Theoretical political platform/party -- would you vote for it?

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Deleted member 4644
No John, I disagree about laundry. The average Halliburton employee in Iraq was getting 80,000 a year or MORE. Many in combat type jobs were getting 200k ++. http://jobsearch.about.com/od/...naljobs/a/iraqjobs.htm

Go get some facts bro. Even if a private first class costs $100,000 to train, by year two he is still cheaper than a paid soldier and he can legally carry a gun and shoot too. If you join the military you don't need a fucking maid. My grandpa was in WWII and he did his own fucking laundry (well not really coz he was an officer, but you get the point).

We have a LIMITED supply of soldiers!!!!

You can't look at it in just terms of dollars and cents. You have to look at the big picture.

If you take a soldier and make him wash his own clothes and cook his own food then you are taking away from the time he can spend patrolling.

We should ask someone of the people were actually in Iraq, but my understanding is that a lot of these guys are spending 10-12 hours a day every day on patrol or standing watch etc etc.

To do what you are saying would require us to greatly increase the size of the military and the number of combat soldiers which is a very difficult and expensive task.

BTW your WW 2 point is meaningless because we had a draft and man power was not an issue, today it is.

The issue of private contractors has a lot to do with that.

It's easy to hire people for a decent wage to wash clothes and wire up networks but those same people might not take a job that involves active patrol and combat.

Manpower can best be utilized when we specialize. Let the soldiers be soldiers.

 

[Deleted member 4644]

I remain 100% unconvinced that the Halliburton Cost-Plus contracts were anything but War Profiteering and Treason (if not legally, then in spirit). (Not necessarily on the part of the Admin, but on the part of Halliburton).

 

[PokerGuy]

Prof: excellent points.

No way would I vote for this platform, it's typical class warfare liberalism in action.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Seems to me that what you propose isn't far from the Democratic positions. The Republicans/Conservatives are the ones in need of a new Platform. So I suspect these suggestions couldn't be the basis for a new Party.

i had assumed it was a rhetorical question and it actually was the democratic platform

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Deleted member 4644
Military: Maintain spending on battlespace superiority weapon systems, including new fighters and guided missile destroyers. No more leasing of planes/weapons from private companies making a profit. Clean up contracting system so fat-cat companies can't leach off the Fed Govt. No more Cost-Plus contracts (unlimited private private). No more private contractors on the battlefield. Soldiers do their own ditch digging and laundry. In exchange, increase soldier pay slightly and medical treatment after deployment.

Problem 3.

The last part sounds like it was written by someone with a total lack of understand as to why things are the way they are.

Soldiers are EXTREMELY expensive. People running laundry mats are not.

BTW I completely agree with the idea of contract reform and think we could probably cut military spending by spending are money wisely.

there are lots of schools where funding is a major problem.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
Prof: excellent points.

No way would I vote for this platform, it's typical class warfare liberalism in action.

why is it only class warfare when you try to help poor people out? Is stacking the deck (even further) for the wealthy not class warfare?

 

[ebaycj]

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Deleted member 4644
No John, I disagree about laundry. The average Halliburton employee in Iraq was getting 80,000 a year or MORE. Many in combat type jobs were getting 200k ++. http://jobsearch.about.com/od/...naljobs/a/iraqjobs.htm

Go get some facts bro. Even if a private first class costs $100,000 to train, by year two he is still cheaper than a paid soldier and he can legally carry a gun and shoot too. If you join the military you don't need a fucking maid. My grandpa was in WWII and he did his own fucking laundry (well not really coz he was an officer, but you get the point).

We have a LIMITED supply of soldiers!!!!

You can't look at it in just terms of dollars and cents. You have to look at the big picture.

If you take a soldier and make him wash his own clothes and cook his own food then you are taking away from the time he can spend patrolling.

We should ask someone of the people were actually in Iraq, but my understanding is that a lot of these guys are spending 10-12 hours a day every day on patrol or standing watch etc etc.

To do what you are saying would require us to greatly increase the size of the military and the number of combat soldiers which is a very difficult and expensive task.

