Originally by: annoing

---

Just goes to show that the free market, low taxes economy is working as intended

---

Originally by: Micheal Dietrich

---

Originally by: annoing

---

Just goes to show that the free market, low taxes economy is working as intended

---

For once I can agree with you at least on the low taxes bit. Every presidential election the runners promise lower taxes and the people cheer but they don't realize it's screwing the nation as a whole, all they know is that it's more money in their pocket.

---

Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto

---

The probloem isn't taxes, it's spending. There hasn't been a President willing to restrain spending since probably Truman(although Clinton restrained spending quite unwillingly), and there have been several who expanded it dramatically.

Bush 43 is virtually a socialist on spending(the Iraq war is about 10% of the extra spending since he came in), Clinton tried to spend on all sorts of things before Congress stopped him, Bush 41 had the S+L thing blow up in his face, Reagan spent his way out of the Cold War and bribed Congress with even bigger amounts of social spending to pay for it, Carter was Jimmy freaking Carter, Ford barely counts, Nixon was decent but not great, Johnson is to blame for that $50 trillion unfunded liability the US has 50 years out, Kennedy started Vietnam, and Eisenhower spent like mad on highways and such. For that matter, the only reason Truman was a cutter was because he was there for the end of WW2 - the Marshall Plan was hardly cheap. The last President to be a cutter both ideologically and practically was probably Calvin Coolidge or Warren Harding.

So yeah, the US has too big of a government and too much debt. It's not as bad as most of Europe, but it's getting there. I'm glad I live in Canada, where accusing an opposing politician of being willing to go into deficit is a massive, and almost invariably unjustified, slur on his character.

---

Originally by: Vigilant

---

...America will come back as usual, once we start getting less involved in other people wars...

---

Originally by: Wendat Huron

---

Originally by: Vigilant

---

...America will come back as usual, once we start getting less involved in other people wars...

---

First part is canceled out by the second part.

---

Originally by: Vigilant

---

American history shows you, if you look at it in detail, that we always have a recessesion when we fight looooong wars. Which, if you have not noticed, we have been since 9/11.

America will come back as usual, once we start getting less involved in other people wars.

And no, I am not against the war, just don't like cost of it from lives and financial perspective.

---

Originally by: Micheal Dietrich

---

Originally by: annoing

---

Just goes to show that the free market, low taxes economy is working as intended

---

For once I can agree with you at least on the low taxes bit. Every presidential election the runners promise lower taxes and the people cheer but they don't realize it's screwing the nation as a whole, all they know is that it's more money in their pocket.

---

Originally by: Vigilant

---

America will come back as usual, once we start getting less involved in other people wars.

And no, I am not against the war, just don't like cost of it from lives and financial perspective.

---

Originally by: Oveur

---

It's important to understand that EVE is a "PvP" focused game

---

Originally by: Micheal Dietrich

---

You can even get a midget with a camera to sit on the floorboard.

---

Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto

---

The probloem isn't taxes, it's spending. There hasn't been a President willing to restrain spending since probably Truman(although Clinton restrained spending quite unwillingly), and there have been several who expanded it dramatically.

Bush 43 is virtually a socialist on spending(the Iraq war is about 10% of the extra spending since he came in), Clinton tried to spend on all sorts of things before Congress stopped him, Bush 41 had the S+L thing blow up in his face, Reagan spent his way out of the Cold War and bribed Congress with even bigger amounts of social spending to pay for it, Carter was Jimmy freaking Carter, Ford barely counts, Nixon was decent but not great, Johnson is to blame for that $50 trillion unfunded liability the US has 50 years out, Kennedy started Vietnam, and Eisenhower spent like mad on highways and such. For that matter, the only reason Truman was a cutter was because he was there for the end of WW2 - the Marshall Plan was hardly cheap. The last President to be a cutter both ideologically and practically was probably Calvin Coolidge or Warren Harding.

So yeah, the US has too big of a government and too much debt. It's not as bad as most of Europe, but it's getting there. I'm glad I live in Canada, where accusing an opposing politician of being willing to go into deficit is a massive, and almost invariably unjustified, slur on his character.

