Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Sen. Jim DeMint :: Townhall.com Columnist
Real Change Requires Principled Conservative Leadership
by Sen. Jim DeMint
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


Since 1966, the opposition party has delivered a response to the State of the Union Address.

This year, I am delivering a Conservative Response not to oppose the President, but to compliment what the President has proposed.

The President last night took some bold positions and we will work to support his principled stands. But more must be done.

As a Senate conservative, I will work with my colleagues to put forth principled conservative ideas for action in Congress.

First, we must start with National Security. Our national defense is the best in the world, but we need to make sure it stays that way. We will propose that at least 4 percent of GDP be spent on national defense, to make sure our troops have the resources, training, and equipment they need to accomplish their mission.

The biggest issue on the minds of most Americans right now is our economy. And one of the top problems with our economy is out of control Federal spending. We are 17 trillion dollars in debt, and much of that debt is held by foreign nations such as China. Reform is needed. We will propose a balanced budget amendment, to make sure we do not spend more than we take in. This amendment will make it harder for politicians to raise the taxes of Americans by requiring a supermajority vote in Congress.

We will also provide a comprehensive global competitiveness program to bring back companies and jobs which have gone overseas. The job losses we have seen are not the fault of the American worker, they are the fault of Washington politicians who see their mission to tax, regulate, and harass businesses until they finally move overseas. Liberals prefer to complain about the jobs that have left. Conservatives will fight to get them back, by lowering taxes on American companies, cutting red tape, and providing other reforms that create a business environment that becomes a global magnet for high quality jobs.

We must secure our border and enforce our immigration laws, without providing amnesty for illegal aliens. We will offer legislation to fund the entire border fence, increase the number of border patrol agents and provide our law enforcement the tools to enforce our immigration laws.

We must reform the way Washington spends your money. Last year, Congress passed an appropriations bill that was approximately 2 feet tall, 3,417 pages long, contained an estimated 9,170 earmarks, with no debate and only 46 hours and 8 minutes to read the bill. The system is a national disgrace. I commend the President for moving the ball forward on this issue. Conservatives in the Senate will carry the President’s call for reform by putting forth earmark reform legislation to provide transparency, disclosure, and reduction of wasteful earmarks.

We will also propose fundamental tax reform. In the short term, we must support the President’s call to make the tax cuts permanent. We will also put forth a proposal to give all taxpayers the option of a flat tax. You can stay in the current system, or you can choose a flat tax with no deductions. It’s up to you, the taxpayer. In the long term, we want to scrap the current tax code altogether because it is loaded with special interest giveaways, loopholes, and complicated hidden taxes. It is time to move to a fair system that taxpayers can understand.

At the same time, we must deal with our entitlement system, which is in serious financial trouble. The first step to reforming Social Security is to stop the raid. The Social Security Trust Fund should have a massive surplus of funds paid by workers for their retirement. But, every year, Congress raids the trust fund to pay for wasteful spending and earmarks. If a business did this, they would be prosecuted. When politicians do it, they get re-elected. The public is starting to wake up to these accounting tricks, and with your help we will end them.

We must provide free market health care options for all Americans. Last night President Bush made it clear that he understands this. Today, many Americans cannot get health insurance due to a discriminatory tax system and burdensome state regulations that make quality plans unaffordable. We will offer legislation to expand the current tax deduction for all Americans, and allow individual Americans to buy insurance across state lines.

Today, too many of our education dollars are being wasted on meddlesome bureaucrats in Washington who provide no added value to local schools. We will provide education reform to give flexibility to states and localities, eliminate burdensome regulations, and ensure that nearly all of our Federal education funds are being spent in the classroom, and decisions are being made by school boards, teachers, and parents – not politicians and bureaucrats.

We will also reform the corrupt and ineffective bureaucracy known as the United Nations. American taxpayers pay the largest contribution to the UN, and what do we get for it? We must refuse to continue sending billions of taxpayer dollars to the UN until it reforms the way it does business.

Americans are tired of this broken government, and I want you to know that conservatives in Washington hear you and intend to work hard to restore this nation. But to succeed in this effort we need the help of Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. I hope you will join us in demanding more from your elected politicians.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Uh, ooooookay
For all these fine conservative ideas, what about Bush's giveaway plan of tax "rebates", particularly to people who didn't pay any taxes in the first place? How does THAT conform with your idea of conservatism?


Hugh and Romney are scurrilous
The Weekly Standard:

John McCain came out early in support of Samuel Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court. He worked behind the scenes to generate more support from his colleagues. He pointed to his 2000 campaign promise to appoint conservative judges as one reason he was pleased with the Alito nomination. He spoke on the Senate floor in favor of Alito's confirmation. He even spent several months campaigning for president telling people Samuel Alito was one of the "finest justices ever appointed to the Supreme Court."

The inescapable conclusion? A President McCain would not appoint Supreme Court Justices like Samuel Alito.

We know this because in the days before the potentially decisive Florida primary, someone (we don't know who) claimed to have heard McCain (we don't know where) say that he was concerned about Alito's conservatism (we don't know when).

I understand the conservative objections to John McCain and I'm sympathetic to many of them, including his willing participation in the so-called Gang of 14.

But this is scurrilous.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/CampaignStandard/2008 /01/hayes_mccain_and_alito.asp

The reality:
Permanent tax cuts means permanent deficits.

A tax credit approach to health care means you don't plan to do anything for those who need it.

9 Billion/mo. in Iraq = wasteful spending with no value added

A tissue of ideologically driven.......
distortions. Let's take healthcare as an example. The goal for healthcare should not be to make sure that it makes a profit as a part of capitalism. The goal should be that we who need health care and prevention get care based on need. Triage is not a new concept and can easily be accomplished as long as it is recognized that this is the goal of the health care system.

It takes a lot of cojones for DeMint to make his distortion with a straight face that taxes are the problem.

Throughout his article DeMint starts with ideology and tries to stuff everything into his preconceived "politically correct" ideology.

plus...
To add to Proud Liberal's point - the goal of health care reform is also to bring health care costs to where our companies can better compete with foreign companies. Countries with universal health care have proven that they've brought health care costs down to far less than ours.

Economic Nitwittery on display
The President's State of the Union was a national disgrace.

Fundamental Tax Reform wasn't even on his radar. Any suggestion that the "conservatives" in the Senate or the House will be able to push some form of fundamental tax refor through is laughable on its face.

And you "conservatives" did a great job when the Republicans held the majority, eh? Wasn't that when the spending spree really began? Do you think we're stupid? And now the President is not happy with 15 BILLION for AIDS in Africa, so now he's proposing $30 BILLION. And again, I ask, DO YOU THINK WE'RE STUPID?

Spare me the crap!!! I'VE HAD IT WITH POLITICIANS!!!!!! REPUBLICANS ESPECIALLY!!!!! How can you keep a straight face when delivering these stump speeches? Can you look yourselves in the eye in the mirror? We gave you the House, the Senate and the Whitehouse. What did you do with the control? Pfft.

NOW LISTEN UP: We need a tax system that is fair, FULLY transparent, FULLY border-adjustable, and EASILY understood by Joe and Jane Sixpack.

SIMPLY STATED: WE NEED THE FAIR TAX, HR 25.

Nothing else will do. The Flat Tax alternative just rearranges the deck chairs---Intolerable IDIOCY by any other name.

Universal Healthcare = Universal Misery
The net present value of the unfunded liability for Social Security and Medicare exceeds the net worth of the country. And the economic illiterati think we can provide medical care for all? Okie dokie....

Betty
The rest of the industrialized world provides universal health care for its citizens. Why can't the US?

Go to the UK......
And "enjoy" some of the "benefits" of "universal healthcare," like waiting for over a year for a surgery that is deemed "non-essential." My grandmother wore diapers and didn't leave the house for that year while waiting for her "non-essential" surgery.

"Enjoy" that palliative morphine treatment for cancer that is deemed terminal. My grandfather died of an otherwise treatable cancer.

You're dreaming. I've seen the "benefits" of universal healthcare up close and personal. NO THANK YOU.

And we can't keep the promises we've already made. Socialist Insecurity and Medicare are hopelessly insolvent. The net present value of the unfunded liability (the amount of money that would have to be in the trust fund to make the programs actuarially sound) exceeds the net worth of the country. Where in heavens name is the MONEY going to come from to pay for all of this "free" healthcare?????

The government is not your nanny. Take responsibility for providing for your healthcare and the healthcare of your family.

The United States system may not be perfect, but it is a far cry from the universal misery in the UK.

A populist conservative's concerns.
As a "populist" conservative I'm concerned the Republican party doesn't become a mouthpiece for corporate interests against working people. For instance in the prohibition of consumers to access Canadian pharmacies in order to obtain affordable drugs or the failure to require pharmaceutical companies to offer competitive pricing to government programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, or the VA.

Or in the failure to oversee the real estate industry, allowing it to quadruple homes prices when federal interest rates were decreased, while it irresponsibly issued billions of dollars worth of unsound mortgages, putting our economy on full tilt and exacerbating an already stressed homeless situation and general housing stock availability. If you recall Reagan's boom was also followed by a real estate bust that cost taxpayer several billion dollars.

If conservatives are to regain credibility, after sitting out the past seven years when Republicans were in the catbird seat, then your programs must offer protection, and a hand up, to workers who have been downsized or outsourced because businesses don't want to pay wages commensurate with the costs of a market driven consumer economy.

Empty words that leave working people to fend for themselves in a world of consolidating corporate interests and rapid change will have the din of aloofness, elitism, and allied wealth against struggling families.

Cut the budget, empower the states, actually dismantle non-functional, archaic, incompetent programs and departments. Empower the government to insure imports and foodstuffs are safe. Don't intrude in our lives but protect us from opportunists who abuse loopholes in the law and are arrogant in their naked ambitions to leave nothing in their wakes but broken lives.

Cam
If you call waiting six weeks to get a wisdom tooth pulled (Germany) to waiting 18 months for heart surgery (Canada) to having the best and brightest give up medicine (United Kingdom) then I suggest you go there.

I am a retired veteran and I have "Universal Healthcare". That means your pharmacy changing the formulary without regard to your prescription needs, rotating doctors, waiting for consults, and almost never seeing the same person twice.

As Walter Williams stated "How do we think we can afford something collectively that we cannot afford individually?"

Oh, I get it. You want me to pay your share.

Captialism means everybody shares in the opportunity while socialism means everybody shares in the misery.

Been there. Seen it. Doesn't work.

NJobserver
The Federal Government drove and practically mandated the housing bubble.

When redlining became illegal, banks were forced to make sub-prime loans. The predictable consequence of trying to flout the real and fundamental laws of economics are now coming home to roost. Didn't anyone ever stop long enough to ask, "How do people with bad credit, no job, and no money get a mortgage?" DUH!!!

Cheap Federal Money drove this crisis. More cheap federal money won't solve it.

Betty: Limited resources
Nobody ever talks about the basic problem with healthcare, which is that resources are limited and so we can't meet all the needs that people have. This means we must ration our distribution of resources by some method. This means that some needs will not be met, whatever the means of resource distribution.

Yes, you've seen what rationing means in Great Britain, but do you see what rationing means in the United States? People see what is happening but we don't see what is not happening.

There are people in the U.S. who are not getting the care they need. Will you, Betty, weigh the lack of care and can you say that one system does a better job of caring for those who need care the most?