BTW your WW 2 point is meaningless because we had a draft and man power was not an issue, today it is.

The issue of private contractors has a lot to do with that.

It's easy to hire people for a decent wage to wash clothes and wire up networks but those same people might not take a job that involves active patrol and combat.

Manpower can best be utilized when we specialize. Let the soldiers be soldiers.

Still, specialization != outsourcing. There's nothing preventing the military from having non-combat specialist positions for said laundry / food service / camp setup and maintenance / computer networking / etc.. duties. Pay could be raised from the current military baseline until people become interested.

It would still be way cheaper than outsourcing.

 

[ebaycj]

Originally posted by: Deleted member 4644
I remain 100% unconvinced that the Halliburton Cost-Plus contracts were anything but War Profiteering and Treason (if not legally, then in spirit). (Not necessarily on the part of the Admin, but on the part of Halliburton).

Why do you think Halliburton moved it's HQ to Dubai before the elections occurred?

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: Deleted member 4644
ProfJohn, not really the kind of feedback I want. Kind of a thread HiJack actually.. esp since I have not actually said that I myself would vote for any of these ideas..

..but I will briefly respond...

1. You are exaggerating. Obama has not outlawed the payment of salaries over $250,000. Furthermore, I would bet that I know 10 to 50 times as many people making $1 million or more a year than you do. These people are 1) hardly starving 2) not going to leave the USA 3) often surprisingly willing to pay more taxes in times of need. They are at least *part* of a the answer to our public funding crisis. PLEASE, however, do not hijack this thread. I have another thread about rich people. Please search for it. Oh, and .. um.. taxes are marginal.

2. Again, not exactly true. I admit that there are a TON of issues related to schools, but funding does play a role. Also, once you weakened the union, you could deploy the funding in more efficient ways. Anyways, I'm not talking about any serious increases, I realize we are basically out of cash in most states anyways. (Again, I understand that spending has increased per pupil and results are down. However, a significant part of that trend is related to other social factors and immigration and similar).

3. Highly, highly questionable. Soldiers are expensive to train yes, but they are paid about 25-35,000 a year and don't exactly have staggering benefits. Still, private contractors certainly cost more. I am talking about combat situations btw. We paid $100 a load for laundry for a while in Iraq. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories...gnews/main636644.shtml

You post a thread asking people what they think of your 'party', and Prof John posts problems he sees with it. And then you accuse him of thread hijacking? What, do you only want responses that agree with your positions? If your positions are FLAWED, they should be pointed out. Most of them are flawed as PJ pointed out.. I think you are living in a fantasy land, thus my original response of pass the joint..

 

[Fear No Evil]

Guns: Support for gun registration at sale. All Small-arms (up to .50 Cal) OK for non-criminals, but limits on ammo sales in large urban cities also OK.

This statement shows you have very little knowledge of guns. .50 CAL is a HUGE bullet and this size restriction will not impact ANY handgun and virtually no rifles or 'assault weapons'. If anything, the LARGE calibers are LESS likely to be used in a crime because a .50 CAL handgun is HUGE.. do a search on Youtube for someone firing a Desert Eagle 50 Cal and tell me if that would be practical for a robbing a bank or holding up a liquor store.. NO.. its way too big. You also realize that the bullets that our soldiers using in Iraq aren't much bigger than a .22LR bullet that most people use for 'plinking'? Its the power behind that bullet which is important.

Limits on ammo sales in urban areas. You think criminals don't have access to cars to hit the local Walmart in Suburbia? I don't see how this will have ANY impact on crime or use of guns in crimes.. It again tells me you have very little knowledge of guns outside of the anti-gun propoganda you have read.

Registration? How will that prevent crimes with people using mostly stolen guns? All this will do is increase the black market for foreign and stolen guns. Criminals by definition don't follow the law. What makes you think they will register? Silly.

Taxes: Reduce or maintain taxes for 95%+ of USA. Raise taxes for the extremely wealthy 99%+ and consider raising for others above 95%.

