How will the United States end?

[quade 3]

Apathy.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[1969912 0]

Quote

Apathy.

BINGO!!

Liberal, Conservative, whatever - it doesn't matter. Participate and vote.

I'm agreeing with Quade. WTF

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[shropshire 0]

Quote

We need a sea change in Congress. We need to start electing people who promise not to give us more government, but those who promise to give us less. .

If so, where will you find these people? Can you name a single politician who is not in the game for themselves?

Power corrupts etc .....

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

We need a sea change in Congress. We need to start electing people who promise not to give us more government, but those who promise to give us less. .

If so, where will you find these people? Can you name a single politician who is not in the game for themselves?

The new governor of New Jersey seems to be very popular on this kind of platform. Ron Paul comes to mind. There's a few others out there. Let the tidal wave of new-breed low-government politicians begin!

I just got my mortgage escrow analysis for the year. My house payment is going up $150 per month. Why? Increasing taxes... I'll vote for anyone who shows the balls to hold the line.

[shropshire 0]

Thanks John and good luck finding more of them... I can't name a single one over here

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Quote

Quote

We need a sea change in Congress. We need to start electing people who promise not to give us more government, but those who promise to give us less. .

If so, where will you find these people? Can you name a single politician who is not in the game for themselves?

The new governor of New Jersey seems to be very popular on this kind of platform. Ron Paul comes to mind. There's a few others out there. Let the tidal wave of new-breed low-government politicians begin!

I just got my mortgage escrow analysis for the year. My house payment is going up $150 per month. Why? Increasing taxes... I'll vote for anyone who shows the balls to hold the line.

The sad truth is in order to turn this around we need to raise taxes AND cut spending. The days where one or the other could do it are long past.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[skygypsie 2]

By moral & spiritual collapse, self centered
" who's got who's hand's in power mongars pockets," then "scratching who's balls, " for personal agendas, deception of public media propaganda, feeding off one person's hard work, and accomplishment's, then claiming the victory as their own, and kick the working MAN when he's down. Wait a minute, that sounds just like our systems; now in play, & those 'governing' over our government
GOVERNMENT: ' we the People'
Perhaps if we each work on 'ours' from within, each person becomes party to the PEOPLE, again !

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

We need a sea change in Congress. We need to start electing people who promise not to give us more government, but those who promise to give us less. .

If so, where will you find these people? Can you name a single politician who is not in the game for themselves?

The new governor of New Jersey seems to be very popular on this kind of platform. Ron Paul comes to mind. There's a few others out there. Let the tidal wave of new-breed low-government politicians begin!

I just got my mortgage escrow analysis for the year. My house payment is going up $150 per month. Why? Increasing taxes... I'll vote for anyone who shows the balls to hold the line.

The sad truth is in order to turn this around we need to raise taxes AND cut spending. The days where one or the other could do it are long past.

Well that's true. Of course in the old days, since 1930's, the tax rate has always been huge; 70% or greater top brkt. So from the mid 30's until Reagan we never have had taxes below 70% top brkt, so there really never was a time when we could control debt thru spending; we've always had high taxes until Reagan. I think 50-60% top brkt is about right.

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

We need a sea change in Congress. We need to start electing people who promise not to give us more government, but those who promise to give us less. .

If so, where will you find these people? Can you name a single politician who is not in the game for themselves?

The new governor of New Jersey seems to be very popular on this kind of platform. Ron Paul comes to mind. There's a few others out there. Let the tidal wave of new-breed low-government politicians begin!

I just got my mortgage escrow analysis for the year. My house payment is going up $150 per month. Why? Increasing taxes... I'll vote for anyone who shows the balls to hold the line.

The sad truth is in order to turn this around we need to raise taxes AND cut spending. The days where one or the other could do it are long past.

Well that's true. Of course in the old days, since 1930's, the tax rate has always been huge; 70% or greater top brkt. So from the mid 30's until Reagan we never have had taxes below 70% top brkt, so there really never was a time when we could control debt thru spending; we've always had high taxes until Reagan. I think 50-60% top brkt is about right.

I meant across the board, not just the "rich."

If this were ever to work, it'd need to be viewed as everyone's problem so all would need to help solve it in the form of higher taxes and/or less aid.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[piisfish 135]

it will sink under the owerweight people

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[Skyrad 0]

Badly

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[wmw999 2,123]

It's sinking under the weight of protecting our freedoms. The freedom to be overweight. The freedom to choose a Nintendo for our kids, and have a TV at the house on all the time, and to have a vehicle for every driving-age person in the family. The freedom to have the streets taken care of, a police department that watches over us without our having to do much. The freedom to have our children, no matter how damaged (either by nature or by rotten parenting), be educated for free. The freedom to move into houses and expect that they have been built properly and inspected. Many of these things used to cost extra. Now they're part of the basic package.

The freedom to have all of our people have an opportunity. That's what we're paying our taxes for.

If you want to see what a future with significantly lower taxes looks like, look towards Colorado Springs. Only consider that they just encourage the poor people to move away to other cities. If, as a country, we do that, we can't just kick people to other countries.

The welfare reform of the 90's was pretty well done. It hurt people, but no one starved to death over it.

How will it end? Not sure. It might no longer be the destination for poor energetic people. But then would it still be America, land of opportunity?

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Skyrad 0]

Quote

But then would it still be America, land of opportunity?

No offence intended but is it now? Is it really any different from any other western democracy?

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca