Let's confiscate all the wealth of the rich

[eflatminor]

heres a thought.

the country that once enslaved black people eleccted a black man to the presidency and is still not willing to elect a libertarian to more than a rep seat.

And that is only in a very few districts.

Your ideas are not good functioning ideas

Care to return to the point of the original post? Either you're ready to defend the kind of spending we've seen or you're not.

 

[rightwinger]

Rather than take all their wealth, why don't we just return the tax rate to what it was before the ill-advised Bush Tax cuts?

Tell ya what, if we go back to the SPENDING levels prior to those tax cuts, you can have the higher rates. Deal?

Does that spending involve Bush wars and an unfunded Medicare Part D?

 

[eflatminor]

Get back to us when you're serious. The Libertarians are the flip side of the Marxists. Neither philosophy has any hope of working without a fundeamental change in human nature. Don't hold your breath.

Checking in on how your party is doing:

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

Sometimes fundamental change is brought about by financial reality. In other words, you are broke.

But what of the parts of your philosophy you don't like to highlight? I don't see things getting better for the American worker, if employers get protections fought for over the decades rolled back.

The only philosophy I'm talking about is living within our means.

Besides, we have been increasing spending pretty dramatically and the number of laws and regulations on businesses have gone through the roof over the last several decades. How's that working out for the American worker?

 

[eflatminor]

Rather than take all their wealth, why don't we just return the tax rate to what it was before the ill-advised Bush Tax cuts?

Tell ya what, if we go back to the SPENDING levels prior to those tax cuts, you can have the higher rates. Deal?

Does that spending involve Bush wars and an unfunded Medicare Part D?

All spending. Reduce what we spent overall to pre Bush levels and you can have have the higher tax rates for everyone. Is that a deal or not?

Before you answer, realize that nobody in Washington outside of one guy is talking about decreasing spending. Nobody.

 

[lizzie]

Forget taxing them more, let's take EVERYTHING the richest Americans have...THAT will help us out of our fiscal mess!

» Forbes 400’s Entire Net Worth Barely Enough to Cover a Single Debt-Ceiling Increase - Big Government

Hmmm, it appears that if we did take all that wealth that we couldn't even pay for Obama's requested debt limit increase, much less begin to chip away at the $15+ trillion of debt we've accumulated.

Goodness, maybe we really do have a spending problem???

How right you are! The entirety of the wealth of the rich won't do a thing to help the debt OR even pay for current spending.

The left is faced with this problem. Is there a way to confiscate the wealth of the rich, and force them to create additional wealth to further pay into government coffers? Obviously taking what they have now won't help. The rich have to continually create wealth. How can they be made to do that?

They can't, and the more pressure is put on them, the more disincentivized they will become. Back in the old days, the 1% could easily fund government expenditures. No longer is that the case, nor should it be. There is no free lunch.

 

[konradv]

Checking in on how your party is doing:

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

Sometimes fundamental change is brought about by financial reality. In other words, you are broke.

But what of the parts of your philosophy you don't like to highlight? I don't see things getting better for the American worker, if employers get protections fought for over the decades rolled back.

The only philosophy I'm talking about is living within our means.

Besides, we have been increasing spending pretty dramatically and the number of laws and regulations on businesses have gone through the roof over the last several decades. How's that working out for the American worker?

Hardly an excuse for throwing the baby out with the bathwater by electing a Libertarian.

 

[eflatminor]

But what of the parts of your philosophy you don't like to highlight? I don't see things getting better for the American worker, if employers get protections fought for over the decades rolled back.

The only philosophy I'm talking about is living within our means.

Besides, we have been increasing spending pretty dramatically and the number of laws and regulations on businesses have gone through the roof over the last several decades. How's that working out for the American worker?

Hardly an excuse for throwing the baby out with the bathwater by electing a Libertarian.

You can no longer make the payments on the bathtub. There's the rub.

 

[Truthmatters]

heres a thought.

the country that once enslaved black people eleccted a black man to the presidency and is still not willing to elect a libertarian to more than a rep seat.

