Otherwise I’m with you. Not only do I propose a starvation diet, but I want all the state Dems spinning a recumbent bike to Ted Nugent’s greatest hits, while Tom McClintock prods them.

I believe government needs to go on a starvation diet.
Constitutionally speaking, the federal government is only allowed a flat tax on income, apportioned according to the population of the states. Other than flat taxes, the only other tax allowed are tariffs. The federal government under such the constitutional restrictions would certainly have money, but it would be forced to be rather small and modest in its ambitions. I think it’s important for government to focus more on policing functions than infrastructure, and government is best where it is local.

And Jon, is there right now government money to “get training”? And, does property tax revenue fund these training programs? Is $8000 not equal to 2 months mortgage, and thus very significant? Your cascade of hypothetical events is pure fantasy as well.

I bring this up because your posts juxtaposed contrast the extreme ends of your respective ideologies. One want no government, the other believes one’s survival depends on it.

Those houses will be foreclosed upon. You’re basically proposing pouring that money into the hands of mortgage companies and interest backed securities, all at the expense of schools, police, fire, etc. Then, when that person does lose their job, they won’t be able to get training because there will be no government money to fund it. Their credit will be so awful, they won’t be able to get any loans to go back to school. The schools will be closing anyway since they won’t have funding. I just don’t understand why you think any of these ideas would possibly work in a fantasy world, let alone the real one. Then, when they’re sick and starving on lawless and deteriorating streets, with no health care and no food stamps, they can celebrate the property taxes they didn’t pay.

Yes, I just got the news about LA. They did awesome, and made some really smart moves. They ran a very intelligent campaign. We kind of did a frontal charge, and that made things more difficult. It’s good to know the base has a voice in their own Party. Hopefully, the GOP will take a stronger stance against undermining USA soveriegnty via Free Trade Agreements and fight harder for small, limited Government. Interesting… Galvin Newsome yesterday was talking like a radical Republican. He was asking the city council to consider hacking 175 city jobs and slashing across the board department costs. I think this depression will force some needed shrinkage of government. Meanwhile, there will be an equal pull to spend our way out by borrowing and taxing. I think CA will see a major battle over property taxes. I personally believe both the property tax and income tax should be abolished. That’d be a great way to help first time home buyers hold on to their homesQ!

There have been some major changes with the L.A. G.O.P. too! WTG folks!

Just like Barack Obama. “I’m opposed to the bailout, but we need it”. Welcome to the next wave of Clinton-speak: Four or more years of a complete unwillingness to take a stand. A president who lives and dies at the will of public opinion. In *that* respect only will Barack Obama’s “regime” be different than George Bush’s.

The bailout has been a complete mess. It makes me sick. Still, it’s better than a complete collapse of our economy. That still may happen but isn’t likely.

The public works projects that Obama will make are not socialism, at least not in my book, though obviously it is in yours. Obama is a pragmatist. Whatever works. He’s not an ideologue. Clinton was similar. I respect their ability to think and change course.