---

Originally by: Rialtor

---

Originally by: Micheal Dietrich

---

Originally by: annoing

---

Just goes to show that the free market, low taxes economy is working as intended

---

For once I can agree with you at least on the low taxes bit. Every presidential election the runners promise lower taxes and the people cheer but they don't realize it's screwing the nation as a whole, all they know is that it's more money in their pocket.

---

The problem isn't taxes, if you look at raw data adjusted for inflation you find that no matter the tax rate our tax revenues remain fairly constant. Graph. Not the best graph to illustrate the point, but the numbers are adjusted for inflation, and notice how it does not move all that much. This is from a 70ish% tax rate in the carter years, to the low tax rate in Reagan years. Why is this the case? low taxes mean more reciepts, and less corporate/rich "Tax magic". The rich and corporations pay most of the taxes in this country, so messing with the tax rate makes those few entities more inventive to which to get around that tax burden. Like moving funds offshore, and operations offshore. The question isn't about high tax rate, or low tax rate. You want the minimum tax rate to fund the services you provide.

But what is the problem? Spending is the problem, the government always grows, and never shrinks. Any candidate that doesn't support vast cuts in the government is doing a major disservice to the future of this country. This isn't about party because both parties are big spenders. You don't get elected in this country unless you run on some platform guaranteeing more spending, which is the real problem. We need to start electing people based on fiscal conservatism, government cutbacks, and pro civil liberties.

---

Originally by: Liang Nuren

---

wrong forum isroy i am vjery drunm

---

Originally by: Vigilant

---

America will come back as usual, once we start getting less involved in other people wars.

---

Originally by: Vigilant

---

American history shows you, if you look at it in detail, that we always have a recessesion when we fight looooong wars. Which, if you have not noticed, we have been since 9/11.

America will come back as usual, once we start getting less involved in other people wars.

And no, I am not against the war, just don't like cost of it from lives and financial perspective.

---

Originally by: CampyloBacter

---

Originally by: Vigilant

---

American history shows you, if you look at it in detail, that we always have a recessesion when we fight looooong wars. Which, if you have not noticed, we have been since 9/11.

America will come back as usual, once we start getting less involved in other people wars.

And no, I am not against the war, just don't like cost of it from lives and financial perspective.

---

some of the victims of 9/11 and their families might think that this ISN'T someone else's war.

I happen to think that the US and Britain (my country) have stood together against the worst type of destabilising influence that want this largely peaceful world to become anarchic and ruled by an idiotic religious doctrine.

---

Originally by: Oveur

---

It's important to understand that EVE is a "PvP" focused game

---

Originally by: Eran Laude

---

Well in most of Europe with the notable exception of Iceland, national debt isn't anywhere near as bad as in the US. For one, as an example, the UK's national debt is only something like 36-37% of national GNP, and even though I detest Gordon Brown he has reduced the percentage of GNP that is national debt, but the US's debt level is approaching more like 70-80%.

Also, European nations tend to have "big government", largely owing due to high taxes. This works - it's largely living within it's means and not overspending ridiculously. Your problem is not low taxes or big government - it's both. You simply can't have them put together. It's either a sparse, low-tax government or a high-tax service-providing socialist government, it's not tenable to have both as the current economic predicament of the US shows.

---

Originally by: B0rn2KiLL

---

Originally by: CampyloBacter

---

Originally by: Vigilant

---

American history shows you, if you look at it in detail, that we always have a recessesion when we fight looooong wars. Which, if you have not noticed, we have been since 9/11.

America will come back as usual, once we start getting less involved in other people wars.

And no, I am not against the war, just don't like cost of it from lives and financial perspective.

---

some of the victims of 9/11 and their families might think that this ISN'T someone else's war.

I happen to think that the US and Britain (my country) have stood together against the worst type of destabilising influence that want this largely peaceful world to become anarchic and ruled by an idiotic religious doctrine.