Awww.. isn't that nice? Tax the rich. Whats your proposed income caps and tax rates? What do you do when you tax someone like Bill Gates and he just decides to lay off 25% of Microsoft to make up for it? Raise his taxes more? Do you even know if the top 1% can even AFFORD to pay all the taxes you propose? Or are you just making assumptions and feel good policies?

Corporate taxes and offshoring: Massive tax rewards to companies that bring manufacturing back to the USA. Promote manufacturing! Increase taxes and eliminate tax loopholes for companies that cannot "live" without the USA but move off-shore to avoid payroll taxes or other taxes.

Ok, so you can buy a $20 pair of jeans from Walmart from China, or an $80 pair made by American workers? Which you can't likely afford because the rich guy you work for just laid you off because you increased his tax rate to 90%.

I don't understand the hard-on for manufacturing. Its moved offshore because people generally want the cheapest price for everything they buy. Have you looked at Hot Deals lately? People will sell their left testicle if it means they can get that new Nvidia card for $40 less. Moving MOST manufacturing back to the United States is just going to increase costs for everyone.. (Maybe we can tax the rich more?).

Torture: No Torture.

Aww.. How about no killing or no war? PEACE LOVE AND UNICORNS! Pass the joint again please.. this is some GOOD shit.

Free Speech: Very important. No illegal wiretaps. Anonymous internet speech OK.

No illegal wiretaps? LOL.. how about no illegal murder? No illegal robbery and no illegal rape too? Kind of a redundant way of saying that? And the Anonymous internet speech, sounds good.. but what do you do when people use it for child porn or calling you a pedophile? Oh, suddenly you aren't so in favor of anonymous speech anymore are you?

There is no such thing as anonymous speech. FREEDOM of speech does not mean ANONYMOUS or free of consequences. You can stand out on a street corner and shout that you think all asian people are criminals, but that doesn't mean there won't be a picture of you on the news saying it. Why should it be any different on the internet?

 

[ccbadd]

Originally posted by: ebaycj

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Deleted member 4644
No John, I disagree about laundry. The average Halliburton employee in Iraq was getting 80,000 a year or MORE. Many in combat type jobs were getting 200k ++. http://jobsearch.about.com/od/...naljobs/a/iraqjobs.htm

Go get some facts bro. Even if a private first class costs $100,000 to train, by year two he is still cheaper than a paid soldier and he can legally carry a gun and shoot too. If you join the military you don't need a fucking maid. My grandpa was in WWII and he did his own fucking laundry (well not really coz he was an officer, but you get the point).

We have a LIMITED supply of soldiers!!!!

You can't look at it in just terms of dollars and cents. You have to look at the big picture.

If you take a soldier and make him wash his own clothes and cook his own food then you are taking away from the time he can spend patrolling.

We should ask someone of the people were actually in Iraq, but my understanding is that a lot of these guys are spending 10-12 hours a day every day on patrol or standing watch etc etc.

To do what you are saying would require us to greatly increase the size of the military and the number of combat soldiers which is a very difficult and expensive task.

BTW your WW 2 point is meaningless because we had a draft and man power was not an issue, today it is.

The issue of private contractors has a lot to do with that.

It's easy to hire people for a decent wage to wash clothes and wire up networks but those same people might not take a job that involves active patrol and combat.

Manpower can best be utilized when we specialize. Let the soldiers be soldiers.

Still, specialization != outsourcing. There's nothing preventing the military from having non-combat specialist positions for said laundry / food service / camp setup and maintenance / computer networking / etc.. duties. Pay could be raised from the current military baseline until people become interested.

It would still be way cheaper than outsourcing.

I don't know if any of you have been in the military before, but you really have things wrong. I spent a year in Saudi/Iraq during the first Gulf War while in the Army and I can tell you the average soldier does wash his/her own clothes and perform all the other things you guys are arguing about. We don't set up "CAMP" though, we are not at Yellowstone. The only place these services are provided are in areas like the Green Zone that have a large enough demand from both military and civilian personnel to justify these services. The military has great logisticians and they do know what they need a lot better then you. The price that is paid is a different story, but how many people would want to go to Iraq and wash laundry for $15K/yr and risk loosing their heads, literally?

