1 - 6
In response to:

Can It Happen Here?

Greg28 Wrote: Mar 26, 2013 10:20 AM
Which is worse: the Cypriot government seizing 40% of bank savings only over the 100,000 Euro level insured, or the US government seizing up to 40% of your total after-tax private wealth when you die, including bank savings, equity investments, all your tangible property, real estate, and cars - up to 40% of all your private property? And the US employs a Gift Tax to prevent you from avoiding the Death Tax. Where did the US government get the right to seize your private property? Seizure of private property is well established in the US. The Cyprus example is trivial in comparison.
Which is worse? Cyprus seizing 10% of people’s bank assets while they are living, or the US seizing up to 40% of a person’s total wealth when they die? And the US implements a Gift Tax while you are living to stop you from avoiding the Death Tax. In both cases, this is a seizure of private property that has already been taxed. The precedent for seizing the private property of US citizens is well established.
The US market is floated by QE. The European markets are similarly printing money. It's hard to see how this ends well. Tax and spend, robbing wealth from the private sector, is counter productive. The brightest sector in the US economy is energy, if only this administration would stop restraining it. And while coal is historically cheap and dirty, innovation shows a potential for 9000 years of clean coal. http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/bobbeauprez/2013/02/25/all-the-coal-none-of-the-carbon-almost-n1519548/page/full/ It makes much more sense focus on the technology of fossil fuels than to continue to waste money on renewable sources. A true full court press on domestic energy could dramatically improve the US economy.
There is no shortage of people who think the deficit should be reduced. But you can count on no fingers the number of people who are willing to see anything cut that could ever impact them - not social security, not medicare, not medicaid, not home mortgage deductions, not unemployment, not food stamps. Only cut something that impacts someone else. Until voters are willing to see their own benefits cut for the good of the nation, there is no way Republicans can get political support for deficit reduction.
... According to OpenSecrets.org, a nonpartisan, independent and nonprofit research group tracking money in U.S. politics, just the top 20 labor unions over the past 20 years have spent over $500 million on federal election campaigns, and 95% of that spending went to Democrats.
It was widely accepted by both Democrats and Republicans that public unions should not have the right to collectively bargain until President Kennedy gave them this right in with Executive Order 10988 in 1962 which allowed unionization of the federal work force. This caused state and local governments to begin to allow unionization. Possibly the most unfortunate aspect of unions in America today is the collusion between unions and legislators. The "union vote" and political contributions can substantially influence elections. This creates an environment where political parties and legislators support unions, frequently at the expense of employers and taxpayers, in order to stay in power. According to OpenSecrets.org, a nonpartisan,...
1 - 6