The top marginal income tax rate: 100 years at a glance

[dcarrigg]

Re: The top marginal income tax rate: 100 years at a glance

Congressional Reform Act of 2011

in the Great State of New Hampster, one _still_ cant get elected guvnah without at least infering (since the bluehampsha crowd started to sway the swayable) to 'taking the pledge':
"if i am elected governor, i will _not_ support a broadbased tax..."

and 400 years later, they still manage to get by - and hey -all the big .mil bases were closed decades ago, to boot.

so, what i want to know is: WHY CANT THE REST OF THE STATES DO THE SAME?

go ahead, educate me here, I DARE YA?

I'll educate you here. The Federal Reserve Bank of Boston's Policy arm actually did a good study on this released back in April.

Here's the Cliff's Notes:

1) New Hampshire has had a smaller social safety net for some time - The New England average for people living in poverty is about 12%. In NH it's 7% of the population. This 5% of the population difference is not on Medicaid - or other social services. 40% of New Hampshires total revenue savings compared to New England is due to these circumstances.



2) So the welfare gap is clear, but NH does save in other areas as well. Hospitals are a particular source of savings because of stricter Medicaid eligibility criteria. There is also no public pre-school and until recently there was no public kindergarten. There are also fewer public hospitals (1) (typically public psychiatric hospitals) than other states.



3) New Hampshire takes in 22% less revenue on average than other New England States.



4) NH has higher corporate and property tax rates than comparable states. This partially offsets the lack of sales and income taxes.





5) New Hampshire also has a more diversified revenue stream than other neighboring states. This leads to more consistent state revenues than those states that rely 50% on income taxes.



6) NH also has unique revenue sources. By socializing the sale of liquor, the state is capable of selling it for less than neighboring states and still turn a profit. Moreover, NH games the Medicaid system to milk money from the Federal Government like no other state. Medicaid, remember, is the #1 expenditure in most states. It is, in fact, quite clever what NH does:





In summation, and to be general NH is a 40/40/20 split between good circumstances/unique revenue streams/decreased services.

40: 40% is due to 'favorable circumstances' of low poverty. Much of this might be due to low-income people 'self-selecting' out of the state to a neighboring state with a stronger social safety net, but I've not seen a definitive study on the matter (Sociology/PoliSci grad students - here's a dissertation for you).

40: 40% is due to somewhat unique revenue streams - higher property and corporate taxes, gaming medicaid better than the rest, etc.

20: 20% is due to savings from higher Medicaid eligibility, no preschool, a higher tuition to state funding ratio for state colleges etc.

So there's the breakdown of how they do it. It can be emulated somewhat, but not everywhere. It is a relatively small state that is surrounded by relatively high tax states so business comes in despite the high corporate tax etc.

[lektrode]

Re: The top marginal income tax rate: 100 years at a glance

thanks dc - always appreciate a good/great comeback

I'll educate you here. The Federal Reserve Bank of Boston's Policy arm actually did a good study on this released back in April.

Here's the Cliff's Notes:

1) New Hampshire has had a smaller social safety net for some time - The New England average for people living in poverty is about 12%. In NH it's 7% of the population. This 5% of the population difference is not on Medicaid - or other social services.

as one who spent his 'formative' years there, i would attribute most of this to the ole time yankee frugality, coupled with a fierce sense of self-sufficiency, esp amongst the upstate bunch: build their own houses, heat with wood they cut/split/stack, tend a garden, pick wild blueberries etc, fishing/hunting for food and beyond that: flatly refusing to go on the dole until a near death experience forces em to

In summation, and to be general NH is a 40/40/20 split between good circumstances/unique revenue streams/decreased services.

decreased .gov services, again, is part of the winning formula: most of NH takes its own trash to the dump (or pays for a private hauler) - tho this is a simplistic example, it forces a wonderful outcome: they dont need to have multiple layers of 'management' (the 100k/year+ assisitant-deputy-directors etc, most of whom are political-patronage jobs that are overwhelming the other nearby/blue states - see NY/NJ and/or CA) along with hundreds of unionized employees, with their own layers of dues-collecting and self-serving bosses (also typically collecting fat 6figure salaries), who force the political class into making 'bargains with the devil' and thereby sell-out the general public for a few more votes.

40: 40% is due to 'favorable circumstances' of low poverty. Much of this might be due to low-income people 'self-selecting' out of the state to a neighboring state with a stronger social safety net, but I've not seen a definitive study on the matter (Sociology/PoliSci grad students - here's a dissertation for you).

again: more good news for NH's general public/taxpayers: the deadbeat class cant make it kranking out welfare babies, with their attendant and EXPENSIVE social-worker buracracies (and yet more assistant-deputy-directrors), that the political class also panders to, again, for just a few more votes...

