USA Politics Thread - *No gun debate*

[Hans Ludwig 0]

Civil Court isn't a strong enough deterrent.

LOL You must have never worked in the corporate world. Do you realize how much money a company spends on hiring risk managers, experienced compliance officers and in-house legal department?

I used to work for a large commercial litigation law firm. Just wave a Request for Discovery, Request of Admission, Request for Interrogatories and Request for Disclosure in front of any company or government agency and watch them urinate on themselves. The discovery process alone is a nightmare (you can bleed someone dry financially with that one), and that isn't even factoring in a settlement or trial by jury/judge or arbitration process.

[froggyluv 2130]

Fair enough -thats your field so I'll take your word for it. The general assumption is that Joe the Farmer will always get out lawyered by big polluting industry McScrew Yoo and Sons.

[st_dux 26]

For the first part' date=' how do you know that they will simply take less in profits from their companies and instead have the company invest?[/quote']

That money gets taxed too, you know. The fact that "the company" is paying it doesn't really make a difference.

I find it difficult to believe the top 1 percent is paying 50 percent of their earnings

The effective tax rate on normal income for someone in the top 1% is around 30%. Any capital gains are taxed at about 15%' date=' and these gains usually come in the form of dividends made by corporations paying 35% in taxes. When you throw in Social Security/Medicare taxes and state taxes, your typical 1%er is effectively paying around 50% of their income in taxes.

Of course, there are exceptions to this. Because the tax code is a convoluted mess that is riddled with loopholes and special exemptions, there are some very wealthy individuals who get away with paying ridiculously low effective tax rates. This is a legitimate problem that should be addressed, but it is atypical and not indicative of what the average wealthy person pays.

also I'm curious what libertarians think about speculation.

As with most issues, the libertarian view is very straightforward: If it's your money, you can do whatever you want with it, and that includes speculating.

The rich are richer then they've ever been

John D. Rockefeller disagrees.

I'd rather take money from the private economy in exchange for a universal healthcare system. I'd rather give up some GDP growth for that. If you disagree' date=' I understand your position, but I would rather move in the direction of Europe and Canada. It works for them, it can work for us.[/quote']

Universal healthcare does work for them, to an extent, but it has significant flaws as well. There are often cases of Canadians that need to hop the border in order to get the treatments they need in a timely fashion, for example -- a rationed healthcare system lacks in efficiency. Moreover, the United States is a very different (and much larger) country than any of the European countries or Canada: There is certainly no guarantee that a universal healthcare system could be as gracefully implemented here, and there are several reasons why it probably couldn't be.

The general assumption is that Joe the Farmer will always get out lawyered by big polluting industry McScrew Yoo and Sons.

This is a legitimate concern that should be dealt with through tort reform.

[dekster 1]

As with most issues, the libertarian view is very straightforward: If it's your money, you can do whatever you want with it, and that includes speculating.

And I believe that if you turn the money press off, speculation will loose much importance.

[maddogx 13]

Seeing as the "War with Iran" thread is closed, I guess I'll use this one.

Iran oil sanctions spark war of words between Tehran and Washington (The Guardian)

It almost seems like some form of hostilities are inevitable at this point. The EU has declared an embargo on Iranian oil, the iranians say they will close the Strait of Hormuz if the embargo is enforced, and the americans have threatened to keep the Strait open with military force, if necessary.

Unless someone backs down, the outcome seems clear.

[Prydain 1]

Meh, the Iranians don't stand to gain anything from blocking the straits and are looking to resolve differences with the EU quickly due to the economic dent.

It will either be as simple as a loud war of words to cover their backing down or, if they really are mental, we will see quick actions followed by quick routing to port from the Iranians. The US might have a problem if they directly attack the Iranian navy to prevent their actions because they don't want to radicalise any more serfs or make Iran mine the straits out of petulance.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Newt Gingrich plans to build a permanent base on the moon by 2020!

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/newt-gingrich-unveils-plan-build-permanent-base-moon-2020-space-coast-campaign-stop-article-1.1012015

More important that voters accept and vote for him

"I accept the charge that I am grandiose," he said, according to TPM. "Because Americans are instinctively grandiose."

Next stop - leader cult?

[sw1 10]

Newt Gingrich plans to build a permanent base on the moon by 2020!

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/newt-gingrich-unveils-plan-build-permanent-base-moon-2020-space-coast-campaign-stop-article-1.1012015

More important that voters accept and vote for him

Next stop - leader cult?

