the part where either of those things stem from healthcare reform

The only real and lasting solution to the economic situation in the US is to cut corporate taxes down to at LEAST a global median level, promote business friendly policies and institute a flat (or flatter) tax and cut capital gains down to zero. Complaining that businesses are unpatriotic for relocating or moving production overseas just compounds the anti-capitalistic atmosphere detrimental to a healthy economy. Money and capital are liquid. Money and capital move to wherever it welcomed. Likewise, creating an anti-business atmosphere drives out business. I personally believe that capital gain taxes should be cut to zero as the corporation has already paid taxes on the profit earned. Any capital gain that is accrued is actually taxed twice in reality.

Next, not only deregulate industry but reduce regulations which binding corporations and businesses. Make it easier for business to relocate. Enact right to work legislation in each of the states. Repeal Obamacare and reform Medicare (which is another looming crisis looming on the horizon which is going to be an issue as the babyboomers age).

What you will see is money and capital move slowly back into the United States. We saw this same phenomena in Europe during the 1980s. As continental Europe pursued social democratic policies money moved to the UK (Thatcher) and the US (Reagan).

Next cut the public workforce by a 20% of its current level and place a hiring freeze for a 4 year period which should drop the non-military and non-essential public work force down to about 25% of its current level. Remember every public worker is a net drain on the economy because every cent comes out of the pocket of someone in the private workforce or corporations. Governments do not create jobs but can create an environment where jobs can be created by the private sector. Privatize whatever services that can be privatized without creating a monopoly. Reduce the wage rate of public workers, if they are good enough they can seek employment in the private sector. The lower public sector wages is an indication that the government should not compete detrimentally with the private sector which is the engine which creates real jobs which drive the economy.

Reduce federal unemployment benefits to 6 months and reduce welfare payments (not to save money per se) but to reduce dependence on government largess (meaning other people's money) and vote buying.

However, due to ideological reasons and loud mouthed special interest groups (squeaky wheel getting the grease) there is little political motivation to institute such reforms.

I will merely supply some definitions for readers to make up their own minds

Capital gains - the increase in value of an asset (as stock or real estate) between the time it is bought and the time it is sold


Reform- to put or change into an improved form or condition


welfare reform was enacted under President Clinton, it reduced payments by putting time limits on how long welfare could be received AND the conditions by which they can be received (Which included work activities)

there is also a capital gains tax phenomena in AMerican history which can be read about here

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-capgainsspur.htm

Yeah, he lost all credibility with me when he started the name-calling, personal attacks on peoples' intelligence and breaking Godwin's Law by making Hitler comparisons. He's just a Canadian Ann Coulter as far as I'm concerned-- all bluster and no facts. Not to mention disrespectful, a pretty crappy payback to we U.S. taxpayers who keep the REAL commies off his back with OUR tax money and blood while his country makes a killing on the oil that runs OUR expensive, superpower-class military.

Nothing he says here much matters because he can't vote against Obama and I doubt he's winning over any people who _can_ with these antics and a handle that translates from the Latin as 'God Emperor'.

Let's just put him on ignore, let him go back to his soapbox in Canada and play Deus Ex Machina with a Parker Bros Monopoly game. I doubt they listen to him there, either.

-Kerry O.

Only that he belongs to MENSA, a society of so-called geniuses with IQs higher than 130. Like any other group, it has its overbearing, arrogant narcissists, but many of the people are really quite humble. I'd bet that Abra is another, and you know him pretty well. Abra is obviously a LOT smarter than us, 'cause you won't catch him dead in this forum, LOL!!


-Kerry O.

Top 1%ile roughly 142 and higher for your information. And who is a Mensan?

Yes, but if you watch him parry and thrust on a topic in Religion .. it's almost fluid!

Well, you KNOW we don't often agree, but I don't think history is going to forgive Alan Greenspan for greasing the rails of this trainwreck. And to lay blame where blame is due, Clinton sure didn't shine when he signed off on the repeal of Glass-Steagall. George Bush just administered the coup de grace with his massive gift to the rich and his twin landwars financed with deficit spending.

This all set the stage for the proverbial Perfect Storm.

I suspect that no matter who gets the reins of power in the 2012 elections, not much of what they do is going to pull us out of the quicksand any faster.

But it at least they might keep us from sinking back in again.


-Kerry O.

Perhaps you are have the inability to comprehend what has been written. Know the rules in invoking the Godwin Law. The Hitler analogy was germane in the discussion owing to eugenics which was brought up. Next as to the name calling tu quoque but I did not call any one here names, did I now? Suggesting something is not the same as saying it.

Would you rather by your oil from us or from the Saudis? Really we Canadian's are pretty nice bunch. We realize that without the US our economy would tank. That is the reason we want the US to do well because then you would buy what we need to sell. See how everything works out? Besides the your larges trading partner is Canada as well.

Be nice... for a change.

Nice opinion but not a viable solution. Still believing the piss down economics works when it has been shown not to and still taking it out on the poor.

Shame.

???

So having good money being paid out to the "poor" like we have been doing is a viable solution? We have been doing that on the micro and macro scales and it has shown not to work. So the solution from the left is "give them more money" so fork over more money to the poor and there are still "poor" around. So what is the left's solution once this has not worked? "You have not tried giving them even more money". Yes this song and dance has been going around for ages nationally and internationally and always the left is so willing to relieve the productive of their labor while squandering it on the ne'er-do-wells usually to buy their vote. Well it is time to cut the umbilical cord and leave the parasites to their own accord. Sooner or later hunger or greed will drive them to choose more more productive avenues of income and the productive will be all the better for it.