40: 40% is due to somewhat unique revenue streams - higher property and corporate taxes, gaming medicaid better than the rest, etc.

on the issue of higher property taxes, this again is a wonderful thing: IT FORCES THE HOMEOWNER CLASS TO FOCUS WITH LASER-LIKE INTENSITY ON THE ISSUES, vs just sitting back and letting the 'managers' (and assistant-deputy-directors) run the show (typically, in the neighboring bluestates, right into the dirt) which then allows the buracracy to force higher and higher budgets - for everything.

also have to agree with a prev obs from mr c1ue: that low property taxes are a give-away to the rich - they sure as hell are out here, where we have multi-million dollar beachfront properties (typically owned by out-of-staters) paying a few thou in taxes

20: 20% is due to savings from higher Medicaid eligibility, no preschool, a higher tuition to state funding ratio for state colleges etc.

dunno about the comment of 'gaming' the medicaid system, seeing as what happened with/to my mother this past winter, but would say they manage that function quite well - tho eye saw firsthand, how it might not workout all that well for the patient - the resources are definetly spread thin - and as i understand whats coming from the recent 'fixing of healthcare', maybe mom checked out just in time...

and re: no preschool/kindergarden, higher tuitions: i'll put it as delicately as i can: I DONT WANT TO PAY FOR 'YOUR CHILDREN' - and i _dont_ believe it should be the states responsibilty to provide 'free' services in this regard (i mean just look what has happened in CA) - tho they may not have the same level of programs as other states, NH's public schools do just fine (even if it is being hijacked by newcomers from south of the border) and nears i know, graduates above avg numbers from HS, with above avg SAT scores etc - the UNH system works just fine and it does so without draining BILLIONS out of the 'general fund' like 'other places' i'm aware of...

So there's the breakdown of how they do it. It can be emulated somewhat, but not everywhere. It is a relatively small state that is surrounded by relatively high tax states so business comes in despite the high corporate tax etc.

it definitely cant/wont be emulated by the bluestates, as they are already swamped/sinking by all of the above and much more dependant, it seems to me, on the continuation of the federal hog slopping (congressional horse trading) thats bankrupting the country, with the FIREman just lapping it up

so i will sum up my position that it is the political class, once again, that is The Problem, and they are enabling the banksters to screw the rest of us.

[dcarrigg]

Re: The top marginal income tax rate: 100 years at a glance

thanks dc - always appreciate a good/great comeback

You know I didn't mean to be adversarial - but my thoughts immediately sprung to that report and I thought I'd clear it up with pretty charts and graphs.

so i will sum up my position that it is the political class, once again, that is The Problem, and they are enabling the banksters to screw the rest of us.

I'm not sure. Sometimes one can blame .gov. They certainly did enable the banks and insider traders to rob the productive economy and the rest of the middle class blind (while one side promised gay marriage and wind turbines and the other promised the electric chair for abortions). But part of NH's equation is the socialization of liquor sales.

I think a lot of it is cultural. It's not just yankee, but something deeply New Hampshire. Live free or die came to mean no damn income tax and no damn sales tax. When income tax and sales tax are simply not an option, you find another way.

The funny thing is that, in having a smaller safety net, and higher corporate and land taxes, NH has still ended up one of the best states for income equality (with VT being the only other one from the northeast in the pack). Add to this the fact that NH actually has 100k population old mill cities where VT does not, and you have an interesting case to be made for progressive results arriving out of unique policy choices.

The sales tax is a regressive monster anyways, and the income tax simply rewards trust babies, money changers and inheritors while penalizing productive people. If I had to pick property and corporate tax vs. sales and income tax, I'd go the NH route any day.

[lektrode]

Re: The top marginal income tax rate: 100 years at a glance

You know I didn't mean to be adversarial - but my thoughts immediately sprung to that report and I thought I'd clear it up with pretty charts and graphs.

oh i realize that dc - i dont take it personal - its something in the blood, methinks, about those from the new england area (esp from BOS and of irish ancestry ;) that makes us want to put our .02 out there for discussion - its practically a sport back there, so i'm quite prone myself - its markedly different out this way, i can tell ya.

I'm not sure. Sometimes one can blame .gov. They certainly did enable the banks and insider traders to rob the productive economy and the rest of the middle class blind (while one side promised gay marriage and wind turbines and the other promised the electric chair for abortions). But part of NH's equation is the socialization of liquor sales.

wont touch the first part of that, other than to say that the political class has made blaming the .gov an easy target - and thats one way to phrase the state's 'monopoly' on liquor sales, but i think this is another part of NH's winning formula - that and the profits directly benefit the general public and remove the shady elements from the equation

I think a lot of it is cultural. It's not just yankee, but something deeply New Hampshire. Live free or die came to mean no damn income tax and no damn sales tax. When income tax and sales tax are simply not an option, you find another way.