To Proud Liberal
I'll take free-market "rationing" over government rationing any day.

The government is not your nanny. Step up to the plate and take responsibility for your care. If you feel strongly about providing medical care for the indigent, then I'd suggest you donate your time, talent or treasure to provide care for the indigent.


Empty promises
I apologize for sounding negative or sarcastic, but come on people. How long have politicians been saying these same things in different ways? For how many years are we going to nod our heads and cheer them on, as though they're heroes, as though they're the only ones that can save us?

They said they're going to fix social security, our public schools, unemployment, immigration, and the economy. They said they're going to cut spending, they're going to balance the budget, etc, etc, blah, blah, blah.

What government needs to do is get the hell out of the way and let the free market do what it does best...make life better for everyone.

And "free market" doesn't include corporations lobbying congress for special regulations that give them a competitive advantage and crush competition, thus limiting consumer choice and driving up prices.

"Free market" also doesn't mean government should create money out of thin air.

Republicans need to be much more Libertarian in their thinking, and Democrats need to be run out of the country.

I'm fed up with what's happened to our country, and what's continuing to happen. Government will only change a little bit here and there to make it appear as though they're changing, all the while pushing us closer to disaster.

Cam
To say permanent tax cuts mean permanent deficits grossly oversimplifies the dynamics of taxation. Whether a tax cut will increase or decrease tax revenue depends on where the current tax rate is on the Laffer Curve. If the lower rate produces more revenue, as the Bush tax cuts did, the rate was above the optimum level and was counterproductive. If a lower rate produces a lower total revenue the rate was already at or below the Laffer peak.

Tax rates greatly influence the behavior of the players in the economy: businesses, investors, taxpayers and consumers. To blindly assume that taxing, at a higher rate will produce more revenue is to assume nonsense.

Part of the trick is that the Laffer Curve, like everything in a dynamic economy, is constantly changing. It's difficult to know where the peak is at any given time. The results produced by the Bush tax cuts, however, certainly argue against throwing them out and expecting to produce more revenue.

Stop the social crap
When will you liberals open your eyes and see reality?? Has socialism ever worked? examples please. Has capitalism built the greatest country in recorded history? Why not go back to our founding father's days and try out a true republic? Betty, nice job on your posts. We cannot provide a risk free life for our citizens. People need to take responsibility for their own lives.

Hard Thought: All your stats, and THEN

SOME have been posted... oh say... "eleventy-hundred" times before. (And, btw, that is a real number for those not yet cognitively developed to "get it.")

If the "wanna be socialists" folks don't get it by now, it isn't going to happen.

Does our health care need fixing? No question!! But to expect the government to do it is ridiculous!


Wow Betty
tell us how you really feel. We lost our health insurance when my husband lost his job. And that was the best thing that ever happened to us.
We now have controll of our health, I had bad
reactions to prescription drugs (so did he) so why should I go that route again? I'm still fighting to regain my health from b.p. pills. I go the natural way and never felt better. Health care/insurance/big pharma/FDA..follow the money. I don't want some uneducated twit in an office, munching do nuts determining if my Dr.
recommended treatment is okay. Please accept
my condolences for your Grandfather, I lost my Mom to endrometrial Cancer 20 yrs. ago. She was on Medicare, so couldn't afford to go to the big Boston hospital, Dana Farber. The Dr. she had
was an idiot, never answered our questions and there are people who want that for every American? Puhlease!
P.S. I'm English bone china on both sides, 1 gen.
American my mum's and second on my Dad's.

Betty: You've bought into a myth
The myth is that the free-market is a magician who sees to it that every individual gets his just deserts based on the premise that there is a direct connection between such things and character, hard work, etc. and financial success.

Health care is about values and I don't like your values and thankfully your's are not mainstream. Americans ask ouselves what kind of a country do we want to live in now that we are a wealthy, post industrial country. Most Americans make a lot of room in their values for fairness, empathy, compassion and practicality.

We believe that we weren't put on earth to primarily be free-market enablers to slavishly let the free-market do whatever it wants to do. Most Americans feel like we should control the free market - being human beings - rather than be the controlled creatures of a soul-less process with no mind and heart.

To Proud Liberal
"Nobody ever talks about the basic problem with healthcare, which is that resources are limited and so we can't meet all the needs that people have."

Resources are "limited" because of government interference with health care. Why is it that so many people government is the only way to make sure people get what they need?

The free market will give people what they need much better than government. And for those that can't afford help charity will provide for them, like it has in the past and present. We're a very giving country, we enjoy helping those in need. Look what happens when you see a news story of someone less fortunate that can't get care they need...they're almost always flooded with help from the public.

It's when you meddle with the free market that problems arise, such as higher prices and less availability, less choice, for consumers.

All you have to do is look at the countries that have "universal health care". Sure, you have a "right" to health care in those countries, but the waiting times to get health care is horrible, and many people die because of those waiting times, or they pay money out of their own pocket to come to the United States or other countries for health care which they cannot get from their wonderful "free" health care at home.

You need to do more research on those countries with socialized medicine. It's a disaster, they have much higher death rates for the most common forms of cancer. People are on waiting lists for much needed surgeries and treatments.

Government controlled health care is not the answer, unless the question is "How do I completely destroy health care in my country?".

To the Free Health Care nuts
First off, nothing is free! So stop calling it FREE... A few posts above talk about limited resources. Show proof of the limited resource issue?
If you stop the illegal immigration that tax the current system with a paper cut on my finger to a minor cold with emergency room visits, there is no resource issue if you can even prove one.
Pay the Doctor directly and remove the government "oversight" and insurance companies that have made millions, while paying the caregivers pennies on the dollar. Ever think why a caregiver charges so much for services; because they have figured out the system and the %, they will be paid on a claim to an insurance company.

Remove the oversight and pay the caregiver directly, while fixing the border.

The market will “fix” the caregiver or insurance company that is gauging the patient. It always has in any other "free market" enterprise, and it always will.

Stunned:
May I point out once again that the United States has become the greatest country in the world concurrently with our transition into a welfare state. We have become the greatest country in the world not during a period of untrammeled capitalism, but during a period when we Americans initiated social security, labor laws, environmental laws, Medicare and Medicaid, government insurance, and active Fed, the exercise of fiscal policies and more. You can go ahead and say we would have been better off without all this but you should realize that this is pure speculation.

The United States became great AS A WELFARE STATE.

RUN WITH WOLVES AND LEARN TO HOWL
Joe writes: Tuesday, January, 29, 2008 11:57 AM
Hugh and Romney are scurrilous
The Weekly Standard
---
You have learned well or did you teach McCain to tell a story adding your own slurs.

Joe what ever you name is, you are misled, uninformed of one of the biggest hypocrites from Washington, or the Devil himself. You have no respect for honor or the American people. The time will come when you will realize how shaky it is to build on a sandy soil or a false foundation of lies and false collations, because we surely reap all we sow.

I mean no harm, but someone needs to tell you how a putrid attitude and disposition are appreciated following the discovery of our corrupt, or misguided comments.

I could not sleep or look myself in the mirror and respect the face I would see, thinking that is the person I never really ever wanted to be.

Love your self enough to know it is not all about money, it is about dignity and unity in truth, virtue, loyalty and a good conscience.

God Bless America, Land of the Free,
God Bless American for sea to shining sea.

Mitt Romney is the Man Jim DeMint is describing.
Go Mitt Go!

Proud Liberal
"We believe that we weren't put on earth to primarily be free-market enablers to slavishly let the free-market do whatever it wants to do."

This shows your complete lack of understanding of the free market. The free market makes slaves of no one, only government (or groups of people using force) can do that.

You can't control the market, when you or anyone else attempts to you make things worse by introducing artificial signals that cause people to make bad choices.

And I strongly disagree with your opinion that using government force to take money from one person and give to another is somehow more compassionate and kind than giving people the freedom to decide how to use their resources of their own free will.

Just because a bunch of people get together and form a majority doesn't make them more compassionate, smarter, or better than anyone else. They just become people with the power to force you to do things "they" think is good.

Liberty Dave
I thought you of all people should know:

Scarce resources is a primary tenet of economic theory. Economic is called the "dismal science" because resources are always scarce.

Try reading Sowell's book on the Anointed. He acknowedges that the main question for economics is "who makes the decisions about the allocation of scarce resources."

The answer he gives is incorrect, but at least he knows the right question.

To Proud Liberal
I will not disagree that the USA has become a welfare state. I will even continue it with the nanny state. The United States wasn't built on a guarantee you will make it. It was built on a guarantee that you have the opportunity for a better life. Not a hand out of a better life.

Fact - Socialism hasn't worked anywhere it is installed.

Do I think people should care for those who can't care for themselves? Sure! The key word is those that CAN'T care for themselves. Not those that won't...
If you examine socialism around the world, you will find that the USA and FREE MARKETS (AKA Capitalism) cares for people better than any government entitlement program. If you take from a person to give to someone else, they reject it. If you ask them to help, they do it more efficiently and effectively. Look at any Non profit that the GOVERMENT doesn't have it's hands on.


Call to Conservatives
This article was not written for people who are Liberals; this is a call to Conservatives. Obviously Liberals can comment and deride as the wish, this is a country where we are allowed to express our views freely; well at least most of the time. This isn't about any candidate, although several of them claiming to be Conservatives might peruse the above lines and take a thing or two from them.
The only way to advance this agenda is to confront the Liberals in the manner of the greatest president in 45 years, Ronald Reagan did. That is to take your case to the American people. Our current President rather than promote is agenda, chose for the last several years to work from behind the scenes in the White House. I for one, do not feel that tactic was very successful.
For our “Conservatives" in Congress, you cannot promote a Conservative Agenda while cooperating with the likes of Ted Kennedy. You have to be a leader not a compromiser. Right now in America, we need a Conservative Leader; not a Liberal Collaborator. I endorse no candidate; let your conscience guide you.

As a welfare state?
"The United States became great AS A WELFARE STATE."

That sounds like a mantra sung by the elites of the old Soviet Union.

In other words, it's absolutely ridiculous, and it's a lie.

The United States became a world super power faster than any other country in history, with a higher standard of living than most countries in the world including more liberty for it's people. What's the main difference between us and other countries? We embraced the notion of capitalism, to a large degree at least.

Embracing more and more socialism is harming our country, not helping it, not making us more compassionate or kind.

oneeye
The linked article below shows how even Laffer can't defend his curve:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1692027,00 .html

Hard Thought
18,000 Americans die each year for lack of health care. Some might need to wait for their care in countries with univeral health care but nearly all receive care. No one has to hold a spagetti feed to pay of the hospital bills.

FairTax
Sen. DeMint,

I believe the FairTax (HR Bill 25 - S 1025) would be a far superior solution than a Flat Tax. Before you disagree - please invest the time reading the Book by John Linder - and the bill itself.

Thank you!

who are you kidding, yourself ?
We agree with what you said, Jim. We just don't believe you mean anything by it. You're still letting H1B visa workers, offshore workers and outsourcing steal our jobs. You let most of the manufacturing in SC die. And you're still letting Wall Street pull your strings. We're just slow to acknowledge the truth. We're not too stupid to recognize it. I've been a Republican for all of my life. But right now I would vote for John Edwards. The Republican party is committing suicide by denying extensions to jobless benefits and tax breaks to retired people who shouldn't even be paying ANY taxes anymore. All of what you're saying is much too little and way too late. Your party's best hope is that the dems nominate HillBilly or Obama because then all the people who might have stayed home will at least come out to vote against either of them.