As for the OP, why repackage the Democrat platform? Make no sense to me.

 

[piasabird]

I think we are going the wrong route on education. Instead of increasing funding we should force schools to decrease the cost of Education for post secondary (College) education. I think too many colleges are drunk on the money and power they have for charging too much for higher education. Education should not be run as a business but as a vocation. We are pricing education beyond the reach of too many people.

I work at a community college and what I have heard for college students is the quality of education at more expensive institutions is not any better than when they are receiving at our community college.

I have no problems with most of the platform. I would not grant any groups special privliges based on their religion or sexual preferences. I would also allow people to protect children for undue infuence from open sexual practices. If people want to have sex as they wish, let them do it in their bedrooms; we have no reason to discuss it in earshot or in the vision of children.

I believe in freedom of speech as long as it is civil communication. No place for cursing in public. We should show respect for other people.

When it comes to abortion, I see no reason for late term abortions. This is just paying someone to murder children. Why not just give birth and kill the child? It is the same thing it is infanticide. Everyone knows this, even if they are unwilling to admit it.

 

[mugs]

What's an acceptable tax rate for the rich? 40%? 50%? 90%?

 

[PokerGuy]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
Prof: excellent points.

No way would I vote for this platform, it's typical class warfare liberalism in action.

why is it only class warfare when you try to help poor people out? Is stacking the deck (even further) for the wealthy not class warfare?

I'm against making judgements as to what class of people are more "deserving" of something. The wealth redistribution based on who is somehow deemed more deserving is wrong. Your "platform" reeks of "more tax on the rich! they don't deserve so much money, give it to the poor!" -- class warfare. Who said stacking the deck for the wealthy isn't class warfare? It is, and it's wrong too.

 

[piasabird]

When it comes to taxes I would quantify how I would tax the rich. As it stands now if you make money off of stocks, you only have a tax rate of about 18% according to Buffett! At the same time I dont want to tax people differently that are just trying to make an honest living. So I say $200,000 is just an honest living. I think that when you make over $2,000,000.00 that you should get no protection at all from any exemptions and you should have to pay about a 40% tax rate.

I think income is income and everyone should have to pay a straight percentage on what they make no matter how little or how much they make with the exception of people who make over 2 million. I also think we should have no inheritance tax. No reason to tax money that has already been taxed. You earn it, you keep it. Also no tax on money in the bank unless you have an increase of over 2 million. We should incourage savings and passing on wealth to the next generation. Farmers should be exempt from property tax for their farmland. They should only be taxed for their house land and their actual income.

I think the government could get by on an honest 10% of Gross Income with no exemptions. That means no exemptions for anything.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Taxes: Reduce or maintain taxes for 95%+ of USA. Raise taxes for the extremely wealthy 99%+ and consider raising for others above 95%.

Awww.. isn't that nice? Tax the rich. Whats your proposed income caps and tax rates? What do you do when you tax someone like Bill Gates and he just decides to lay off 25% of Microsoft to make up for it? Raise his taxes more? Do you even know if the top 1% can even AFFORD to pay all the taxes you propose? Or are you just making assumptions and feel good policies?

you realize that not only would he not do that, he doesn't have the power to do that, right? Have you ever thought about how stupid the suggestion is that because you raised someones taxes, they are going to work less? if anything (both economic theory and empirical evidence support this btw) increasing someones taxes make them work more, because the need to work harder and long to have the same income.

Corporate taxes and offshoring: Massive tax rewards to companies that bring manufacturing back to the USA. Promote manufacturing! Increase taxes and eliminate tax loopholes for companies that cannot "live" without the USA but move off-shore to avoid payroll taxes or other taxes.

Ok, so you can buy a $20 pair of jeans from Walmart from China, or an $80 pair made by American workers? Which you can't likely afford because the rich guy you work for just laid you off because you increased his tax rate to 90%.

