much more attractive as they command above-market wages.

And when they change the laws to expedite making citizens out of all those illegals, and don't think that plan isn't right around the corner, they have millions and millions of grateful new voters who will keep them in power in perpetuity. Or at least long enough to complete dismantling America as we know it.

All the dems have to negotiate are the 2010 mid-terms and the 2012 general elections. I don't think the voters are stupid enough to allow your scenario to materialize. Besides, there simply aren't enough jobs, union or otherwise to make your scenario credible. Most statesa are cutting jobs and benefits to stay solvent. Lo siento.

 

[Foxfyre]

Duh. If the illegals are let in, the "fair pay" scale goes to minimum wage. Enjoy working your ass off for nothing moron. The best way to breakn unions is to allow cheap labor in. Than you dems, all the CEOs and their bonuses thank you too. Cheap labor is the answer, Thank you Ms Solis.

As for being "marginalized", you're about to see what the "majority" is all about. Enjoy your "whiney minority" status.

Or you can have an Administration who supports and is actively working hands on to encourage as many illegals as possible to come here and suppress those wages which makes the unions, supported and employed by the government, much more attractive as they command above-market wages.

And when they change the laws to expedite making citizens out of all those illegals, and don't think that plan isn't right around the corner, they have millions and millions of grateful new voters who will keep them in power in perpetuity. Or at least long enough to complete dismantling America as we know it.

All the dems have to negotiate are the 2010 mid-terms and the 2012 general elections. I don't think the voters are stupid enough to allow your scenario to materialize. Besides, there simply aren't enough jobs, union or otherwise to make your scenario credible. Most statesa are cutting jobs and benefits to stay solvent. Lo siento.

The voters were stupid enough to believe the pure bunk Obama fed to them in order to get elected. The voters are gradually waking up but are still blaming the GOP for the current deficits even though the GOP has little little to do with those.

And the Dems won't care whether there are jobs for all those illegals. They obviously haven't cared about jobs as they continue to implement policy and push an agenda that are job killers, and they obviously don't care how much financial trouble the country is in as they continue to make that situation worse with more and more indefensible spending bills.

The Dems want the votes, the power, the prestige, and the personal fortune that their reign of power gives them. And as for the rest of us, they'll keep buying and feeding us cake until the whole thing collapses. At that point they figure they'll have theirs and the American public will have forgotten who did that to them as they always do seem to forget after awhile.

 

[kyzr]

Or you can have an Administration who supports and is actively working hands on to encourage as many illegals as possible to come here and suppress those wages which makes the unions, supported and employed by the government, much more attractive as they command above-market wages.

And when they change the laws to expedite making citizens out of all those illegals, and don't think that plan isn't right around the corner, they have millions and millions of grateful new voters who will keep them in power in perpetuity. Or at least long enough to complete dismantling America as we know it.

All the dems have to negotiate are the 2010 mid-terms and the 2012 general elections. I don't think the voters are stupid enough to allow your scenario to materialize. Besides, there simply aren't enough jobs, union or otherwise to make your scenario credible. Most statesa are cutting jobs and benefits to stay solvent. Lo siento.

The voters were stupid enough to believe the pure bunk Obama fed to them in order to get elected. The voters are gradually waking up but are still blaming the GOP for the current deficits even though the GOP has little little to do with those.

And the Dems won't care whether there are jobs for all those illegals. They obviously haven't cared about jobs as they continue to implement policy and push an agenda that are job killers, and they obviously don't care how much financial trouble the country is in as they continue to make that situation worse with more and more indefensible spending bills.

The Dems want the votes, the power, the prestige, and the personal fortune that their reign of power gives them. And as for the rest of us, they'll keep buying and feeding us cake until the whole thing collapses. At that point they figure they'll have theirs and the American public will have forgotten who did that to them as they always do seem to forget after awhile.

I don't know if I should reply to your post or just say "thank you". It makes perfect sense based on their actions and policies. However, if SS & Medicare go bankrupt, the "financial collapse" will be disastrous. I liked when they were going after off-shore tax cheats and the Swiss bank accounts. The business regulation Bill got so watered-down as to be useless. Madoff would be relieved.
We need to fix SS & Medicare ASAP, which party wants to tackle that one?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Solis needs to be fired since she cares more about illegals than US workers. Then again, if the unions are so stupid as to support the "let em in" democrats the unions deserve what they get, no jobs and low wages.