Proud Liberal
"Scarce resources is a primary tenet of economic theory. Economic is called the "dismal science" because resources are always scarce."

The best retort to what you say above is to quote Ludwig Von Mises in regards to people calling economics the "dismal science". I'd hightlight the words *peaceful human cooperation* if I could.

Ludwig Von Mises:

"The main achievement of economics is that it has provided a theory of peaceful human cooperation. This is why the harbingers of violent conflict have branded it as a dismal science and why this age of wars, civil wars, and destruction has no use for it."

As for who should control the allocation of scarce resources...you do remember the Soviet Union, don't you? Mass unemployment, hunger, long lines for all goods/services, a horrible way of life for the majority of all people except of course the elites. The government controlled all resources, and it was a horrible outcome for the people of that country.

Your opinions on economics is why our country is in great danger.

Liberty Dave
As George Will has said: "Capitalism Destroys TRadition." And a number of economists have commented on the type of character one must have BEFORE one engages in the free-market. The free market encourages the development of certain characteristics to the detriment of alternative characteristics. In our day we are all conditioned to develop these characteristics and this makes us creatures of the free-market. We exhibit our residual liberty in resisting to be conditioned. We aren't really much different than the dog who salivated when the guy rang his dinner bell. The dog didn't will himself to salivate. He salivated because he was taught to expect dinner following the bell. We get an education, work hard, become conservatives because we expect a payoff.

A FOUNDATION BUILT BEFORE YOU WERE
Proud Liberal writes:
Tuesday, January, 29, 2008 2:22 PM
Stunned:
---
Proud of what, robbing the bank, undermining the foundation of the greatest nation. You don't even know where your milk comes form, much less the price paid, which you statist liberals claim as a right.

Someone loved you before you ever were born. They loved you enough to leave the world a little better than it was, at the time they were born.

"Life is in the present,
there is no other time,
to do some little kindness.
Know now, that's what life's about!"

"Now is the only eternity,
we will ever know.
Now is perfection or self mastery.
"Now"-- That's what life's about!"

'"Now" is to know and to do,

Cam
Actually, it's not Laffer's curve. It just kind of accidentally got named after him. He doesn't have to defend anything.

The fact remains that the Bush tax cuts increased tax revenues and anyone who thinks the government needs more money would be stupid to get rid of them.

The problem in dealing with the deficit isn't taxes, it's runaway spending, especially the earmarks.

A FOUNDATION BUILT BEFORE YOU WERE
A FOUNDATION BUILT BEFORE YOU WERE

Proud Liberal writes:
Tuesday, January, 29, 2008 2:22 PM
Stunned:
---
Proud of what, robbing the bank, undermining the foundation of the greatest nation. You don't even know where your milk comes form, much less the price paid, which you statist liberals claim as a right.

Someone loved you before you ever were born. They loved you enough to leave the world a little better than it was, at the time they were born.

"Life is in the present,
there is no other time,
to do some little kindness.
Know now, that's what life's about!"

"Now is the only eternity,
we will ever know.
Now is perfection or self mastery.
"Now"-- That's what life's about!"

'"Now" is to know and to do,
to cherish and to love,
to make the world a better place
by making a better self'

"That’s What Life's About
" by Phillip L Hansen

God Bless America, Land of the Free,
God Bless American for sea to shining sea.

Mitt Romney is the Man Jim DeMint is describing.
Go Mitt Go!

proud Liberal
writes, "The United States became great AS A WELFARE STATE."

Good one. Oh, you were serious. So we were less than great prior to 1964? 1932? Just exactly when did we become great in your eyes? I would guess 1964. Those wonderful years when people learned they could vote themselves the benefits they deserved from living in such a wealthy nation and moral values became completely relative. The greatness you see currently is bemoaned as the beginning of the end by a lot of us. If you were King though, you would set it all right, taking those resources hoarded by the healthcare providers and rationing them fairly to those more deserving.

That damned free market will be the death of us all if we do not grab hold of it and forcefully manage it for the greater good. King Liberal knows how to do it, just ask him. It is much better that we all die before our time from waiting on poor quality medical care than that some people currently do not have health insurance and simply pass the cost of care on to others. That is the current system.

If our greatness is measured by how many tax dollars are redistributed according to the King Liberal fairness guidelines then, when will we know when we are great enough, oh wise one. You can hand everyone a government provided medical kit and say there, everyone has healthcare but, is it really good healthcare? That apparently means nothing to you. It is far better if everyone had horrible free health care paid by tax dollars than that a few currently get collections on their credit bureau when they go to the hospital.

Read the Time article linked by Cam
I read it. Conservatives should read it and take it to heart.

Senator DeMint
writes, "I hope you will join us in demanding more from your elected politicians. "

Hey, my delegation includes Tom Coburn and James Inhofe among others. I am not moving to Mass or the Peoples' Democratic Republic of California. Let them eat cake.




Hitchhiker
Are you advocating that we do away with government help to people who have catastrophic costs for illnesses? Are you suggesting they should be responsible for their own costs and if they can't then they needn't show up at a doctor's office?


Are you a Parasite-am I misreading you?
Hitchhiker writes:
Tuesday, January, 29, 2008 3:09 PM
Senator DeMint
---
Are you not in agreement with Senator DeMint?

If you are not, you are a parasite hitching a ride, hitchhiker.

Someone loved you before you ever were born. They loved you enough to leave the world a little better than it was, at the time they were born, by their personal vision and sacrifice.

"Life is in the present,
there is no other time,
to do some little kindness.
Know now, that's what life's about!"

"Now is the only eternity,
we will ever know.
Now is perfection or self mastery.
"Now"-- That's what life's about!"

'"Now" is to know and to do,
to cherish and to love,
to make the world a better place
by making a better self'

"That’s What Life's About
" by Phillip L Hansen

God Bless America, Land of the Free,
God Bless American for sea to shining sea.

Mitt Romney is the Man Jim DeMint is describing.
Go Mitt Go!

Hooray! DeMint!
Now this is what I've been wanting to hear. Going through the gov't to take care of education,retirement,health needs is the least effective and most wasteful and inefficient way to do it. Wasteful. Socialism never works. Socialism can't work. When the free market isn't working it is due to heavy gov't regulation. Please liberals I know you care, but your solutions won't work. Please read a good economics book. It is a science with natural rules. Meaning if these rules are broken there will be natural consequences. Socialism goes against what is. Conservatives care as much as liberals but conservatives want solutions that actually work not just make you feel better. Socialism destroys every nation it touches. Other nations that have tried socialized medicine have failed. Let the doctors and patients have the power not the bureaucrats.

There is No Liberty In Sarcasm
Liberty Dave writes:
Tuesday, January, 29, 2008 2:06 PM
Empty promises
----
When will a liberal ever praise the GOP? I guess you will when you become a mature adult. If we don’t respect our selves it is impossible to see a virtue in others, because, “the ugliness we see in other is a reflection of our won nature.”

Someone loved you before you ever were born. They loved you enough to leave the world a little better than it was, at the time they were born, by their personal vision and sacrifice.

"Life is in the present,
there is no other time,
to do some little kindness.
Know now, that's what life's about!"

"Now is the only eternity,
we will ever know.
Now is perfection or self mastery.
"Now"-- That's what life's about!"

'"Now" is to know and to do,
to cherish and to love,
to make the world a better place
by making a better self'

"That’s What Life's About
" by Phillip L Hansen

God Bless America, Land of the Free,
God Bless American for sea to shining sea.

Mitt Romney is the Man Jim DeMint is describing.
Go Mitt Go!

Cam
Why should health care be "not for profit"? I am in health care and can tell you that I invested many years in becoming a surgeon. These are grueling years of self-sacrifice, mostly unpaid, accruing massive debt, then paid ata pittance the last few years. From 18 to 30 I was in school/residency; for five years after I served in the Navy. Let me make this clear-nobody can go through all of that for love of money. Your heart and head have to be in the right place to see it through. But if the financial incentives are not there, you will get people that love it but are not gifted enough. Already many of the best and brightest go into banking and investing. If you want us to work for no profit are you ready for your doctor's office to be as nice as the DMV?

Proud Liberal
"The free market encourages the development of certain characteristics to the detriment of alternative characteristics."

You're incorrect. The free market doesn't develop characteristics in anyone. That comment makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. The beauty of the free market is that it allows people to operate in peace with one another, not using force in any way.

I'm not sure where you get this idea that the "free market" is some kind of entity that has some sort of visible effect on a person's being.

"In our day we are all conditioned to develop these characteristics and this makes us creatures of the free-market."

Another comment that makes no sense. How can you prove what you're saying here?

"We aren't really much different than the dog who salivated when the guy rang his dinner bell."

Yes, we've extremely different from an animal that has very low intelligence and has only a small set of thoughts. That's a horrible comparison.

"We get an education, work hard, become conservatives because we expect a payoff"

People do things in this world based on incentives. For some it's money, other's it's something else such as helping the elderly or children with disabilities. We all have incentives that drive us. So everyone, including you, "want a payoff". And there's nothing wrong with that, because some people's payoff is by helping others. And even if your payoff is to become rich you can only do so by serving others, creating something that others will find valuable and purchase.

The free market is just a concept, and that concept, in a nutshell, is to allow people to trade with one another peacefully, without the use of force. Government should only be there to make sure others don't force you to do something you wouldn't ordinarily do of your own free will.


To Spiceman
"There is No Liberty In Sarcasm"

I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make, Spiceman. My point was quite obvious, that we keep hearing promises from politicians like the ones mentioned in the article. We've heard those promises for years, and many of us have wised up to the fact that it's just slick marketing.

TO Proud Liberal
The myth you've bought into is that government control will result in a more "fair" allocation of scarce resources. Codswallop.

The PRICE of healthcare allocates the scarce resource. If you don't like that, move to a country where there is socialized/nationalized healthcare. If you enjoy good health, you'll be fine. Just don't get sick.

Before you make the move, perhaps you might be interested in this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.h tml?in_article_id=490233

Preach your Gospel elsewhere. I'm not buying it.

To CVN65
Very good comments, it's nice to hear from someone with health care experience such as yours discuss that topic.

No, Hitchhiker, I get what you mean...
...You have superior Senators -- from Oklahoma. Mine, in WI are disasters: Feingold, Kohl. Both Democrats. YUCK! They seem, however, to have a hold on their Senate seats here. Ho, hum. Maybe I'll move to a different state -- actually, I plan to, in 7-10 years or less.

Mom in Wisconsin

Cam
18000 Americans die waiting for health care? Because they can't afford it, or what?

The other systems like the NHS in England have per capita death raths much higher than ours because their health care is rationed by the government and there is no available alternative.

Your number is meaningless without context.

More on British Healthcare
FROM: http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/h ealthmain.html?in_article_id=369918&in_page_id=1774&in_page _id=1774&ct=5&expand=true

"...Details of the guidelines emerged days after health trusts in Suffolk announced that obese patients would be banned from having knee and hip replacements...."

Oh yeah, sign me up! Let's allow the bureaucrats whose pudgy pink posteriors are planted firmly within the beltway to decide who is and who is not a good candidate for knee and hip replacement. Of course, they'll get care if they need it. Pfft.