I don't understand the hard-on for manufacturing. Its moved offshore because people generally want the cheapest price for everything they buy. Have you looked at Hot Deals lately? People will sell their left testicle if it means they can get that new Nvidia card for $40 less. Moving MOST manufacturing back to the United States is just going to increase costs for everyone.. (Maybe we can tax the rich more?).

i agree, alot of manufacturing, particularily non-capital intensive manufacturing, can go away. have fun making my pants, china.

Torture: No Torture.

Aww.. How about no killing or no war? PEACE LOVE AND UNICORNS! Pass the joint again please.. this is some GOOD shit.

this same argument can be made about genocide. allow me to demonstrate:

Genocide: No Genocide.

Aww.. How about no killing or no war? PEACE LOVE AND UNICORNS! Pass the joint again please.. this is some GOOD shit.

anyways, the point is that in addition to the moral implications of torture, it doesn't work and makes us look even worse. From a pragmatic perspective, there is no purpose to torture.

Free Speech: Very important. No illegal wiretaps. Anonymous internet speech OK.

No illegal wiretaps? LOL.. how about no illegal murder? No illegal robbery and no illegal rape too? Kind of a redundant way of saying that? And the Anonymous internet speech, sounds good.. but what do you do when people use it for child porn or calling you a pedophile? Oh, suddenly you aren't so in favor of anonymous speech anymore are you?

There is no such thing as anonymous speech. FREEDOM of speech does not mean ANONYMOUS or free of consequences. You can stand out on a street corner and shout that you think all asian people are criminals, but that doesn't mean there won't be a picture of you on the news saying it. Why should it be any different on the internet?

you realize there there is such a thing as a legal wiretap right? all you need is a judge.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: Deleted member 4644
Constitutional interpretation and change: the USC is a living document and various rights such as privacy can be "read in" by judges; however, most major changes *should* be in the form of Amendments, not SCOTUS decisions. Party would propose and favor Const. Amendments when possible/feasible.

This is just funny. "Amendments when possible/feasible"? Seriously?!? And who makes that call? And what if that person/group decides an amendment is not possible/feasible, then what? Bypass the process? This line - the USC is a living document and various rights such as privacy can be "read in" by judges - is just an invitation to Bush-like abuse.

 

[MotF Bane]

Originally posted by: newnameman
No. I didn't need to read any further than "the USC is a living document and various rights such as privacy can be "read in" by judges".

EDIT: Which was originally the first bullet point.

This.

 

[Fear No Evil]

you realize that not only would he not do that, he doesn't have the power to do that, right? Have you ever thought about how stupid the suggestion is that because you raised someones taxes, they are going to work less? if anything (both economic theory and empirical evidence support this btw) increasing someones taxes make them work more, because the need to work harder and long to have the same income.

Right, he isn't going to do that.. I agree.. but some employees MAY be laid off because of it if the company is not making as much profit. Of course Bill Gates is not in a position to do it himself anymore, but the analogy stands. The company I work for laid people off because its profits were not high enough. I'm talking billions in profits. Now take those billions and make it 100's of millions and how many people will get canned?

I do agree that increasing the taxes will cause people to have to work harder, but it will likely be the Joe Sixpack having to now do the work of 2-3 people, and not the executive telling them what to do. To take your example to the point of absurdity, if you would tax people at 99.9999% they would work near infinitly hard. At some point the tax rate being to high causes people to saw screw it and just cash out their chips.

you realize there there is such a thing as a legal wiretap right? all you need is a judge.

Right.. but his point of 'No illegal wiretaps' is already the case.. if they are illegal they shouldn't be done. No point in having a platform of something that already illegal. Just seemed like an odd way of saying it.

 

[Schadenfroh]

1) No
2)

Guns: Support for gun registration at sale. All Small-arms (up to .50 Cal) OK for non-criminals, but limits on ammo sales in large urban cities also OK.

No registration. Background check and waiting period of two or three days, no gun-show loopholes on this.

