au1929 wrote:
Would you please enlighten me as to the "limited " social programs you in your compassion for the poor and unfortunate you would allow. In addition which of the social programs now in effect would you abandon. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid or food stamps?
Regarding tax cuts for the wealthy. It is beyond reason to enact tax cuts during a time of war when the US is expending hundreds of billions of dollars which by the way the do not have and than cut social services to pay for them. That is Robin Hood in reverse. Take from the needy and give to the wealthy.
Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are too entrenched now to quit cold turkey. I think we would have been better off with different type programs than these, but now that we have them, we should not break the promises included in these programs over the last 50 years or more. Some reform of these programs would be helpful to try to keep them from breaking the bank, which they will if allowed to grow unhindered. I would have to look at the Food Stamp program to see if some reform is in order, such as would it make sense to go back to the old system whereby basic food items like sugar, flour, etc. be provided instead of a blank check to buy potato chips, pop, whatever. I would need to look at this program in detail to really come up with something more definite. I would rescind Bush's prescription drug program. I don't think that was a huge problem the way it was. I haven't talked to anybody that likes the new program or understands it. If left unhindered, it will grow exponentially with a huge component of abuse.
Concerning cuts in the tax rates, you need to consider the fact that tax rates are not a "zero sum game." To explain, 0% tax rate collects no taxes, but a 100% tax rate would also collect little tax because nobody would work any more than absolutely necessary to get their rations from the government, and the economy would tank like it eventually does in every communist system. Somewhere in the middle is the most efficient tax rate, and I think we may be higher than that optimum rate, so that lowering the rate does more to increase revenue than increasing the rate would. Reagan proved that exactly. I believe Bush is proving this again. Tax revenues currently are not suffering from the tax rate cut. Another simple illustration, how did Walmart make more money than all other retailers? The answer is obviously they lowered their prices. Lowering taxes spurs the economy. That is a proven fact. And the tax cuts not only benefited the wealthy, they greatly benefited the poor. Some of those poor are in my own family so I know how much money they got, and it was significant. Much more than they even paid into the system. And they spent it on real significant needs for their families.
And as far as Robin Hood in reverse, I do not think any social program is being cut in any significant manner because of the poor. Document it if you have an example.
I would submit the idea here that our biggest economic problem for society is irresponsibility. How do you fix that?
Like who?