"Proud" Liberal
I don't see how someone who is on and or favors welfare can be proud.

Government does not pay for anything. We, the taxpaying citizens, are the ones who pay. Don't you understand that basic point?

Oneeye
Bush's own staffers, Laffer, and virtually all economists are saying Bush's tax cuts didn't increase tax revenue enough to pay for themselves. Like so many conservatives with so many issues, it seems no amount of evidence will convince you.

CVN65 - I don't recall saying that health care should be "not for profit". People with your training deserve to be well compensated. My greatest beef is with the congressional staffers who walked away with big fat salaries with drug companies after coniving the 3 AM vote on the Medicare Drug Act in 2003 that prevented free market forces from keeping drug costs down.

Oneeye
Bush's own staffers, Laffer, and virtually all economists are saying Bush's tax cuts didn't increase tax revenue enough to pay for themselves. Like so many conservatives with so many issues, it seems no amount of evidence will convince you.

CVN65 - I don't recall saying that health care should be "not for profit". People with your training deserve to be well compensated. My greatest beef is with the congressional staffers who walked away with big fat salaries with drug companies after coniving the 3 AM vote on the Medicare Drug Act in 2003 that prevented free market forces from keeping drug costs down.

Something you might have overlooked...
Here is a point that is often overlooked in this debate. The costs of healthcare here in the US are not just a function of OUR demand. Our healthcare system, and to a larger extent, the drug industry, is driven by the costs that we pay for countries that have "universal" health systems. Any innovation in health care comes from the United States, especially new drugs. Socialist countries promptly set price controls on those drugs. Who makes up the difference? The American consumer. In other words, it's not just the American government you have to look at.

Cam
I'm not saying that the tax cuts have paid for themselves, but I will say that the tax cuts have not "cost" the government as much revenue as originally projected. The static model used by Treasury and the GAO overstate the cost of tax cuts, and overstate the revenue brought in by raising taxes. They neglect the fact that tax policy changes peoples behavior. Can we at least agree on that?

Cam and FrmrSSGT
Tax cuts came. Tax revenues increased. More than paid for themselves, but the government did what it always does with more money and that is spend it.

It is in the public domain. Look it up.

Ronald Reagan said that government is like a babies alimentary canal. Voracious appetite on one end and no responsibility on the other.

To Liberty Dave - How Best to Hope
Liberty Dave writes:
Tuesday, January, 29, 2008 3:48 PM
To Spiceman
"There is No Liberty In Sarcasm"
---
I appreciate your response. You have a good point.

So how do we change the direction of our life. We have positives and negatives, and we may choose how we approach it. If we are positive some will tell us we are to optimistic; we are negative and others will count it sarcasm. Why? Simply because we do not share the same values, nor is personal self-mastery an Olympic sport or it would be of interest.

Could you believe that, “If we fail to tame and train our nature, --that nature will determine our future?”

It is all wrapped up in a very simple package”
* Standards and values we cherish and live by
* a disposition of mature emotional habits
* an attitude of wise knowledgeable mental habits
* actions and behavior in thought, word and deed in harmony with sound, spiritual, material principle and law.

“Positive attention gets positive results, while negative attention gets negative results.” A positive principle centered person finds more positive answers and results than the negative person. A positive person focuses on the opportunity of the occasion not the fault of the occasion. Solutions do not materialize by focusing in the problem, as it leads to sarcasm and complaints, not ideas or insights that lead to solutions.

As long as there is one honest person in the world, that person being ourselves, there is hope.

Remember what Thomas Sowell said, “It’s amazing how much panic and honest man will cause a multitude of hypocrites.” From the Bible, “The wicked flee when no man pursueth, the righteous are bold as a lion.”

Follow the money
FrmrSgt: I think you may have overlooked somethings as well. US drug companies also spend millions marketing drugs. Convincing people they need them. Only New Zealand allows direct to consumer advertising. Drug companies also spend millions basically bribing doctors. Gifts, dinners, vacations painted as training seminars.

Hard Thought - Did you even read the article debunking the myth of tax cuts paying for themselves? Here it is again:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1692027,00 .html

When Ronald Reagan made a public appearance his aides had to put tape on the ground so he would know where to walk. As Henry Kissinger said, "When you meet the man you wonder how he could have ever become governor of California let alone President of the United States."

Pharma
Cam: US pharmaceutical companies spend billions, that's BILLIONS developing drugs. If you don't like the medications, how about you boycott them? Go ahead, do without.
Parasite socialist countries like Canada feed off our research and development.

Too little, too late
Sorry, Senator: The president is about 7 years too late to be discovering fiscal discipline. He is nothing but a deceptive, big government spender cloaked in a conservative robe.

The King
writes, "Are you advocating that we do away with government help to people who have catastrophic costs for illnesses? "

Either that or amend the constitution to read:

The congress of the United States of America is obligated to take any and all measures necessary with maintaining the health and/or life of the citizens of this country, it being deemed necessary to the republic that none of its citizens ever be forced to pay for something they want or feel like they need. It being deemed necessary that citizens lives should be extended through whatever means are technologically available at the time regardless of cost. (Guys, hint, you can always just pass the cost on to the next generation).

Also, please define catastrophic. Does erectile dysfunction count? I need to plan ahead.

You do know that universal big brother health care is exactly what is needed to ration all the latest and greatest high tech health care so that the current baby boomer pigs that think everything is their divine right cannot extend their lives a few more years at catastrophic cost to their children. With big bro in charge, we can just eliminate all those new medicines and techniques and just pull the plug on them after taking a vote to make it all legal and stuff.

Kapahulu & Betty
There is something that neither one of you understand and it is this: you each do something in your brains, but it is only in your brains and not in the real world, and what you do is to form a model of the world where the government stands alone and is monolithic, unconnected to people, society, etc., in any way. And Betty, you form this model where "bureaucrats" are not people who have families, worship at church, coach little league, spend their money, etc. Bureaucrats, for you Betty, are wholly divorced from anything else in the real world. All of this modeling in your head makes you feel better about yourselves because you are not "them." You've finely identified who "they" are, and they are over there and you are over here and they're not human beings and you are. And that gives you pleasure.

Spiceman
Yes, you are misreading me. Try again.

I agree with you Hichhiker
Someone once told me that 90% of the cost of health care is expended in the last three days of life, trying to keep people alive for a few more hours. I say withhold the technology, let people pass when it's time.

Another thing you may agree with me about if you are the Libertarian I think you are. Perhaps the gravest assault on individual liberty by the government is in using the police power of the State to deny me my liberty to die when, where and how I choose. That's the ultimate assault on individual liberty, wouldn't you agree?

Hitchhiker
You're wrong. As Moderate Mark alluded to above, it's our system that currently gives people drugs and procedures they don't need while people who need them can't get them. Other countries don't put up with that.

kapahulu - For the record, I avoid using pharmaceuticals at all costs. Drug companies rush products to market without adequately testing them and often distort the results of the tests they do. Researchers, the FDA, and the medical journals are just one huge incestuous web. It sounds like you believe everything they say.

Wrong, Real Change
Requires listening to the people and responding to their concerns. Not exploiting current circumstances to promote a stale ideological agenda. I agree with cutting spending but that is a non-optimal solution to reinvigorating the economy. Last, unless you find a way to address the built in benefits for earmarks (assists in re-election), this is more idle talk guaranteed to fail since it is intellectually braindead and doesn't address the core incentives that cause spending to be out of control.

And who are you listening to that says we need a $600B budget for the Pentagon? So on one hand this genius wants to cut spending, and the other hand, he wants record spending for wars which have gotten us nothing in return. More $$ for bombing countries that have nothing to do with 9/11. Pathetic.

I am old enough
to remember when Dr's were private businessmen, loved and revered by their community and patients. My doctor is in a clinic run by suits, its very disconcerting to have a nurse ask you personal questions in a waiting room and then the dr. spending only at most 15 minutes with you as said nurse acts as time keeper. Why do i want to go through that? Many young ones
don't know what it was like to have a doctor really spend time with you. The doctor previous to my present one was forced into retirement because of exhorbitant malpractice costs. We have a medicare supplement but we don't use it,
thank God we are very healthy and do what we did in the old days, got a cold take care of it yourself. If we need it, we'll use it but still won't like it, government charity forced on us by theiving politicians.

Listening to the people gets you
where we are now: people wanted low rates and cheap mortgages and they got them. Now they can't pay for them.

People moan and groan about healthcare but Medicare is swamped with over 20% fraud, not perpetrated by juveniles or the Gen X'ers.

Leadership means having something to offer like ownership--the US now has 70% home ownership, which the subprime mess won't affect. Mostly, homeowners vote, don't rob banks, don't shot their neighbors, and their kids don't drop out of school.

Medical private savings accounts are now available to ease the pain of ins. problems. People who are young enough to realize Medicare will be bankrupt soon can use medical savings.

The idea Bush promoted but Congress and the people ignored was starting some privatization of Soc. Sec., which younger people can expect to pay for dearly but get little back themselves.

Ownership empowers. Gov't programs and the 19th C. socialism all the Dems. offer is more of the same since FDR. Europe is beginning to withdraw for its socialist pipedream, but Dems. here just offer more of the same: tax, spend, increase gov't, restrict personal freedom, same old same old.

Tea Party
When I was growing up a hamburger, which we got at Bud's Creamry, consisted of the two buns and the hamburger patty, lettuce, onion, tomato, relish, mayonaisse, ketchup - I don't think I left out anything. But that's what a hamburger was. Anything less was not a hamburger.

Then, along came McDonalds and convinced the American people that a hamburger was two buns with a patty inbetween. I figure there's at least three, maybe five generations that have grown up not knowing what a real hamburger is.

What I have observed is this, every generation of people growing up, say five to ten years younger than the last group growing up, have no clue about the knowledge, tastes, attitudes of the previous generation.

In politics, bringing this back to the purpose of Town Hall, it seems people talk about the past without knowing anything about what they are talking about.

At least the author
is proposing some items I would like to see enacted. However, I'd like to see some action rather than the usual promises. The Conservative leadership must confront the Democrats boldly instead of taking it up the wazoo like they have the past 8 years.

Betty makes a good point
Betty made this point to "Proud Liberal"If you feel strongly about providing medical care for the indigent, then I'd suggest you donate your time, talent or treasure..."

That is an excellent point and I think the same point can be made to all those far right wingers still blindly supporting "The War" no matter what: If you feel so strongly about spreading democracy to the middle east, then I suggest you put on a uniform or put your kids in a uniform and donate your time or your treasure...



To Proud Liberal
And are the people responsible for rationing healthcare in Britain unconnected from their communities? Do they not go to church, coach soccer, blah, blah, blah, blah.......

Hello, Is ANYBODY HOME????

The fact is that when the government rations healthcare, there will be universal misery. NAME ME ONE COUNTRY where it works and there are no waiting lists for "non-essential" surgery and healthcare services are provided at the level requested by the population.

Hint: It doesn't exist.

On the joys of Canadian healthcare:

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4618

What color is the sky in your world?

Mr. DeMint

Baghdad Bob is laughing at you.

Keep Hugh Hewitt from sharp objects
Certain conservative opinion makers are not pleased.

