statefan91 said:

---

griff17matt said:

---

That was kind of my point. Trump is just not the face you want on that, though. Not now. I would flush EVERYTHING about Trump being associated with the party because, like it or not, he is branded a certain way now. My point was that if you take those items for what they are, it's very moderate, middle of the road policy that appeals to A LOT of people. But Trump doesn't. So, the GOP needs to decouple itself from him, take that sort of road map a bit, and become a voice of the people that feel like they're not being heard in NYC, LA, Chicago, and the like. I also think you need to deescalate the race baiting and provide a counter-point that it's actually class that is separating everyone right now. Classism is much more dangerous for poor to lower-middle class families right now.

Welfare is a great one that I like to start off with. Pubs hate it and Dems love it. Pubs want them off asap and Dems want them on it as long as they can. I'd love to start out with an offer of a one-time chance to be on welfare for 3 years. In those 3 years, you also have community college paid for. If you graduate, you get to stay on welfare for 2 more years and then you're on your own. That does a couple things, imo. You get more people contributing to society, they get a purpose and direction in life, AND you've just lightened the welfare burden as well as made a new tax payer. With those last two things, you can then offer childcare for kids 2+. That takes away an excuse to stay on welfare for single parents.

Now, that's probably not a big thing that uber conservative people want to hear, but I think it's a compromise that meets both extremes in the middle. It's difficult for either side to argue with it because you're getting them "off the books" in 5 years at most for staunch Pubs and bleeding heart Dems still get to bask in the glow of their empathy.

We don't have enough compromise in DC and I think the heart of that is the absence of term limits. If you knew you had a max of 12 years in the Senate or House, I think you would work to enact things that best serve you when you return to the private sector. Right now, the best thing they can do is to serve their re-election hopes, however damning that turns out to be.

---

It's even easier than that in my opinion. The problem is primaries. Primaries get you the most extreme candidates on either side usually and cause it to become a zero-sum game. Ranked choice pushes people more towards working together and less extremism.

---

griff17matt said:

---

The two worst things that can happen to the Republican party: 1) Continue to put Trump as the face of the party & 2) split an already minority party into half and secure the fact that you'll never be in power again.

I don't necessarily mind most of the *things* Trump did. The *way* he did it, however, was just not something I can really get behind as the leader of my country.

America First, in my opinion, needs to be more "down the middle of the fairway" politically. I would really like to see this as their platform:
1 Fiscally CONSERVATIVE
- End Omnibus bills
- Reduce military spending
- Balance the budget
- Begin to pay down our debt
- Push for term limits
2 Socially Libertarian
- Prison reform
- End War on Drugs
- Chill out with the trans hate but still keep a solid do not cross line wrt children/teens
- Engage with ways to conserve the planet
- Brainstorm ways to encourage companies to pay their employees a wage they can live on
- Reform welfare to incentivize a return to being productive in society
3 Internationally engaged, but isolationist
- Regularly involved with other countries
- Not the world police
- Not the world military
- Not the world bank
- Find other ways to empower other friendly nations to make partners instead of dependents

I'm convinced that if the GOP could turn this into their platform, the VAST majority of American's would vote for that person. It is very middle of the road. But play to the 60% in the middle and ignore the 20% to either far side and this country would be better for it. THAT would be putting America First...in my humble opinion.

---

griff17matt said:

---

ncsualum05 said:

---

griff in my opinion and if you paid attention to things other than the noise Trump actually took a lot of those stances.

Regarding point #1 the GOP as a whole was a big part of the problem and still are. You have some conservatives, some populists, and some "establishment" politicians. Trump was not good at being fiscally conservative but would it have mattered if he tried harder? I mean congress is the main problem here passing the type of bills and budgets they do. Seems neither party will ever give up their big huge swamp spending bills. You can't even get a majority of GOP to agree on fiscal responsibility and you're never getting 1 democrat vote.

Point 2: This is where Trump broke with a lot of "conservatives" in which he did prison reform. He also encouraged better working conditions through the magic of a strong economy. Wages were on the rise before covid, and employment was at an all time high, particularly in minority communities. The GOP has more and more become the party of the working class. There are some though that just need to get out of the way. Once again where Trump fails is welfare reform. But Trump is not a fiscal conservative nor does he believe it would ever be a winning issue. That's where I disagreed. No politician ever wants to touch it.

