The wave of the future

[billisonboard]

Jan 8, 2011 16:09:38 GMT -5 burnsattornincan said:

Mr. dezilooooo, did you miss the last sentence of #28? It doesn't affect your credibility much because, well you know.

Also don't miss that in message #29 it was admitted the last sentence in #28 was true.

[deziloooooo]

love all this leather and whip stuff ,, ,

[safeharbor37]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Safe, perhaps it has escaped my attention, but I see no reference to "we the people" of Illinois voting in favor of paying higher taxes in the article."
The voters of Illinois are responsible for the actions of those they elect. I think that State governments can be more responsive than a Federal government.
What seems to be missing in this discussion is the idea that any solution which can get majority acceptance must have elements which are not approved by a significant minority. As long as you insist that every element meet your approval, you cannot be part of a functioning majority ~ and will remain a vocal, but ineffective, minority with little or no power to influence the decisions of the majority.
Better to compromise and get a little of what you want than to insist on getting everything and getting nothing. Inflexibility is not a virtue.

[deziloooooo]

Jan 8, 2011 22:16:45 GMT -5 safeharbor37 said:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"
What seems to be missing in this discussion is the idea that any solution which can get majority acceptance must have elements which are not approved by a significant minority. As long as you insist that every element meet your approval, you cannot be part of a functioning majority ~ and will remain a vocal, but ineffective, minority with little or no power to influence the decisions of the majority.
Better to compromise and get a little of what you want than to insist on getting everything and getting nothing. Inflexibility is not a virtue.

A bit like what Obama and the Republicans agreed on just a week or so ago, Tax cuts, extending unmployment and a few other items ? Yep, that was a good example I think.

[traelin0]

Jan 8, 2011 22:16:45 GMT -5 safeharbor37 said:

The voters of Illinois are responsible for the actions of those they elect. I think that State governments can be more responsive than a Federal government.
What seems to be missing in this discussion is the idea that any solution which can get majority acceptance must have elements which are not approved by a significant minority. As long as you insist that every element meet your approval, you cannot be part of a functioning majority ~ and will remain a vocal, but ineffective, minority with little or no power to influence the decisions of the majority.
Better to compromise and get a little of what you want than to insist on getting everything and getting nothing. Inflexibility is not a virtue.

safe, how many times have I said this in the past? Capital flows and emigration speak louder than anything else. Capital is fleeing this country because all American politicians of all political persuasions and stripes know how to do is tax, spend, and inflate. And people are using federalism as best they can to flee those states which do it the worst. This is not speculation, it is demonstrable and has been analyzed by people from Harry Dent to Martin Armstrong.

This country doesn't stand a chance in competing on the world stage in 10 years if it adheres to a 100 year old tax system. Asia is moving toward less taxation and flat taxes. We're doomed.

I have also said that I will invest the hard-won fruits of my labor domestically when the electorate and its politicians act like economic adults -- but not until then. That's the beauty of capital; it can indeed take its ball and go home (or abroad). Politicians right now are satisfied (like Obama recently) with limiting the discourse to pleading with people to invest here. I'm waiting for the typical capital controls of dying empires.