U.S needs to start fresh

I realized that inorder for start ups,and business to hire more people, the U.S needs a complete reboot.

Here's how we can do it.


1. Look at taxes,and how damn messed up the system is.

--We need to get rid of 100 Percent of all current taxes,inorder to allow the US create a fresh environment,for business in the US.

--We would replace all the current taxes with a single consumption tax. This means,you only get taxed on how much you spend.  NOT ON YOUR FRUITS OF LABOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!(INCOME TAX)


2.We need to bring back the gold standard!
--So no more devaluing of our precious dollar's value!

3.Balanced Budget Amendment!
--The government arn't our lords,so they should not beable to spend more than what they bring in! Just like a citizen could!


4.Every budget GOV should get cut a flat across the board, 25 percent.
Military,Education,Welfare,subsides,farming...ect..ect!

5.A temporary block on environmental restrictions,until the unemployment rate,reach a certain number!

Gold is an asset.

ya so

This is beyond ridiculous

3 sounds good, 1 needs a little work, the rest are awful

why you all mad?

Balanced budget amendment is am idiotic idea which would only hurt the ability of the govt to do anything towards helping an economy in recession.

>>7
Except that the govt does nothing sensible about economic recession, and in fact only acts to cause it, then lengthen it when it happens.

>thinking that a balanced budget on a federal level is remotely a good idea
ISHYGDDT

I think the taxes are fine. Your looking at them with a single minded view.

Average american tax rate: 24%
Average europeon tax rate: 35%

Our debt: skyscraper high
Their debt: reasonable

We have a high budget government, on a low taxing system. The average American makes between $43,000-$48,000 a year. That really is a lot of money. People don't realize it as much as they should. If you pay only 1/4 of your yearly income in taxes vrs 3/8 your gonna have more spending money to better circulate the economy by increasing the flow of money but then when your gov spends more than whatever you pay them to spend your gonna have many problems.

Reasons why we spend too much: we have too many government run programs. Welfare, Medicare, social security, etc. Are all programs to give money to those who can't afford to make it by. In my thought, this is an over population on a low tax system. If taxes where higher, less money would be borrowed. If the population was lower, less money would be requested because they can't find a source of income.

300+ million people. Lets say the population is now dropped to 250million. 50+ million people are now gone. That's a lot more jobs open, with a lot less people unemployed. More employed people, means less money needed from the gov. Which also means that the lower tax percent can still continue to be used and wont be an issue.

>Lets say the population is now dropped to 250million. 50+ million people are now gone.

There's our answer!  Let's kill 50 million people!

How about we start with you?

And I challenge your assertion that Social Security is a giveaway.  Social Security was set up as a government administered pension plan.  People pay in money THEY earned, people draw out at retirement.  Any inclusion of Social Security in any budget cut is just somebody trying to steal someone else's money.

You want to cut money?  Cut the defense budget so they don't have the money to lob at GE and other contractors.  The Defense Department is still fighting the Cold War.

>>10
The average American makes between $43,000-$48,000 a year. That really is a lot of money.
Of course that's a lot of money since you got the fucking statistic wrong. And the average is the wrong stat to use anyway. According to the wiki on personal income, the 2005 median personal income for all persons >= 18 years of age, was about $25200.

The stat you're trying to use (and UR STIL UZN IT RONG) is the median household income. Households contain about 2.7 people in the USA, and generally bring other income earners into the stat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_income_in_the_United_States
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html

National Debt = Money in circulation

No debt = No money = No exchange of goods/services = No advancements for the human race

>>13
Retard logic is retarded.

>>12
 The statistic your using is 6 years old, and refers to 18 year old citizens. Im receding to the 2009/2010(can't remember which year) gdp average of the country. Take the national debt, divide it by the nations population. Now you get a gross average per citizen for how much money it would take to pay off the debt per citizen for example. Your looking at the estimated debt per citizen. But that's off topic.