Point 3: Trump was pulling us out of being world police. He got many people out of the Middle East and even achieved historic peace deals there. We crippled Iran, stood by Israel, sucked up a little to NK to keep crazy ass calm, and hurt Russia and China economically. We made nations up the anty on these damn bills for things like NATO and the UN. Organizations that were becoming anti-America, accomplishing nothing, and we were propping up. Trade deals were huge. So we weren't being isolationist... we were just looking out for America's interest more than others. Most politicians and the people we have in power now would sell us in a heartbeat for an extra dollar. We have been selling out to foreign countries for decades to screw our own people over so they could get personally richer.

---

That was kind of my point. Trump is just not the face you want on that, though. Not now. I would flush EVERYTHING about Trump being associated with the party because, like it or not, he is branded a certain way now. My point was that if you take those items for what they are, it's very moderate, middle of the road policy that appeals to A LOT of people. But Trump doesn't. So, the GOP needs to decouple itself from him, take that sort of road map a bit, and become a voice of the people that feel like they're not being heard in NYC, LA, Chicago, and the like. I also think you need to deescalate the race baiting and provide a counter-point that it's actually class that is separating everyone right now. Classism is much more dangerous for poor to lower-middle class families right now.

Welfare is a great one that I like to start off with. Pubs hate it and Dems love it. Pubs want them off asap and Dems want them on it as long as they can. I'd love to start out with an offer of a one-time chance to be on welfare for 3 years. In those 3 years, you also have community college paid for. If you graduate, you get to stay on welfare for 2 more years and then you're on your own. That does a couple things, imo. You get more people contributing to society, they get a purpose and direction in life, AND you've just lightened the welfare burden as well as made a new tax payer. With those last two things, you can then offer childcare for kids 2+. That takes away an excuse to stay on welfare for single parents.

Now, that's probably not a big thing that uber conservative people want to hear, but I think it's a compromise that meets both extremes in the middle. It's difficult for either side to argue with it because you're getting them "off the books" in 5 years at most for staunch Pubs and bleeding heart Dems still get to bask in the glow of their empathy.

We don't have enough compromise in DC and I think the heart of that is the absence of term limits. If you knew you had a max of 12 years in the Senate or House, I think you would work to enact things that best serve you when you return to the private sector. Right now, the best thing they can do is to serve their re-election hopes, however damning that turns out to be.

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

pineknollshoresking said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

griff17matt said:

---

The two worst things that can happen to the Republican party: 1) Continue to put Trump as the face of the party & 2) split an already minority party into half and secure the fact that you'll never be in power again.

I don't necessarily mind most of the *things* Trump did. The *way* he did it, however, was just not something I can really get behind as the leader of my country.

America First, in my opinion, needs to be more "down the middle of the fairway" politically. I would really like to see this as their platform:
1 Fiscally CONSERVATIVE
- End Omnibus bills
- Reduce military spending
- Balance the budget
- Begin to pay down our debt
- Push for term limits
2 Socially Libertarian
- Prison reform
- End War on Drugs
- Chill out with the trans hate but still keep a solid do not cross line wrt children/teens
- Engage with ways to conserve the planet
- Brainstorm ways to encourage companies to pay their employees a wage they can live on
- Reform welfare to incentivize a return to being productive in society
3 Internationally engaged, but isolationist
- Regularly involved with other countries
- Not the world police
- Not the world military
- Not the world bank
- Find other ways to empower other friendly nations to make partners instead of dependents

I'm convinced that if the GOP could turn this into their platform, the VAST majority of American's would vote for that person. It is very middle of the road. But play to the 60% in the middle and ignore the 20% to either far side and this country would be better for it. THAT would be putting America First...in my humble opinion.

---

There is a lot to like here. I would quibble with a few items, but I generally agree this would attract the majority of Americans and be far better than the current state.