---

Christians you mean? are we being a tad racist? hmmm ?

---

Originally by: CampyloBacter

---

Christians you mean? are we being a tad racist? hmmm ?

---

Originally by: Sydonis

---

Originally by: B0rn2KiLL

---

Originally by: CampyloBacter

---

Originally by: Vigilant

---

American history shows you, if you look at it in detail, that we always have a recessesion when we fight looooong wars. Which, if you have not noticed, we have been since 9/11.

America will come back as usual, once we start getting less involved in other people wars.

And no, I am not against the war, just don't like cost of it from lives and financial perspective.

---

some of the victims of 9/11 and their families might think that this ISN'T someone else's war.

I happen to think that the US and Britain (my country) have stood together against the worst type of destabilising influence that want this largely peaceful world to become anarchic and ruled by an idiotic religious doctrine.

---

Christians you mean? are we being a tad racist? hmmm ?

---

Yeah... there's no such thing as the perfect religion - most religions are fine as long as you don't get extreme. Extremist Christians are just as bad as Extremist Muslims (cf Spanish Inquisition and don't the *** claim Christian values?). If all religions were moderate and hence more tolerant of others, things would be better all over the world.

Of course, expecting people to drop their own national religion or suppress it when they move there is wrong IMO - you move to a country, you respect their native customs and religion or you move elsewhere (and yes, I know this is ironic coming from a Brit, given our track record in the past). Expecting special treatment when you move to a country just leads to increased tensions.

---

Originally by: goodby4u

---

Originally by: Sydonis

---

Yeah... there's no such thing as the perfect religion - most religions are fine as long as you don't get extreme. Extremist Christians are just as bad as Extremist Muslims (cf Spanish Inquisition and don't the *** claim Christian values?). If all religions were moderate and hence more tolerant of others, things would be better all over the world.

Of course, expecting people to drop their own national religion or suppress it when they move there is wrong IMO - you move to a country, you respect their native customs and religion or you move elsewhere (and yes, I know this is ironic coming from a Brit, given our track record in the past). Expecting special treatment when you move to a country just leads to increased tensions.

---

Indeed, most mainstream religions preach a good message about love for one's neighbor, however when people twist religion(as they can twist anything on this planet including science).

The ideal however is what I believe in, which is anybody can believe in anything they want aslong as it doesnt lead to hurting me, or any other person.

---

Originally by: B0rn2KiLL

---

Christians you mean? are we being a tad racist? hmmm ?

---

Originally by: Lix Titrax

---

Originally by: B0rn2KiLL

---

Christians you mean? are we being a tad racist? hmmm ?

---

When did Christians become a race?

---

Originally by: Lix Titrax

---

Originally by: B0rn2KiLL

---

Christians you mean? are we being a tad racist? hmmm ?

---

When did Christians become a race?

---

Originally by: CampyloBacter

---

some of the victims of 9/11 and their families might think that this ISN'T someone else's war.

I happen to think that the US and Britain (my country) have stood together against the worst type of destabilising influence that want this largely peaceful world to become anarchic and ruled by an idiotic religious doctrine.

---

Originally by: Che Villa

---

a lot of stuff about energy independence and other things

---

Originally by: Sydonis

---

Agreed - although I would add "and doesn't dictate what other people should believe in" to your statement. I don't like someone else telling me to believe in God because they say so... I prefer to do so because I choose to and in my own way. I also don't believe in telling other people that they're wrong in their beliefs, outside of informed debate (free speech is (usually) a worthwhile liberty, after all).

---

Originally by: Venkul Mul

---

I hope you never have to live in Italy. We have this nice foreign state guy and head of a religion (the pope) constantly trying to dictate how we should live. And sadly he has a lot of success as the politician fear to lose some vote if they don't make the catholic church happy.

Having a religious teacher in the public school that must be approved only by the Catholic hierarchy and that is paid by the state is something that disturb me a lot.

---

Originally by: Che Villa

---

Edited by: Che Villa on 09/10/2008 20:11:29

...

