Wowee, if you do that, about 20% of corporations will fold instantly, as they make their profits at the margins. Many more, probably more than 50% would be gone in a couple of years. The remainder would likely all move overseas because they don't want to be forced to accept 15x the $50 Pedro the Once a week janitor gets every week. They certainly won't work 60 hour weeks for $12.50 an hour.
lol, talk about extreme positions. You know less than nothing about economics, and here you are advocating class warfare rather than recognizing actual root causes of financial crises, ie the people in charge of money issuance, ie the Federal Reserve.
Note that you said nothing about the extreme wage disparity that has emerged between the private and government sectors. How about limiting politicians and bureaucrats the same way? No, no, they "deserve" their money.
It's "scum" to get back money that has been paid out in taxes?
Maybe it's better to dismantle the system that forces people to act in such a way, and to stop lambasting people trying their best to change the system from within without any bloodshed. If this budget issue isn't fixed, their will be blood, and a lot of it. Civil Wars, like divorces, are often started over economic issues.
And where did that money come from? Taxpayers. You know who else has the ability to tax? The states. You know who can administer programs like these more effectively? People who actually live in the places affected.
They take a billion in tax revenue, and give $500 million in programs. The other half is gobbled up bones and all by the bureaucracy. Further, such grants are not necessarily merit based, meaning they are promoting mediocre performance. This is why we have fallen so far behind in the education game.
If you find the Constitution to be so stifling, why do you live in a country with one? There are plenty that don't. Living in a country that has laws but chooses not to follow them because they are inconvenient sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.
Stop bailing them out and giving them subsidies, and that will rapidly revert to the way it was in the golden age of air travel, only now with modern conveniences.
So you are saying that local entities would drive away any and all commerce from their area of influence by instituting ridiculous taxes and regulations?
It seems that the only argument against this is that state and local governments will self destruct, meanwhile the Federal government is already self destructing.
First, I didn't say they didn't do anything, but they are moving water from one side of the pool to the other while spilling some on the ground. The Federal Government can't create more than it consumes due to its nature. Claiming that they somehow keep ALL the states afloat is simply BS, and the fact is that it doesn't happen. More often, the Feds try to control state governments by using money taken from those same states as a lure. We see it in federally mandated speed limits (why is the speed limit 70 in the middle of perfectly flat desert?), in federally mandated drinking ages, etc, etc.
Second, when is the last time the US was invaded? How many other nations have we invaded since the last time we were invaded?
Third, the Internet is different from DARPAnet, and would have come about on its own, simply as a result of rapidly improving computers. Just because the government happened to fund the first group to make a network connection doesn't mean it wouldn't have happened without them.
I know this is slashdot and all, but the actual budget Ron Paul proposes cuts the budget by a trillion dollars in the first year. $200 billion comes from the DoD.
I never had problems with food I bought in Mexico, nor have I ever heard of anyone who has. You sure we aren't using other people's money to tilt at windmills?
You can't deregulate the financial sector without ending the Fed. As long as the Fed is there, any and all laws can and will be bypassed for the benefit of the banks. Deregulation was never the problem. At most, it just made the problem come to a head instead of festering in the background as it has done since the Fed bailed out the S&L banks in 1987.
Galveston is in his district. You really think that he would do something to endanger the people of his own district?
Also, if you actually knew ANYTHING about the great hurricane, you would know Cuban officials were warning Texas about it days before it arrived, but the National Weather Bureau ignored the warning, claiming the storm would head up the Atlantic Coast.
Further, it's not as if the satellites would suddenly fall out of the sky. They could easily be operated by state governments. But state-worshipers don't want to hear anything about capabilities of locals, much less private companies.
They don't "deal" with nukes, they just say "no" to everything having to do with nuclear power, and keep us dependent on foreign oil, to an even and ever greater degree than when they were founded a few short decades ago.
New nuclear power plants would be safer than current ones, allowing outdated designs to be wound down safely, and even to have their waste reprocessed rather than throwing it all away under a big mountain in the desert. But the goobermint don't like that.
Sometimes you have to cut the Gordian Knot to get anywhere.
When you have a complex problem that is getting more and more complex with each passing day, the solution is to get rid of those making things more complex. That is all that is happening here.
Slashdot Mirror
Wowee, if you do that, about 20% of corporations will fold instantly, as they make their profits at the margins. Many more, probably more than 50% would be gone in a couple of years. The remainder would likely all move overseas because they don't want to be forced to accept 15x the $50 Pedro the Once a week janitor gets every week. They certainly won't work 60 hour weeks for $12.50 an hour.
lol, talk about extreme positions. You know less than nothing about economics, and here you are advocating class warfare rather than recognizing actual root causes of financial crises, ie the people in charge of money issuance, ie the Federal Reserve.