Rush Limbaugh, Hugh Hewitt, much of the roster at the National Review and many (but certainly not all) of their more conservative talk radio and blogger colleagues are beside themselves at the prospect that one of the Republican contenders they deemed to be “not conservative” might be nominated. As Mike Huckabee won Iowa, John McCain took South Carolina and Fred Thompson bestirred himself to draft a note withdrawing from the race, the fretting has intensified. How could the voters reject their advice?

There are a few explanations the dismayed conservative punditocracy might use to explain their apparent disconnect with Republican voters.

One is that the electorate has not rejected their advice about what constitutes an unacceptable candidate. Voters are simply rejecting the flawed candidates who were poor standard-bearers for conservatism. This scenario seems eminently reasonable given that the pundits’ favored contenders were in fact so terribly hobbled by their own shortcomings.

As for Mr. Romney—who may still win, but who has underperformed in the early going—he certainly was a dutiful spokesman for every possible item on the conservative wish list, but perhaps he was a bit too dutiful. His penchant for pandering grew to ludicrous proportions as he not only reversed himself on a long list of policy positions but cooked up a distinctly unconservative proposal for rescuing Michigan’s auto industry just in time for its primary. When he finally reverted to the “real” Mitt Romney—an optimistic businessman with no compunctions about directing an activist government—it was clear that even his newly minted conservative persona was in a Bain-like turnaround.

http://www.observer.com/2008/what-will-rush-hugh-say-if-mcc ain-wins

Yes, Listening to People is a Mistake
>Renny: Listening to people is what got us where we are now: people wanted low rates and cheap mortgages and they got them. Now they can't pay for them.

That's a simplistic assessment of the subprime crisis; but even accepting this, far fewer people were hit directly by this fallout than weren't. In a majority rules democracy, the people can very well advocate against a bailout for those that made errant choices.

We live in a democracy. The kind of attitude that once we elect our "exalted leaders", they can make all the tough decisions while ignoring us rabble, is the kind of attitude that's put us into minority party status. And we will belong there until we grow up , and recognize that like Reagan did, if you want to lead, you have to persuade the people to your vision, not rule over them arrogantly.

To Tea Party
Thank you for your condolences. The whole experience taught me some valuable lessons. If I hadn't seen it with my own eyes, I never would have believed "healthcare" could be that bad. But, the majority of Britons have never seen the other side, having never tasted fillet, they are content with hamburger.

And I proudly wear the label of "Curmudgeon," even though my sense of humor is on vacation(Rampant, unmitigated stupidity and concurrent insults to my intelligence tend to do that). Perhaps I'll adopt "Curmudgeon" as my handle.

Definition from: http://www.concentric.net/~marlowe/curdef.shtml

A curmudgeon's reputation for malevolence is undeserved. They're neither warped nor evil at heart. They don't hate mankind, just mankind's absurdities. They're just as sensitive and soft-hearted as the next guy, but they hide their vulnerability beneath a crust of misanthropy. They ease the pain by turning hurt into humor. . . . . . They attack maudlinism because it devalues genuine sentiment. . . . . . NATURE, HAVING FAILED TO EQUIP THEM WITH A SERVICEABLE DENIAL MECHANISM, has endowed them with astute perception and sly wit.
Curmudgeons are mockers and debunkers whose bitterness is a symptom rather than a disease. They can't compromise their standards and CAN'T MANAGE THE SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF necessary for feigned cheerfulness. THEIR AWARENESS IS A CURSE.
Perhaps curmudgeons have gotten a bad rap in the same way that the messenger is blamed for the message: They have the temerity to comment on the human condition without apology. They not only refuse to applaud mediocrity, they howl it down with morose glee. Their versions of the truth unsettle us, and we hold it against them, even though they soften it with humor.



Betty
The Fed is not the Federal government. The Fed is nothing more than a private banking cartel and yes they did cause the housing bubble.

Banking/corporate interests own the government. Next up the North American Union.

You need to take a closer look at the "fair tax" it is hardly fair. People buying a house to live in will pay 30% tax and people buying investment properties don't pay tax. Gee wonder who thought that up?

Flat tax is fair. Close the loopholes. In my state Intel used to pay .5% in taxes and the state now lets them pay a $10.00 min tax. Consumption tax would be a boondoggle for wealthy. If avg car costs 25k, rich are going to pay 125K for a car? Is health insurance priced according to the number of people or your income. Middle class will pay the biggest percent of their income in taxes.

It is misleading to say rich pay the largest amt overall. It is more honest to look at WHAT PERCENT OF YOUR INCOME is spent on taxes. I am self-employed. Combined state and fed taxes on income 30K-72K is just slightly under 50%. (BTW most businesses fall in this bracket, and pay highest %). After 90K 15.5% SS tax drops off. Are the "rich" paying 50%?


Ah, Jagermeister......
PSST.......we live in a REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC, not a Democracy. Go back to Civics 101.

The Sub-prime mess will touch EVERY AMERICAN as the Fed tries to inflate their way out of this.

Gold reached a new nominal high today and the Euro is now trading at nearly 1.48. What do you think that means? Every American will be touched by this......

Proud Liberal
writes, "That's the ultimate assault on individual liberty, wouldn't you agree? "

I have an advanced health care directive signed with witnesses and copies to my entire family. I have copies of my family members as well. Won't be seeing us on TV ala Terry Schiavo.

Betty
ease up a bit, you don't have to jump down everyone's throat

Betty
writes, "The Sub-prime mess will touch EVERY AMERICAN as the Fed tries to inflate their way out of this.

Gold reached a new nominal high today and the Euro is now trading at nearly 1.48. What do you think that means? Every American will be touched by this......"

I agree. However, if left alone the sub prime mess will be a bump on the road. A valuable lesson to lenders and borrowers alike. Yes, the Fed will ease money to confront the temporary credit crunch and life will go back to normal for the rest of us. Should be end of story. No politician in an election year can fail to tout the crisis of the day to its advantage though and, they are practically scrambling over one another to propose a solution. I hate government solutions.

Bush's Voodoo Economics?
President Bush said in his SOTU address that we should not let his tax cuts expire and that he will balance the budget by 2012. A financial columnist in my local paper said that in order to have a "slight surplus" by 2012 we will have to let the tax cuts expire and we will have to keep the alternative minimum tax.

Voodoo!?!

Bush's Voodoo Economics?
President Bush said in his SOTU address that we should not let his tax cuts expire and that he will balance the budget by 2012. A financial columnist in my local paper said that in order to have a "slight surplus" by 2012 we will have to let the tax cuts expire and we will have to keep the alternative minimum tax.

Voodoo!?!

To Anna
Why do you assume that income, the measure of what an individual contributes to society in the form of productive work or investment, is a fair basis upon which to inflict a tax?

Why isn't fair to inflict a tax on the basis of what an individual TAKES from society in the form of consumption?

FROM EACH ACCORDING TO HIS MEANS.......

That is straight out of the Communist Manifesto.

I challenge you to question the very premise of your argument. It is flawed from inception.

And why do you think that investment properties should be taxed? Do you think the renters will pay the tax whether the tax is inflicted on rents or on the initial purchaser????????

Under the Fair Tax, no business is taxed, be it rental real estate or a manufacturing concern---AS IT SHOULD BE. Currently, the US inflicts one of the highest Corporate Net Income Taxes in the OECD. What do you suppose that has done to our competitiveness in the world market? Why is it appropriate to tax capital?

MORE........

To Anna........More on taxation...
Maestro Greenspan, from testimony before the Joint Economic Committee on May 21, 2003, page 29, here: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname= 108_senate_hearings&docid=f:89738.pdf

"...First, Congressman, let me just repeat a cliche which happens to be true, namely, that capital doesn't pay any taxes. Only people pay taxes. What happens is that you impose taxes on organizations which then deflect them elsewhere, but at the end of the day, all taxes are paid by people.
I've always argued that this is a very inefficient way of organizing revenues within a government and that we are far better to gain our taxes directly rather than putting them on capital because all it does is slow down the growth of economic activity and the revenue base from which the revenues actually occur. And I've argued over the years for the elimination, where we possibly could, of taxes on capital. And I, as you probably are aware, have always argued for the elimination of the capital gains tax. And the reason is I think it's an extraordinarily inefficient tax, an inefficient means of raising revenue in the sense that, by imposing itself on capital, it reduces the growth rate in the economy.
Now, having said what I just said, I need not answer the rest of the questions that you raised..."

The Fair Tax is superior to the flat tax because it completely untaxes capital.

The Fair Tax is superior to the flat tax because it will make the US a tax haven.

See: http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22501.html

The Fair Tax is superior to the flat tax because it will make our exports competitive:

SEE:

http://www.iie.com/publications/opeds/oped.cfm?ResearchID=1 97

The Fair Tax is superior to the flat tax because it will restore financial privacy.

SEE:

http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Articles/TColemanAndr ews.htm

Shall I go on?

To Hitchhiker
Big Ben and the boys are doing their very best imitation of a deer in the headlights. While I agree with you that they shouldn't meddle, but they CAN'T and WON'T leave it alone to allow the "malinvestments" in liquidate. It's an election year. That cannot and will not be allowed to happen.

Buy gold, invest in non-dollar denominated assets. That is the only way to preserve the purchasing power of your current net worth.

Why not just get rid
Of the Federal Reserve Banking Corporation?
Then we would have no income tax to pay at all.

We could even be like the first Americans and all the following generations up to WW2.
None of them paid income tax.
Few exceptions were people who paid them from 1913 who were very rich in their day.

No Americans paid income tax until the establishment of the FRC.
One exception was under Lincoln, who called for an income tax on the higher income people during the Civil War, then it was removed until 1944 and the VOLUNTARY income tax was instituted.

Rid America of the thieving bankers controlling the economy, and presto, tax problems go away.

"The States should be applied to, to transfer the right of issuing circulating paper to Congress exclusively, in perpetuum."
--Thomas Jefferson to John W. Eppes, 1813. ME 13:276

Lincoln financed the Civil War with Greenback dollars, and there was never any debt to pay.
This is what we need to do today.


talent scout
Exactly.

I don't consider Greenspan to be a "maestro" either.

Talent Scout is Correct
The debate over the tax system is really a debate over the most efficient way to contract the money supply with the fewest incursions on private property and privacy.

When the Fed inflates by printing money or expanding credit, we pay the higher prices with dollars saved....we pay a stealth tax.

When the Congress inflicts an income tax, we pay directly and visibly.

Net bottom line is this: When the Federal Government needs money, we pay direct taxes and the indirect inflation tax---one of the most ingenious methods of "plucking the goose with the least hissing." (Jean Baptiste Colbert)

It's past time for the American people to wake up and resist the actions of Congress and the Fed---a blatantly unconstitutional piece of work.

And yes, I'm tired of politicians lying through their teeth...."conservatives" and "Republicans" especially. Worthless invertebrates....all of them. The state of the union and the responses, Democrat and "conservative," were an insult to my intelligence.

I can respect the honest Democrats. At least they are honest, misguided, but honest. The current crop of "Republicans" are either stupid, or they think we are. They are all about preserving power by piddling on principle.

When DeMint decries the need for principled conservative leadership, I immediately think: "AND WHAT WAS YOUR FIRST CLUE?" The Republicans have so damaged their brand, they are destined to be out of power for a long time. It doesn't matter who we nominate. Obama is going to be the next president. God help us all.