Energy independence should be paramount to the next leadership. Hundreds of billions of petro dollars sent to far off lands so they can build islands that look like palm trees. Take that $700 Billion from the buyout and use that money to reward companies for the first efficient cellulosic ethanol plant that produces ethanol efficiently. Use that money to reward advances that directly influence a decrease in our dependence of foreign oil.

Only about 22% of the oil we import in America comes from the Persian Gulf, that seems like a good place to start. Americans could probably achieve that simply by changing their lifestyles a bit. We've already decreased the amount of gas consumed because of the high gas costs.

In my opinion, the high gas costs, and this current Wall Street debacle is good for us Americans. We needed a kick in the pants. And don't buy into the fear. Local banks are still giving out loans, those of us who didn't spend like mad men are doing good. Unemployment is still well below levels in Europe, and, up until the ****ing Fed cut the rate earlier this week, the dollar was doing fairly well amid the crisis.

We will weather the current storm, it is the storm gathering that I am really afraid of.

---

Originally by: Micheal Dietrich

---

For once I can agree with you at least on the low taxes bit. Every presidential election the runners promise lower taxes and the people cheer but they don't realize it's screwing the nation as a whole, all they know is that it's more money in their pocket.

---

Originally by: CampyloBacter

---

Originally by: Vigilant

---

American history shows you, if you look at it in detail, that we always have a recessesion when we fight looooong wars. Which, if you have not noticed, we have been since 9/11.

America will come back as usual, once we start getting less involved in other people wars.

And no, I am not against the war, just don't like cost of it from lives and financial perspective.

---

some of the victims of 9/11 and their families might think that this ISN'T someone else's war.

I happen to think that the US and Britain (my country) have stood together against the worst type of destabilising influence that want this largely peaceful world to become anarchic and ruled by an idiotic religious doctrine.

---

Originally by: Ankanos

---

its the central banks that are orchestrating
the global meltdown..they just used us (USA)
as the launch platform..

doesnt matter who gets in the whithouse, the IMF,
central banks, CFR, TLC etc..own both sides, -of
all the governments..

9/11 and the "war on terror" sham was
just precursor to all this.

*they* want they're one world government
they already have most of the governments taking
over all the financial institutions to "save us"
from the new invisible economic boogie ban.
(bin laden being the first invisible boogie man)

the banks are consolidating(eating)
all the little fish's hard assets and
robbing us blind.

the same players responsible for the 1929 crash
are playing us again..only the stakes are much bigger this time.. buy up any gold/silver you can find,
-fiat currency is gonna flatline.. -maybe plant a garden too.. hungry times a-coming..




-ank

---

Originally by: Ankanos

---

its the central banks that are orchestrating
the global meltdown..they just used us (USA)
as the launch platform..

doesnt matter who gets in the whithouse, the IMF,
central banks, CFR, TLC etc..own both sides, -of
all the governments..

9/11 and the "war on terror" sham was
just precursor to all this.

*they* want they're one world government
they already have most of the governments taking
over all the financial institutions to "save us"
from the new invisible economic boogie ban.
(bin laden being the first invisible boogie man)

the banks are consolidating(eating)
all the little fish's hard assets and
robbing us blind.

the same players responsible for the 1929 crash
are playing us again..only the stakes are much bigger this time.. buy up any gold/silver you can find,
-fiat currency is gonna flatline.. -maybe plant a garden too.. hungry times a-coming..




-ank

---

Originally by: Vigilant

---

..other people wars.

---

Originally by: Jinx Barker

---

Have a look see here: National Debt CLock Runs Out OF Digits....

Europe, I dare say, will recover much quicker and faster than we ever would at this point.

---

Originally by: Glarion Garnier

---

Religion is purely mind control

---

Originally by: Pwett

---

Ah, the absolute number is not the issue, it's its relation to the GDP.

Ours is still less than our GDP, whereas in the UK, it's greater.

---

Originally by: Titus Vulso

---

Where are you getting that information chief?

a quick google lead me to

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?ID=277

which says as of march 2008 its equivalent to 43.2 per cent of GDP.