About the social security, here's what I have wrong with it.
Social security was made in the 60s to create a solution to people aging longer but could not work due to their age. The idea on how you worked was to do hard labor till at the latest of 50 years old and then work,  let's say, a cashier job at a store (a much less physical job). Over the years as the quality of life, medicine, etc furthered people could not work past the age of 60 or so. Social security,  in simple form, is the working public paying to keep the elderly living because the elderly at some point was putting money into the country.

When social security was new the age to start collecting social security was low. Since the age limit was low, a 55 year old man for example,  could be collecting social security while working a low paying job at a store. So that they could make it by even though their working cababilitys weren't up to par with the younger generation.

Over the years more people started collecting social security, and decided not to work. Since the start of social security the pay rate to those collecting from social security has risen by over 400% (even while following the inflation rate). This is because those collecting social security have used their checks to live off of. While this pay out increases, so does social security tax on our paychecks.

So after all that, here is why I have a problem with social security. As people live longer, and the baby boomers have almost fully come into social security collections, we have never before seen so many people collecting social security checks. In todays economy, the unemployment rate is over 30% the government recommended "safe level of unemployment" (4-6%). With such a high unemployment rate, less money is going into the social security system. Which means low income to the program, more people going into the program, then there's even more that either the government has to pick up or tax onto the social security tax. If the tax is raised, problem dep't with. Id the government picks up the check, income tax raises or less money is put into some other government funded program/service.

And I do believe the age requirement to collect social secuirty was raised recently. I think it moved from 65-70.

>>15
Sovereign debt does not work that way.

>>15
>implying you could just pay off the national debt if you had the money

You could just end socialist welfare which makes up like 90% of the government spending. Default on the debt because it was created through socialism and fuck it all anyways.

>>12
Median income of everyone is meaningless. in a proper sane society women belong in the household, having children, taking care of the house, etc. Not in the work force and maybe having children at 45.

>>10
You are looking at it wrong. Government spending as a % of GDP shows that america is just as much socialist/big government as most euro countries.

>>15
Social security was a ponzi scheme which could never last and was in fact designed to be disastrous.

Several parts make social sercurity impossible, the incredibly low birth rates among whites. Mass immigration of non-whites who do nothing but leech on the welfare system. And the fact that like all socialism, it makes everything worse by subsidizing the problem.

(sigh)
When you said "start fresh", I was kinda hoping we could take a look at something deeper than the symptoms. Like the constitution. It needs some work.

First and foremost, it needs to separate corporations from humans. When they're both given exactly the same rights on paper, in a society where money equals power, humans inevitably end up as sub-lower class citizens. (after all, a human's yearly salary is a corporation's petty change)


But if we're gonna talk taxes and social security, one reason Europeans pay more tax is public health care. Basically this means that your economy isn't ass-raped every time you get sick.

Also, in (richer parts of) Europe, social security tends to mean you don't lose as much (at first, anyway) if you lose your job. Less reason for people to go apeshit when they get fired.

>>19
Liberal activist judges need some work, aka hanging, that will fix the constitution.

>it needs to separate corporations from humans.
Nothing to do with the government, this is a "progressive" point. And you communist rhetoric is very divorced from reality, corporations are made up of people.

>Basically this means that your economy isn't ass-raped every time you get sick.
No, what it means is that everyone gets raped all the time, and you have absolutely no incentive to keep yourself healthy.
Further, 50% of all health care spending in the USA is by the government. and the government is the cause of all the problems as well.

unemployment is a cancer, PAYS people to stay unemployed/work under the table? Doesn't make any sense.

Socialism CREATES and PERPETUATES poverty by providing disincentive to go back to work/make good decisions.

>>20
Trying to find a word of truth in there.  So far, the best I've managed is "the".

Liberal activist judges
There are more conservative activist rulings by the SCOTUS than liberal.

Op wants to discourage spending and encourage saving.  Consumer spending drives economic growth. Op is a socialist.