Abortion: Pro-choice, but allows states to place reasonable limits on late-term and partial birth and other extreme choices.

The federal government should have no say in this. It should be up to the states. I am personally against abortion (and the death penalty) and I would vote to ban both in my state (although I would have a difficult time voting against the death penalty as it "might" be a "necessary evil" to maintain order), but I am not going to force my views on your state. Contraception and voluntary sterilization should be "free" and encouraged to those on government assistance.

Immigration: The border must be secured in a reasonable manner with fences and/or more officers. Once the border has been secured, immigration numbers should be re-evaluated based on actual economic need and the absorption ability of our health-care and education systems. Learning English should be a factor/encouraged when giving people citizenship.

I mostly agree.

Taxes: Reduce or maintain taxes for 95%+ of USA. Raise taxes for the extremely wealthy 99%+ and consider raising for others above 95%.

No, institute a flat tax of around ~20% (or whatever is necessary as long as the percentage is the same for everyone). No deductions, no write-offs. Say bye bye to the majority of the IRS and accountants.

Constitutional interpretation and change: the USC is a living document and various rights such as privacy can be "read in" by judges; however, most major changes *should* be in the form of Amendments, not SCOTUS decisions. Party would propose and favor Const. Amendments when possible/feasible.

I mostly agree.

Sales taxes and other "fees": Screw fees. Reduce car fees, license fees and most other fees the gov't charges that target the middle class. Increase income taxes on the very rich and rich if needed to compensate (yes, this will be needed).

See my stance on income tax.

Greed: Increase regulation for banking and change the due diligence required for a rating agency to issue a credit rating on a company. Make sure the FASB accounting rules reflect reality and not shell-games. Increase criminal penalties for massive frauds. Prosecute massive frauds.

I agree that there should be harsher penalties for "white collar" crime. I personally know (knew, he died a while back) someone that pulled off a "savings and loan" scheme and illegally invested people's money in high risk investments without their permission. If it had worked, he and his clients would have been insanely rich, however a recession hit and the investments went to zero. He went to a country club style minimum security prison, after the Army Corp. of Engineers forced him to finish his work on one of their projects (he was a great engineer). A guy stealing $50 from a curb store gets a harsher penalty.

Corporate taxes and offshoring: Massive tax rewards to companies that bring manufacturing back to the USA. Promote manufacturing! Increase taxes and eliminate tax loopholes for companies that cannot "live" without the USA but move off-shore to avoid payroll taxes or other taxes.

Protectionism to an extent can be used as a tool to help balance trade. However, it is a very fine line to walk. I would like to see a free trade agreement with non-government subsidized business sectors between Japan, South Korea and much of Western Europe. Note that this is only for goods manufactured / grown on their territory (not an English company exporting stuff manufactured by their factory in Vietnam). We should also be moving towards creating a single currency with Canada and reducing travel restrictions with our allies to encourage tourism and trade.

Education: Money is *part* of the problem, but not all. Make every effort to increase education funding and pay teachers more. In exchange, the Teacher's Union should be weakened and/or it must be easier to fire bad teachers. Increase vocational training. No increase in vouchers.

Agreed, but our society is also "part" of the problem. We waste a good bit of money on students that do not want to learn and drag down the standards for those that do wish to learn. I am on the fence on vouchers as I am still trying to determine if the pros outweigh the cons.

Military: Maintain spending on battlespace superiority weapon systems, including new fighters and guided missile destroyers. No more leasing of planes/weapons from private companies making a profit. Clean up contracting system so fat-cat companies can't leach off the Fed Govt. No more Cost-Plus contracts (unlimited private private). No more private contractors on the battlefield. Soldiers do their own ditch digging and laundry. In exchange, increase soldier pay slightly and medical treatment after deployment.

Some private contractors might be a "necessary evil," but I agree with your reasoning and mercenaries are hardly trustworthy.