Dear God, it's like listening to the campaign pledges of a 9 year old boy. What a ludicrous and utterly irrelevant idea. Only a Republican could be this plainly absurd :D

[PELHAM 10]

Got to say that's nonsense. Base on the moon by 2020, in only 8 years? It will take that long just to get a shuttle replacement functional. Someone else once said something about a manned landing on Mars and had to be taken on one side and told the facts of life. Sad to see history repeating itself.

[Lauxman 10]

This has to be the most boring, one-sided election I've ever seen. Not nearly as fun or interesting as the last few rounds.

[Fox '09 14]

so eric schniderman sounds like he may be the right man for the job, I really hope they do go after those bastards. Obama will have a much tougher time getting reelected if he doesn't serve some justice.

Edited January 31, 2012 by Fox '09

[nodunit 397]

Newt Gingrich plans to build a permanent base on the moon by 2020!

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/newt-gingrich-unveils-plan-build-permanent-base-moon-2020-space-coast-campaign-stop-article-1.1012015

I don't...I just..I....what?

[Nicholas 5]

I don't...I just..I....what?

Go big or go home, right? :)

[Darkhorse 1-6 16]

I would start a new thread about this, but it's 3AM and it wouldn't make any sense to anybody who reads it. Maybe tomorrow, or maybe somebody else can.

This bill, H.R. 3699 would deny American citizens the ability to access, for free, taxpayer funded research. The senator behind this is being paid by a large publishing company, apparently. Well, she can kiss my ass. http://www.taxpayeraccess.org/

[Fox '09 14]

very simple bill, bad news nonetheless. Darrell Issa always seems to come up with crappy legislation. To the good people of California, kick this man out.

[nodunit 397]

I would start a new thread about this, but it's 3AM and it wouldn't make any sense to anybody who reads it. Maybe tomorrow, or maybe somebody else can.

This bill, H.R. 3699 would deny American citizens the ability to access, for free, taxpayer funded research. The senator behind this is being paid by a large publishing company, apparently. Well, she can kiss my ass. http://www.taxpayeraccess.org/

That's a middle finger if I ever saw one, if we can't see what our taxes are going to then they shouldn't be using them for anything! It's public money therefore it shoudl be public knowledge, and it wouldn't exist without the tax payers dollars therefore it is a RIGHT. I swear...

[GRS 10]

Gotta love the contradiction that is "representative democracy"

[nettrucker 142]

I stumbled upon this video and I personally believe that they will try to do it.

yYKbKTPZHBo&feature=related

Ron Paul is a threat to many people with special interest, especially the "banksters" and other lobby goups.

In case he's going to win the election 2012 he's in great danger.

[dmarkwick 261]

I stumbled upon this video and I personally believe that they will try to do it.

Ron Paul is a threat to many people with special interest, especially the "banksters" and other lobby goups.

In case he's going to win the election 2012 he's in great danger.

Exactly the same was said of Obama, turned out he was exactly, precisely the same as the rest, regardless of promises. Can't possibly expect RP to be different, until he's actually different :) talk is cheap, gets you into office, to enable you to perpetuate the status quo IMO.

[nettrucker 142]

Well for being honest I expect him to be different, if he's not and follow the Obama direction we are all screwed and going down the drain. The presidential election of 2012 will affect the whole world . . . one way or another. I still have the hope that he's not giving in, because he's not getting money from the establishment as other candidates do. But we will soon see how everything turns out.

[GRS 10]

Well we can go with a guarantee of more of the same old shit or a chance of something different. Go Paul.

Better yet, go the people!

[Lauxman 10]

Good thing for Ron Paul's safety that he has no chance to beat President Obama.

[nettrucker 142]

care to explain why he has no chance in your opinion?

[Lauxman 10]

First of all, Romney is trashing everyone else in the primaries.

Second of all, the economy has been slowly reviving in the last year under Obama's administration.

Third of all, even if Ron Paul were to get elected, he'd be a president fighting with a Congress that doesn't agree with any of his ideas for 4 years, getting absolutely nothing done. He'd be ineffective.

[rangerpl 13]

Exactly the same was said of Obama, turned out he was exactly, precisely the same as the rest, regardless of promises. Can't possibly expect RP to be different, until he's actually different :) talk is cheap, gets you into office, to enable you to perpetuate the status quo IMO.

If Paul doesn't deliver, we're no worse off than we would be with Obama or Romney in charge.