[quote=“JEG,post:38,topic:39899"”]
Vietnam was just pure idocy.
[/quote]
[quote=“JEG,post:40,topic:39899"”]
I know that, but Clinton had a low spending rate becuase he just sat there and got head. He did nothing for this country but ensure it is well fucked over in the future. If you look at how much we are spending as opposed to say WWII, yes the numbers LOOK higher, but they actually arent. I am only saying WWII because we spent so much money…and looks like we survived.
[/quote]
My point was that we really wont have a grasp on our curent spendings impact for a few years atleast. Also sometimes big defecit spending can do good for the long run it just depends on what it is being used for really. A war ummm probably not a benefit. But say we went on deficit to fund technology(getting off oil) or education perhaps and it will probably benifit in the long run. I have faith in the US economics system and there are many ways to keep inflation down, GDP where we want it so on and so forth so i dont worry too much.
I’m not sure if Hillary is the answer, but I’d take Donald Duck over our current regime.
We need:
higher taxes on wealthy
higher capitol gains taxes
healthcare for everyone (gov or employer required - millions of americans need it)
protective tariffs
As for the arguments about spending, notice that following the second world war the relative debt has only increased under W and the gipper - strangely both are republicans.
Also note that during WWII while the debt was increasing there was also an increase in jobs. It brought us out of the depression. Why, that spending made jobs and spread the wealth out. The current spending on the Iraq/Afghanistan fiasco has only served to make a small few very wealthy (I won’t argue this happened in WWII as well) while the working class has suffered. How many millions have been layed off since Jan 2001? The point is the debt generated in the early forties benefitted all, where the current debt run up has benefitted a few but will cost us all.
I disagree with higher taxes on the wealthy. They already pay an incredable amount of taxes. Punishing them for making something of themselves instead of being a bum and taking free government handouts is not the way to go.
[quote=“JoesTypeS,post:24,topic:39899"”]
For the most part, illegal immigrants are doing work that americans refuse to do. So you have 2 solutions:
-
Force employers to pay more for shitty jobs so Americans will do them (you can drive up wages 2 ways: 1- mandating it 2- fining and jailing ANYONE who employ illegal immigrants enough to ruin their lives…top level too like the CEO of walmart)
-
Continue to allow those willing to do the work to do the work
[/quote]
You’re close. You don’t have to raise the wage though. There are American’s willing to do a lot of these jobs for the current minimum wage. The problem is too many companies are allowed to hire under the table illegals for less than the minimum wage.
And for the jobs that you can’t find legal citizens to do for minimum wage the companies will simply have to offer more money. No need to force them to pay higher wages because if they can’t find the people they need they will automatically have to offer more money. That’s how capitalism works. The government doesn’t set a price, the consumer does.
But :tup: on fining the hell out of companies who employee illegals. I’ve been calling for that for years.
I want to know what the democrats on this board think the answer is to illegal immigration. Do we just continue business as usual? Do we give all illegals amnesty? That would completely tip the scales on voting day and drown all social programs. Reagan gave illegals amnesty in '86. Didnt solve the problem. How does this country stop the hemoraging? I honestly want to know what the democratic game plan is.
[quote=“BrockwayMT,post:43,topic:39899"”]
strangely both are republicans.
[/quote]
You graph with it’s red and blue curve is very misleading in this day of “red state”, “blue state” considering that Ike (Eisenhower), Nixon and Ford were all Republicans as well.
While we’re playing with graphs, look how this one of the Dow’s performance lines up with the “bad” Bush/Reagan years. 
Notice how it was flat from 1965 until almost 1980?
I honestly say kick them out and shoot anyone who tries to cross the border. Sounds harsh but they are draining this country and the liberals are letting them. Fuck that. If someone breaks into my house and tries to take my shit I will kill the mothafucker. Not say "oh here, take some money, and food, and use some of my healthcare that you didnt pay for or contribute towards.
Liberals would argue if you do that then prices are going to rise, businesses will fail. The US will look like Nazi’s, kicking doors down and shipping illegals home by the millions. Thats pretty aggressive, not to mention impossible logistically. What if an illegal family has kids who were born in the US and are thus citizens? Do we break up the family? How would you fill the void of 30 million workers? Theres no easy solution here.
