Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I think there is room for compromise between more moderate Republicans and most of the Democrats. There is no room for compromise between Tea Party and Democrats. A Tea Party candidate has to have control of both houses of congress in order to implement any of his platform.Although, I don't care much for Romney, of all the Republican hopefuls, he stands the best chance of actually getting something done. He isn't so far to the right that he can't garner some support from Democrats in Congress while reining in most Republicans. Unless the Republicans sweep both houses of Congress, Cain or Perry will face the same problem Obama faces in dealing with Congress.
Sigh...
Do you really think the Democrats aren't going to be lock step against ANYTHING Romney proposes? That's pretty much what they were with Bush after the post-9/11 glow faded. That's what the REpublcians were with both Clinton and Obama.
The whole notion of "bipartisanship" is a fallacy. If the opposing party goes along with you, it's because they've realized they'll be slitting their own throats if they don't.
"If the 9-9-9 plan is imperfect (and I think it is),..."
Here is what I think is implicit...and should be made explicit: the plan is based upon the mechanism of the free-market....that is competiton.
a) flat income tax of 9%...but eliminated several other taxes
b) national sales tax of 9%....added to state & city tax, granted
c) now, here is the genius of the plan: 9% corporate tax...instead of the 35% current.
I believe that this would cause a tremendous boom in the economy.
Further, it would be the lowest corporate tax in the industrial world...and would result in a huge rush of businesses- and jobs- back to the United States.
And...with reduced taxes at every level of production, manufacturing, wholesale and retail distribution....prices in every industry should fall precipitously....
OK...there is no guarantee that business wouldn't keep the profits, but here would be a legitimate role for government oversight, i.e., prevent price fixing.
So...in theory, products should be about 25% cheaper than currently.
Well?
A whole lot of flaws in your thinking.
The first is that the greedy corporate bloodsuckers are going to pass along the savings to us. Really? Have they done this with all the products they've outsourced to China? No.
The second thought is that if you replace an income tax with a sales tax, you are going to increase revenues, when the opposite is true. People will just find other ways to buy things. When Cook County instituted a huge sales tax on cigarettes, people just started going out to nearby Dupage county to buy their smokes.
Replacing 9% in income tax with 9% in sales taxes will just mean people won't buy as much stuff.
The numbers just don't add up.
Let's try this. Let's actually tax high enough to pay for everything AND reduce the debt by at least 100 billion a year. (It'll only take 140 years to pay it off that way!) Then when people are actually paying for the government they get, they can make a decision as to how much of it they actually want. But this borrow and spend BS has to come to an end.
And thoughts on the divided government:
In the 1950's, the Democrats were far right of the current Republican party. They were fiscal conservatives and not the wild eyed leftist extremist that we see among their leadersh9ip now. It really didn't matter all that much whether the Democrat or Republican was elected.
In the 1990's, the bitter partisanship and ideological extremism had reared its ugly head, but we had a strong, visionary, Repuiblican Congress coupled with a Democratic President who apparently held no convictions of any kind but just wanted to look good. As a result he vetoed a lot of stuff, but eventually came around on the important stuff and as a result had a pretty good presidency.
The Democrats in Congress we have now are even more extremely left than what we had in the 90's and anything but a very strong Republican President wouldn't have a chance against them. We would have to have another Reagan with the ability to go straight to the people and influence public opinion.
But which one of the announced candidates has the ability to do that? Again, the one that comes up in my mind is Cain.
And yet I haven't yet decided that he is my candidate.
This is going to be a tough election.
If the GOP does win the election and puts another Democrat light in the White House, they will be done. There will be a Tea Party inspired third party developed and organized and ready to start taking over by 2014.
If the GOP does win the election and puts another Democrat light in the White House, they will be done. There will be a Tea Party inspired third party developed and organized and ready to start taking over by 2014.
You do realize that we haven't elected a third party candidate to the presidency since Washington and there are no third party candidates in Congress now. The Tea Party splitting from the Republican party would guarantee a Democrat victory.
Your last statement is the more likely result of the Tea Party breaking with the Republican Party. Third party candidates rarely get elected but they can influence the two parties.If the GOP does win the election and puts another Democrat light in the White House, they will be done. There will be a Tea Party inspired third party developed and organized and ready to start taking over by 2014.
You do realize that we haven't elected a third party candidate to the presidency since Washington and there are no third party candidates in Congress now. The Tea Party splitting from the Republican party would guarantee a Democrat victory.