Unfortunately I don't see it happening as long as Trump and populism are steering the ship

---

Isle, you really don't understand the America First (Trump and MAGA) agenda... I can give you a few places to learn.

Start by watching the new program on Newsmax - Cortes and Pelligrino at 9:00 PM

---

Not agreeing with something does not mean I don't understand it.

And no I'm not going to stay up to watch an opinion "News" show. I dislike all of them, whether it's Fox, MSNBC, or anyone else

---

Civilized said:

---

griff17matt said:

---

The two worst things that can happen to the Republican party: 1) Continue to put Trump as the face of the party & 2) split an already minority party into half and secure the fact that you'll never be in power again.

I don't necessarily mind most of the *things* Trump did. The *way* he did it, however, was just not something I can really get behind as the leader of my country.

America First, in my opinion, needs to be more "down the middle of the fairway" politically. I would really like to see this as their platform:
1 Fiscally CONSERVATIVE
- End Omnibus bills
- Reduce military spending
- Balance the budget
- Begin to pay down our debt
- Push for term limits
2 Socially Libertarian
- Prison reform
- End War on Drugs
- Chill out with the trans hate but still keep a solid do not cross line wrt children/teens
- Engage with ways to conserve the planet
- Brainstorm ways to encourage companies to pay their employees a wage they can live on
- Reform welfare to incentivize a return to being productive in society
3 Internationally engaged, but isolationist
- Regularly involved with other countries
- Not the world police
- Not the world military
- Not the world bank
- Find other ways to empower other friendly nations to make partners instead of dependents

I'm convinced that if the GOP could turn this into their platform, the VAST majority of American's would vote for that person. It is very middle of the road. But play to the 60% in the middle and ignore the 20% to either far side and this country would be better for it. THAT would be putting America First...in my humble opinion.

---

With the exception of the hard trans line I could get behind this whole platform.

Well done. If you run for local office your sign is definitely going in my yard.

---

griff17matt said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

griff17matt said:

---

The two worst things that can happen to the Republican party: 1) Continue to put Trump as the face of the party & 2) split an already minority party into half and secure the fact that you'll never be in power again.

I don't necessarily mind most of the *things* Trump did. The *way* he did it, however, was just not something I can really get behind as the leader of my country.

America First, in my opinion, needs to be more "down the middle of the fairway" politically. I would really like to see this as their platform:
1 Fiscally CONSERVATIVE
- End Omnibus bills
- Reduce military spending
- Balance the budget
- Begin to pay down our debt
- Push for term limits
2 Socially Libertarian
- Prison reform
- End War on Drugs
- Chill out with the trans hate but still keep a solid do not cross line wrt children/teens
- Engage with ways to conserve the planet
- Brainstorm ways to encourage companies to pay their employees a wage they can live on
- Reform welfare to incentivize a return to being productive in society
3 Internationally engaged, but isolationist
- Regularly involved with other countries
- Not the world police
- Not the world military
- Not the world bank
- Find other ways to empower other friendly nations to make partners instead of dependents

I'm convinced that if the GOP could turn this into their platform, the VAST majority of American's would vote for that person. It is very middle of the road. But play to the 60% in the middle and ignore the 20% to either far side and this country would be better for it. THAT would be putting America First...in my humble opinion.

---

There is a lot to like here. I would quibble with a few items, but I generally agree this would attract the majority of Americans and be far better than the current state.

Unfortunately I don't see it happening as long as Trump and populism are steering the ship

---

Yep, I like a lot of that. I don't think Fiscal Conservatism is a real thing anymore and if it's pushed it will just look like things that hurt people directly (social programs) and benefit corporations (tax cuts)

---

It certainly isn't a thing practiced any longer. That doesn't mean it's not attainable. It would be things that "hurt" both sides. You can't cut revenues and expect to pay off debt. At least Dems realize to spend you have to actually collect first. Pubs just cut taxes and spend into oblivion. If you're going to cut spending to Medicare/aid, you can't leave defense spending alone. If you're going to cut taxes, you have to balance the budget against what you collect in taxes. It's basic **** but all these dumbasses that care not one iota about where this country heads for the next 100 years spend money like drunkards.

