I would agree with Mikko's positions as they are backed with extensive rationales but they suffer from problems of putting the theoretical over the practical, difficulty in bootstrapping, and loss of the human element.
For example, take outsourcing. If a manufacturer moves manufacturing from the US to another country, there are two immediate results: more money for the company, and a lot of angry rednecks. How exactly can this help the country as a whole? I can consider that prices
may drop, but if you are unemployed, good luck coming up with the cash in the first place. For sure, new jobs are not created to the same number as the ones lost, and any that are made are not immediate. The benefits only appear to apply to the few at the top. Any effects must take time to spread, and while that happens, it does hurt the people.
Any sort adaptation or upward mobility comes at an up-front cost that many people just can't advance, hence bootstrapping. Going from unskilled labor to skilled, "high-tech" jobs takes a college education, for better or worse. Especially with a generational gap, people will fall down the stairs because the elevator is broken.
On the matter of taxes, it would be best to have a simple linear ratio of wealth to tax. That way, there is no true penalty for success because the curve never accelerates. It's just an even share. Indeed, the tax system is too complicated. If you go from single, childless, and living in an apartment, to married, with kids, living in a house you own/mortgage, you go from having an additional yearly chunk killing some large fraction of a paycheck on top of tax already withdrawn, to "Here, have a procreation bonus back from the taxes we already drew!".
Getting back to healthcare, take TX's example. How could you get rid of Obamacare while still manage to fund her treatment without her getting fucked and dying? These are humans we are talking about, not economic case studies. Humans are not ants, that's why the book Freakonomics was such a hit.
Mad Max RW, on 01 July 2012 - 09:11 AM, said:
Progressives ruined this country and they're a plague in both political parties.
Progressives kick ass. They put the people first.
TerminX, on 30 June 2012 - 08:11 PM, said:
Is making a political point really worth sacrificing significant federal funding that goes to improve the quality of life of the state's residents?
Descent, on 30 June 2012 - 08:26 PM, said:
You'll keep seeing more of this shit until we get the Baby Boomers out of office. There are a massive number of them who love that childish, teenage, reactionary response. Pragmatism be damned.
Captain Awesome, on 29 June 2012 - 09:20 PM, said:
Work for change on the local level. Get fundamentalist Christians off your school boards, kick the rich fucks monopolizing on town hall out, bail on racist sheriffs. Get honest people to represent you on the local level, and your representatives in Washington (this is harder, but it can be done.) We're gonna have to work from the bottom up to kick corruption, shenanigans, and corporations. We're also going to have to change ourselves. Selfish ignorant citizens elect selfish ignorant leaders. Vote locally, think globally.
Also, this.