When it comes to how to manage a social unit such as a 'State' of a country, there is that most fundamental problem of..'budget'.

The Government must know:

-Revenues.
-Expenditures.

Political pressure always arises to influence those 2 factors.

The Socialist inclined will always emphasise 'human services/health/education. etc. The problem is, they tend to idealize how much needs to be spent..and seldom refer to how much is available.

When the Revnues don't match the expenditures, they have a standard solution:

*Raise Taxes*. (income redistribution)

The Capitalist approach is: *cut spending* (fiscal responsibility)

Governor Tim Pawlanty (Republican/Capitalist) of Minnesota was faced with a deficit of: $1.2 Billion in Feb 2010, there was also a remaining deficit of $2.7Billion from 2009

The Governor’s budget plan includes:
• $250 million in reductions to state government aids to local units of government
• $347 million in reductions to state health and human services programs
• $387 million extension of enhanced federal Medicaid funding for states
• $47 million in reductions to state higher education institutions
• $181 million in reductions to state agencies and other programs $1.2 billion total

For more information, including his job creation initiatives refer here:
http://www.governor.state.mn.us/mediacenter/pressreleases/PROD009860.html

Now..the Questions for discussion.

1/"Should he have just raised taxes to pay for the deficit?" (tax the rich)

2/ "if he had taxed 'the rich'....what might result in terms of job growth and employment vision by those 'rich ?

3/ "If a state cannot afford the luxury of certain social programs, should it spend on them anyway?"

Here is the result for Maryland:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/09/29/taxing_the_rich_107350.html

You should send those links to Brumby Al, seems he doesn't get it!
He's going to win again you know? Watch our stamp duties and taxes go even higher when he and his green mates get back in!

I'm rather hoping some of our progressive friends will seek to show us where the 'Capitalist' approach is flawed and the Socialist (Tax those rich bastards) approach is right.

I also hope they will stick to the case study and suggest alternative approaches to the problem of fiscal ruination other than 'taxing the rich'.

I have invented a new saying :) (I think it's original but can't be sure)

"Socialists thrive on Capitalist money until it runs out, then everyone is equally poor" (C)AGIR

I have a feeling the only thing which will happen is mockery, ad hominem or (due to the lack of any substantial counter argument) *silence*

Of course if I blamed some Muslims for the crisis :) they would be all over me

Trouble is Al you think anything slightly left of the Tea Party is socialist.

It is not only the rich who are taxed. Do you have any concerns over how a rich person may come into their fortunes. Was it through hard work and long hours? Did it come via exploitation of labour ie. sweat shops? Was any anti-competitive behaviour involved such as price fixing?

You make a mistake in targeting positive collective programs like health etc when the real problems with revenue is waste and in governments becoming too involved in policy and funding of programs that are not solely of the collective interest and serve a greater electoral agenda. This is true of both sides of politics.

So it is WASTE we should be calling to account not social programs that benefit everyone rich or poor that allow access to services that might not be available except for an elite group under a strong RW agenda.

When the likes of Al start calling for cutbacks to defense and security spending, by far the most wasteful and unproductive expenditure we have, then I will start to listen to their calls to cut back social services.

When the wealthy stop avoiding the pittance they (and the rest of us) are currently required to pay then I will listen to their bleating about how they pay too much tax.

You get what you pay for. Less tax = less services, more poverty, more crime, more cost which equals either more cuts<go back to step 2>or increase tax. Which brings us full circle and back to Al and his call for less tax. Its just a pointless, endless merry go round.

The only answer is to ignore the whining and just get on with it. Tax their ill gotten gains and to hell with them. They should think themselves lucky the real militant socialists arent after them to take it all not just a percentage.

Pelly asks:

Do you have any concerns over how a rich person may come into their fortunes. Was it through hard work and long hours? Did it come via exploitation of labour ie. sweat shops? Was any anti-competitive behaviour involved such as price fixing?

Yes I absolutely DO!

and those things are the worst aspects of unregulated capitalist exploitation. The solution of course is.. REGULATE those things.

On the other hand.. look at the man who started with $3000 and one employee who started 'PAYCHEX'..now a billionaire, employing some many thousands of people.
http://www.paychex.com/

Capitalism (free market) is not the problem WE are the problem, and those awful things you mentioned can be dealt with by law, not by Marxism :)

"""
those awful things you mentioned can be dealt with by law, not by Marxism :)
"""

The problem is, Al. The people making the laws don't benefit from such laws. It doesn't matter whether they lean to the left or the right. They both ensure the status quo which has always been in their favour!

MIKK....you say:

Cutbacks to defense and security spending,...then I will start to listen to their calls to cut back social services.