And that is only in a very few districts.

Your ideas are not good functioning ideas

Care to return to the point of the original post? Either you're ready to defend the kind of spending we've seen or you're not.

when have I ever defended the spending of billions on a war designed on lies to the American people.

I fought it real hard while most of the country just went along.

man I wish we had that money back.

 

[rightwinger]

Tell ya what, if we go back to the SPENDING levels prior to those tax cuts, you can have the higher rates. Deal?

Does that spending involve Bush wars and an unfunded Medicare Part D?

All spending. Reduce what we spent overall to pre Bush levels and you can have have the higher tax rates for everyone. Is that a deal or not?

Before you answer, realize that nobody in Washington outside of one guy is talking about decreasing spending. Nobody.

Sounds like a plan

Now to make it really fair, once we cut spending to pre- 2001 levels, let's cut the income of the super wealthy back to pre-2001 levels

That will put us back on a level playing field

 

[lizzie]

But what of the parts of your philosophy you don't like to highlight? I don't see things getting better for the American worker, if employers get protections fought for over the decades rolled back.

The only philosophy I'm talking about is living within our means.

Besides, we have been increasing spending pretty dramatically and the number of laws and regulations on businesses have gone through the roof over the last several decades. How's that working out for the American worker?

Hardly an excuse for throwing the baby out with the bathwater by electing a Libertarian.

The only way we can preserve a modicum ot liberty is to elect more libertarian-minded politicians. The road we are going down with big government politicians, on both the right and the left, is going to end in our eventual demise economically.

 

[eflatminor]

when have I ever defended the spending of billions on a war designed on lies to the American people.

I fought it real hard while most of the country just went along.

I fought against it hard as well but I also understand that the $800 billion or so we've spent over 10 years in Iraq is far less than the budget short fall we face THIS YEAR. We're going to have to spend a hell of a lot less than just Iraq.

 

[eflatminor]

Does that spending involve Bush wars and an unfunded Medicare Part D?

All spending. Reduce what we spent overall to pre Bush levels and you can have have the higher tax rates for everyone. Is that a deal or not?

Before you answer, realize that nobody in Washington outside of one guy is talking about decreasing spending. Nobody.

Sounds like a plan

Now to make it really fair, once we cut spending to pre- 2001 levels, let's cut the income of the super wealthy back to pre-2001 levels

That will put us back on a level playing field

Government determines income? Where is that in the Constitution?

 

[rightwinger]

The only philosophy I'm talking about is living within our means.

Besides, we have been increasing spending pretty dramatically and the number of laws and regulations on businesses have gone through the roof over the last several decades. How's that working out for the American worker?

Hardly an excuse for throwing the baby out with the bathwater by electing a Libertarian.

The only way we can preserve a modicum ot liberty is to elect more libertarian-minded politicians. The road we are going down with big government politicians, on both the right and the left, is going to end in our eventual demise economically.

No country on earth has ever succeeded by operating on Libertarian principles

The only country currently run by Libertarians is Somalia

 

[lizzie]

Hardly an excuse for throwing the baby out with the bathwater by electing a Libertarian.

The only way we can preserve a modicum ot liberty is to elect more libertarian-minded politicians. The road we are going down with big government politicians, on both the right and the left, is going to end in our eventual demise economically.

No country on earth has ever succeeded by operating on Libertarian principles

The only country currently run by Libertarians is Somalia

No country run the way we are currently run will ever succeed long term. Just take a look at some of our European counterparts. They are economically doomed, and their neighbors are picking up the bill for their fiscal foolishness. When we go down, there won't be anyone to pick up the tab for us.

Oh- forgot to add- Somalia is a state of anarchy, not libertarianism. There's a subtle but distinct difference.

 

[rightwinger]

All spending. Reduce what we spent overall to pre Bush levels and you can have have the higher tax rates for everyone. Is that a deal or not?

Before you answer, realize that nobody in Washington outside of one guy is talking about decreasing spending. Nobody.