Note that you said nothing about the extreme wage disparity that has emerged between the private and government sectors. How about limiting politicians and bureaucrats the same way? No, no, they "deserve" their money.
It's "scum" to get back money that has been paid out in taxes?
Maybe it's better to dismantle the system that forces people to act in such a way, and to stop lambasting people trying their best to change the system from within without any bloodshed. If this budget issue isn't fixed, their will be blood, and a lot of it. Civil Wars, like divorces, are often started over economic issues.
And where did that money come from? Taxpayers. You know who else has the ability to tax? The states. You know who can administer programs like these more effectively? People who actually live in the places affected.
They take a billion in tax revenue, and give $500 million in programs. The other half is gobbled up bones and all by the bureaucracy. Further, such grants are not necessarily merit based, meaning they are promoting mediocre performance. This is why we have fallen so far behind in the education game.
If you find the Constitution to be so stifling, why do you live in a country with one? There are plenty that don't. Living in a country that has laws but chooses not to follow them because they are inconvenient sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.
Get to eating. Most of those services are taken over at the local or state levels.
Stop bailing them out and giving them subsidies, and that will rapidly revert to the way it was in the golden age of air travel, only now with modern conveniences.
So you are saying that local entities would drive away any and all commerce from their area of influence by instituting ridiculous taxes and regulations?
It seems that the only argument against this is that state and local governments will self destruct, meanwhile the Federal government is already self destructing.
First, I didn't say they didn't do anything, but they are moving water from one side of the pool to the other while spilling some on the ground. The Federal Government can't create more than it consumes due to its nature. Claiming that they somehow keep ALL the states afloat is simply BS, and the fact is that it doesn't happen. More often, the Feds try to control state governments by using money taken from those same states as a lure. We see it in federally mandated speed limits (why is the speed limit 70 in the middle of perfectly flat desert?), in federally mandated drinking ages, etc, etc.
Second, when is the last time the US was invaded? How many other nations have we invaded since the last time we were invaded?
Third, the Internet is different from DARPAnet, and would have come about on its own, simply as a result of rapidly improving computers. Just because the government happened to fund the first group to make a network connection doesn't mean it wouldn't have happened without them.
The budget for the DoD is cut by $200 billion on day one. Something that was likely left out of the article on purpose.
You could certainly bring that up at your local city council meeting, but police, fire, etc are not the purview of the Federal Government.
I know this is slashdot and all, but the actual budget Ron Paul proposes cuts the budget by a trillion dollars in the first year. $200 billion comes from the DoD.
Funny, so you are saying that this time is different?
Trimming the budget to levels last seen ten years ago is "extremist"?
Trim them until they are. If they aren't fast, efficient, and responsive, then we don't need them. Let the States take over those duties.
I'm sure you mean "detractors".
I never had problems with food I bought in Mexico, nor have I ever heard of anyone who has. You sure we aren't using other people's money to tilt at windmills?
You can't deregulate the financial sector without ending the Fed. As long as the Fed is there, any and all laws can and will be bypassed for the benefit of the banks. Deregulation was never the problem. At most, it just made the problem come to a head instead of festering in the background as it has done since the Fed bailed out the S&L banks in 1987.
Make us up some more lies. These were to easily dispensed with via a simple glance at the actual budget.
And we need the FCC for what, exactly? To save us from Jackson Family nipples?
$200 billion is cut from the DoD on day one. It's line item number one on the budget.
Galveston is in his district. You really think that he would do something to endanger the people of his own district?
Also, if you actually knew ANYTHING about the great hurricane, you would know Cuban officials were warning Texas about it days before it arrived, but the National Weather Bureau ignored the warning, claiming the storm would head up the Atlantic Coast.
Further, it's not as if the satellites would suddenly fall out of the sky. They could easily be operated by state governments. But state-worshipers don't want to hear anything about capabilities of locals, much less private companies.
lol, a parasite sucking from 50 hosts is necessary to keep each of the hosts afloat. That is hilarious. Mod parent funny.
Paul's budget cuts the DOD budget by 200 billion dollars immediately. Thee is a 15% blanket cut, and it pulls war funding. That's day one.
Not really. Most of those guys don't do anything except tell people who already know what they are doing what to do.
They don't "deal" with nukes, they just say "no" to everything having to do with nuclear power, and keep us dependent on foreign oil, to an even and ever greater degree than when they were founded a few short decades ago.
New nuclear power plants would be safer than current ones, allowing outdated designs to be wound down safely, and even to have their waste reprocessed rather than throwing it all away under a big mountain in the desert. But the goobermint don't like that.
Sometimes you have to cut the Gordian Knot to get anywhere.
When you have a complex problem that is getting more and more complex with each passing day, the solution is to get rid of those making things more complex. That is all that is happening here.
And where are YOUR solutions, Mr. Fancy-pants?
You seem to be naught but ad hominem and irrational hatred.