Would it? I honestly believe that if Ross Perot had not wigged out and gone all looney tunes and quit at the last minute, he would have beaten both GHW Bush and Bill Clinton in 1992. But when he betrayed his base, he was not able to regain their trust when he got back in in that election or the next one. And still he got almost 19% of the vote. Clinton was able to muster just 43%; Bush got 37%.
Both political parties and Congress are at an all time low in approval ratings these days. The Tea Party is the strongest and most committed unorganized group I've seen come along in a long long time. Give the people a vision and make them believers in a real plan for reform and I am quite sure a third party candidate could do very well these days. The miserable performance of our government has pretty well smashed confidence in either of the major political parties.
At the very least we could put the fear of God into them and provoke some honest to goodness real reform and competence for a change.
Your last statement is the more likely result of the Tea Party breaking with the Republican Party. Third party candidates rarely get elected but they can influence the two parties.You do realize that we haven't elected a third party candidate to the presidency since Washington and there are no third party candidates in Congress now. The Tea Party splitting from the Republican party would guarantee a Democrat victory.
Would it? I honestly believe that if Ross Perot had not wigged out and gone all looney tunes and quit at the last minute, he would have beaten both GHW Bush and Bill Clinton in 1992. But when he betrayed his base, he was not able to regain their trust when he got back in in that election or the next one. And still he got almost 19% of the vote. Clinton was able to muster just 43%; Bush got 37%.
Both political parties and Congress are at an all time low in approval ratings these days. The Tea Party is the strongest and most committed unorganized group I've seen come along in a long long time. Give the people a vision and make them believers in a real plan for reform and I am quite sure a third party candidate could do very well these days. The miserable performance of our government has pretty well smashed confidence in either of the major political parties.
At the very least we could put the fear of God into them and provoke some honest to goodness real reform and competence for a change.
A lot of Republicans, Democrats, Independents agree with the Tea Party. Government is spending too much money. Where they differ with the Tea Party is they do not want to take the steps necessary to fix the problem. As long as cuts don't effect their disability check, welfare check, social security check, VA benefits, Medicare, government contract, kids school, student loan, salary, job benefits, government grant, subsidy payment, then they're all for it. I think the public reaction to massive government spending cuts will be similar to their reaction to the Ryan plan to save Medicare.
2. "The first is that the greedy corporate bloodsuckers are going to pass along the savings to us. Really? Have they done this with all the products they've outsourced to China?"
Haven't heard of WalMart, eh?
And, while 'passing along the savings,' they still make a bundle.
See, that's how capitalism works.
Try to get out once in a while.
3. " The second thought is that if you replace an income tax with a sales tax,..."
An intellect that can only be considered argillaceous.
It's called 9-9-9, not 9-9.
Know why?
Because it doesn't "... income tax with a sales tax,..."
It replaces a replaces a progressive income tax with a flat tax. 9%.
Even you should be able to understand that...no?
Focus on the idea; it may become a Kodak moment.
I can see you slapping your self on the forehead. Good!
4. "When Cook County instituted a huge sales tax on cigarettes, people just started going out to nearby Dupage county to buy their smokes."
Cook County is a county.
The United States is a country.
Again...focus on the differences.
I know.....seeing differences, distinctions, has proven to be a difficulty for you...
...but imagine having to cross national borders to buy your cigarettes and
other daily necessities, and you may just see where a national sales tax might become
more difficult to avoid.
In summary, the Cain plan as this advantage: it is bold, and innovative, and, as history has shown, lower taxes results in higher business activity.
[A lot of Republicans, Democrats, Independents agree with the Tea Party. Government is spending too much money. Where they differ with the Tea Party is they do not want to take the steps necessary to fix the problem. As long as cuts don't effect their disability check, welfare check, social security check, VA benefits, Medicare, government contract, kids school, student loan, salary, job benefits, government grant, subsidy payment, then they're all for it. I think the public reaction to massive government spending cuts will be similar to their reaction to the Ryan plan to save Medicare.