Sounds like a plan

Now to make it really fair, once we cut spending to pre- 2001 levels, let's cut the income of the super wealthy back to pre-2001 levels

That will put us back on a level playing field

Government determines income? Where is that in the Constitution?

Well, if you want to magically set spending at ten year old levels, shouldn't income be held at those levels too? The super wealth have made a lot of money in the last ten years.....why ignore that when you decide what to spend?

Could you go back to what you were spending ten years ago?

 

[eflatminor]

Hardly an excuse for throwing the baby out with the bathwater by electing a Libertarian.

The only way we can preserve a modicum ot liberty is to elect more libertarian-minded politicians. The road we are going down with big government politicians, on both the right and the left, is going to end in our eventual demise economically.

No country on earth has ever succeeded by operating on Libertarian principles

The only country currently run by Libertarians is Somalia

Such a tired old bullshit argument. My goodness I can't believe people this pull this one out of their ass. Incredible. Okay, one more time... Libertarianism is NOT anarchy. Somalia is the latter. The first 125 years or so of America is closer to the former.

 

[eflatminor]

Sounds like a plan

Now to make it really fair, once we cut spending to pre- 2001 levels, let's cut the income of the super wealthy back to pre-2001 levels

That will put us back on a level playing field

Government determines income? Where is that in the Constitution?

Well, if you want to magically set spending at ten year old levels, shouldn't income be held at those levels too? The super wealth have made a lot of money in the last ten years.....why ignore that when you decide what to spend?

Could you go back to what you were spending ten years ago?

Under the law, spending is controlled by Congress. It doesn't take magic, just a vote. Not the case with regard to what one person wishes to pay another for their labor.

I spend less today than I did ten years ago. This is what I do when I'm trying to start a new business.

Next.

 

[rightwinger]

The only way we can preserve a modicum ot liberty is to elect more libertarian-minded politicians. The road we are going down with big government politicians, on both the right and the left, is going to end in our eventual demise economically.

No country on earth has ever succeeded by operating on Libertarian principles

The only country currently run by Libertarians is Somalia

No country run the way we are currently run will ever succeed long term. Just take a look at some of our European counterparts. They are economically doomed, and their neighbors are picking up the bill for their fiscal foolishness. When we go down, there won't be anyone to pick up the tab for us.

Oh- forgot to add- Somalia is a state of anarchy, not libertarianism. There's a subtle but distinct difference.

They are not doomed and neither are we

Any country trying to operate as Libertarian would be doomed. That is why nobody will do it

 

[lizzie]

No country on earth has ever succeeded by operating on Libertarian principles

The only country currently run by Libertarians is Somalia

No country run the way we are currently run will ever succeed long term. Just take a look at some of our European counterparts. They are economically doomed, and their neighbors are picking up the bill for their fiscal foolishness. When we go down, there won't be anyone to pick up the tab for us.

Oh- forgot to add- Somalia is a state of anarchy, not libertarianism. There's a subtle but distinct difference.

They are not doomed and neither are we

Any country trying to operate as Libertarian would be doomed. That is why nobody will do it

Yes, we will not survive our future government debts. We have a growing dependent population, and to few workhorses to carry the load. No matter what you believe, we cannot continue to defy the laws of nature and succeed. Libertarianism works just fine as long as you have a population which is mature enough to handle it. True, with our current populace, it would be difficult. Too many mental and emotional children.

 

[rightwinger]

Government determines income? Where is that in the Constitution?

Well, if you want to magically set spending at ten year old levels, shouldn't income be held at those levels too? The super wealth have made a lot of money in the last ten years.....why ignore that when you decide what to spend?

Could you go back to what you were spending ten years ago?

Under the law, spending is controlled by Congress. It doesn't take magic, just a vote. Not the case with regard to what one person wishes to pay another for their labor.

I spend less today than I did ten years ago. This is what I do when I'm trying to start a new business.

Next.

Interesting...

So the US Government has to spend the same while the cost of labor, fuel goods and services has gone up significantly. It would mean our military and social security beneficiaries would have to accept pre 2001 salaries.

Yes....Libertarians would be very popular as they destroy the country