I can partly agree, but Defense is crucial to freedom. You must be a young pella cos apparently you don't recall Australia's lack of readiness when the Japanese came marching down Malaya and started Bombing Darwin ?

Defense is a no brainer..we must have it. If you think the Defense forces/spending hasn't been cut ...clearly you don't have a military background. I can see it more as SLASH and BURN and I have many mates in high positions in the Military and it's procurement areas.

Can you stick to the CASE STUDY Mikk..for the sake of this discussion.

Do you see........ that simply 'taxing the rich' or 'increasing taxes' does NOT produce the desired revenue outcome ?

That's what I want to know. They tried it in Maryland...and kaaaa-PUT.. they LOST money. It had nothing to do with Defense at all.

Again...do you 'see' this fundamental reality ?

Ranting or repeating 'dogma' does nothing to resolve this question.

Al you said "Yes I absolutely DO!" but you only appear to submit threads about perceived Socialists with headings like "Socialist monkey on Capitalim's back...".

Lets get some perspective here - the ALP in Australia and the Democrats in the US are not socialists. They have in fact followed too far on the RW agenda of privatisation in areas that should be IMO public assets and owned by 'the people'. They have also gone down the globalisation path which is fraught with anomalies and self-serving agreements which fail to acknowledge the sovereign rights of nations in many aspects such as biosecurity and laws surrounding adversting/labelling just to mention only two, including exploiting the poor in the developing world.

The irony is you raise issues about 'socialists' who are behaving like capitalists through and through. Your concerns should be about the extreme effects of capitalism.

Gawd, Pelican....don't you realise that if Beck says it is so...then it must be so.

Pelly...you say:

Your concerns should be about the extreme effects of capitalism.

That's exactly where my concerns are. It seems to me from observation that there are to main groups of people in society.

1/ "The professionals and their networks"
2/ "Workers and their networks"

I see that 'Capitalists' seem to chose which is most advantageous to themselves. Soros is a capitalist. Maurice Strong is a capitalist..they are billionaires... but they use their money to try to orchestrate political change... ostensibly for the betterment of society.... but in reality for the betterment of their own power and bank balance.

Then you get the 'true believers' (supposedly) the hard core commies who just want revvvvvolUTION. They are idealists for now, but if they ever have power...they will sink to the same depths of corruption and self indulgence that all men with power do.

EXAMPLE ..this will crack you up :)

There is a COMMISSION to PREVENT WASTE and FRAUD of the Stimulus money in the states.

They will meet on Nov 27th (I think)...GUESS "where" they are going to meet ? ....haha.. the RITZ CARLTON hotel! ! ! !

Just breaks me up...

Poirot.. c'mon...u can do better... c'monnnn now.....

Poirot dear... no..not "if Beck says so"

If... what he says is...wait..he says very little.... most of his shows are things OTHER people say... such as Mr Soros and various others.. he builds the show around 'their' words not his.

He always says "DON'T....believe my words.. GOOO..and do your OWN research"

All Beck does is this king of thing.

"George Soros wants to create a Global Government"

Then..he shows a clip of Soros himSELF saying just that.

Look at some of the material proxy has linked us to.

And look at them! The rat as friends. What a joke. WE have a religious and we have a law type with no.

Capitalism..............we see you. You should not underestimate. All is failing cause of you that's all in what. And with your greed............... I think you lot are right on track.

Vote 1 the fools.

However, I could be wrong.

Its just my OP.

BLU

ALGOREisRICH,

I'll give you that much, I don't like him. However two wrongs can make just one right.

What is your interest in such matters?

Religious and all?

You are difficult man to read.

BLUE

HI Blue

my interest in 'such matters' is my own freedom.

SUCH MATTERS= Global Government, Socialism,Political Correctness etc.

I see the pernicious influence of GG PC MC effecting our laws and our independance and sovereignty.

I asked people at a factory the other day

Q "Do you feel your voice is heard here?"

A. "Nope, haha, not a chance"

Q "How about your voice being heard at say...local government level?"

A. "Not at all.. what a joke"

Q "What about at State government level?"

A. "even less"

Q "Federal?"

A. "impossible"

Q "If there was global government?"

and there you have it. The more we are connected to 'International' anything...law, Conventions, the UN....the less sovereignty we have and the more our freedom is threatened.

If one is a 'progressive' (Socialist) they probably think their voice WILL be heard :) oh the poor saps. They will be heard about as much as the workers who helped Lenin take power were when he systematically ANNIHILATED them after they won.

EXAMPLE ? here...have a peek. Read it and weep.

http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/2010/07/28/nj-judge-oks-rape-of-wife-by-muslim-citing-religious-belief-overturned-on-appeal/

Notice this report is from SECULAR news sources :)

ALGOREisRICH.

Even the comments in this thread pretty well sums up factions and religions to a tee.

