[gales0678]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Conservatives get in, and what? Cut taxes on the Oprahs, n' Meg Whitman Billionaires. Which mathematically would work if you cut spending, but they can't stay in office if the poor live like they do in Bangladesh. So, they cut taxes, and keep spending. The Progressive gets in, and does things to help the poor/ middle class. However, they don't raise taxes enough on the Billionaires etc. So (big surprise,) we have deficit spending created by both sides. The ignorant thing about the whole Conservative Fantasyland is that everything will be just awesome if we cut spending, cut taxes, and cut regulation. That's a sure 100% guarantee of concentrating the wealth of the nation in the fewest hands. Unregulated Capitalism results in that. We don't have to conduct the experiment. To say otherwise is like telling people honey grows hair. Really, you have a country full of people that haven't seen or heard of uncontrolled Capitalism. So, they'll believe your sht, but it doesn't create this rosey picture you describe. It always has resulted in a situation like we had in the 1890's Guilded Age. Your fantasy will result in more (and richer) Vanderbilts, Astors etc. It won't help the poor, or the middle class. Unregulated Capitalism destroys the middle. It picks a side (rich, or poor) for them to join. Seems almost everyone thinks we can do better without much Gov't, but the middle class is only around due to Gov't forces. Try it (without Gov't.) You'll see. Look, you've got people like Meg Whitman making a billion bucks while producing what product? Nothing..nada..zip...zero. You wonder why we're in trouble? We give people a billion bucks for not having to make a product (except manipulation.) Not only that, but then you want to put them in charge of Gov't. Yea, o.k., guess what they will do? They'll give out tax breaks (n' other advantages) to more manipulators that don't actually make a product.

cutting taxes worked scuds , it brought more $$$ into the treasury than under clinton , there were other mistakes (spending side) , but , i think they got the revenue side right - just follow the numbers