Quote:
Originally Posted by Minte
America has spoken..
Clearly I don't like or respect what they said. But it is what it is.
I do feel for the generations coming up though. Work hard, graduate from college with enormous debt only to not find a job. Or if they do, probably not one that is going to pay well.
|
So what's the solution?
Quote:
|
If the country is morphing to a nannie state then all I can say is I was lucky to be alive in the 60's and have an opportunity to build and grow a business. The changes today in society are not ones I would ever choose for anyone.
|
Well you're business started in the 60s so you had some great years.
Quote:
In a couple of hundred years, assuming there still is a human race I imagine that they will look at the US dynasty that existed for about 60 years and look to this period of time as about when it ended.
Nothing lasts forever!
|
In 100 years Americans will look back at their short term at the top of the pile and wonder what went wrong.
Quote:
|
My only comment on paying more tax is..you were right all the time. I will certainly pay more, but at the end of the day it won't make a bit of difference to my lifestyle.
|
The less tax = more jobs lie is so proven to be a lie, it's amazing so many peddle it. It has no logic and silly to the extreme. Still this is the argument.
If I get more in my pay packet, I will go out and spend more.
So where do the extra jobs come from? Not jobs in the shops, serving more people rarely calls for a big increase in people serving. Yes it builds a few more malls and fast food outlets. It doesn't in the 21st century build more factories in the US. It turns the US into a Nation of shop keepers.
If I earn more, I will work harder.
So someone earning $50k a year, won't work harder to earn earn an extra $50 if on that extra he pays 10% more tax. 
He will let his family get buy on $50k, rather than $90k. The opposite is true, people struggling to make ends meet, take on two jobs or work longer hours.
Still it brings up the question of people earning more. If a businessman can get his product made cheaper, he will go for it. By cutting staff, automating or simply shipping jobs to cheaper places in the world.
These two point are superbly illustrated here in the online porn business. Companies will go with the cheapest supplier no matter where he is, to maximise their profits and wage packet. Nothing wrong with that, but why assume it's different?
Is there a better way?
IMO yes. Maximise the profits of the private sector, without abusing the country or system. Then tax these big earners so they support the country around them.
Get rid of the Private Health near monopoly and copy the model that's successful in the rest of the civilised world.
No bright student from what ever back ground of income level should have to pay for an education in a subject that will advance the countries future. The sciences, engineering, type subjects. If they want to take college courses to become lawyers or doctors, for instance, on a grant. They have to repay that by working in the public sector for say 10 years.
Take some of the Government money and invest it in companies like
http://www.teslamotors.com/ or Solar panels. Robbie said that he didn't have solar panels because of the cost. That's wrong. Subsidise the price of US manufactured solar panels that are fitted to US homes and feed the excess back into the National Grid. Las Vegas might become energy independent during the day with such a plan.
There are other areas that better investment will produce a better future for America. Still the truth will be that some will be left behind, not by choice. These people have to be cared for, because that's the way the World is going. Do they get looked after well, allowed to sit at home and do nothing and vegetate into a lower class? No they have to be employed and if business won't or can't employ them. Business has to pay for them to be employed. In jobs to make the country a better place.