Maestro
is a reference to his early music career.

And speaking of this Betty
Betty writes: 1:11 AM
Talent Scout is Correct
The debate over the tax system is really a debate over the most efficient way to contract the money supply with the fewest incursions on private property and privacy.

-------
I would to God we all would return and read the wisdom of our Founding Fathers, and look into the questions of banking and taxes.
They explained it all very very very well.
Just a couple quotes about this very topic.


"Private fortunes, in the present state of our circulation, are at the mercy of those self-created money lenders, and are prostrated by the floods of nominal money with which their avarice deluges us." --Thomas Jefferson to John W. Eppes, 1813. ME 13:276

"It is a cruel thought, that, when we feel ourselves standing on the firmest ground in every respect, the cursed arts of our secret enemies, combining with other causes, should effect, by depreciating our money, what the open arms of a powerful enemy could not." --Thomas Jefferson to Richard Henry Lee, 1779. ME 4:298, Papers 2:298

"That paper money has some advantages is admitted. But that its abuses also are inevitable and, by breaking up the measure of value, makes a lottery of all private property, cannot be denied. --Thomas Jefferson to Josephus B. Stuart, 1817. ME 15:113

I recommend The Federalist Papers.
There is a tremendous amount of wisdom in them. The writing of James Madison is like poetry. Jefferson was correct about many things...but he shunned the Federalist/Anti-Federalist label. If I recall correctly, he aligned himself more with the Anti-Federalists.

And here's a book review of "Maestro" for those who did not catch the reference: http://www.businessweek.com/2000/00_49/b3710086.htm

cam and proud liberal still out there?
It is hard to believe anyone would quote a Time article, as recommended reading. Hey Cam and PL..wanna buy the Golden Gate Bridge? I can sell it to just you guys (for a limited time only) for only $20,000! Send your money order to .......

Betty
Jefferson and Madison got along well, at least from what I have read.

quote:
In 1801, after Jefferson was elected President, Madison entered the Cabinet as Secretary of State. This was a period of rapid growth & change. He was deeply involved in many of the federal reforms executed by Thomas Jefferson, many of which were intended to reverse the effects of federalist rule. Jefferson, in his close friendship with Madison, also recognized that Madison was a thoroughly practical man whose political skills would be of great value to the reforms he would pursue.

Betty
It is obvious that you have not followed Demint and his voting. He has consistently voted against the big spending bills and consitently voted against "earmarks". In fact, he has been one of the leaders in the fight going so far as to fight against his own co-Senator, the infamous McCain BB, Linseedoil Grahamcracker.

Demint is one of the FEW good Senators up there.

And if you really want a good book about Jefferson, the Federalists, and the election of 1801 read "The Jeffersonian Crisis" by Richard E. Ellis. This book was published in 1971 long before the Clintons or the Bushes but the parallels with the election this year are simply amazing.

http://www.amazon.com/Jeffersonian-Crisis-Courts-Politics-R epublic/dp/0195013905

Fact-Checking the State of the Union
NPR-Did President Bush get all his facts straight during his State of the Union speech? As with most political addresses, the president’s assertions left plenty of room to quibble.

READ MORE

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/fact-checking-the- state-of-the-union-speech

Bush has NO RESPECT FOR THE RULE OF LAW
Just before Monday night’s State of the Union speech, in which Mr. Bush extolled bipartisanship, railed against government excesses and promised to bring the troops home as soon as it’s safe to withdraw, the White House undermined all of those sentiments with the latest of the president’s infamous signing statements.

Over the last seven years, Mr. Bush has issued hundreds of these insidious documents declaring that he had no intention of obeying a law that he had just signed.

This week’s statement was attached to the military budget bill, which covers everything except the direct cost of the war. The bill included four important provisions that Mr. Bush decided he will enforce only if he wants to.

The first provision created a commission to determine how reliant the government is on contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan, how much waste, fraud and abuse has occurred and what has been done to hold accountable those who are responsible. Congress authorized the commission to compel government officials to testify.

Perhaps this violated Mr. Bush’s sense of his power to dole out contracts as he sees fit and to hold contractors harmless. The same theory applies to the second provision that Mr. Bush said he would not obey: a new law providing protection against reprisal to those who expose waste, fraud or abuse in wartime contracts.

The third measure Mr. Bush rejected requires intelligence officials to respond to a request for documents from the Armed Services Committees of Congress within 45 days, either by producing the documents or explaining why they are being withheld. Clearly, this violates the power that Mr. Bush has given himself to cover up an array of illegal and improper actions.
It’s glaringly obvious why Mr. Bush rejected the fourth provision, which states that none of the money authorized for military purposes may be used to establish permanent military bases in Iraq.
Congress passes laws and then King George breaks them..

Bush has NO RESPECT FOR THE RULE OF LAW
Just before Monday night’s State of the Union speech, in which Mr. Bush extolled bipartisanship, railed against government excesses and promised to bring the troops home as soon as it’s safe to withdraw, the White House undermined all of those sentiments with the latest of the president’s infamous signing statements.

Mr. Bush has issued hundreds of these insidious documents declaring that he had no intention of obeying a law that he had just signed.

This week’s statement was attached to the military budget bill, which covers everything except the direct cost of the war. The bill included four important provisions that Mr. Bush decided he will enforce only if he wants to.

The first provision created a commission to determine how reliant the government is on contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan, how much waste, fraud and abuse has occurred and what has been done to hold accountable those who are responsible. Congress authorized the commission to compel government officials to testify.

Perhaps this violated Mr. Bush’s sense of his power to dole out contracts as he sees fit and to hold contractors harmless.

The same theory applies to the second provision that Mr. Bush said he would not obey: a new law providing protection against reprisal to those who expose waste, fraud or abuse in wartime contracts.

The third measure Mr. Bush rejected requires intelligence officials to respond to a request for documents from the Armed Services Committees of Congress within 45 days, either by producing the documents or explaining why they are being withheld. Clearly, this violates the power that Mr. Bush has given himself to cover up an array of illegal and improper actions.

It’s glaringly obvious why Mr. Bush rejected the fourth provision, which states that none of the money authorized for military purposes may be used to establish permanent military bases in Iraq.
Welcome to BUSHWORLD where the Congress passes laws and then King George breaks them..

Principled ??? What principles?
Principled conservative leadership??? Isn't that an oxymoron .. a contradiction in terms..

Bush/Cheney and their dictatorial presumption that they are above the law.. have for 7 years trampled all over the principles this country was founded on and a little ole document called the constitution..

Principled..? Yeah in a pigs eye...

Reform and government worker unions

It will be interesting to see how Conservatives in the Senate and Congress enact any reform without restructuring what Federal employees do. From what I understand by what candidates suggest, it can happen only through attrition. The problem is that most haven't saved enough to retire and hence government employees will "work" longer in order to address that reality.

It appears that Federal, State and local government employees vote Democrat. If there was even a hint of changing the way the governments do business, politicians would be voted out of office.

The enemy of reform is the population that relies upon it for their sustanance. How can any meaningful reform take place in such an environment?

Compassionate Conservatism
will send us to the poor house making our children's children pay for all these handouts already in existance and the one's proposed by President Bush.

At some point, we have to pull back and realize we have to pay for all this stuff - Americans.

Laying out a dozen compassionate ways of spending our money might sound lofty and idealistic, but the rubber meets the road when it's time to come up with the dollars - especially when we are in a time of war.

The speech just had way to much Nanny state ideals involved. What happened to allowing people to take care of themselves and others as they see fit?

Jim Demints Article
Great article. The Federal government is too involved in Health Care and Education. That is why these two areas are so expensive and get poor results. When you make it free for everyone then you have to ration it. Cost goes up, quality goes down. Free Choice ought to be allowed in Education and Health Insurance. Then, you will see quality go up and cost go down. But, Democrats aren't going t allow it because they want everyone subserviant to the Nanny State, and the current majority of Republican lawmakers don't have the gonads to take them on!

Economic Death Spiral



The capital formed during the latter 19th century and early 20th century is the capital that made the 20th century, the American Century, and rewarded the American people with the highest standard of living in the world.. That capital has now been squandered by the Marxism of Democrats, and replaced by massive debt, enormous taxation, and worthless money.
The economics of this disaster has caused investors taking their capital offshore, to places where capital is welcome and safer---- China and India, for example.
Unless the scapegoating and demonizing of capitalism and business is stopped in an America burdened with an economic death spiral of massive debt, enormous taxation, and worthless money , the outlook for a prosperous America in the 21st century is foreboding and grim.
On a different note: "Carbon politics" (environmentalism), properly so-called, is merely the organized power of the rich Democrat class---represented by Democrat types like Al Gore, Ted Turner, John Edwards, the Sierra Club--- for oppressing and lowering the living standard of the common people.

The United States a great WELFARE
Dear Proud Liberal:
You say: The United States became great AS A WELFARE STATE. At age 76, I see little evidence to support your conclusion.

True, we have enjoyed great technological success and often invented it ourselves...except for important things like the internet and global warming courtesy of the Nobel Peace Guru named Al Gore. But, then he is one of us?

I started ten companies and eight failed- par for the course! Two are still alive with great ideas and a lack of anything but grief from the government. OK, perhaps they need to be given to a nation that has a different set of tax rules?

The U.S. has now dumbed down education to achieve what? A bureaucratic mess and poor performance?

We have a porous border so that more willing workers can temporarily escape such socialist utopias as Mexico. Short term chaos and long term disaster coming.

We stopped Saddam and his plan, recently revealed by an FBI spy in his cell, to get to renew his nuclear program to stop Iran and expand on his own without paying homage to bin Laden; but we have ignored what Bush achieved because it didn't happen faster and because opponents hung the missing WMD campaign at his feet. Nobody stops to see that the real WMD in Iraq was Saddam!

No, I do not see liberal success except in building a much larger class of poor people who seemed to be entitled to procreate faster than any one else!

To Vic
Incorrect. Based on his record, I know Jim DeMint is not to be trusted.

About Mr. DeMint and taxation:

When he campaigned for his Senate seat one of the main planks of his platform was the Fair Tax. Inez Tenenbaum, the woman against whom he ran for this seat, excoriated him for his support of the Fair Tax and made it sound like Jim was evil incarnate, wanted to take food from the mouths of the poor, yadda, yadda, yadda.....He withstood the blistering attacks and gladly accepted the votes of Fair Tax advocates.

Once elected, he backed away from his support of the single most conservative fundamental tax reform proposal to date--The Fair Tax. He is not a co-sponsor of S.1025. He has introduced his own bill that is nothing short of an ABOMINATION: http://demint.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?Fuseaction=Issue s.Detail&Issue_id=d83df3ad-31a9-449c-bceb-7d08315d5cac

Jim DeMint is proposing that we institute a consumption tax and institute a business transfer tax and maintain the FICA and Medicare wage tax. Pfft. Brilliant, Jim, just brilliant. What business in their right collective mind would locate on our shores under that scenario? Only the Fair Tax completely untaxes capital, removes the income and wage tax and will make April 15th just another spring day.

His word carries ZERO credibility with me. Fool me once......

For Joe
Nothing Romney has done is nearly as "scurrilous" as the thoroughly false ad McCain sprang over the weekend stating that Romney favored a timetable for certain withdrawal from Iraq.

