This forum post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore reformcongress. Show Details
This forum post is hidden because you have submitted an abuse report against it. Show Details
In Response to RE: Communist Party Saying Same Thing About Downgrade as Mainstream Democrats by cecily
The antis, what?
The anti-big government?
The anti-redistribution of wealth?
The antis, what?
As far as the ear marks go, it isn't just those ear marks. It is what the ear marks are used to buy votes for. For example, the health care bill that the Democrats claimed would insure some 30 million more people. Except for one thing, it doesn't include businesses with under fifty employees. Besides the problem that creates in that these businesses aren't going to hire the 50th person in their business unless they have a clear comparative advantage with competitors in the markets in which they operate, the bigger issues is the number of businesses that there are with fewer than 50 employees. Some 42 million people work for businesses with fewer than 100 employees, and the vast majority of those businesses have fewer than 50 employees.
Many of these companies already provide health care insurance for their employees that is more flexible than the State Exchanges are, and cost the workers less out of pocket than those State Exchanges will. In most of the States, people can get insurance for much less, particularly when we know that most people are getting policies that cover far more than they use, at least until they age. This is why employers should not buy group insurance policies but simply pay the premiums up to what they are paying now for what the employees choose, and take the difference in salary and or wages so that their real incomes that they take home increase, while also increasing revenues to SS and Medicare. Even with that, SS and Medicare need to be moved out of the National Debt and at the very least put in private savings accounts that pay the same interest that the federal government pays, but in private accounts and not being used by other agencies in the intergovernmental debt. The government borrowed the people's money and are asking the same people that they borrowed it from to service that debt. That is not a wise investment by any means.
To follow up on the ear marks, the voters who want them in their districts and don't want to solve the problem are part of the problem. That is not intended to insult anyone, but that's the way that it is. What would be better is to simply cut the tax rates and eliminate the loopholes for all industries, and make it simple and competitive with other countries that were not competing with the United States in the 1950s and 1960s. This is particularly about Europe and Japan that were rebuilding after WWII and the emerging markets that were not getting larger shares of the global market during those decades, like India and China. However, this will require renegotiating of Treaties which means our State Department is going to have to break these treaties, if and only if the other countries are willing to break them. They can certainly keep the rates where they are without a treaty, but we have to make ours competitive with theirs.
The treaties were designed to prevent double taxation, which means that the companies were already there operating, and they did not move there afterwards except for mostly in circumstances where they went over there to produce the good in the country they sell it in. Caterpillar is one of those companies. It is pretty expensive to ship them in the United States, but it would cost a whole lot more to ship it from here to there. I don't begrudge companies that move operations overseas to fulfill demand overseas. What we need is to produce the goods we consume here in this country. That would raise the value of the dollar in the United States and around the world, and then each country should go to their own currency and increase the value of each of them respectively. Get rid of the Euro and other currencies that are not specific to one country.