So speaks, eagle beak, one of the marginalized males that America has passed by.

Any worker deserves fair pay, period.

Duh. If the illegals are let in, the "fair pay" scale goes to minimum wage. Enjoy working your ass off for nothing moron. The best way to breakn unions is to allow cheap labor in. Than you dems, all the CEOs and their bonuses thank you too. Cheap labor is the answer, Thank you Ms Solis.

As for being "marginalized", you're about to see what the "majority" is all about. Enjoy your "whiney minority" status.

Yep, you sound like a marginalized male. The richies were doing well when the unions were at their height of power from 1945 to 1975, then the rich class went to breaking down the middle class and stealing their wealth. The middle class is coming back, and the rich class is going to scream (but they still will be rich, but just not as rich). By the way, I am not a Dem but a Republican.

 

[Foxfyre]

All the dems have to negotiate are the 2010 mid-terms and the 2012 general elections. I don't think the voters are stupid enough to allow your scenario to materialize. Besides, there simply aren't enough jobs, union or otherwise to make your scenario credible. Most statesa are cutting jobs and benefits to stay solvent. Lo siento.

The voters were stupid enough to believe the pure bunk Obama fed to them in order to get elected. The voters are gradually waking up but are still blaming the GOP for the current deficits even though the GOP has little little to do with those.

And the Dems won't care whether there are jobs for all those illegals. They obviously haven't cared about jobs as they continue to implement policy and push an agenda that are job killers, and they obviously don't care how much financial trouble the country is in as they continue to make that situation worse with more and more indefensible spending bills.

The Dems want the votes, the power, the prestige, and the personal fortune that their reign of power gives them. And as for the rest of us, they'll keep buying and feeding us cake until the whole thing collapses. At that point they figure they'll have theirs and the American public will have forgotten who did that to them as they always do seem to forget after awhile.

I don't know if I should reply to your post or just say "thank you". It makes perfect sense based on their actions and policies. However, if SS & Medicare go bankrupt, the "financial collapse" will be disastrous. I liked when they were going after off-shore tax cheats and the Swiss bank accounts. The business regulation Bill got so watered-down as to be useless. Madoff would be relieved.
We need to fix SS & Medicare ASAP, which party wants to tackle that one?

I'm beginning to feel like a broken record and a minority of one here, but I have a simple solution for that.

We didn't get into the entitlement mess overnight and we shouldn't expect to get out of it overnight. Congress could dismantle social security and medicare today if they wanted to--there is nothing to prevent them from doing that. We are legally entitled to none of the contributions we have made to those programs if Congress decided to just scrap them. That is what makes them such an abysmal deal for the people and illustrates how precarious are our freedoms and property when we allow government too much power.

So, my solution is simple. Pass an iron clad law or preferably a Constitutional amendment making it illegal for Congress to authorize or spend one more dime that benefits any individual, group, entity, or constituency and does not benefit all, rich, poor, black, white et al equally.

No contracts will be let without soliciting the lowest bidder and the contract will go to the lowest qualified bidder whether or not that bidder is union or pays union scale.

Government contracts will be distributed as equitably as possible among the states based on population density. No state or city will receive preferential treatment to get government installations.

All Federal taxes other than licenses, processing, and usage fees will be scrapped in favor of a flat tax applied equally across the sociopolitical spectrum, individuals and businesses. This will likely reduce the monies available to Congress, but when they can't use the people's money to buy prestige, power, votes, or influence, they won't need nearly as much money.

Existing entitlements will be phased out as slowly and carefully as they have accumulated so that we do not break faith with those we have made dependent on those entitlements. Any entitlements will thus gradually be consigned to the states and local communities where they were intended to be.

Congress will be left with the responsibility to provide the common defense but will be required to use good stewardship in doing that. Congress will have responsibility to promote the general welfare meaning that they use whatever laws, regulation, and policy are necessary to secure our rights and then leave us alone to live our lives. And Congress and the Administration will have whatever other Constitutional responsibilities are assigned to it which should leave our elected legislators freedom to spend most of their time back in their home states where they will experience what the rest of us are experiencing.

