Visit the Archives for U.S. Politics Online -- U.S. Politics Online . net
Last I checked, Pelosi lost her Speakership and Obama is in danger of losing his job as well. The only reason he has a chance is because our nominee is going to be someone just as fake.
No, but enough Democrats fell that she lost her job. I think the Democrats' losses were greater than in any election since WWII.
The fact that she is STILL the Minority leader is going to prevent Democrats from being in the majority again anytime soon.
- Frustrated Independent
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
"Every time something really bad happens, people cry out for safety, and the government answers by taking rights away from good people.” - Penn Jillette amazingly enough, and I agree.
True, but I wouldn't say it's politically unfeasible. Spending doesn't have to be cut, it just needs to grow slow. WHen Democrats are interested in slow growth as they were in the 90s, the public doesn't even notice or care. The interest groups howl, but without a major political party to give a damn, no one else does either.
But right now you have a Democratic Party that can't stand the idea of any program growing at less than 10% a year.
The government should spend as much as it needs to accomplish it's legitimate goals, and it should spend as little as it can to accomplish these goals, and taxes should be set at a level sufficient to pay for this spending and to effect some modest reduction in the debt during good times.
If there is a war or major crisis, spending may rise, deficits may be necessary, but the worst policy is run deficits in good times, good times should produce surpluses, and until the debt is paid off, taxes should not be reduced just because we have a surplus.
And to return to the actual topic.
Since tax supported health care, run by the government is perfectly constitutional (John Adams signed it into law, I'll take his opinion of what's constitutional over some internet poster). Then if congress feels that it needs to put some form of health care out there and pay for it by taxes, as long as the taxes are sufficient to pay for the spending, I don't have a problem with it, and neither does the constitution.
Last edited by goober; 03-31-2012 at 10:08 PM.
You should always have an informed opinion, so after I inform you, please feel free to express my opinion...USCitizen
The way to make the government spend less is public financing of elections.
If elections are publicly funded, special interests lose influence, the common people gain influence, and things in all probability get better.
Because with publicly funded elections, congress will feel less needs to be spent.