'Liberal activist judges'

>conservative activist judges make a series horribly partisan decisions in the past few years.

>>20
corporations are made up of people
So are governments. Your point?

no incentive to keep yourself healthy [...] PAYS people to stay unemployed/work under the table
Sure, $10 or so a day on social security is WAY more than the measly $50 you'd get from work. Right.

communist rhetoric
So, suggesting that the state could have a purpose for taxation other than to line the pockets of greedy politicians, that's communism now? Wow, impressive logic there.

Please discuss these issues on my blog: http://mantasreview.blogspot.com/

U.S needs to start speaking FRENCH

I love how so many "conservatives" think "GAWD DAMN IT TEACHERS MAKE TOO MUCH MONEY FUCK!"

Yeah, cut their pay by 25%.  You're a fucking genius.

>>28
Public-school systems run at extraordinarily large costs over private and parochial schools, per student. There is no economy of scale, which is the number-one indicator that those public-school systems are wasteful. And the number-one reason why they are that wasteful is due to the ruinous expense of unionized labor.

So yes, cutting their pay is the required move. It does not even take a genius to see that one.

>>28
I work in the school system. We fired school teachers so we could buy the principles new ipads. It's not the the pay rate of the school teachers, it's the lack of accountability of the system itself. Teachers are nothing more than babysitters. The kids act like rabid retards. The unions demand nifty benefits and pay rates for a system that isn't fit to do the job it was meant to.

Not that you gave a fuck about the teachers or kids anyway.

>>30-kun, before we address teacher pay, we should address administrator pay. But the political systems that rule your schools refuse to ever fix that. So with limited budgets pressing, something must be cut. And so teachers have to be laid off and eventually the rest face pay cuts....... while administrators dine lavishly at the public trough.

The teachers are the ones best positioned to re-take the school systems from the administrators. But they haven't, and they won't, since they are SHIT SHIT SHIT scared of rocking the boat that could get them perceived losses or higher perceived losses.

I blame them. They are protectionist, and it is costing them ultimately. My lack of sympathy follows.

It would be nice if the US had a parliamentary system with multiple parties. Voting Democratic or Republican is no real choice.

you're a dumbass, the US are purposely devaluing their currency so they can gain back essential manufacturing jobs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNa7tNFB7c4

>We need to bring back the gold standard!
Should base the currency on a variety of coins.

>>33
You are a fucking idiot because thats not how you get manufacturing jobs, and if they were "essential" why would the government ENCOURAGE them to leave?

>>28
Public schools run at upwards of 10,000 per student per year.

Teachers making 6 figures doing absolutely no work.
Schooling should be privatized entirely.

>>31
shut up commie.

>The teachers are the ones best positioned to re-take the school systems from the administrators.

Don't forget the corrupt teacher's unions.

>>35
Teachers making 6 figures doing absolutely no work.
Are you fucking kidding me? Teachers barely eek out a livable income during their first few years.

Us debt is actually better than some european countries.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/35/Public_debt_percent_gdp_world_map.PNG

However Spain, Portugal, Italy and Greece are suffering from a debt crisis at the moment and the UK, France and Germany are reeling it back in to prevent themselves from suffering the same fate, we should too.

>>38
Austerity measures aren't the way to go about it, though. Those are implemented by people who are incapable of balancing a budget.

>>39
>implying balancing the budget when you're knee-deep in shit with a huge trade deficit is even remotely a good idea
Trade deficit => budget deficit, unless you feel like raping the private sector.

>>40
When I mentioned that austerity measures are implemented by people who are incapable of balancing a budget, I was being coy and meant "right-wingers". Obviously, you want to make sure the trade deficit is taken care of first. But, of course, you cannot have deficits and debt forever.

>>37
same like everyone else entering a career? Teachers get fucking coddled ridiculously.