[quote=“Muckman,post:49,topic:39899"”]
Liberals would argue if you do that then prices are going to rise, businesses will fail. The US will look like Nazi’s, kicking doors down and shipping illegals home by the millions; its pretty aggressive. What if an illegal family has kids who were born in the US and are thus citizens? Do we break up the family? How would you fill the void of 30 million workers? Theres no easy solution here.
[/quote]
Businesses aren’t going to fail because someone has to start paying a minimum wage. Some will, probably a number of landscaping ones when everyone with a mcmansion can no longer afford to pay someone to mow their lawn because the guy riding the mower is getting minimum wage instead of some under the table cash rate of $4/hr. But that’s just how it goes. Some for prices going up slightly. If all businesses have to pay more it’s not like one will have an unfair advantage over the other, so very few should go out of business.
As for breaking up families, no way. Send the parents AND the kids back. End this BS that if you sneak over here illegally and pop out a kid that kid is automatically a citizen.
[quote=“JayS,post:50,topic:39899"”]
Businesses aren’t going to fail because someone has to start paying a minimum wage. Some will, probably a number of landscaping ones when everyone with a mcmansion can no longer afford to pay someone to mow their lawn because the guy riding the mower is getting minimum wage instead of some under the table cash rate of $4/hr. But that’s just how it goes. Some for prices going up slightly. If all businesses have to pay more it’s not like one will have an unfair advantage over the other, so very few should go out of business.
As for breaking up families, no way. Send the parents AND the kids back. End this BS that if you sneak over here illegally and pop out a kid that kid is automatically a citizen.
[/quote]
:word:
[quote=“JayS,post:47,topic:39899"”]
Notice how it was flat from 1965 until almost 1980?
[/quote]
:lol: at the scaling on the y axis it makes the 87 crash look like nothing, when it was the highest loss in dow history
I totally agree Jay, Im just playing devils advocate. I am so sick of everyone saying the agriculture and construction industries will be hit hard if they lose the illegal labor force. Tough shit. Prices are artificially low because they are paying illegals under the table and below minimum wage. Theres no tax on that either. How do you pay taxes without a SSN, you dont. So basically the whole country is taking a hit so these companies can take advantage of illegals so a head of lettuce is cheaper and their stock goes up.
[quote=“JEG,post:44,topic:39899"”]
They already pay an incredable amount of taxes.
[/quote]
Volume and percentage are drastically different…someone making 500K or even $3,000,000 pays only 7% more in federal taxes than I do. That’s not right, even a 2% tax increase on incomes over $300,000 would generate massive revenue for the government, and it wouldn’t curb spending AT ALL
[quote=“Muckman,post:49,topic:39899"”]
Liberals would argue if you do that then prices are going to rise, businesses will fail.
[/quote]
Liberals? Try the corporate republican party.
[quote=“JayS,post:47,topic:39899"”]
You graph with it’s red and blue curve is very misleading in this day of “red state”, “blue state” considering that Ike (Eisenhower), Nixon and Ford were all Republicans as well.
While we’re playing with graphs, look how this one of the Dow’s performance lines up with the “bad” Bush/Reagan years.
Notice how it was flat from 1965 until almost 1980?
[/quote]
Remember that the cost of living didn’t increase much in that period either. People neglect that the Dow and GDP and all that don’t necessarily correlate to [the majority of, i.e. not rich] people being better off.
The widening distribution of wealth allows wealth on a macro scale to increase while the higher percentage of people on the lower end of the income scale stagnate or decrease.
This bickering is pointless
[quote=“JoesTypeS,post:54,topic:39899"”]
Volume and percentage are drastically different…someone making 500K or even $3,000,000 pays only 7% more in federal taxes than I do. That’s not right, even a 2% tax increase on incomes over $300,000 would generate massive revenue for the government, and it woudn’t curb spending AT ALL
[/quote]
:tup: This is one of the most important changes they could possibly make.
Kill the illegals, kill hitlary, and get someone with a decent fucking IQ in the white house.