Obama will win, right now there is no doubt. Republicans have always been a odd coalition and today with the dependence on this coalition hanging together, forget it. The far right religious republican, the tea party, and the few sane republicans left will never come back together. I have to redo my old Martian visitor assessment, but it works even today. A slight improvement in the economy and it will be a landslide as well. http://www.usmessageboard.com/congress/63125-a-martian-votes-on-tuesday.html
[A lot of Republicans, Democrats, Independents agree with the Tea Party. Government is spending too much money. Where they differ with the Tea Party is they do not want to take the steps necessary to fix the problem. As long as cuts don't effect their disability check, welfare check, social security check, VA benefits, Medicare, government contract, kids school, student loan, salary, job benefits, government grant, subsidy payment, then they're all for it. I think the public reaction to massive government spending cuts will be similar to their reaction to the Ryan plan to save Medicare.
Who are these Tea Partiers, let's say, among seniors, who are advocating for having their own Social Security and Medicare benefits cut?
Who are the Tea party veterans who are advocating for cutting their own VA benefits?
I don't know who programmed Kingfish Cain with the "9 9 9" mantra but that man is a stereotypical buffoon and those who would benefit from the ideas he puts forth (i.e., the rich) gratefully regard all who agree with him as useful idiots.And thoughts on the divided government:
In the 1950's, the Democrats were far right of the current Republican party. They were fiscal conservatives and not the wild eyed leftist extremist that we see among their leadersh9ip now. It really didn't matter all that much whether the Democrat or Republican was elected.
In the 1990's, the bitter partisanship and ideological extremism had reared its ugly head, but we had a strong, visionary, Repuiblican Congress coupled with a Democratic President who apparently held no convictions of any kind but just wanted to look good. As a result he vetoed a lot of stuff, but eventually came around on the important stuff and as a result had a pretty good presidency.
The Democrats in Congress we have now are even more extremely left than what we had in the 90's and anything but a very strong Republican President wouldn't have a chance against them. We would have to have another Reagan with the ability to go straight to the people and influence public opinion.
But which one of the announced candidates has the ability to do that? Again, the one that comes up in my mind is Cain.
And yet I haven't yet decided that he is my candidate.
This is going to be a tough election.
Okay, I'm convinced this one ate paint chips as a child. Sad, really.
2. "The first is that the greedy corporate bloodsuckers are going to pass along the savings to us. Really? Have they done this with all the products they've outsourced to China?"
Haven't heard of WalMart, eh?
And, while 'passing along the savings,' they still make a bundle.
See, that's how capitalism works.
Try to get out once in a while.
I have seen how Capitalism works, snookums. It's called "the Recession of 2008", and we all got screwed except the fat cats you worship.
3. " The second thought is that if you replace an income tax with a sales tax,..."
An intellect that can only be considered argillaceous.
It's called 9-9-9, not 9-9.
Know why?
Because it doesn't "... income tax with a sales tax,..."
It replaces a replaces a progressive income tax with a flat tax. 9%.
Even you should be able to understand that...no?
Focus on the idea; it may become a Kodak moment.
I can see you slapping your self on the forehead. Good!
It's still a profoundly retarded idea. Every tax institute and think tank have told Cain that his SimCity economics won't work. I'll take their views over yours, thank you.
4. "When Cook County instituted a huge sales tax on cigarettes, people just started going out to nearby Dupage county to buy their smokes."
Cook County is a county.
The United States is a country.
Again...focus on the differences.
I know.....seeing differences, distinctions, has proven to be a difficulty for you...
...but imagine having to cross national borders to buy your cigarettes and
other daily necessities, and you may just see where a national sales tax might become
more difficult to avoid.
It's not really a difference. You put a tax on, people will find ways to get around them. Black markets, Flea Markets, Ebay, and so on. or they just won't buy until they have to. Or worse, they'll buy those cheaper foreign goods because the tax on those would be less.
In summary, the Cain plan as this advantage: it is bold, and innovative, and, as history has shown, lower taxes results in higher business activity.
You know what, if you are representive of the kind of idiot who supports Cain, I might even hold my nose and vote for Romney. You people don't even live in the real world.
[A lot of Republicans, Democrats, Independents agree with the Tea Party. Government is spending too much money. Where they differ with the Tea Party is they do not want to take the steps necessary to fix the problem. As long as cuts don't effect their disability check, welfare check, social security check, VA benefits, Medicare, government contract, kids school, student loan, salary, job benefits, government grant, subsidy payment, then they're all for it. I think the public reaction to massive government spending cuts will be similar to their reaction to the Ryan plan to save Medicare.
Who are these Tea Partiers, let's say, among seniors, who are advocating for having their own Social Security and Medicare benefits cut?
Who are the Tea party veterans who are advocating for cutting their own VA benefits?