You said this yourself.

f one is a 'progressive' (Socialist) they probably think their voice WILL be heard :) oh the poor saps. They will be heard about as much as the workers who helped Lenin take power were when he systematically ANNIHILATED them after they won.

Freedom is over rated. Since the dawn of time no-one has had freedom.( not even the rulers themselves )

You have freedom right now. I think your making mountains out of mole hills.
The greens and labor are not remotely in the same ilk as other power hungry counties and quite frankly I don't think the Australian people would stand for it.

To compare over-sea's with our own is a little thin at best.

The comments on the link however show the poisons of religions.

You certainly like to sink your teeth in:)

Try to get out a little more:)

The boogy man is not real:)

Have a great day.

BLU

Dear Blu

I liked the tone and style of that last post :)

But you say this:

"The greens and labor are not remotely in the same ilk as other power hungry counties and quite frankly I don't think the Australian people would stand for it."

The key bit is the last .. "I don't think...stand for it"

Nowwwwww.....you should be tweaking to my Fabian Socialist theme of recent weeks.

See this first please.

http://thinkinginchrist.com/2009/08/the-fabian-socialist-window/

Click on the window to enLARGE it and notice the following:

The image on the shield between the 2 men with hammers. (See it ?)
Connect that..with the NAME "Fabian" and see this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabius_Maximus read specifically about his 'strategy'.

Now..the end game.. see in that image above the people down below..worshipping....what? "Socialist Literature"

The WHOLE point of the Fabian strategy was 'not to engage in open combat' but to work as a wolfe..dressed as a sheep...

The Inevitability of gradualism....*Ponder* this please.

But on the CASE STUDY....do you see the point there ? (Opening post)

ALGOREisRICH

Now..the end game.. see in that image above the people down below..worshipping....what? "Socialist Literature"

Your talking of a time in history which has little if any relevance in today's Socialist Literature. To comparing the likes of Starlin, or other dictators and yes, you can throw in Soros as well, with the likes of Bob brown, I think your off the track. While I see your point to a degree, the mountains out of mole hills is just what it is. The capitalist are doing the same thing, only with more clever tactics.

"The WHOLE point of the Fabian strategy was 'not to engage in open combat' but to work as a wolfe..dressed as a sheep...

Yes ALGOREisRICH.... and no other faction does that now...do they:)

Very thin indeed:)

BLUE

Blue...no they don't :) and consider this:

"Many molehills a mountain doth make"

That's the point... it's molehill by molehill.

Gay Rights... activism..shaming...demonstrations... pressure... LAW change.

REFUGEES... hammering away and shaming... demonstrations... pressure.. LAW change.

HUMAN RIGHTS (sooooo called) VHRCEOC continually undermines Australian sovereignty.. Labor Politicians LIE (I have evidence) and 'bit by bit'....'Granny' slips of her clothes to reveal the WOLF inside.... ready to eat us up.

Your getting up-set. AL. Human numbers are the main risk. Why do all humans feel that this is all not happy-ness? You say............its all in the completed factions!...........that's bull.

See you tomorrow.

Just one other.......

If we and god were one and with nature............. What would all three say?

I wait your answer.

BLUE

All three, Blu would say "Exercise good stewardship" :)

Back to the case study... can you see the point and can you disagree with the main premise of this thread ?

ie... High taxing/big spending (left wing) governments simply don't 'get' that those who are being hurt by the taxes can simply 'move' off state and avoid it.

Maryland. "We'll tax those rich bastards and make $100,000,000"
The 'Rich bastards' moved to Florida and the state LOST over $200,000,000

High Taxing/Big Spending (for the sake of the working class vote mind you) is 'anathema' to those who get hit the hardest.

Low Taxing/Careful spending + VALUES (of do for your neighbour as you would want him to do for you) is a better approach.

If you just 'TAX' people it will become a mad scramble to 'avoid', and people will feel screwed and care less about their neighbour.

Pericles.. come on... here is your opportunity to make a meaningful (constructive) contribution...I'd value your thoughts on this actually.
CJ ?

Pelly?

All three, Blu would say "Exercise good stewardship" :)

Give that man a gold star.

I'll leave it there:)

BLU

I really doubt that, Boaz.

>>Pericles.. come on... here is your opportunity to make a meaningful (constructive) contribution...I'd value your thoughts on this actually.<<

You have provided one example that - possibly even coincidentally, given the impact of the GFC - meets your criteria of your "beat-up on Socialists" agenda.

From this we are required to extrapolate that an entire political philosophy is barren of ideas, integrity, rationality and values.

But as usual, you only shout the headlines. You never, ever look into the substance.

