Comments on: Who the hell is G.E. Smith? http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/ Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:51:41 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.3 by: G.E. Smith http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-218552 Fri, 22 Jun 2007 17:32:48 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-218552 I encourage people to take part in the site. A limited-government presence -- be it conservative or libertarian -- is desperately needed there! I encourage people to take part in the site. A limited-government presence—be it conservative or libertarian—is desperately needed there!

]]> by: Carl http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-215207 Wed, 20 Jun 2007 02:36:12 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-215207 I might just do that -- eventually. I might just do that—eventually.

]]> by: G.E. Smith aka globalist_elitist http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214903 Tue, 19 Jun 2007 20:25:16 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214903 Carl - I encourage you to make a page at u4prez. It could help publicize your holistic politics. Carl – I encourage you to make a page at u4prez. It could help publicize your holistic politics.

]]> by: Carl http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214888 Tue, 19 Jun 2007 20:06:01 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214888 Were I to put up a fake presidential campaign, I would headline it: tax carbon instead of labor. The FICA tax needs to be replaced with an anynomous tax. Until that happens, the entitlements will continue. A carbon tax which would double energy prices would collect about the same as FICA/Medicare. Both taxes are about equally regressive. THe current income-history based SS could then be phased over to a simple flat payout to everyone -- on the low end. Those with a history of low incomes could live well. Those with a higher income history will need to save an invest in order to continue their lifestyles. The result would be a giant reduction in actuarial burden. We could also reduce our "defense" burden by making part of the carbon tax a tariff. With NAFTA, Canada and Mexico are exempt from the tariff portion, so we don't bankrupt them, but we do put a hurtin on terror-supporting countries, and reduce our need to patrol the Persian Gulf. Were I to put up a fake presidential campaign, I would headline it: tax carbon instead of labor. The FICA tax needs to be replaced with an anynomous tax. Until that happens, the entitlements will continue. A carbon tax which would double energy prices would collect about the same as FICA/Medicare. Both taxes are about equally regressive.

THe current income-history based SS could then be phased over to a simple flat payout to everyone—on the low end. Those with a history of low incomes could live well. Those with a higher income history will need to save an invest in order to continue their lifestyles. The result would be a giant reduction in actuarial burden.

We could also reduce our “defense” burden by making part of the carbon tax a tariff. With NAFTA, Canada and Mexico are exempt from the tariff portion, so we don’t bankrupt them, but we do put a hurtin on terror-supporting countries, and reduce our need to patrol the Persian Gulf.

]]> by: G.E. Smith aka globalist_elitist http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214868 Tue, 19 Jun 2007 19:33:04 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214868 Tax cuts produce more revenue. There is no holding anything hostage to anything. I say cut taxes. Let revenues soar. Pay SS benefits from the main account. What you're suggesting is absurd and will never, under any imaginable circumstances, be even remotely politically possible. Tax cuts produce more revenue. There is no holding anything hostage to anything. I say cut taxes. Let revenues soar. Pay SS benefits from the main account. What you’re suggesting is absurd and will never, under any imaginable circumstances, be even remotely politically possible.

]]> by: G.E. Smith aka globalist_elitist http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214867 Tue, 19 Jun 2007 19:31:28 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214867 Already read it, already responded, and you, sir, are wrong. Already read it, already responded, and you, sir, are wrong.

]]> by: Kn@ppster http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214836 Tue, 19 Jun 2007 19:03:43 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214836 g_e, Wow, coincidence ... you need to read the latest over at my blog, on holding good policies hostage to bad ones. Tom g_e,

Wow, coincidence … you need to read the latest over at my blog, on holding good policies hostage to bad ones.

Tom

]]> by: globalist_elitist aka G.E. Smith http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214794 Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:10:42 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214794 I should have said we can never REALLY scale it back. I should have said we can never REALLY scale it back.

]]> by: globalist_elitist aka G.E. Smith http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214784 Tue, 19 Jun 2007 17:56:22 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214784 What do you suppose we do about debt and entitlements? We can never scale back government so long as we have debt. We can never abolish entitlement programs so long as a new class of entitlees enrolls through FICA to pay for the benefits of current retirees. Decreasing revenues is a recipee for a perpetual welfare state and Depression. What do you suppose we do about debt and entitlements? We can never scale back government so long as we have debt. We can never abolish entitlement programs so long as a new class of entitlees enrolls through FICA to pay for the benefits of current retirees. Decreasing revenues is a recipee for a perpetual welfare state and Depression.