---

Originally by: Micheal Dietrich

---

Originally by: annoing

---

Just goes to show that the free market, low taxes economy is working as intended

---

For once I can agree with you at least on the low taxes bit. Every presidential election the runners promise lower taxes and the people cheer but they don't realize it's screwing the nation as a whole, all they know is that it's more money in their pocket.

---

Originally by: mishkof

---

Originally by: Micheal Dietrich

---

Originally by: annoing

---

Just goes to show that the free market, low taxes economy is working as intended

---

For once I can agree with you at least on the low taxes bit. Every presidential election the runners promise lower taxes and the people cheer but they don't realize it's screwing the nation as a whole, all they know is that it's more money in their pocket.

---

That is because the Socialist politicians do not want to stop their drunken sailor spending...If you cut taxes you MIGHT have less to spend...It figures modern day American politicians dont get it.

Regardless, expendatures have increased far faster then any tax system could keep up with anyways. No way am I paying over 50% in taxes so some states local politician can build a bridge to the North pole with federal funds.

If you guys want to be sheep and pick up the tab regardless of what is spent that is on you. I personaly prefer more responsible spending and lower taxes...Of course many of you believe that "paying taxes is your patriotic duty"...

---

Originally by: Micheal Dietrich

---

You can even get a midget with a camera to sit on the floorboard.

---

Originally by: Patch86

---

The free market is where you decide to leave it up to chance. You say "people will set up vital services so they can profit, so everything will deal with itself". There's no need for everyone to kick in some cash, and no need for an elaborate elected system of management. Everything will obviously cost a little more (seeing as the people running any given thing are after a bit of profit on top of the running costs), but it's also true that the risks aren't on the public, they're on small groups of individuals.


It is a dogged adherence to the free market principle, so fanatically followed since the '80s, that has gotten us into this current mess. Its the same devotion to the free market principle that contributed to the Great Depression. Advocating the free market as a solution to the current problem is naive at best. And advocating no-tax, no-spend is to advocate the free market.

---

Originally by: Le Skunk

---

Originally by: CampyloBacter

---

Originally by: Vigilant

---

American history shows you, if you

Yes because Iraq played a big role in 9/11

And yes, ******s largely secular regime (abolishing sharia law, establishing a westernized legal system, giving women many new rights, having cristians in his cabinet) which was activly involved in stamping out religious zealots in iraq - was really heavily into "destabalising religious doctrine"

SKUNK

---

Some simplification there!

You feel that the intervention of western forces in Iraq was unjustified- Rather like the appeasers of the 1930's who felt that H Itler should be allowed to continue because he'd improved Germany's infrastructure!!

S Husein- a proven murderous dictator who dragged the world's biggest powers to war- Who you claim was a reforming, moderate influence in Iraq? Have you seen the photos of dead Kurdish children???

Al Qaeda- a shameless group of priveliged Muslims who use their influence to indoctrinate those less fortunate and well-educated than themselves. To do their dirty work to destabilise the peaceful, and largely tolerant Western Democracies, in the name of Islam.

Your naievety is touching. Husein didn't orchestrate 9/11. But would you prefer him still to be in control? His influence extended far beyond Iraq and his anti West sentiments were well known. I think history will judge the West to have done the right thing, although it's much more fashionable at present to jump on the anti-war bandwagon.

Originally by: Micheal Dietrich

---

Originally by: annoing

---

Just goes to show that the free market, low taxes economy is working as intended

---

For once I can agree with you at least on the low taxes bit. Every presidential election the runners promise lower taxes and the people cheer but they don't realize it's screwing the nation as a whole, all they know is that it's more money in their pocket.

---

Originally by: Sydonis

---

Am I the only one that would like to see a nationalised bank in the UK that only handles deposits and doesn't offer a fancy interest rate, but does offer security? Right now, I'm not sure where I'd be putting my cash if I had any... for once I'm glad to be broke (lost my job a while back and still no luck).

---