echoraven wrote:Faldoe wrote:The Presidency is like the tip of an iceberg. There is a lot of momentum that will push a president in the direction that momentum is going. ...
True enough.Faldoe wrote:1) He is elected and his election demonstrates that a majority of US citizens disagree with the political status quo - a dem and repub venture...
Still true enough.Faldoe wrote:...He tries to implement the kind of policies he is advocating - money out of politics, dealing with wall st. and economic inequalities and most important: The environment....
If you want money out of politics, support a flat tax. It (literally) removes the incentive to purchase politicians.
Income inequality - slippery slope. It really should be "equality of opportunity" and not "equality of outcome", perhaps for starters companies SHOULD NOT GET A TAX BREAK FOR SHIPPING JOBS OVERSEAS, they should face a import tax. As much as my libertarian leanings are against this, I believe this establishes momentum in the other direction.
The environment - This needs to be done smartly and not with the heavy hand of government. There are power companies all over the country that are fighting the solar movement. They need to be punched in the balls and publicly humiliated. Smart efforts like the Elio commuter car (under $7k, around 80mpg) need to be promoted and incentivized. Hopefully this approach will be more beneficial to the environment AND to American workers that have not recovered from the Bush recession.
A flat tax wouldn't do away with Citizens United "corporations are people too", would it?
What is a slippery slope regarding income inequality? The whole stage in which the money game is played is the problem. It's not that more people should get a shot at "making it" or becoming rich. The income inequality, in my view, as a topic, is important in how it shows how capitalism works and how wealth has been concentrating in a group.
Climate Change/The Environment SHOULD be dealt with by the heavy hand of government in terms of using force to mandate polluting companies change their behaviors, invest far more of their money into alternative energies and to make polluters pay for disasters - like the BP oil spill.
People keep saying "If we (the US) take drastic measures in altering out behaviors around Climate change, China will still be polluting, etc." We should lead the way because we're headed off a cliff, not whether other countries are involved.
How else did Bush win twice? 
No but seriously. HOW?
Colbert.