Cut - defense spending, pork projects, *some* social programs
Tax - progressive flat tax (under 50k/yr 10%, under 150k/yr 15%, over 150k/yr 20%) reduce tax code complexity and end loop holes, end corporate welfare tax loops and implement some sort of progressive flat tax here based on gross sales so mom & pop hardware doesn't get hit the same as Amazon.

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

griff17matt said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

griff17matt said:

---

The two worst things that can happen to the Republican party: 1) Continue to put Trump as the face of the party & 2) split an already minority party into half and secure the fact that you'll never be in power again.

I don't necessarily mind most of the *things* Trump did. The *way* he did it, however, was just not something I can really get behind as the leader of my country.

America First, in my opinion, needs to be more "down the middle of the fairway" politically. I would really like to see this as their platform:
1 Fiscally CONSERVATIVE
- End Omnibus bills
- Reduce military spending
- Balance the budget
- Begin to pay down our debt
- Push for term limits
2 Socially Libertarian
- Prison reform
- End War on Drugs
- Chill out with the trans hate but still keep a solid do not cross line wrt children/teens
- Engage with ways to conserve the planet
- Brainstorm ways to encourage companies to pay their employees a wage they can live on
- Reform welfare to incentivize a return to being productive in society
3 Internationally engaged, but isolationist
- Regularly involved with other countries
- Not the world police
- Not the world military
- Not the world bank
- Find other ways to empower other friendly nations to make partners instead of dependents

I'm convinced that if the GOP could turn this into their platform, the VAST majority of American's would vote for that person. It is very middle of the road. But play to the 60% in the middle and ignore the 20% to either far side and this country would be better for it. THAT would be putting America First...in my humble opinion.

---

There is a lot to like here. I would quibble with a few items, but I generally agree this would attract the majority of Americans and be far better than the current state.

Unfortunately I don't see it happening as long as Trump and populism are steering the ship

---

Yep, I like a lot of that. I don't think Fiscal Conservatism is a real thing anymore and if it's pushed it will just look like things that hurt people directly (social programs) and benefit corporations (tax cuts)

---

It certainly isn't a thing practiced any longer. That doesn't mean it's not attainable. It would be things that "hurt" both sides. You can't cut revenues and expect to pay off debt. At least Dems realize to spend you have to actually collect first. Pubs just cut taxes and spend into oblivion. If you're going to cut spending to Medicare/aid, you can't leave defense spending alone. If you're going to cut taxes, you have to balance the budget against what you collect in taxes. It's basic **** but all these dumbasses that care not one iota about where this country heads for the next 100 years spend money like drunkards.

Cut - defense spending, pork projects, *some* social programs
Tax - progressive flat tax (under 50k/yr 10%, under 150k/yr 15%, over 150k/yr 20%) reduce tax code complexity and end loop holes, end corporate welfare tax loops and implement some sort of progressive flat tax here based on gross sales so mom & pop hardware doesn't get hit the same as Amazon.

---

I agree completely with the first paragraph, I'd love to cut taxes but we are so far in the hole now and some effort to pay down debt is going to be necessary.

Social programs should be consolidated and streamlined. Make rules and eligibility easy and clear, then send people cash. You can probably save money here just by reducing administration expenses. Pork spending and defense can be cut. Some departments need to be abolished or scaled back. End or greatly scale back subsidies to businesses. SS and Medicare are on track to run out of money. Some compromise of cuts and added revenue is critical.

On the tax side, this may not be realistic, but I'd love to start over. Simply the tax code as much as possible. Put high priced tax attorneys out of business by making compliance and enforcement straight forward. Abolish corporate taxes, or at least reduce them to 10% or less. You can raise rates on dividends and capital gains accordingly, but it's not efficient to tax the same money twice. People would be surprised how many economists agree that the corporate income tax is one of the worst and least efficient taxes.

On income tax, simple graduated rates like what you suggested, but with a negative rate for the lowest earners. This could also replace some social spending. Milton Freidman was a big proponent of the negative Income tax. A VAT may also be a good idea instead of normal sales tax. Taxing consumption is usually better than taxing income. And finally, a carbon tax with tradeable credits is one of the best ways to address climate change without spending large amounts of government money. IMO, the carbon tax should be returned to citizens as a dividend instead of going to the general budget

---

Civilized said:

---

griff17matt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

With the exception of the hard trans line I could get behind this whole platform.