And I honestly believe that will fix the problem.

 

[daveman]

[By the way, I am not a Dem but a Republican.

By the way, you are a 'tard.

 

[kyzr]

The voters were stupid enough to believe the pure bunk Obama fed to them in order to get elected. The voters are gradually waking up but are still blaming the GOP for the current deficits even though the GOP has little little to do with those.

And the Dems won't care whether there are jobs for all those illegals. They obviously haven't cared about jobs as they continue to implement policy and push an agenda that are job killers, and they obviously don't care how much financial trouble the country is in as they continue to make that situation worse with more and more indefensible spending bills.

The Dems want the votes, the power, the prestige, and the personal fortune that their reign of power gives them. And as for the rest of us, they'll keep buying and feeding us cake until the whole thing collapses. At that point they figure they'll have theirs and the American public will have forgotten who did that to them as they always do seem to forget after awhile.

I don't know if I should reply to your post or just say "thank you". It makes perfect sense based on their actions and policies. However, if SS & Medicare go bankrupt, the "financial collapse" will be disastrous. I liked when they were going after off-shore tax cheats and the Swiss bank accounts. The business regulation Bill got so watered-down as to be useless. Madoff would be relieved.
We need to fix SS & Medicare ASAP, which party wants to tackle that one?

I'm beginning to feel like a broken record and a minority of one here, but I have a simple solution for that.

We didn't get into the entitlement mess overnight and we shouldn't expect to get out of it overnight. Congress could dismantle social security and medicare today if they wanted to--there is nothing to prevent them from doing that. We are legally entitled to none of the contributions we have made to those programs if Congress decided to just scrap them. That is what makes them such an abysmal deal for the people and illustrates how precarious are our freedoms and property when we allow government too much power.

So, my solution is simple. Pass an iron clad law or preferably a Constitutional amendment making it illegal for Congress to authorize or spend one more dime that benefits any individual, group, entity, or constituency and does not benefit all, rich, poor, black, white et al equally.

No contracts will be let without soliciting the lowest bidder and the contract will go to the lowest qualified bidder whether or not that bidder is union or pays union scale.

Government contracts will be distributed as equitably as possible among the states based on population density. No state or city will receive preferential treatment to get government installations.

All Federal taxes other than licenses, processing, and usage fees will be scrapped in favor of a flat tax applied equally across the sociopolitical spectrum, individuals and businesses. This will likely reduce the monies available to Congress, but when they can't use the people's money to buy prestige, power, votes, or influence, they won't need nearly as much money.

Existing entitlements will be phased out as slowly and carefully as they have accumulated so that we do not break faith with those we have made dependent on those entitlements. Any entitlements will thus gradually be consigned to the states and local communities where they were intended to be.

Congress will be left with the responsibility to provide the common defense but will be required to use good stewardship in doing that. Congress will have responsibility to promote the general welfare meaning that they use whatever laws, regulation, and policy are necessary to secure our rights and then leave us alone to live our lives. And Congress and the Administration will have whatever other Constitutional responsibilities are assigned to it which should leave our elected legislators freedom to spend most of their time back in their home states where they will experience what the rest of us are experiencing.

And I honestly believe that will fix the problem.

Not bad, but I don't see the VAT as solving the SS & Medicare funding mess, all that happens is no one buys anything. There are several sites devoted to those options, just google "fixing SS" or "fixing Medicare". SS is easy, Medicare is tough, especially if Obamacare doesn't get stopped. I like the balanced budget amendment, but no one would vote for it. Existing entitlements are the problem. They take up about 75% of the Fed budget. IMHO entitlements need to be reduced and EVERYONE needs to be included, especially Congress. They don't need their Premium retirement plan, they need to get what we all get.

 

[Foxfyre]

I don't know if I should reply to your post or just say "thank you". It makes perfect sense based on their actions and policies. However, if SS & Medicare go bankrupt, the "financial collapse" will be disastrous. I liked when they were going after off-shore tax cheats and the Swiss bank accounts. The business regulation Bill got so watered-down as to be useless. Madoff would be relieved.
We need to fix SS & Medicare ASAP, which party wants to tackle that one?