>>42
same like everyone else entering a career?
Years ago, I would have said "no". The huge problem is that wages today were sufficient nearly two decades ago, that isn't the case today (note: this applies to pretty much everything, not just teaching positions).
Teachers get fucking coddled ridiculously.
Pure unadulterated bullshit. I say they're not honored enough! In the rest of the Anglosphere, a teaching position is a position of respect, and not surprisingly the countries in the rest of the Anglosphere achieve higher excellence in education than does the US. I'm guessing that this constant attack on "teachers" here correlates with the rising culture of anti-intellectualism. It certainly wouldn't surprise me if that is the prime motivator.

>>43
It's kind of anti-intellectual to pin everything on "anti-intellectualism", isn't it? I'm pretty sure a term invented by butthurt pseudo-intellectuals isn't the root cause of an actual problem in society.

>I'm guessing that this constant attack on "teachers" here correlates with the rising culture of anti-intellectualism.

More like an ever growing bureaucracy more worried about money than results.

We blow so many trillions of dollars on education,each year it's such a joke.

Yet we are ranked ....what 22nd?

>>44
When you have a culture where you have people like Michele Bachmann that say things like Hurricane Irene was punishment from God, people think you're a some kind of Einstein because you can correctly answer five clues on one episode of Jeopardy!, one where people cannot locate major nations or continents on a blank or incorrectly-labeled map, people (depending on where you live in the country) that think homeschooling and Jaysus is the answer to all the problems of education, then yes, it certainly is. It's not unreasonable or unfair to say that there's a burgeoning culture of anti-intellectualism going around. People have to realize that educating oneself isn't entirely just a formal matter, it's also autodidactic.

>>45-46
What I also found interesting is that other countries that are doing much better, completely eliminated their standardized testing and measure success in education via other methods. The never-ending trumpet here is "We need more standardized testing! More stringent tests!", and yet, the education declines further.

>>47

How do you propose to measure whether the kids know what they need to know without tests?  It's illogical to say you educate someone and never find out whether they know what they need to know.  Standardized testing is the best way to make sure that the basic stuff gets covered.

>>48
You seem to have looked over what I wrote
completely eliminated their standardized testing and measure success in education via other methods.
It's illogical to say you educate someone and never find out whether they know what they need to know.
Other countries use some sort of audit system to measure not only student success, but also how well teachers are employing such. The whole system seems to work much more efficiently, and also better able to determine its own status (not to mention less bureaucratic and less costly). I see no reason why the US cannot do so. I think either Virginia or West Virginia is starting to use such methods to improve their education standards. It seems like education reform will happen amongst the individual states, until the Federal government realizes that doing things the old way simply doesn't work.

>>49
I see no reason why the US cannot do so.
Reason: Unions and yuppies.

The former ensure that the entitlement mentality dominates in teachers in the public school systems, as well as ensuring that those teachers are insulated from the consequences of simply not doing their jobs.  The latter ensure that the bootstrapping nature of public education continues to turn into outright militant elitism by the level of secondary education, where unions do not dominate (and why should they, since the liberal indoctrination there is even stronger).

>>49
No, seriously.  How do you measure what the children are learning, if not by testing them?  "HURR DURR WE GOTS MAGICAL POWAHS, WE IS DA EDUMACATIONAL PROFESSHUNALZ, WE KNOWS WHAT WE BEEZ DOINS, YOU TAXPAYER SCUM HAVE NO RIGHT TO QUESTION US" is what got us where we are now.

>>50
Unions
Other countries have teacher labor unions as well, and their education isn't as shitty. I think in the US, it's more of a systemic problem and it's not just simply "Yuppies" and "Unions".

>>51
No, seriously.  How do you measure what the children are learning, if not by testing them?
You have poor reading comprehension. Re-read what I wrote in >>49

Austerity measures... lol

I love how they water drought-tolerant plants along the side of the highway every single night of the week, but they have the nerve to tell us to take shorter showers.