War on Terror: Leave Iraq ASAP, probably 1 year. Leave Afghanistan as soon as stable, ideally 1-2 years. Increase pressure on those who give money to radical mosques, and give more money to moderate education systems.

I will take this a step further and close down non-critical military bases in countries that do not agree to a cost-sharing security pact like we have with Japan.

Torture: No Torture.

I agree, the US should not torture people.

Affirmative Action: Generally, not a good thing. Ok in very limited forms to reduce segregation at the high school level. Maybe OK in very limited forms at the college level. No for employment.

It is a racist institution that should be abolished. College level affirmative action is not good for our society either.

Free Speech: Very important. No illegal wiretaps. Anonymous internet speech OK.

Agreed

Anti-Trust: Current tele-comm system NOT OK. Make illegal attempts by tele-comms and cable to destroy start-ups and local comm systems. Encourage competition.

Agreed

Gay issues: The government should not be involved in people's bedroom. Gay marriage should be allowed. Ideally, this would occur on a state-by-state basis.

Let each state decide for itself, the federal government should have no say in this.

 

[Deleted member 4644]

Fear No Evil,

1) First of all, a point of clarification. I meant to say that .50 Cal is OK, nothing above that (20mm, etc).

2) I disagree with you about the ammo and registration points, but I think they are fairly minor point.

3) Regarding taxes: taxing rich individuals does not cause them to lay off their employees. I am not sure what your educational background is, but I know a lot about taxes and corporate structures, and this is not how businesses work.

Also, do you understand that taxes are marginal? Finally, yes I do know that the top 1% can afford it, because I am part of it (and I am friends with many people who make up the top .001%.)

For most of the extremely wealthy, making money is a game. They want to maximize their profits the same way someone wants to finish a video game and get all the points/powerups. They will not radically change their lives or investment styles because they have a little bit less money (at least, not the wealthy people I know).

4) Offshoring. Offshoring is here to stay, and most manufacturing will never come back. That said, the US has a trade deficit of almost $1 trillion a year, which is an unsustainable number. We simply don't make enough of value to export to other countries, and it should be a national priority to change that, unless we want to substantially reduce our level of consumption as a nation.

5) Torture should not be the policy of the USA. I could see extreme situations where it could be required, like a nuke ready to go off in a city. Otherwise, we are just bringing ourselves down to their level. We win the war on terror by being a better society.

I think the neo-cons today who think we have to change the Constitution/laws/treaties to allow illegal wiretapping and torture are cowards.

Innocent people die. It is horrible and sad and we should work very hard to prevent it, but innocent people die. It is cowardly to change your values and your life just because of one big scary terrorist event.

6) I can't even understand what your point is about wiretaps..

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: piasabird
I work at a community college and what I have heard for college students is the quality of education at more expensive institutions is not any better than when they are receiving at our community college.

I was in the honors program at my CC and it was a very good program. Small class sizes with mostly experienced professors.

Similar to what you would get at a high end private school, with lots of exceptions of course.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Deleted member 4644
5) Torture should not be the policy of the USA. I could see extreme situations where it could be required, like a nuke ready to go off in a city. Otherwise, we are just bringing ourselves down to their level. We win the war on terror by being a better society.

I think the neo-cons today who think we have to change the Constitution/laws/treaties to allow illegal wiretapping and torture are cowards.

Innocent people die. It is horrible and sad and we should work very hard to prevent it, but innocent people die. It is cowardly to change your values and your life just because of one big scary terrorist event.

What does this have to do with anything???

We don't torture for moral reasons and moral reasons alone. If you think our enemy is going to treat our captured soldiers any better now that aren't waterboarding then you are a hopeless fool.

 

[MagicConch]

This 'tax the hell out of the rich' thing is not sustainable in the US b/c it's tax structure is the central reason for its success in the first place. Part of the reason the US attracts wealthy individuals from around the world is b/c of how they are taxed in other countries. It is unwise imo to think that if we increased their tax burden significantly (even if it still has no appreciable effect on their lifestyle) they will simple stay and play with less dollars.

 

[Jadow]

sounds like a platform I would not support.