I'm beginning to feel like a broken record and a minority of one here, but I have a simple solution for that.

We didn't get into the entitlement mess overnight and we shouldn't expect to get out of it overnight. Congress could dismantle social security and medicare today if they wanted to--there is nothing to prevent them from doing that. We are legally entitled to none of the contributions we have made to those programs if Congress decided to just scrap them. That is what makes them such an abysmal deal for the people and illustrates how precarious are our freedoms and property when we allow government too much power.

So, my solution is simple. Pass an iron clad law or preferably a Constitutional amendment making it illegal for Congress to authorize or spend one more dime that benefits any individual, group, entity, or constituency and does not benefit all, rich, poor, black, white et al equally.

No contracts will be let without soliciting the lowest bidder and the contract will go to the lowest qualified bidder whether or not that bidder is union or pays union scale.

Government contracts will be distributed as equitably as possible among the states based on population density. No state or city will receive preferential treatment to get government installations.

All Federal taxes other than licenses, processing, and usage fees will be scrapped in favor of a flat tax applied equally across the sociopolitical spectrum, individuals and businesses. This will likely reduce the monies available to Congress, but when they can't use the people's money to buy prestige, power, votes, or influence, they won't need nearly as much money.

Existing entitlements will be phased out as slowly and carefully as they have accumulated so that we do not break faith with those we have made dependent on those entitlements. Any entitlements will thus gradually be consigned to the states and local communities where they were intended to be.

Congress will be left with the responsibility to provide the common defense but will be required to use good stewardship in doing that. Congress will have responsibility to promote the general welfare meaning that they use whatever laws, regulation, and policy are necessary to secure our rights and then leave us alone to live our lives. And Congress and the Administration will have whatever other Constitutional responsibilities are assigned to it which should leave our elected legislators freedom to spend most of their time back in their home states where they will experience what the rest of us are experiencing.

And I honestly believe that will fix the problem.

Not bad, but I don't see the VAT as solving the SS & Medicare funding mess, all that happens is no one buys anything. There are several sites devoted to those options, just google "fixing SS" or "fixing Medicare". SS is easy, Medicare is tough, especially if Obamacare doesn't get stopped. I like the balanced budget amendment, but no one would vote for it. Existing entitlements are the problem. They take up about 75% of the Fed budget. IMHO entitlements need to be reduced and EVERYONE needs to be included, especially Congress. They don't need their Premium retirement plan, they need to get what we all get.

No there is no easy fix to either SS or Medicare, but they and other entitlements can be gradually phased out and transferred to the states without breaking our implied contract with those we have made dependent on those programs. They will continue to be a drain on the budget during that process, but at least we don't have to exacerbate the problems and can correct some of the abuses.

I am very much opposed to a VAT. I am very much a flat tax person. The flat tax could allow a very few strategic exemptions to encourage say purchase of health insurance, buying a home, support of private charities etc. that all citizens could take advantage of and would reduce pressure on social services--promotion of the general welfare that the Founders envisioned--but every working citizen and business entity would pay it.

A VAT would involve too much record keeping, could become far too complicated, and would be too easy to dicker with to reward special constituencies or whatever.

You put enough Tea Party minded folks into Congress and we will have a balanced budget amendment requiring a balanced budget except in cases of extreme national emergency such as being attacked by Russia or China or being targeted by a giant asteroid or some such. Even then, once the emergency was past, the Constitution could require repayment of any debt accrued to be included in subsequent budgets.

 

[kyzr]

No there is no easy fix to either SS or Medicare, but they and other entitlements can be gradually phased out and transferred to the states without breaking our implied contract with those we have made dependent on those programs. They will continue to be a drain on the budget during that process, but at least we don't have to exacerbate the problems and can correct some of the abuses.

I am very much opposed to a VAT. I am very much a flat tax person. The flat tax could allow a very few strategic exemptions to encourage say purchase of health insurance, buying a home, support of private charities etc. that all citizens could take advantage of and would reduce pressure on social services--promotion of the general welfare that the Founders envisioned--but every working citizen and business entity would pay it.

