I_Like_Dirt wrote:I agree, although I'd argue that wanting sustainable government isn't a problem just for the Ds and hasn't been for some time. I get that Rs have long argued for it and the portion of Rs for sustainable government tends to prioritize the issue above everything else whereas more Ds who value sustainable government put it equal, or even potentially below a few other issues, but the reality is that the Rs haven't been any more for sustainable government than the Ds have for some time, whether its entitlements, military interventions or tax cuts, both parties have made it patently clear that it doesn't really matter how much they talk about sustainable government at this point, they simply won't act on it as anything more than an afterthought.
Local, State and Federal.
On a Federal level, I think the Rs are actually much worse than the Ds. They have not constrained spending when they have governed to a sustainable level, wars/military. Their growth policies aren't; education, immigration, tax policy have had then name of growth on them but really were not close. Not only that but they pay lip service to the issue - they run on it and then don't do anything about it. So, violent agreement.
On a State and Local level, the Rs have been reasonably good at constraining spending (but you have to break it down state by state). Part of that is the Ds constraint having to bow to unions and their associated unfunded liabilities - unions are good but not when they control politicians and the contract negotiations therein.
I_Like_Dirt wrote:And that's where my current issue with the Rs is. D's, if you want sustainable government, well, yeah, good luck with that, but if you want social progress, at least they stand for something of value sometimes, even if their organization is a hot mess more often than not. I'm not really sure what thing of value the Rs stand for at this point. It certainly isn't sustainable government, nor sustainable societal structure, nor social progress. Basically, they stand for anger/social conservatism, saber rattling or worse internationally and even at home, and cut and run tax grabs as far as I can tell, and everything else is lip service. That said, if you value fiscal conservatism, you have 0 options at this point - the Rs are no better than the Ds. I get that they aren't American issues specifically, but it still blows my mind that the Panama and Paradise papers got so little play in the American media, because they really should. It isn't like tax shelters aren't something Americans don't also use - they just use their own tax shelters. That's a massive issue. It doesn't stop the need to curb entitlements, but tax collection and entitlement efficiency need to go hand in hand because one isn't going to work without the other.
Agreed, the R platform has been hijacked over time - and is now Trump's platform. I don't see how you support it.
BTW, you should do some research on where many of the tax breaks started. You might be surprised that they were initiated by the Ds. Accountants just use tax policy that has been put in place. Illegal tax shelters should be shut down - but they are just a trickle of revenue compared to the legal tax shelters.
And then we get back to the same place, IMO - at this point neither party deserves our support. Not a good place to be...
(I really thought was funny - not being snarky)
you’re a piece of work gtn. Take a deep breath.