Where do Progressives hide?

[Reservoir_Dog]

keep government small and out of our way.

Yet, when something isn't working you start screaming and whining about how the government isn't doing anything about it.

[Dawg]

keep government small and out of our way.

Yet, when something isn't working you start screaming and whining about how the government isn't doing anything about it.

Nope, you have me confused with half of Canada and Slick.

[callmeslick]

still waiting for examples, dawg.........

ya see, my point is that what you are talking about is an unworkable model, sort of like anarchy. Sounds good to some folks, but completely unworkable. Hell, even the US at the beginning didn't really use that model. Sure, the Federal Govt was small, which made sense given the difficulty of transportation and communication up and down the Atlantic coast. Still, most of the states had pretty robust government,
some had pretty considerable taxation for the day, and the concept of free market capitalism hadn't even been developed fully. As you were dealing in an agrarian society, there were no real industries, nor any true corporations. So, feel free to cite me some working models of the theory you embrace put into practice, and I'll consider them. Until then, I keep thinking of some of the more abusive snakepits of child labor, slavery,
abuse of workers and widespread, abject poverty, as those have been the more common results when societies embrace a weak government coupled with a free market capitalist economy. We've managed to progress from that sort of thing in most of the Western world, due to, um, progressives, now that I think of it.

[callmeslick]

oh, and dawg(or any other so-called Conservatives), here's another point to ponder:

Lots of folks espouse 'low taxes', 'lowering taxes', or whatever. But, let's talk reality, USA-style, for a moment. We have an annual deficit of 1 trillion bucks. God knows what the overall debt is at the moment, but it's a matter of trillions. We owe this money out, and without other folks purchasing that debt, the whole nation goes under. Everything.....defense, entitlements, all government functionality. Essentially, nationwide chaos would occur. Now, consider this for a moment: in our national budget, defense spending, debt paybacks, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security account for over 80% of the total. You couldn't find more than 20% support from the public to eliminate any of those, ever.
Thus, to cut taxes, or even think about it, is ludicrous. What we need, and badly, is leadership with the balls to get the public to accept the concept of shared sacrifice, and raise taxes measurably. At the least, raise taxation enough, somehow, to cover the annual budget, and not incur new debt. That, by the way, is what Obama is trying to do with the budget commission he wants to establish, i.e: look at how to get that balance.
Clinton nearly got there, until Bush fecked it all up by dropping taxes and tossing in two unpaid-for wars.
That is water over the dam, at this point. IMHO, the burden ought to be heavily weighted toward the top 5 or 10 percent of the income scale, and include elimination of a host of breaks given to the wealthy. You can start with the 15% rate for capital gains income, as that has NEVER been shown to increase investment, it only stimulates buying and selling for profitmaking. Why should I pay 15% for money made by calling my stock brokerage, while someone else pays 28% for actual earnings from labor?
The underlying problem, as I see it, is that we damn near demand services without payment for them. It's like me hiring Ruggie to do $10,000 worth of window and door work on my house, but only agreeing to pay him
$7,000 for it. It doesn't work in the real world, and we've gone on, blindly assuming it works in the fantasy world we call politics and government. It doesn't. We either face reality, or doom, as a nation.

[Dawg]

slick, honestly, your post is so diluted from what is really going on in the world, I'm just too busy to bother.

p.s. I meant to use diluted, not deluded ok? Some how more applicable after getting thru the first couple of sentences.

[callmeslick]

too busy, or coming up empty? I'll leave that for others to decide. Either way, a lame comeback.

[Dawg]

I used to play slick, but frankly you were the topic of discussion last year at the pub and many piled on with slickisms, both ones I'd overlooked, forgotten about and ones I wasn't aware of.
So, I'm even less inclined to give a crap about trying to prove anything, now Res on the otherhand, theres still hope for him, he really wants to be an American.

[callmeslick]

still no examples, huh? Nor, an explanation of how lowering taxes would do anything other that raise the deficit, a la Bush.

loved the story about the pub.....pretty much true to form, produce criticism of the guy that isn't there to debate the matter.Kinda shows the lack of balls I always called them on. Further example? Dontcha just love Fly's response to my stopping by Crabcake's to wish everyone Happy Holidays? His bearded mug should be in a dictionary someplace next to the word "pussy".

[ruggbutt]

s an explanation of how lowering taxes would do anything other that raise the deficit, a la Bush.

Or doing much much worse and giving money to rich banking execs......................

[callmeslick]

same difference. Notice which group started THAT ball rolling(check your calender, all bank bailouts were instituted in fall of 2008).........