A VAT would involve too much record keeping, could become far too complicated, and would be too easy to dicker with to reward special constituencies or whatever.

You put enough Tea Party minded folks into Congress and we will have a balanced budget amendment requiring a balanced budget except in cases of extreme national emergency such as being attacked by Russia or China or being targeted by a giant asteroid or some such. Even then, once the emergency was past, the Constitution could require repayment of any debt accrued to be included in subsequent budgets.

A flat won't raise enough money. The top 1% of incomes own 90% of everything. Cutting their taxes means that they either put more money in Swiss accounts, or they move more factories overseas. You look like you're going after the poor instead of the wealthy. The bottom 50% of incomes don't pay any real income tax. I could see raising the minimum tax rates to your flat tax rate (17%?) just to keep the country afloat until the Debt and Entitlements get under control. I like the Clinton era top tax rates. That was the best time, when the debt was being paid down, and the Budget was balanced.

 

[Foxfyre]

No there is no easy fix to either SS or Medicare, but they and other entitlements can be gradually phased out and transferred to the states without breaking our implied contract with those we have made dependent on those programs. They will continue to be a drain on the budget during that process, but at least we don't have to exacerbate the problems and can correct some of the abuses.

I am very much opposed to a VAT. I am very much a flat tax person. The flat tax could allow a very few strategic exemptions to encourage say purchase of health insurance, buying a home, support of private charities etc. that all citizens could take advantage of and would reduce pressure on social services--promotion of the general welfare that the Founders envisioned--but every working citizen and business entity would pay it.

A VAT would involve too much record keeping, could become far too complicated, and would be too easy to dicker with to reward special constituencies or whatever.

You put enough Tea Party minded folks into Congress and we will have a balanced budget amendment requiring a balanced budget except in cases of extreme national emergency such as being attacked by Russia or China or being targeted by a giant asteroid or some such. Even then, once the emergency was past, the Constitution could require repayment of any debt accrued to be included in subsequent budgets.

A flat won't raise enough money. The top 1% of incomes own 90% of everything. Cutting their taxes means that they either put more money in Swiss accounts, or they move more factories overseas. You look like you're going after the poor instead of the wealthy. The bottom 50% of incomes don't pay any real income tax. I could see raising the minimum tax rates to your flat tax rate (17%?) just to keep the country afloat until the Debt and Entitlements get under control. I like the Clinton era top tax rates. That was the best time, when the debt was being paid down, and the Budget was balanced.

If Congress is prohibited from voting themselves power, prestige, money, and votes, a flat tax will be enough. And that bottom 50% should pay it right along with the top 1% so that half of Americans won't be exempt from the consequences of who and what they vote for. Everybody should pay his fair share, and if everybody does, it should not be a burden on anybody. Remember, I am not expecting to give Congress all the money it spends now. I am expecting Congress to collect only the absolute minimum necessary to carry out its Constitutionally specified responsibilities plus whatever it has to have to gradually phase out the entitlements.

It won't need even half the bureaucracy that it now has.

It won't be allocating billion dollar funds that are used like petty cash funds for whatever.

And new legislators might GASP have to make do with the existing furnishings in their offices if they don't want to redecorate out of their own pockets. They won't have the several hundred thousand dollar expense accounts to cover stuff like that any more. The USA has hundreds of acres of warehouses of very nice furniture, furbishings, office equipment etc. that was removed for all new stuff for the next legislator. Some of it isn't even two years old and is still in mint condition and we have billions of dollars of it that have been stored for decades. Let's use some of that stuff before we buy any more.

You give them a tax structure and business regulation and climate as favorable or more favorable than they can get anywhere else, and US business will be moving back to the states instead of moving off shore. A flat tax pretty well eliminates tax shelters too.

 

[kyzr]

No there is no easy fix to either SS or Medicare, but they and other entitlements can be gradually phased out and transferred to the states without breaking our implied contract with those we have made dependent on those programs. They will continue to be a drain on the budget during that process, but at least we don't have to exacerbate the problems and can correct some of the abuses.

I am very much opposed to a VAT. I am very much a flat tax person. The flat tax could allow a very few strategic exemptions to encourage say purchase of health insurance, buying a home, support of private charities etc. that all citizens could take advantage of and would reduce pressure on social services--promotion of the general welfare that the Founders envisioned--but every working citizen and business entity would pay it.

