Tax Freedom Day

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Can't a guy just comment on how Republicans have traditionally been against big government, yet while in power now (and enjoying quite the majority) have been doing a splendid job of abandoning those traditions?

305738[/snapback]

 

Let me put it this way: no. Simply because I believe that bringing "Republican" or "Democrat" into the argument clouds the real issue, that the root causes are basic systemic issues with how our government is run that transcend partisan considerations. Whether it's supposed to be or not, the federal government as a practical matter is designed (or has evolved) to be fiscally irresponsible and bloated. Whatever political party might be in power at a given moment may be able to fix it with enough political will, but neither one causes it.

[Rubes]

Let me put it this way: no.  Simply because I believe that bringing "Republican" or "Democrat" into the argument clouds the real issue, that the root causes are basic systemic issues with how our government is run that transcend partisan considerations.  Whether it's supposed to be or not, the federal government as a practical matter is designed (or has evolved) to be fiscally irresponsible and bloated.  Whatever political party might be in power at a given moment may be able to fix it with enough political will, but neither one causes it.

306099[/snapback]

 

 

Well put, and a good statement of the real issue, I would say. Nevertheless, I was not contradicting that, at least not that I could tell. I did not state (or, at least in my mind, intend to imply) that Republicans were the cause of big government. My intention was merely to reflect on the fact that Republicans have traditionally been anti-big government, and to a large degree continue to sell themselves as such, when the reality is that current Republicans practice almost nothing that would suggest this.

 

I don't really see how stating this clouds the issue. It's already a given, to some extent, that Democrats would be expected to behave this way. I guess it just reinforces the fact that it's true for anyone, despite any claims to the contrary.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

(1) They have been a party of idealists, and not realists, for a while. What I mean is that they have too many members running around talking about their Utopian ideal of NO governmennt regulation on almost everything. Most people can't envision this, and distrust this idea, especially when it comes to things like drugs, welfare (in some form), schools, and infrastructure.

 

305965[/snapback]

 

 

If they did that, they'd be no different than the Democans.

[IUBillsFan]

Since the wealthiest 1% pay a lot less tax now then they did recently of course the tax freedom day comes earlier.

 

And from the article:  the internet bubble boosted tax collections to artificially high levels.

306015[/snapback]

 

Then you also have the EIC people...Everyday is tax freedom day for them...

[Alaska Darin]

Well put, and a good statement of the real issue, I would say. Nevertheless, I was not contradicting that, at least not that I could tell. I did not state (or, at least in my mind, intend to imply) that Republicans were the cause of big government. My intention was merely to reflect on the fact that Republicans have traditionally been anti-big government, and to a large degree continue to sell themselves as such, when the reality is that current Republicans practice almost nothing that would suggest this.

 

I don't really see how stating this clouds the issue. It's already a given, to some extent, that Democrats would be expected to behave this way. I guess it just reinforces the fact that it's true for anyone, despite any claims to the contrary.

306303[/snapback]

To me it's simply proof that absolute power corrupts absolutely - as if we needed more evidence of that.

 

The only solution is significantly less government, which the politicians won't let happen without an overwhelming mandate from the people. As long as these 2 parties are in control, we'll continue to get squeezed.

[John Adams]

If they did that, they'd be no different than the Democans.

306325[/snapback]

 

I don't follow you.

[beausox]

They do. Ken was focusing on the fiscal responsibility angle because that was the topic of the thread.

 

The Founding Fathers risked their own and their families lives to change the government that oppressed them. All we have to do is vote to effect a change.

 

The Libertarians suffer from a few major problems:

 

(1) They have been a party of idealists, and not realists, for a while. What I mean is that they have too many members running around talking about their Utopian ideal of NO governmennt regulation on almost everything. Most people can't envision this, and distrust this idea, especially when it comes to things like drugs, welfare (in some form), schools, and infrastructure.

 

This has begun to change. Libertarians are increasingly realistic, and focus on real plans, not for decimating government, but just for shrinking its size/reach in realistic bits. This should have broader appeal, but the perception of the Libertarians is often still that they(we) are a party of Utopian Hedonists who need to grow up. If the Libs can overcome this perception, they will have a shot at gaining influence.

 

(2) The two party system works- for the two parties. People vote for their party because that's their habit, and they know that third parties don't win.

 

(3) There is no known standard bearer. The Libertarians need a "name" defector (likely some true Conservative) or a known charasmatic leader. This sounds shallow, but it's true. A name candidate would give the party street cred. The Michael Badnariks and Harry Browne's of the world will not draw national interest.

305965[/snapback]

 

OhMyGod I agree. That come to think of it is perhaps the ultimate insult.