The very next response Romney gave in the interview from which McCain drew a quote to take out of context, Romney stated unequivocably that as President he would veto any legislation that included mandatory troop withdrawal dates.

Don't complain about how "scurrilous[ly]" McCain has been treated. His campaign has stooped to a new low.

McCain
Is there a way to convince Fred to announce support for Romney before Super Tuesday? I'm so afraid voters don't know the 'real' McCain, and am worried sick for my country. We cannot let him win.

For Proud Liberal
"The goal for healthcare should not be to make sure that it makes a profit as a part of capitalism."

At no point does DeMint state or suggest that this is the goal of conservatives in government.

"The goal should be that we who need health care and prevention get care based on need."

Karl Marx would be proud of you. Unfortunately for Marx (and you), economic systems based on this noble ideology in places like Canada and the UK are failing miserably.

"Triage is not a new concept and can easily be accomplished as long as it is recognized that this is the goal of the health care system."

The idea that there should be a national triage system that, for example, treats all broken bones across the land before any cuts and bruises will be dealt with is hopelessly idealistic, impractical, and unfair to those can afford their own health care because they have worked for it.

This also has actually begun in the UK, where the government is sending out info instructing the citizenry which 'minor' ailments the state-run health care system there can no longer afford to treat.

Worse, there is even one case in the UK, in which the state health care system is refusing to set man's broken ankle unless and until he quits smoking.

"It takes a lot of cojones for DeMint to make his distortion with a straight face that taxes are the problem."

You are the one who is distorting DeMint's words. All DeMint is advocating for are free-market solutions

"Throughout his article DeMint starts with ideology and tries to stuff everything into his ... ideology."

This is the only thing you got right. DeMint is a conservative because he believes in the conservative ideology. Thus he recommends conservative free-market solutions. Unlike liberals who insist on foisting communisn on the nation in the name "fairness".

For Cam
"...the goal of health care reform is also to bring health care costs to where our companies can better compete with foreign companies."

History and practice has shown that employers can compete most effectively when they are not tangled up in government red tape, regulations, and restrictions.

"The rest of the industrialized world provides universal health care for its citizens. Why can't the US?"

And the rest of the industrialized nations in the world have health care that is significantly inferior to ours overall.

"Permanent tax cuts means permanent deficits."

The Kennedy tax cuts of the '60's, the Reagan tax cuts of the '90's, and the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 all INCREASED revenue to the Treasury. Demint is right and you are wrong. It is irresponsible spending that causes deficits.

The majority of the national debt referenced by DeMint is the direct resonsibility of Democrat-controlled Congresses from 1960 to 1994. The vast majority of the debt is indirectly the responsibility of Democrats for their socialist nanny state programs such as Social Security and the Great Society (aka welfare). Now liberal want to add national healthcare to the nanny-state load and raise taxes, which will SHRINK revenue.

The only thing worse than a fool is a stubborn fool.

Betty
If he is against the Fair Tax then he is a real conservative. Only liberals like the fair tax because it is a tax increase.

Correction
In my post at 11:46 "Reagan tax cuts of the '90's" should read "Reagan tax cuts of the '80's".

TO Vic
Incorrect, again.

The Fair Tax is calculated to be REVENUE NEUTRAL. It will raise the same amount of revenue as the current monstrosity. It is not a "tax increase" as you allege, rather it is a change in the manner in which we collect the same amount of revenue.

Of the 68 co-sponsors in the House (HR 25), all but one are REPUBLICANS.

The Demon-crats hate this proposal because once enacted, they will lose the single most effective social engineering tool: The Internal Revenue Code.

Betty
Betty has appointed herself queen of the playground. She is right and we are all wrong!

At least the democrats are "honest", that is HILLARIOUS!

To Anna
I invite you to dispute any of my facts. I'll thank you to refrain from personal attack.

Co-Sponsors of HR 25, The Fair Tax Act
COSPONSORS(68), ALPHABETICAL

Rep Akin, W. Todd [MO-2] - 1/31/2007
Rep Alexander, Rodney [LA-5] - 10/23/2007
Rep Bachus, Spencer [AL-6] - 1/4/2007
Rep Baker, Richard H. [LA-6] - 2/8/2007
Rep Bartlett, Roscoe G. [MD-6] - 2/8/2007
Rep Bilbray, Brian P. [CA-50] - 4/17/2007
Rep Bilirakis, Gus M. [FL-9] - 3/9/2007
Rep Bishop, Rob [UT-1] - 7/17/2007
Rep Bonner, Jo [AL-1] - 1/11/2007
Rep Boozman, John [AR-3] - 5/9/2007
Rep Boren, Dan [OK-2] - 1/4/2007
Rep Brady, Kevin [TX-8] - 1/4/2007
Rep Brown, Henry E., Jr. [SC-1] - 1/11/2007
Rep Brown-Waite, Ginny [FL-5] - 9/24/2007
Rep Burton, Dan [IN-5] - 1/4/2007
Rep Carter, John R. [TX-31] - 2/5/2007
Rep Conaway, K. Michael [TX-11] - 1/4/2007
Rep Crenshaw, Ander [FL-4] - 1/4/2007
Rep Cubin, Barbara [WY] - 1/19/2007
Rep Culberson, John Abney [TX-7] - 1/4/2007
Rep Davis, David [TN-1] - 1/23/2007
Rep Davis, Jo Ann [VA-1] - 1/4/2007
Rep Deal, Nathan [GA-9] - 1/4/2007
Rep Drake, Thelma D. [VA-2] - 1/5/2007
Rep Duncan, John J., Jr. [TN-2] - 2/8/2007
Rep Fallin, Mary [OK-5] - 9/17/2007
Rep Feeney, Tom [FL-24] - 1/4/2007
Rep Flake, Jeff [AZ-6] - 1/31/2007
Rep Franks, Trent [AZ-2] - 2/5/2007
Rep Gilchrest, Wayne T. [MD-1] - 6/11/2007
Rep Gingrey, Phil [GA-11] - 1/5/2007
Rep Goode, Virgil H., Jr. [VA-5] - 1/4/2007
Rep Granger, Kay [TX-12] - 1/4/2007
Rep Hall, Ralph M. [TX-4] - 2/6/2007

HR 25 Co-Sponsors, Continued
Rep Hastert, J. Dennis [IL-14] - 1/10/2007
Rep Hensarling, Jeb [TX-5] - 1/22/2007
Rep Hoekstra, Peter [MI-2] - 2/28/2007
Rep Hunter, Duncan [CA-52] - 2/8/2007
Rep Issa, Darrell E. [CA-49] - 5/7/2007
Rep Keller, Ric [FL-8] - 2/5/2007
Rep King, Steve [IA-5] - 1/11/2007
Rep Kingston, Jack [GA-1] - 1/31/2007
Rep Lamborn, Doug [CO-5] - 10/9/2007
Rep Lewis, Jerry [CA-41] - 2/6/2007
Rep Lucas, Frank D. [OK-3] - 9/10/2007
Rep McCaul, Michael T. [TX-10] - 1/4/2007
Rep Mica, John L. [FL-7] - 1/9/2007
Rep Miller, Gary G. [CA-42] - 2/8/2007
Rep Miller, Jeff [FL-1] - 1/4/2007
Rep Moran, Jerry [KS-1] - 1/18/2007
Rep Myrick, Sue Wilkins [NC-9] - 1/4/2007
Rep Neugebauer, Randy [TX-19] - 1/4/2007
Rep Norwood, Charles W. [GA-10] - 1/4/2007
Rep Pearce, Stevan [NM-2] - 1/4/2007
Rep Pence, Mike [IN-6] - 1/4/2007
Rep Poe, Ted [TX-2] - 1/4/2007
Rep Price, Tom [GA-6] - 1/4/2007
Rep Stearns, Cliff [FL-6] - 1/4/2007
Rep Sullivan, John [OK-1] - 1/30/2007
Rep Tancredo, Thomas G. [CO-6] - 1/4/2007
Rep Thornberry, Mac [TX-13] - 2/15/2007
Rep Tiahrt, Todd [KS-4] - 2/12/2007
Rep Walberg, Timothy [MI-7] - 1/11/2007
Rep Wamp, Zach [TN-3] - 6/18/2007
Rep Weldon, Dave [FL-15] - 2/5/2007
Rep Westmoreland, Lynn A. [GA-3] - 1/4/2007
Rep Whitfield, Ed [KY-1] - 1/30/2007
Rep Young, Don [AK] - 1/5/2007


S.1025 Co-Sponsors (companion Bill)
Introduced by Senator Saxby Chambliss, co-sponsored by "liberals" like:

Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] - 3/29/2007
Sen Cornyn, John [TX] - 3/29/2007
Sen Inhofe, James M. [OK] - 4/18/2007
Sen Isakson, Johnny [GA] - 3/29/2007

Where's Mr. DeMint?????


Nice words
Too bad RINOs like John McCain will niether hear nor understand them.

I should have known better
thasn to respond to Betty. This column is NOT about that crooked scam of legislation called the fair tax but she is here to push it.

You see she gets paid for doing that. She is a shill for the corporate interests thaqt are pushing that scam.

To Vic
Wrong again. DeMint made tax reform a part of this discussion by mentioning it in his piece. I am not a "paid shill" for anything, but rather a very interested citizen who has been supporting fundamental tax reform for over a decade, the Fair Tax for nearly a decade.

When you allege that I'm a "Shill for corporate interests" sounds like you are a liberal who believes the corporations should be taxed to death. We already do that. The US inflicts the second highest Corporate Net Income tax in the OECD. See:
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22501.html

In the words of Dr. Phil: "Howz that workin' out for you?"

And with "liberals" like Tom Coburn and John Cornyn and Johnny Isackson co-sponsoring the legislation, I can easily see how you would be confused by the true intent of the bill. LOL.



Is this just a real bad dream? Hope so.
Excepting a few fans of Marx that post here, we're all conservatives. We're all about less tax, less government spending, and less government regulation. We're all about making our country energy independent, and controlling our borders. If polled, I'd bet none of us want our nation to go the way of the formerly sovereign European countries that gave it up to the European Union. Is all of this true so far?

Senator DeMint; here's what I want to know. Why don't the GOP candidates talk about the North American Union? It is real, and should be the a hot topic during this campaign. So far, only Ron Paul has earned my vote on this one.

Why don't the GOP candidates make the direct case to the people that we can solve our energy problems by drilling for our own oil? Oh yea, I think one of them did say that; it was Ron Paul.

Why don't the GOP candidates emphasize that we can, and will, level the playing field with our "so called" trading partners and bring our industrial base back home? Whoops, sorry, I think Ron Paul said something like that.

Why don't the GOP candidates point out that when the government cuts everyone a rebate check, it adds to the total sum of money chasing goods, without increasing the amount of goods produced? I taught my kids this phenomenon using play money when they were in grade school. Yup, Ron Paul says it everyday.

My dream was that one day a GOP candidate would step forward and tell the truth. The nightmare is that the GOP called him crazy, then ignored him. Therefore, on Nov. 4, I'm staying home. When we go down the drain, I'd rather a Democrat be in charge.

Any answers Sen. DeMint?

Ah jeez, Backerin
Are facts and logic all you have?

WELL DONE!

Fed Cut by 50 basis points.......
and gold is going STRAIGHT up.....

http://www.kitco.com/charts/popup/au24hr3day.html

Who's zoomin' who, Mr. DeMint?

