Glaucon

I have noted the personal attacks, even in your present comments about objecting to what you perceive as my personal attacks. Have you been able to consider that?

My comments that you consider condescending and arrogant attempts at trying to cover my shallow thought process may be something you should try to understand and reflect on rather than attempting to dismiss and divert and continue your word games and deflections. Yes?

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

No issue for me to respond - will avoid responding to or continuing attacks on the person - look forward to opportunities to comment on issues.

Airforceone

It's just a very sad group of peoe that just insult when you post anything as far as solution and it's just insults no discussions. The TP over the last 8 years has just Accomplished one thing it's called h**e for anything. What a Damm disgrace. Your right about Dave pretty sad person. Can't imagine living that kind of life and just h**e anything and everything this government does. But for sure he got his and wants to prevent anybody from getting what he has.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

No issue for me to respond - will avoid responding to or continuing attacks on the person - look forward to opportunities to comment on issues.

Airforceone

Why is it always bloated Government spending as a talking point but never any mention of less funds due to corporate tax loopholes. If we discuss spending should we not discuss lack of funds

Airforceone

Thank You Dave for a well thought out post. I do now understand your true ideology. You are not one that lives on h**e but looking for not right or left solution rather common sense solution.

My poverty issue is based on the constant agenda of education cuts, food stamp cuts, and cuts to SNAP. I know your a bright guy but if we don't feed and educate our poor where is the path out of poverty. Yes you can say it's the per ants responsibility but what if they were born into poverty so the string of poverty goes on and on.

I do agree with your welfare rights should be associated with responsibility. If the opportunity is there and not taken advantage of then I could care less let them live in the street.

I found your immigration response very interesting. I have read the immigration Bill passed in the Senate on a bi-partison v**e and blocked in the house, and it addresses your concerns. It does not encourage i******s to come because it had I believe immigrants prior to 2010 were covered with certain conditions. (Have Been working) (Paying Taxes) (No Legal or DUI issues) (education) anybody entering the country after that date was scheduled for immediate deportation. Now the main component to the immigration bill was to actually fund a law put into the immigration bill signed by Ronald Reagan where it made it illegal to hire i******s. This Obama bill funds the E-Varify system to create an easy path for the corporate elite to check the legal status of a potential employee as to there legal status. If there illegal and they hire him it is major fines. So i******s cannot get Jobs they won't come. The other issue is the underground economy where contractors are paying there i******s cash and not paying any taxes. It is estimated that 40% of illegal are working under this condition. So under the Obama bill it funds and makes this a high priority to catch and fine these companies. These are just a couple of main fixes to immigration. I would hope that you would read the immigration bill it addresses every concern of yours. Not to be sarcastic but that talking point of encouraging i******s to come was a lie put out by Fox to stop this bill from passage.

Trickle Down economics was created by Ronald Reagan and the same agenda is carried on through each Republican president. Reagan advocated Tax breaks for the wealthy and the profits would trickle down to the poor and middle class. I really don't understand your comment on this issue because it's pretty clear it had not worked so I would appreciate you elaborating on this issue.

Flat tax had always been part of the democratic agenda, it goes back to Carter and Kennedy but had always been rejected by the GOP.

I will be careful in the future not to use the phrase GOPTP. Because the GOP and the TP are totally different. I wish they would create a seperate and distinct party under the TP name. I don't consider TP legislators republicans it's not even close to a republican agenda. My total disgust for Koch Brothers is there agenda to tear down every bit of regulation that affects what there producing. And they are doing it through the corporate elite in this country thru there super PAC ALEC and 11 other Pacs. But there agenda of eliminating regulation is there agenda to totally distroy our social programs, eliminate corporate Taxes and maintain the tax loopholes, turn all federal government land over to the states which will allow them to drill where ever they want pipelines where ever the want and not be held accountable for any pollution or damage.
If you would like to get into the actual Koch agenda which I have researched I would enjoy discussing.

But thanks for your post I understand that we both identified problems we just differ on the way to fix

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

I'm not aware that there are constant cuts to education and food stamps. From everything I've ever read, we spend more on both subjects now than we ever did before. Also, I'm not sure that spending on education and improving education are the same thing. Surely we spend more now than we did a generation ago, and more then than a generation before that - and yet our results have shown no improvements. If you go back a relatively short time America was generally considered the leading nation for education. In more recent times, we're considered to be behind some 2nd and 3rd world nations.

On immigration, the failure to enforce the employment laws from the Reagan era is and was a failure of will, not funding. I actually managed businesses and was involved in hiring both in Texas and California during the early years of the legislation and let me assure you we were very careful to not hire i******s. With the e******n of Clinton the emphasis on enforcement slowed to a virtual halt that became a total halt with W and largely stayed the way until today. As to E-Verify, that is a false promise. Those who want to game the system do so with impunity - employers by law forward the name and SSN number of every employee to the federal government. The Soc Sec Admin knows clearly that the names and numbers associated do not match, but the funds coming in are too attractive and the will to enforce the law is none existent. While I agree that the Senate bill did not grant instant immunity, it did provide a path far less onerous, expensive and time consuming than an immigrant from outside the country trying to enter. After the Reagan amnesty there were those who said it would encourage a flood of i******s and they we were told enforcing the employment laws would prevent that. History shows the cynics were right - and that is the basis of the cynicism today. Nothing short of a secure border would convince the doubters - and they have real history on their side.

The economic model you refer to was not trickle down - it was never anything any Reagan official ever said. That term, like Star Wars to denigrate the Strategic Defense Initiative, was created by his opponents to denigrate the supply side concept. The meme that he reduced taxes for the rich is also something his opponents said that was not backed up by reality. He did cut tax rates while eliminating many deductions. The tax rates were cut for everyone, but the elimination of deductions hit the higher income folks far harder than the lower ones. Most of the lower income folks then, as now, didn't even use deductions. The files using the EZ forms. What Reagan had to deal with was something his economic opponents said could never happen - double digit inflation coupled with double digit unemployment. I don't know if you lived through that era, but mortgage rates got up to almost 20% interest - and unemployment rates were deep into the teens.

I don't have the time to go into some of your other points, but I suspect you have sources that might be suspect. Take for instance your comment on the flat tax. I have no idea where you've concluded that it has been supported by Dems and rejected by the GOP folks. The only place I've ever heard it discussed seriously is by fringe elements of the Republicans - like Steve Forbes and some of the writers at the Heritage Foundation. I'd love to see your sources that suggest it was ever seriously discussed by Democrats.

Airforceone

You know Dave keep watching Fox if you really wanted answer you look it up you just can't read one article and use it as fact. There are many sites and gov web sites to fact check ex specially your BS which is a total waste of time but it's fun looking it up.

Airforceone

No you i***t nobody has a problem with how much they get paid it's the taxes they don't pay, and the tax shelters. I could care less just tax these people at the same rate I do.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

TD is another of those who think mentioning Fox News somehow validates them -

I do watch Fox News, as well as MSNBC and ABC - and I read several periodicals, including the the Economist - and in each and every one of those any reasonable person would conclude that people like TD are intellectually deficient in both fact and analysis.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

So, now you don't care about CEO pay, only about taxes paid by CEO's - yet you are fool enough to constantly deride the very people who are most supportive of simplified tax with no loopholes -

You show a total lack of either factual knowledge of the ability to analysis information - a kind of idiocy that reduces you to calling others i***ts