Well done. If you run for local office your sign is definitely going in my yard.

---

What about the hard Trans line are you against?

---

Families, physicians, and mental health care professionals need to consult to make those difficult decisions on a case by case basis. The government doesn't need to be dictating very personal health care decisions.

The doctors and health care professionals comprising the AAP and APA are in the trenches with trans youth and their families seeing the effects of both gender-affirming care and also of situations where that care is denied. Those organizations strongly oppose hard line legislation for gender-affirming care.

---

griff17matt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

griff17matt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

With the exception of the hard trans line I could get behind this whole platform.

Well done. If you run for local office your sign is definitely going in my yard.

---

What about the hard Trans line are you against?

---

Families, physicians, and mental health care professionals need to consult to make those difficult decisions on a case by case basis. The government doesn't need to be dictating very personal health care decisions.

The doctors and health care professionals comprising the AAP and APA are in the trenches with trans youth and their families seeing the effects of both gender-affirming care and also of situations where that care is denied. Those organizations strongly oppose hard line legislation for gender-affirming care.

---

I suppose that is fine as long as the child being cared for can sue the ever loving **** out of everyone involved should they grow up and feel they were traumatized by "adults" making the decisions for them as children and adolescents. Who is to say those feelings aren't there because they are feeling conflicted because of their emerging sexuality and such? "I'm attracted to guys so I feel like I should be a woman" is a very fine line to walk when dealing with a 13 year old boy just hitting puberty.

Gender dysphoria (as much maligned as the term seams to be these days) is a serious, life altering decision that should be weighed heavily by the person involved. I am personally of the belief that teens shouldn't be making those decisions for themselves at that age. Again, I suppose I would be okay with leaving the government out of health decisions as long as there are legal protections for the child undergoing such treatments at the behest of doctors and parents that opens them up for at the very least civil punishment, if criminal punishment is a bridge too far for most.

Maybe I'm being a bit too "reefer madness" here, but I feel like there are going to be a LOT of 20-40 year olds really, really pissed at the people they trusted in their youth that coerced them into getting sex changes at such a young age. But, a lot like the abortion topic, I'm not sure this is something the two sides will ever really see eye-to-eye on.

As a slight aside, does anyone else feel like this may be a stepping stone to condone a child's sexuality and, by extension, an adult's attraction to them in the same manner? I'm not sure it will ever be a straight line to that but couldn't you say if a child, however young, can recognize whether they should literally change sexual organs, then they should be able to use those organs or allow others to use them in whatever manner they choose? I dunno...I feel like GP or BBW right now even bringing this up. Maybe I should capitalize and bold some random buzz words or something.

---

Steve Williams said:

---

Read an article where a bunch of republicans are threatening to form a new party if current republicans don't move on from Donald Trump. Curious what those on the right think about this.

Gonna give my 2 cents and hopefully won't set anyone on fire. I think they should. Just my opinion but personally, I think Republicans should put everything they have behind Ron Desantis. I think he is a guy that could unite the party and if they did that, the Dems would have their hands full in 24.

---

• Public Ownership. This is the core tenet of socialism. ...
• Economic Planning. Unlike in a capitalist economy, a socialist economy is not driven by the laws of supply and demand. ...
• Egalitarian Society. ...
• Provision of Basic Needs. ...
• No Competition. ...
• Price Control. ...
• Social Welfare. ...
• Social Justice.

bigeric said:

---

Add line item veto.

---

curmudgeon.zen said:

---

DeSantis/Noem FTW.

---

bigeric said:

---

How would line-item veto differ legislatively from veto?

---

Cornpack said:

---

bigeric said:

---

Add line item veto.

---

Currently line item vetos are unconstitutional per SCOTUS in Clinton v. City of New York. Do you really think that giving the executive the power to legislate, and not just enforce the law, is something working trying to create a new constitutional amendment for? I mean if you're not a big separation of powers person and prefer a solitary strong branch of government then fine but that seems like a lot of effort to change our entire system of government otherwise.