]]> by: Kn@ppster http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214782 Tue, 19 Jun 2007 17:53:52 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214782 Um ... isn't the goal to get into the correct "revenues go DOWN" sections of the Laffer Curve? There are two such sections -- one is on the near side, where tax CUTS reduce revenue to government. The other is on the far side, where tax HIKES reduce revenue to government. I want to be in that near section, not in the far one OR in the middle area where government is raking in more money to raise hell and cause accidents with. Um … isn’t the goal to get into the correct “revenues go DOWN” sections of the Laffer Curve?

There are two such sections—one is on the near side, where tax CUTS reduce revenue to government. The other is on the far side, where tax HIKES reduce revenue to government.

I want to be in that near section, not in the far one OR in the middle area where government is raking in more money to raise hell and cause accidents with.

]]> by: globalist_elitist aka G.E. Smith http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214670 Tue, 19 Jun 2007 15:09:08 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214670 Carl - Yes, the Laffer Curve is a CURVE, and at some level, tax cuts will not produce more revenue. We obviously have not gotten there yet because Bush's tax cuts have produced RECORD revenues. We are going to be running a surplus by 2008 or 2009, DESPITE the massive spending. Sorry, but you're wrong. EVIDENCE? EVIDENCE? Clinton? Um, no. Your evidence is non-existent. We have no way of knowing where revenues are maximized until we cut taxes and revenues are decreased. That hasn't happened. And there's certainly no reason to believe that we're even close. Carl – Yes, the Laffer Curve is a CURVE, and at some level, tax cuts will not produce more revenue. We obviously have not gotten there yet because Bush’s tax cuts have produced RECORD revenues. We are going to be running a surplus by 2008 or 2009, DESPITE the massive spending. Sorry, but you’re wrong. EVIDENCE? EVIDENCE? Clinton? Um, no. Your evidence is non-existent. We have no way of knowing where revenues are maximized until we cut taxes and revenues are decreased. That hasn’t happened. And there’s certainly no reason to believe that we’re even close.

]]> by: Carl http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214655 Tue, 19 Jun 2007 14:46:59 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214655 G_E: Sorry, supply side tax cuts won't increase revenue. They did when marginal rates were 70%. Now, when they are down in the 30s there is likely a net loss of revenue when taxes are cut. Remember, the Laffer Curve zeroes out at both 100% and 0% marginal rates. Evidence indicates that the Clinton Administration came closest to the maximum on the Laffer Curve. Tom: Listened to Stephanie Miller with Ron Paul. The love affair is real, and yes, they know his rightwing side. And not all leftists are pro-immigration. Listen to Ed Schultz sometime. Immigration is an issue that transcends the left-right divide. Ron Paul has something that none of the LP presidential contenders has: an ort of credibility. G_E: Sorry, supply side tax cuts won’t increase revenue. They did when marginal rates were 70%. Now, when they are down in the 30s there is likely a net loss of revenue when taxes are cut. Remember, the Laffer Curve zeroes out at both 100% and 0% marginal rates. Evidence indicates that the Clinton Administration came closest to the maximum on the Laffer Curve.

Tom: Listened to Stephanie Miller with Ron Paul. The love affair is real, and yes, they know his rightwing side. And not all leftists are pro-immigration. Listen to Ed Schultz sometime. Immigration is an issue that transcends the left-right divide.

Ron Paul has something that none of the LP presidential contenders has: an ort of credibility.

]]> by: globalist_elitist aka G.E. Smith http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214315 Tue, 19 Jun 2007 06:07:24 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214315 Tax credits, vouchers, whatever. Don't be so sensitive, Georgy. Tax credits, vouchers, whatever. Don’t be so sensitive, Georgy.

]]> by: George Phillies http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214278 Tue, 19 Jun 2007 05:05:10 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214278 The above claim that I support vouchers is false. Those of you who are interested in my actual positions should try reading my web site. The above claim that I support vouchers is false. Those of you who are interested in my actual positions should try reading my web site.

]]> by: matt http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214247 Tue, 19 Jun 2007 04:14:44 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/06/18/who-the-hell-is-ge-smith/#comment-214247 Especially if said nominee is Hillary. Especially if said nominee is Hillary.

]]>