Betty
I always enjoy reading your post. Thanks for the common sense. I'm not an economist or a CPA, but I've read all I can about the Fair Tax and I do recognize common sense when I see it. I haven't read the Federalist Papers since law school---too long ago; I agree though, James Madison was one of a kind.

Thank You, Goldilocks.....
I have a BS in Economics, an MS in Taxation and a JD. I am a CPA and Attorney and I am terribly concerned about the future of this country. I'm not a paid shill for anybody, just terribly, terribly concerned about the future that awaits my children and grandchildren.

My best to you.

Cam and Proud Liberal
Do either of you know what "triage" actually is? It is a system that rations the limited supplies to benefit the most people in a system that is overwhelmed by casualties. In other words, it rations the care people receive. To bad/so sad for those who are DENIED care.

Here are the military categories in triage.
Minimal - The patient needs minimal care that can be delayed indefinitely. There is no threat to life, limb or eye-sight. They can be returned to duty.
Delayed - The patient requires care but can wait for a short period. They can be returned to duty after receiving care.
Urgent/Urgent-surgical - These patients are the top priority for evacuation and treatment. There is a threat to life, limb and/or eyesight. The patient will most likely be evacuated from theater once stabilized.
Expectant - Treatment of this patient is either futile or would consume too many resources and is therefore expected to die.

This is what happens when demand exceeds supply. And this is the case for all health care systems.

Michael writes
"Show proof of the limited resource issue?

Michael, in what city do you live? How many CT scanners are there? One symptom for a glioblastoma, a deadly brain tumor, is a head ache. This is diagnosed with an CT (actually with a brain biopsy after a mass is found on CT or MRI). How many people get head aches each year. Given that 1) there are a finite number of CT scanners, 2) CT scanners are used not only for head CTs but many other conditions also, 3) It cost money to run the CT scanner, maintain it, pay for the people to operate it, 4) there is a finite amount of money to pay for this 5) each scan requires a certain amount of time, 6) there is a finite amount of time per day, 7) brain tumors of all types are extremely rare causes of head aches; this is a limited resource and can not be used on every single person who complains of a head ache.
Thus the resources of health care ARE limited.

Sen. DeMint:
I applaud your insights and vision. However, under the present political atmosphere, I find it hard to believe you or your colleagues will be able to change much, if anything. Unless it is answering the calls of the special interests, which so many of you pamper-too while ignoring doing what is best for the majority of the country and honoring the will of “We The People”.

Both Dole and McCain are war heroes who are genuine patriots; however, the political arena we currently find ourselves in is surely not patriotic. It has become a corrupted, self-serving, etc., etc. unpatriotic system that must be changed. Else, America will continue its slow decline into oblivion. So if you really want to change something, change the out-of-control political system you are perpetuating.


Proud Liberal
You need to read George Washington's Farewell Address.

PL writes
"Are you advocating that we do away with government help to people who have catastrophic costs for illnesses? Are you suggesting they should be responsible for their own costs and if they can't then they needn't show up at a doctor's office?"

This is what tue insurance is for. The thing we call "health insurance" today is not insurance at all but a way to have other people pay for your care.

I invite you all...
...to join a group of people who are educating ourselves and each other on the Principles of Capitalism and Prosperity. Go to http://www.freecapitalist.com. There you can join in some great discussions about capitalism, truth, and prosperity, and learn more about what our Founding Fathers called, 'Prosperity Economics'. There is also an archive of great Free Capitalist Radio shows to enjoy. I hope to see you there!

fair tax?
Is a consumption tax fair?

Let's compare family of four with income of 45K (@national average) to family of four with income of 200K (I wouldn't call that rich).

Family with income of 200K is making 4.44 times the amount of other family.

If 45K family buys a new car at 25K the wealthier family is going to pay 111K for a car? Both families would have to pay the same tax on things like health insurance. Add an extra 30% to health insurance and even less will be able to afford it.

Avg house price in my city is now about 275K is the 200K family going to pay a million plus for a house? Will they spend 4.44 times as much on food? Of course, investors would not even have to pay taxes on houses they buy.

Please don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining. Consumption tax will be a boondoggle for wealthy people.




change
We certainly do need change but I have no hope it will happen. Rep party has kicked the base in the teeth and abandoned conservative principles.

None of the candidates are conservative. All the candidates (either party) are globalists.

I expect next president (either party), will preside over the end of our country as we know it and the creation of the North American Union. Bush has been holding summits on integration for the last three years under SPP.

“We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the new world order” David Rockefeller

It looks to me like the right major crisis will be economic collapse of US. When the US goes down we will take the world with us. We will be told NAU is the answer.

The new world order is one world gov.

"This fourth beast is the fourth world power that will rule the earth. It will be different from all the others. It will devour the whole world, trampling and crushing everything in its path. It's ten horns are ten kings (EU, NAU, SAU, etc) who will rule that empire. Then another king will arise, differnent from the other ten, who will subdue three of them..." Dan 7

You can read the bible to see how that story ends.

The next major crisis and the answer will be the NAU. America is owned by banking/corporate interests. It isn't going to matter who you vote for. 2010 is the goal for the NAU and I will be surprised if it doesn't happen.

conservatives
need to bolt the GOP and form their own "Conservative American Party" and we need to be lead by great Americans such as Jim Demint.
Maybe more true conservaatives in the US House and US Senate would declare to be "Conservative Americans" and in short order this nation would have three national political parties.

Gee maybe we draft one
Maybe we should draft a consistant conservative to run for president.Wait we did....Fred Thompson!!!!

Anna
I know you don't care to be confused with facts, but I'll try.

The Fair Tax includes a prebate to EVERY LEGAL AMERICAN. It effectively untaxes all purchases up to the poverty level. The Fair Tax likewise repeals the single most regressive tax we inflict on ourselves: The FICA Tax. Medicare taxation is likewise repealed.

When repeal of the FICA tax is considered in conjunction with the prebate, the Fair Tax is MORE progressive than the current system.

Please read the bill at thomas.loc.gov and/or the book:

http://www.amazon.com/FairTax-Answering-Critics-Neal-Boortz /dp/0061540463/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1201746907& sr=8-1

Charlie
I wish the same thing would happen. It would take a great deal of courage for a group of Conservative Republicans to leave and form another party. They would be ignored by the press, the dems and the republicans. It would take courage and I do not see anyone in the GOP who would chance it. They are all satisfied to live the high life to take the chance of losing their lifestyle.

Betty
I agree with much of what you say. I support the Fair Tax as far better than what we have now but, I think we could take it even further and make it even more simple.

You seem to believe, like talent scout and many others here, that the Federal Reserve system is somehow evil. I have to differ. talent scout wrote earlier that he thinks the income tax and the Fed are intertwined or practically one and the same. He then posted some dates which clearly contradicted this. There is no link between the two.

I do not know how to explain it. It is not a subject that is easily explained. My undergrad degree was in finance and my financial markets classes were some of the tougher ones. This whole fear of the Fed thing seems to boil down to the end of the world scenario. Since we are basing our currency on paper and faith, if the whole system crashes (I still don't know exactly how this is supposed to happen) then we will fall back to bartering or using gold as money.

The whole world is faith. Our capitalist economy assumes that the workers will continue to buy products that generate revenue to pay their wages and the owners so they can go buy more goods. If people just stop, what happens? Have some faith that the world will continue to turn.

The Federal Reserve is not our enemy, Congress is. The federal bureaucracy is. The Fed just acts as a clearinghouse for banking transactions, lender of last resort in a crisis to prevent panic, and uses open market activities to attempt to smooth out the volatility in the economy from speculative bubbles and errant tax and spending policies that occur when humans do stupid things.


Betty
If people didn't panic then perhaps there would never have been a need for the Federal Reserve. The driving forces behind its creation were in fact the propensity of people to run take their money out of the bank in case it failed and they thought they would lose it. History has shown again and again how easy it is for people to be herded like cattle. If we could take the irrational behavior of people out of the equation, it would be a pretty dull life, imo. The perfect marxist state with everyone living in abject poverty and misery, all equal.

Hitchhiker
The Fed was created in 1913, ironically, the same year the 16th Amendment was passed. You'll never find a direct link, but the income tax and the Fed are inextricably intertwined. The FED looks out for your best interest the same way the IRS looks out for your best interest.

If the government owns the keys to the printing press, which they do, why do we need an income tax? Ruminate on that for a while. You'll get a clearer picture.

Bank runs are caused by fractional reserve banking. The Fed is a cure for a disease that could have easily been cured by requiring higher reserves. The Fed was created instead. In 1971, the US Economy was completely unhinged from gold. The fiat currency now gives the Fed unrestrained latitude to create inflation, which they do with reckless abandon. They of course tell us that the CPI is increasing by a mere 2 -3 %. Codswallop. The Feds job is to tell us it's rainging while piddling on our legs.

I'd like to recommend some books, in decreasing order of importance to the current discussion:

The Case Against the Fed by Murry Rothbard

The Creature from Jekyll Island by Hmmm...authors name escapes me now.

Americas Great Depression by Murry Rothbard

Crashproof: How to profit in the coming economic collapse by Schiff (first name escapes me---excellent book and a quick read)

The Coming Collapse of the Dollar and How to Profit from it by a young Turk named James Turk.

Good general reading:

The Law by Frederic Bastiat

Selected Essays on Political Economy, also by Bastiat

Economics in one lesson by Henry Hazlitt

Democracy in America by Alexis De Tocqueville (Pay particular attention to his chapter on administrative despotism).

The Second Treatise on Government by John Locke

Anything by John Stuart Mill

The Man and the State by Herbert Spencer

The Road to Serfdom by Hayek

Virtually anything published by the Von Mises Institute.








Geez - Bush was boring enough
Whomever get's elected next November first needs to restore competency to government whether Republican or Democrat. Bush had too many political hacks working for him that had little leadership experience. Our next president also needs to quit getting advice from political think tanks populated by ex-politicians like Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. We expect our elected officials to use their own brains not brains for hire from rent a consultant. Both McCain and Obama would represent change but from a different perspective of course. I believe both would insist on competent leadership in the lower echelons of government so this is some hope for the country if either of those gentlemen are elected. It will be good to see Bush back in Crawford permanently.

Go Betty Go
Ohhh yeaaa; I like your reading list.

This thread is probably dead, but I'll throw this out anyway. In the Florida debate, Ron Paul used his "question to the another candidate", to ask Sen. McCain if he would continue to to operate the Working Group on Financial Markets in the shadows, or would he disband the group. McCain, for a split second was shocked, then broke into his "patronizing a mental patient" smile. He blathered about his own style of leadership, and then the questioner quickly moved to the next candidate, ignoring Paul's plea for the good Senator to answer the question.

Unfortunately, this brilliant question was far over the heads of at least 99.9% of the electorate. Paul was referring to the President's "Plunge Team", convened in 1987 to find creative ways to keep the bubble from bursting, even if it means manipulating the markets. No, you can't find it in the news here in the States, but most financial junkies around the world have read about it in their local newspaper. Here, try this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&g rid=A1YourView&xml=/money/2008/01/07/ccview107.xml



backerin..I am starting to think GO also
Desperation is a sometimes a useful emotion....
And it will definitely lead me to Ron Paul...
No diss here..I am about there NOW! :)
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.