---

bigeric said:

---

limit line-item veto to spend, tax, and/or budget bills.

---

griff17matt said:

---

The two worst things that can happen to the Republican party: 1) Continue to put Trump as the face of the party & 2) split an already minority party into half and secure the fact that you'll never be in power again.

I don't necessarily mind most of the *things* Trump did. The *way* he did it, however, was just not something I can really get behind as the leader of my country.

America First, in my opinion, needs to be more "down the middle of the fairway" politically. I would really like to see this as their platform:
1 Fiscally CONSERVATIVE
- End Omnibus bills
- Reduce military spending
- Balance the budget
- Begin to pay down our debt
- Push for term limits
2 Socially Libertarian
- Prison reform
- End War on Drugs
- Chill out with the trans hate but still keep a solid do not cross line wrt children/teens
- Engage with ways to conserve the planet
- Brainstorm ways to encourage companies to pay their employees a wage they can live on
- Reform welfare to incentivize a return to being productive in society
3 Internationally engaged, but isolationist
- Regularly involved with other countries
- Not the world police
- Not the world military
- Not the world bank
- Find other ways to empower other friendly nations to make partners instead of dependents

I'm convinced that if the GOP could turn this into their platform, the VAST majority of American's would vote for that person. It is very middle of the road. But play to the 60% in the middle and ignore the 20% to either far side and this country would be better for it. THAT would be putting America First...in my humble opinion.

---

PackDaddy said:

---

griff17matt said:

---

The two worst things that can happen to the Republican party: 1) Continue to put Trump as the face of the party & 2) split an already minority party into half and secure the fact that you'll never be in power again.

I don't necessarily mind most of the *things* Trump did. The *way* he did it, however, was just not something I can really get behind as the leader of my country.

America First, in my opinion, needs to be more "down the middle of the fairway" politically. I would really like to see this as their platform:
1 Fiscally CONSERVATIVE
- End Omnibus bills
- Reduce military spending
- Balance the budget
- Begin to pay down our debt
- Push for term limits
2 Socially Libertarian
- Prison reform
- End War on Drugs
- Chill out with the trans hate but still keep a solid do not cross line wrt children/teens
- Engage with ways to conserve the planet
- Brainstorm ways to encourage companies to pay their employees a wage they can live on
- Reform welfare to incentivize a return to being productive in society
3 Internationally engaged, but isolationist
- Regularly involved with other countries
- Not the world police
- Not the world military
- Not the world bank
- Find other ways to empower other friendly nations to make partners instead of dependents

I'm convinced that if the GOP could turn this into their platform, the VAST majority of American's would vote for that person. It is very middle of the road. But play to the 60% in the middle and ignore the 20% to either far side and this country would be better for it. THAT would be putting America First...in my humble opinion.

---

Do you have any plans between 2024 and 2028?

---

griff17matt said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

griff17matt said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

griff17matt said:

---

The two worst things that can happen to the Republican party: 1) Continue to put Trump as the face of the party & 2) split an already minority party into half and secure the fact that you'll never be in power again.

I don't necessarily mind most of the *things* Trump did. The *way* he did it, however, was just not something I can really get behind as the leader of my country.

America First, in my opinion, needs to be more "down the middle of the fairway" politically. I would really like to see this as their platform:
1 Fiscally CONSERVATIVE
- End Omnibus bills
- Reduce military spending
- Balance the budget
- Begin to pay down our debt
- Push for term limits
2 Socially Libertarian
- Prison reform
- End War on Drugs
- Chill out with the trans hate but still keep a solid do not cross line wrt children/teens
- Engage with ways to conserve the planet
- Brainstorm ways to encourage companies to pay their employees a wage they can live on
- Reform welfare to incentivize a return to being productive in society
3 Internationally engaged, but isolationist
- Regularly involved with other countries
- Not the world police
- Not the world military
- Not the world bank
- Find other ways to empower other friendly nations to make partners instead of dependents

I'm convinced that if the GOP could turn this into their platform, the VAST majority of American's would vote for that person. It is very middle of the road. But play to the 60% in the middle and ignore the 20% to either far side and this country would be better for it. THAT would be putting America First...in my humble opinion.

