Posted by Kromey at 12:57pm Sep 25 '12No. It'd be catastrophic to eliminate 43% of federal spending in a single year. This alone disqualifies Johnson from the presidency.
As you and so many others are so fond of using to defend countless Obama failings, it requires a Congress working in tandem with a President to get things done. Congress wouldn't go along with something this drastic, therefore it wouldn't happen, therefore there'd be no undefined "catastrophe", and therefore it disqualifies no one.
That's going to make it cost more money.
The typical wage (excluding the effects of the current recession) out-paces inflation over time. Therefore tying SS benefits to inflation rather than wage growth will have the exact opposite effect you claim -- costs will rise slower.
The Fed should retain its independence from the political trends Congress represents.
I'm actually with Ron Paul on this one, that the Fed needs to be eliminated entirely. Barring that, an entity that wields as much power over our economy as the Fed does absolutely must be transparent and subject to oversight -- if not from Congress, then from someone.
My concern would be state and local levels doing more stupid shit like teaching creationism instead of science.
Interesting how this concern hasn't been borne out in reality, given that the feds don't currently prohibit teaching Creationism...
Free trade needs to be fair trade, which I doubt Johnson supports.
Explain this please.
More work visas is a tough sell with unemployment being high.
Aye, it would be a tough sell, but at the same time remember that this nation was founded on the ideas of America being a beacon of hope and a save haven for the world. Lately we've turned an ugly cold shoulder to the "tired and weary" we used to welcome, made it harder and harder for them to find the "American dream", and that needs to change. Making work visas easier to get is one step in the right direction.
AKA tax dollars funding religious schools.
They already do. However, that aside, what's so wrong with parents having choices for their children's education?
Just get rid of the goddamn naked scanners.
Just get rid of the goddamn TSA.
Yes, a foreign base restructuring/closing is way overdue. And while the US provides an umbrella of military protection over our allies, we ought to expect others to pull their weight more.
This. A huge reason we spend so much more on our military than anyone else is because for a lot of countries, we are their military, or at least a large part of it. At the very least, if we're going to continue to provide that "umbrella", we should charge for the service.
Pure common sense.
Aye -- and yet no one else supports it.
No, it will make health care more affordable to some people and inaccessible to others. That's the only possible outcome of unregulated insurance underwriting.
There's that old conflation again -- he didn't say insurance, he said health care!
In the absence of regulation, insurers would locate in the most permissive states and engage in the worst practices.
...and consumers would catch on to those shady practices and seek out companies that aren't engaging in them, forcing those more shady companies to bring their standards up or fail. Happens every day, with consumers e.g. checking up on a company with the BBB and, if it has a bad rating, taking their business elsewhere. Happens every day in the insurance market today, even, with some companies offering services above and beyond their competitors, using that as a selling point to bring in new customers -- in some cases stealing them away from their competitors -- despite higher costs.
As you and so many others are so fond of using to defend countless Obama failings, it requires a Congress working in tandem with a President to get things done. Congress wouldn't go along with something this drastic, therefore it wouldn't happen, therefore there'd be no undefined "catastrophe", and therefore it disqualifies no one.
That's going to make it cost more money.
The typical wage (excluding the effects of the current recession) out-paces inflation over time. Therefore tying SS benefits to inflation rather than wage growth will have the exact opposite effect you claim -- costs will rise slower.
The Fed should retain its independence from the political trends Congress represents.
I'm actually with Ron Paul on this one, that the Fed needs to be eliminated entirely. Barring that, an entity that wields as much power over our economy as the Fed does absolutely must be transparent and subject to oversight -- if not from Congress, then from someone.
My concern would be state and local levels doing more stupid shit like teaching creationism instead of science.
Interesting how this concern hasn't been borne out in reality, given that the feds don't currently prohibit teaching Creationism...
Free trade needs to be fair trade, which I doubt Johnson supports.
Explain this please.
More work visas is a tough sell with unemployment being high.
Aye, it would be a tough sell, but at the same time remember that this nation was founded on the ideas of America being a beacon of hope and a save haven for the world. Lately we've turned an ugly cold shoulder to the "tired and weary" we used to welcome, made it harder and harder for them to find the "American dream", and that needs to change. Making work visas easier to get is one step in the right direction.
AKA tax dollars funding religious schools.
They already do. However, that aside, what's so wrong with parents having choices for their children's education?
Just get rid of the goddamn naked scanners.
Just get rid of the goddamn TSA.
Yes, a foreign base restructuring/closing is way overdue. And while the US provides an umbrella of military protection over our allies, we ought to expect others to pull their weight more.
This. A huge reason we spend so much more on our military than anyone else is because for a lot of countries, we are their military, or at least a large part of it. At the very least, if we're going to continue to provide that "umbrella", we should charge for the service.
Pure common sense.
Aye -- and yet no one else supports it.
No, it will make health care more affordable to some people and inaccessible to others. That's the only possible outcome of unregulated insurance underwriting.
There's that old conflation again -- he didn't say insurance, he said health care!
In the absence of regulation, insurers would locate in the most permissive states and engage in the worst practices.
...and consumers would catch on to those shady practices and seek out companies that aren't engaging in them, forcing those more shady companies to bring their standards up or fail. Happens every day, with consumers e.g. checking up on a company with the BBB and, if it has a bad rating, taking their business elsewhere. Happens every day in the insurance market today, even, with some companies offering services above and beyond their competitors, using that as a selling point to bring in new customers -- in some cases stealing them away from their competitors -- despite higher costs.
Re: Picking Through Gary Johnson's Positions - Kromey