A VAT would involve too much record keeping, could become far too complicated, and would be too easy to dicker with to reward special constituencies or whatever.

You put enough Tea Party minded folks into Congress and we will have a balanced budget amendment requiring a balanced budget except in cases of extreme national emergency such as being attacked by Russia or China or being targeted by a giant asteroid or some such. Even then, once the emergency was past, the Constitution could require repayment of any debt accrued to be included in subsequent budgets.

A flat won't raise enough money. The top 1% of incomes own 90% of everything. Cutting their taxes means that they either put more money in Swiss accounts, or they move more factories overseas. You look like you're going after the poor instead of the wealthy. The bottom 50% of incomes don't pay any real income tax. I could see raising the minimum tax rates to your flat tax rate (17%?) just to keep the country afloat until the Debt and Entitlements get under control. I like the Clinton era top tax rates. That was the best time, when the debt was being paid down, and the Budget was balanced.

If Congress is prohibited from voting themselves power, prestige, money, and votes, a flat tax will be enough. And that bottom 50% should pay it right along with the top 1% so that half of Americans won't be exempt from the consequences of who and what they vote for. Everybody should pay his fair share, and if everybody does, it should not be a burden on anybody. Remember, I am not expecting to give Congress all the money it spends now. I am expecting Congress to collect only the absolute minimum necessary to carry out its Constitutionally specified responsibilities plus whatever it has to have to gradually phase out the entitlements.

It won't need even half the bureaucracy that it now has.

It won't be allocating billion dollar funds that are used like petty cash funds for whatever.

And new legislators might GASP have to make do with the existing furnishings in their offices if they don't want to redecorate out of their own pockets. They won't have the several hundred thousand dollar expense accounts to cover stuff like that any more. The USA has hundreds of acres of warehouses of very nice furniture, furbishings, office equipment etc. that was removed for all new stuff for the next legislator. Some of it isn't even two years old and is still in mint condition and we have billions of dollars of it that have been stored for decades. Let's use some of that stuff before we buy any more.

You give them a tax structure and business regulation and climate as favorable or more favorable than they can get anywhere else, and US business will be moving back to the states instead of moving off shore. A flat tax pretty well eliminates tax shelters too.

Two problems:
1. What replaces SS & Medicare? How do you provide pensions and Medical care for the elderly w/o SS & Medicare? Are you aware of what it costs for medical insurance these days? Are you going to let the boomers starve? We need to fund the next 20-years or so of SS & Medicare. How do you expect to do that?

2. Your arguments about "lower business taxes and less regulation" are eeriely like we heard for the last 8-years...the years that led to the financial collapse. I want more regulation, if you don't like it, forget about the US consumer market.

My solution is to eliminate derivatives and short-selling of stock, stop "options" and the global casino. All there would be is "going long" whereby businesses get capital and get tax breaks for creating domestic jobs. Then they get punished for moving jobs overseas.

 

[Foxfyre]

A flat won't raise enough money. The top 1% of incomes own 90% of everything. Cutting their taxes means that they either put more money in Swiss accounts, or they move more factories overseas. You look like you're going after the poor instead of the wealthy. The bottom 50% of incomes don't pay any real income tax. I could see raising the minimum tax rates to your flat tax rate (17%?) just to keep the country afloat until the Debt and Entitlements get under control. I like the Clinton era top tax rates. That was the best time, when the debt was being paid down, and the Budget was balanced.

If Congress is prohibited from voting themselves power, prestige, money, and votes, a flat tax will be enough. And that bottom 50% should pay it right along with the top 1% so that half of Americans won't be exempt from the consequences of who and what they vote for. Everybody should pay his fair share, and if everybody does, it should not be a burden on anybody. Remember, I am not expecting to give Congress all the money it spends now. I am expecting Congress to collect only the absolute minimum necessary to carry out its Constitutionally specified responsibilities plus whatever it has to have to gradually phase out the entitlements.

It won't need even half the bureaucracy that it now has.

It won't be allocating billion dollar funds that are used like petty cash funds for whatever.

