1 - 10 Next
And more importantly, the moderates and undecided need to hear a moral argument about over spending, not an accounting argument about deficits or total debt. Have you noticed all Dem arguments are moral ones about hating the poor,etc. Republicans respond with and accounting argument about deficits and always lose the argument and often the election and the spending continues, sometimes with lower taxes sometimes with higher taxes, but it always continues,. The argument needs to be about spending. Obama loves to argue about accounting with Republicans. Doing so of course distracts from the gross immorality of destroying our country and our children's future with out of control spending.
Furthermore Kirk, If you keep the argument to spending argument, then it is very easy to make a moral and logical case that spending is a problem that requires spending cuts. If you call it a morally neutral based mathematically defined debt or deficit problem you open yourself up to the argument that increased taxes are one reasonable solution to this problem. If a Repubick then fails to agree, he seems unreasonable, uncompromising and extreme. This is why Repubiks like Bob Dole, McCain, Romney and the Bushes always lose the argument. This why they are called "the tax collectors for the welfare state", because they have reduced the argument to one of accounting. The argument should be a moral one about waste, dependency, etc.
Kirk, You missed the whole point of Dan's article. Republicans are not dumb because they prefer raising taxes to cutting spending. Repubiks are dumb because they are losing the semantic war of words which makes them seem less compromising and more extreme. The result is they lose the political war for the mass of voters who are too busy with their lives to think this through (which incude the ever important undecided and moderates) who then just vote for the folks they think are more reasonable and willing to compromise after they are told by and reinforced by the main stream media talking heads that these people are Democrats.
...societal collapse. Now are you ready to argue?
If we learn to call the problem a spending problem, then the obvious solution is to cut spending. This is something the brain dead moderates and potential brain dead Liberal converts can understand. At the same time deficits and debts should be described as symptoms of the spending problem. Taxes should be defined and described as something to pay for the limited but necessary functions of government. The current amount of tax revenue soaked up by government far exceeds what is needed for limited and necessary government. The rest of the revenues simply contribute to human dependency and corruption in our society and waste and inefficiency in our economy, which taken to extreme which they are already at, can lead to a complete ....
Yeah, but Mitchell is right about how the argument is stated, because to state it in terms of a debt problem, lets the Democrats seem reasonable and willing to compromise with their always willing offer to raise taxes. If the Republican then responds that he does not want to raise taxes, he seems to favor the rich and appears not willing to compromise. We of course can see thorough this. The problem though are the brain dead independents, who "just want everyone to get along and compromise" They then vote for the willing to compromise and less extreme Democrat and taxes and spending both go up again and again. It also makes it difficult to convert any brain dead Liberals to our cause for the same reason.
His English and spelling is pretty poor, too. Must have went to a government school.
In response to:

Romney Smacks Wind Energy Money Grab

Tom24 Wrote: Aug 24, 2012 12:16 PM
... where he wrote about what is seen and not seen in economic transactions. What is seen here is the few and mostly temporary jobs you mention in building wind farms and in running wind companies and of course that includes lobbyist and p.r folks like you. It also includes the $100 million payments to wind farm crony entreprenurs like Tom Carnahan (see my previous post). What is not seen is all the wealth that will be lost by society in general and jobs created from the things that could have been purchased with the tax money and lost wealth resulting from the perpetual higher energy cost paid by all citizens that wind power ultimately represents. I can assure you that the latter greatly exceed the former.
In response to:

Romney Smacks Wind Energy Money Grab

Tom24 Wrote: Aug 24, 2012 12:10 PM
At what cost per Job? Would anybody buy wind energy if it was not subsidized by direct taxpayer subsides and by laws that forced utilities to buy the energy? When coming up with your answer to the first question please include all subsidies and higher energy cost from forced purchase of wind power. Oh, and how much does the support of the Wind Energy Association and your salary amount to on my energy bills. "Success story" indeed. I suggest you say: "Crony capitalist success story at the expense of, and no benefit to, the American taxpayer and citizen and their families. Do you sleep well at night? And one more thing. I suggest you and other green energy belivers read the late economist Frederic Batiste...
In response to:

Romney Smacks Wind Energy Money Grab

Tom24 Wrote: Aug 24, 2012 11:52 AM
On a final note, I really don't blame Tom Carnahan for this mess. He was simply an opportunist who took advantage and I would guess likely had a little inside knowledge to make that possible. I blame the politicians on both sides of the isle that created such wealth wasting boondoggles. Ultimately though I blame the stupid public who supported the whole mess by electing the politicians that wrote the laws that made it possible, for which they and their families will pay through their own reduced wealth.
1 - 10 Next