The fact is the poor will always remain with us. The definition what is poverty will forever change. There will always be poor among us. But in a capitalist state that is usually a temporary state which many of us may experience. If we define poor by median income there will always be people below the medium income level. If we define poverty as being the bottom 1%, 2%, 10% what have you there will be someone in that category. If you define poverty by what someone owns or has access to in a home (well that seem to be a new trend), such as owning a Playstation, wide-screen TV, having a cell phone, having high speed internet, a home, a car or what ever else that could be thought of to qualify one to be "poor" there will be people who would qualify for these but these would not necessarily be poor. As I said there will always be a bottom 10% (or what ever number can be dreamt of). So the left will always have someone to claim as a victim of whatever oppression is in vogue at the time.

The only way to create sustained wealth is to allow the free market to make choices. As I have stated cut spending, reduce the public workforce, enact right to work legislation, cut welfare, repeal Obamacare, cut and flatten taxes, cut salaries of the public servants, cut federal benefits etc. Such a policy would make more money available for investment and job creation. If you claim that capitalists are greedy, do you think capitalists would keep money in banks??? No they invest, start business or make existing business even bigger or invest in infrastructure. A free unfettered market is an excellent at figuring as to what is required and where thus the market will decide as to where resources and capital is required.

A better site regarding capital gains (site not run by a weed smoking hippie)

http://www.accf.org/publications/102/the-case-for-a-broad-based-capital-gains-tax-cut

http://dreier.house.gov/pdf/IPI%20-%20CapGainsKey.pdf

From elsewhere in the world
http://finance.indiamart.com/taxation/facts_capitalgains.html

Hey! Almost all the dope smoking hippies I know are extremely bright and rational. (Steve Jobs happened to be a dope smoking hippie too )

WOW,,I never really thought about people and views and words that LEAD others to follow,,,COMING FROM A SINGLE SITE,,,but to be real,,HEY,,we all gotta eat,,,SO..
Maybe OUR world NOW HAS PEOPLE,,planted or seeded into Net Work sites to HELP spread their Philosophies, lies and BS,,in hopes of MAKING other TURN from how they feel,,damn it boys,,,,
LIFE is beginning to stink anymore...
IF I was wanting to MAKE IDEAS and GET OUT TO PEOPLE EVERYWHERE,
What would 100 bucks a day for a telemarketer,,teleNETER,,lol,,have to do except,,join sites,,,and preach their pitch to whoever would listen,,,,The home bound person MAKES money,,and the backers get their VOICE out,,,,,Pretty cool,,yet,,,pretty damn scary...
Just saying?

site ran by and information provided by are not the same thing

the information from the link originates from Paul Krugman,, as the New York Times explains:

Mr. Krugman received his B.A. from Yale University in 1974 and his Ph.D. from MIT in 1977. He has taught at Yale, MIT and Stanford. At MIT he became the Ford International Professor of Economics.



Mr Krugman also won the Nobel Prize for economics in October 2008

Perhaps an inability to read an article for what it is worth seems to be an acute symptom some suffer from ... The article is not by Paul Krugman as you would have us believe. Steve Kanga wrote that article. Steve Kanga's education level? Oh yes Russian Studies and even that was not complete!!! Attempting to clothe an article in an aura of authority by quoting persons out of context and attributing it to another is similar to what Mohamed did to allah. Throwing words into an idol's mouth and then claiming allah said it so it must be true.

Conversation from the Sahih Bukahari the most authentic source of ahadith:

Mohamed: Allah revealed that I am to wed your daughter.
Ali: But we are brothers
Mohamed: We are not brothers of blood but brothers in faith. Allah sent the heavenly cranes of supplication and when their gift was uncovered I saw a babe, your daughter. It is allah's will
So Mohamed married Ayisha when she was six. And there are still 1 billion (and growing) followers of Islam all hoodwinked by a third rate ventriloquist and his sock puppet.

That would be the part where Obamacare targets the ONLY industry that already has the heaviest insurance mandate burden with a 5 employee requirement for healthcare coverage instead of the 50 employee requirement imposed on ALL other industries.

Ours is an industry where 5% profit is typical, due to the current insurance mandates imposed on us. Unless insurance premiums go down drastically, healthcare coverage for my 31 employees will cost me 6%-8% of company profit….that’s 1%-3% more than we have the ability to cover....even if I don't make a dime myself.

The typical response to this is..."You will simply have to raise our prices"...basic business 101…right? I'll go ahead and cover this as you don't know the inner workings of our industry...so here is how it really works: The larger corporations in this industry will not raise prices because they have the leverage to absorb the added cost through backroom deals with the suppliers who can’t afford to lose their business. Mid-sized to smaller companies do not have that pull, so will not be able to raise thier prices and remain competative.

This formula spells disaster for small to middle-sized companies in the labor industry….and though it is not solely due to Obamacare, as the bloodsucking 40% payroll insurance mandates were already a hardship….but the added Obamacare mandates are the final backbreakers.

Point taken, in an nod to Steve Job.
Requiem aeternam dona is Domine et lux perpetua luceat is. Requiescat in pace.

Very astute.

I wouldnt have anyone believe anything. I admit though that I often speak on a college educated level so I believe in peoples ability to seperate 'opinion' from 'information'. The reference to the information in the piece is absolutely credited to Klugman, as well as the Bureau of economic analysis and Robert S McIntyre.

Hopefully, those with college education understand the significance of references in any written piece and can distinguish such referenced material from the writers interpretations and opinions.

There is, as in most writing, the presence of both.