And new legislators might GASP have to make do with the existing furnishings in their offices if they don't want to redecorate out of their own pockets. They won't have the several hundred thousand dollar expense accounts to cover stuff like that any more. The USA has hundreds of acres of warehouses of very nice furniture, furbishings, office equipment etc. that was removed for all new stuff for the next legislator. Some of it isn't even two years old and is still in mint condition and we have billions of dollars of it that have been stored for decades. Let's use some of that stuff before we buy any more.

You give them a tax structure and business regulation and climate as favorable or more favorable than they can get anywhere else, and US business will be moving back to the states instead of moving off shore. A flat tax pretty well eliminates tax shelters too.

Two problems:
1. What replaces SS & Medicare? How do you provide pensions and Medical care for the elderly w/o SS & Medicare? Are you aware of what it costs for medical insurance these days? Are you going to let the boomers starve? We need to fund the next 20-years or so of SS & Medicare. How do you expect to do that?

2. Your arguments about "lower business taxes and less regulation" are eeriely like we heard for the last 8-years...the years that led to the financial collapse. I want more regulation, if you don't like it, forget about the US consumer market.

My solution is to eliminate derivatives and short-selling of stock, stop "options" and the global casino. All there would be is "going long" whereby businesses get capital and get tax breaks for creating domestic jobs. Then they get punished for moving jobs overseas.

When you put out a fire, what do you replace it with?

I'm not replacing SS and Medicare. I am phasing it out slowly and carefully, just as it has accrued for decades now, until the Federal government no longer has responsibility or jurisdiction for it. Once it has been slowly phased out it will be the states or local communities who provide it if it is provided. We cannot continue it as it now exists. These should not have been federal programs.

Lower business taxes did not lead to the financial collapse. Government meddling and lack of reasonable regulation preventing the people's money from being inappropriately gambled and that encouraged irresponsible behavior at every level caused the financial collapse. Make it illegal for Congress to pass any law or impose any regulation or policy that benefits any person or group or constituency and not everybody and a lot of that nonsense stops automatically. It takes most of the corruption out of the legislative process and restores fiscal sanity.

Congress should take no more of the people's money than it absolutely has to have to carry out its constitutional responsibiities. And remember that it was the unnecessary regulation that I want eliminated--not that regulation that prevents us from doing violence to each other. Don't tell businesses they HAVE to provide health insurance to their employees for instance. If we want to encourage that activity, we offer tax credits but let the people order their own lives.

Return the government to the people as the Founders intended.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Unrestrained greed and criminal enterprises, along with poor regulation (if that's what you mean by 'government meddling'), caused this collapse. The business community was intent on lining its pockets, and it certainly did at the expense of the average investor, small businessman, professionals and blue-collar workers of America. If the role of the government had been as in 1929, we would be in the middle of a Depression even greater than 1929 to 1941.

 

[Dragonfly]

I wonder if the righties ever really stop to think what would happen to our economy if all the illegal immigrants were to be suddenly whisked away south of the border and not allowed back in again?

They are too busy trying to deport them all. Then they can blame President Obama for making the economy worse by deporting them.

 

[Dragonfly]

I wonder if the righties ever really stop to think what would happen to our economy if all the illegal immigrants were to be suddenly whisked away south of the border and not allowed back in again?

Yeah, I mean look what happened when millions of immigrants who came to this country through Ellis Island legally and took the jobs no one else wanted.......



You make it so easy, do you really understand what comes out of your brain?!?!

Was your navy in your bathtub or some other body of water?

Maineman:
As a fellow houstonian, let me apologize for this ignorant statement. I appreciate your service to our county. Please don't think all houstonians are dimwits.

 

[oreo]

YouTube - Obama's DOL Secretary Hilda L. Solis: You Have the Right to Be Paid Fairly Whether Documented or Not

comments at site.

Well of course--this is Obama's policy-

 

[editec]

well that answers a lot of questions as to whose side these asswipes are on and it's definitely not the side of Real Americans.

So you support those people and corporations who WANT ILLEGALS here so they can exploit them and therefore don't have hire citizens?

What side are YOU on?

Certainly not this nation's side, if you think like that.

Why do you hate this country, Willow?