For a start, I doubt whether Maryland is going to miss those "absentee millionaires". Why do I think that? Because I have dug up some facts that you and your shock-jocks managed to ignore.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/21/news/economy/highest_income_census/?postversion=2009092203

"Maryland is the nation's top-earning state for the third year in a row, with a median household income of $70,545 in 2008, according to a U.S. Census Bureau report released Monday"

In the same report, it points out that:

"Florida was the only state where median income actually declined, falling 0.01% before adjusting for inflation", which puts the "exodus to zero tax" in some perspective, does it not?

So, forgive my pragmatism, but I suspect Maryland will not significantly miss the departing revenue, if indeed it can be described as such, as it represents mere rounding errors in its overall $15 billion tax take.

But I guess that means nothing to a person who relies on carefully-selected sound-bites to support their every argument.

And let's be honest here, you don't actually do any research yourself, do you. You simply reproduce whatever dribble the shock-jocks hand out to you, and expect everyone to say "wow, how insightful".

I've said it before, and I'll no doubt need to say it again to you on a regular basis, Boaz.

Do. Some. Basic. Research.

Dear Pericles... thankyou for that additional perspective on Maryland, but you gave us some rather fanciful assumptions in that post.

1/ You assumed/stated "They won't miss it"

But the fact that they decided to tax more to raise revenue suggests the opposite ..no?

It's one thing to do research..it's another to draw correct conclusions.

The point is..they 'wanted' more revenue.
They 'taxed the rich' to get it.
They lost money.. lots. ...double what they planned to raise. *ouch*

Conclusion ? "raising taxes to increase revenue did not work" whether they will miss it ? hmmm seems to me they would.. after all they planned to raise $100,000,000 which must have had a purpose...no?

So..I suggest in like manner to you

Do. some. basic. thinking. :)

(your post is still appreciated)

At last..Pericles has a contribution. Pity it isn't as useful as it might be :(

Here is an amazing speech by Ronald Reagan in 1964 which mirrors the very same attempt at socializing America with "Obamacare".. very much worth listening to.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRdLpem-AAs

Pericles.. it is quite valid to extrapolate from the case study because it is as universal as the conditions which enabled it.

If you have a spare moment, see the Reagan speech. It's a beaudy! and you can see the "Obamacare" is just 'camels nose in the tent door' socialism and Reagan does a MUCH better job than I or space will allow in pointing out where it all goes.

I'm asserting one fundamental POINT in this thread.

SOCIALISM is high taxing/big spending (until the dosh runs out)

CAPITALISM is low taxing/fiscal responsibility/running by affordable budgets and the dosh does not run out.

Perhaps a better term for 'Capitalism' would be 'fiscal/economic conservative'

But c'mon Pericles, you know human nature.. "gimme gimme gimme" and that's why Socialism does not work.

Once it takes hold.. it will try to dictate EVerything you can and can't do... is that the kind of society 'you' want?

You never say much about your own beliefs here.. but you attack and undermine fiscal/economic conservative posts.. makes me *wonder* you know......a bit of a 'elitist/socialist' by any chance?

If yes..by all means make your case.

Well AL those that jump in early never see what they really are. Sad isn't. Save the world! Yes! would love too!

Well its the same old ways. Can dish it out but cant take it:) Oh I live for F/heads:)( your such great entertainment ) This is 4 years deep. Adult-children...shock! I must get out more.

see.......its hard when one must hear so much wrong...but then again, I should lighten up:) But maybe that's why thanks to the likes of Paul hogan and such, is why racism and Australia fool are both in the same pod:)

Even some new/old posters are having some slight simulated mind developments in the realms of paranoia, but Iam sure they will get better soon:) Iam just learning here and it seems that now bast@rd comments are the go when it comes to qlds screwing over they own kind for a buck. WOW! You must all be so captivated in your spender.

And these people are the back-bone of this country/state. Big picture laughing stock, but they will tell you they don't have any court problems. lol. Again... what fantastic people, and there not judge mental:)


BLUE

Continued.

Oh dear, Oh dear, Oh dear! You know slander and defamation is against the law...........arrrrr but we are all aware that some are not that bright and are only look for a fight instead of thinking and maybe saving this country that all clam to say they love and die for it all lol Thats a joke! Your all to busy being smart-arses, that's why your Government has to import out-side help:)

If that's all you have for your country,WELL! I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. For some I'd tell you to go to hell..........But I think your all ready there.

And you wonder why no other culture cant stand you. I have talked to all, and This land was built on racism, but you know who you are and you don't need me to tell you.

Oh....by the way........my first 4 weeks here in QLD........my daughter was sexually assaulted by a Queen-slander.

Thats why Iam not too happy with my families introduction to this land of.........well I'd better leave it there I thinks.

I believe there's always a new day, but I doubt it.

BLU