---

There is a lot to like here. I would quibble with a few items, but I generally agree this would attract the majority of Americans and be far better than the current state.

Unfortunately I don't see it happening as long as Trump and populism are steering the ship

---

Yep, I like a lot of that. I don't think Fiscal Conservatism is a real thing anymore and if it's pushed it will just look like things that hurt people directly (social programs) and benefit corporations (tax cuts)

---

It certainly isn't a thing practiced any longer. That doesn't mean it's not attainable. It would be things that "hurt" both sides. You can't cut revenues and expect to pay off debt. At least Dems realize to spend you have to actually collect first. Pubs just cut taxes and spend into oblivion. If you're going to cut spending to Medicare/aid, you can't leave defense spending alone. If you're going to cut taxes, you have to balance the budget against what you collect in taxes. It's basic **** but all these dumbasses that care not one iota about where this country heads for the next 100 years spend money like drunkards.

Cut - defense spending, pork projects, *some* social programs
Tax - progressive flat tax (under 50k/yr 10%, under 150k/yr 15%, over 150k/yr 20%) reduce tax code complexity and end loop holes, end corporate welfare tax loops and implement some sort of progressive flat tax here based on gross sales so mom & pop hardware doesn't get hit the same as Amazon.

---

I agree completely with the first paragraph, I'd love to cut taxes but we are so far in the hole now and some effort to pay down debt is going to be necessary.

Social programs should be consolidated and streamlined. Make rules and eligibility easy and clear, then send people cash. You can probably save money here just by reducing administration expenses. Pork spending and defense can be cut. Some departments need to be abolished or scaled back. End or greatly scale back subsidies to businesses. SS and Medicare are on track to run out of money. Some compromise of cuts and added revenue is critical.

On the tax side, this may not be realistic, but I'd love to start over. Simply the tax code as much as possible. Put high priced tax attorneys out of business by making compliance and enforcement straight forward. Abolish corporate taxes, or at least reduce them to 10% or less. You can raise rates on dividends and capital gains accordingly, but it's not efficient to tax the same money twice. People would be surprised how many economists agree that the corporate income tax is one of the worst and least efficient taxes.

On income tax, simple graduated rates like what you suggested, but with a negative rate for the lowest earners. This could also replace some social spending. Milton Freidman was a big proponent of the negative Income tax. A VAT may also be a good idea instead of normal sales tax. Taxing consumption is usually better than taxing income. And finally, a carbon tax with tradeable credits is one of the best ways to address climate change without spending large amounts of government money. IMO, the carbon tax should be returned to citizens as a dividend instead of going to the general budget

---

Do you happen to have any literature on the bolded? I'd be interested to read/hear about that.

So you're essentially saying that no business should EVER be taxed? I think I would only be okay with this if you incentivized lower taxes with meeting a pay threshold for your workers. I don't think Amazon should be making billions of dollars while still paying their workers like peons. I know they're getting better about this (and unionization should be shunned around every corner), but if Bezos is raking in 100 billion, I think the ones making him that money should be getting serious pay raises on the regular.

Again, though, mom and pop hardware can't compete with Lowes wrt pay for their employees just based on scale alone. I think you have to have a way to keep hometown or regional stores from closing in favor of box chains.

We're already seeing that become more and more prevalent in towns where competition is a razor thin margin. I'd say it would be easier to be a mom and pop place in Raleigh or Charlotte as opposed to somewhere like Wilson or Statesville or Asheboro. So, I say that to say, you really need to ensure whatever policy you enact doesn't cripple more rural/suburban communities.

---

bigeric said:

---

I'll take the bad with the good.

---

BBW12OG said:

---

bigeric said:

---

...

---

So when a GOP controlled White House overrules the entire SOCIALIST PARTY agenda and they have no say in the matter are you gonna be good with that one as well?

I would thank the good Lord for his small blessings.

...

If it wasn't for Joe Manchin this country would be over as we know it. ...

I wish Manchin would just go ahead and switch parties, and end the Dems power push.
...

---