I am a "Senior" Tea Partier who. like all the other 'senior' Tea Partiers are not wanting our Social Security or Medicare cut. We've paid in to those programs all our lives, have been forced to be made dependent on them, and it isn't right that they now be taken away when we have no time left to regroup and reorganize.
We all, however, do want Congress to now start reforming the program so that you younguns, currently with heads full of mush, won't be saddled with crushing debt and reduced benefits when YOU are seniors. We didn't get into the current mess all at once but inch by inch over the years. We have to reverse it the same way, inch by inch and replace it with a system that won't crush the economy.
Good, level-headed plan, Foxfyre. I hope the powers that be listen to you.[A lot of Republicans, Democrats, Independents agree with the Tea Party. Government is spending too much money. Where they differ with the Tea Party is they do not want to take the steps necessary to fix the problem. As long as cuts don't effect their disability check, welfare check, social security check, VA benefits, Medicare, government contract, kids school, student loan, salary, job benefits, government grant, subsidy payment, then they're all for it. I think the public reaction to massive government spending cuts will be similar to their reaction to the Ryan plan to save Medicare.
Who are these Tea Partiers, let's say, among seniors, who are advocating for having their own Social Security and Medicare benefits cut?
Who are the Tea party veterans who are advocating for cutting their own VA benefits?
I am a "Senior" Tea Partier who. like all the other 'senior' Tea Partiers are not wanting our Social Security or Medicare cut. We've paid in to those programs all our lives, have been forced to be made dependent on them, and it isn't right that they now be taken away when we have no time left to regroup and reorganize.
We all, however, do want Congress to now start reforming the program so that you younguns, currently with heads full of mush, won't be saddled with crushing debt and reduced benefits when YOU are seniors. We didn't get into the current mess all at once but inch by inch over the years. We have to reverse it the same way, inch by inch and replace it with a system that won't crush the economy.
Who are these Tea Partiers, let's say, among seniors, who are advocating for having their own Social Security and Medicare benefits cut?
Who are the Tea party veterans who are advocating for cutting their own VA benefits?
I am a "Senior" Tea Partier who. like all the other 'senior' Tea Partiers are not wanting our Social Security or Medicare cut. We've paid in to those programs all our lives, have been forced to be made dependent on them, and it isn't right that they now be taken away when we have no time left to regroup and reorganize.
We all, however, do want Congress to now start reforming the program so that you younguns, currently with heads full of mush, won't be saddled with crushing debt and reduced benefits when YOU are seniors. We didn't get into the current mess all at once but inch by inch over the years. We have to reverse it the same way, inch by inch and replace it with a system that won't crush the economy.
So you're one of the people who ISN'T like the Tea Party people, according to that other poster.
Nothing there, really.
I can only apply the appropriate: Jerk.
I believe most people today are far less concerned about the distance future than they are the immediate future. They're worried about how they're going to pay the rent or mortgage payment next month, their soon's college tuition next fall, and layoffs. The Tea Party agenda does not address that. Instead it's a plan to radically change the function of government as we know it, revamping the tax codes, eliminating most federal regulation, and shifting power from the federal government to the states. IMHO, most people are not looking to eliminate the federal government, they just want see it work in their best interest.[A lot of Republicans, Democrats, Independents agree with the Tea Party. Government is spending too much money. Where they differ with the Tea Party is they do not want to take the steps necessary to fix the problem. As long as cuts don't effect their disability check, welfare check, social security check, VA benefits, Medicare, government contract, kids school, student loan, salary, job benefits, government grant, subsidy payment, then they're all for it. I think the public reaction to massive government spending cuts will be similar to their reaction to the Ryan plan to save Medicare.
Who are these Tea Partiers, let's say, among seniors, who are advocating for having their own Social Security and Medicare benefits cut?
Who are the Tea party veterans who are advocating for cutting their own VA benefits?
I am a "Senior" Tea Partier who. like all the other 'senior' Tea Partiers are not wanting our Social Security or Medicare cut. We've paid in to those programs all our lives, have been forced to be made dependent on them, and it isn't right that they now be taken away when we have no time left to regroup and reorganize.
We all, however, do want Congress to now start reforming the program so that you younguns, currently with heads full of mush, won't be saddled with crushing debt and reduced benefits when YOU are seniors. We didn't get into the current mess all at once but inch by inch over the years. We have to reverse it the same way, inch by inch and replace it with a system that won't crush the economy.