precisely - and the lack of a broadbased tax is what prevents .gov from feathering its nest, discourages crony capitalism, the waste and fraud that goes along with it - and the biggie? theres NO MONEY to pay the politicians, so that type goes elsewhere and leaves those motivated by true concern for their communties to be deeply involved in the process of running the state/county/towns and eliminates the need to begin 'campaigning' and 'fundraising' again, almost as soon as they get in the first time vs the self-aggrandizing, ego-driven, wanna-be-prez types that tend to spring up within the cesspools of corruption that is most of the bluestates - such as the the senator from MA who was "for the iraq attack before he voted against it" and is now romping thru the mideast and se asia practically stirring up the hornets nest, while he advocates for what? (hint: methinks he's simply making himself look prezidential again)

The funny thing is that, in having a smaller safety net, and higher corporate and land taxes, NH has still ended up one of the best states for income equality (with VT being the only other one from the northeast in the pack). Add to this the fact that NH actually has 100k population old mill cities where VT does not, and you have an interesting case to be made for progressive results arriving out of unique policy choices.

The sales tax is a regressive monster anyways, and the income tax simply rewards trust babies, money changers and inheritors while penalizing productive people. If I had to pick property and corporate tax vs. sales and income tax, I'd go the NH route any day.

yes - its perty clear the results speak for themselves in this regard - its too bad the others are too blinded by their political machines to notice just how well things work up north of the border, eh?

just imagine what the guys in 1775 would think about whats happened in the place that started the grand experiment known as The United States - over a 2 penny tax on tea? - what would they do? i think they'd want to burn washington to the ground and start again - just my ole yankee .02

[lektrode]

Re: The top marginal income tax rate: 100 years at a glance

Presented without comment.

(Originally from the Washington Monthly)

and what? no more on this one?

THE MOST SIGNIFICANT ISSUE OF THE PAST 30 YEARS OR SO, AND MOST OF THE OPINIONATED CROWD IS OVER ARGUING ABOUT RACIST CAVEMEN?

come on, fer chrisakes!!

we need to have more on this topic OR THERE IS NO HOPE FOR 'change _anybody_ will believe in'

or is it cuz most agree with me and dcarrigg, that NH's formula WORKS?

[lektrode]

Re: The top marginal income tax rate: 100 years at a glance

ok... its 'all quiet on the eastern front' (and/or anyplace north, west or south of Lat: 21.17'.17" N x Lon: 157.50'.31" W ;)
so it must be dinner time, or at least its '5oclock somewhere'
and they're all spun out over on the racist caveman thread

SO WHEN DO WE RESUME DISCUSSING WHO AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO PAY FOR 'life, as we know it, in America'

or has this simply become another 'abstraction' for most people - PAYING for it, that is....

come on... i know yer out there, lets give it a go - i can wait, its still early out here

[dcarrigg]

Re: The top marginal income tax rate: 100 years at a glance

oh i realize that dc - i dont take it personal - its something in the blood, methinks, about those from the new england area (esp from BOS and of irish ancestry ;) that makes us want to put our .02 out there for discussion - its practically a sport back there, so i'm quite prone myself - its markedly different out this way, i can tell ya.

I get the feeling we come from very similar backgrounds.

wont touch the first part of that,

Can't say I blame ya'.

and thats one way to phrase the state's 'monopoly' on liquor sales, but i think this is another part of NH's winning formula - that and the profits directly benefit the general public and remove the shady elements from the equation

If a 'state monopoly' that make profits that 'directly benefit the general public' doesn't fall under the definition of a socialized industry, then I must have been really confused when listening to all of the right-wing arguments against single-payer healthcare.

precisely - and the lack of a broadbased tax is what prevents .gov from feathering its nest, discourages crony capitalism, the waste and fraud that goes along with it - and the biggie? theres NO MONEY to pay the politicians, so that type goes elsewhere and leaves those motivated by true concern for their communties to be deeply involved in the process of running the state/county/towns and eliminates the need to begin 'campaigning' and 'fundraising' again, almost as soon as they get in the first time vs the self-aggrandizing, ego-driven, wanna-be-prez types that tend to spring up within the cesspools of corruption that is most of the bluestates -

I would somewhat agree and somewhat disagree. I think that it is more important that NH has a culture of avoiding these things than politicians being corrupt in other places (even though it clearly occurs). I truly mean it. I think that politicians in NH quite simply aren't corrupt because it simply isn't tolerated there. I also think that that the size of the legislature (very, very large) lends itself to the dilution of power and makes it more difficult for any one politician to swindle.

such as the the senator from MA who was "for the iraq attack before he voted against it" and is now romping thru the mideast and se asia practically stirring up the hornets nest, while he advocates for what? (hint: methinks he's simply making himself look prezidential again)

He looks awfully presidential on his yacht he hid in RI to dodge taxes.

yes - its perty clear the results speak for themselves in this regard - its too bad the others are too blinded by their political machines to notice just how well things work up north of the border, eh?

Yeah, it really does work better.

I don't think that MA could do it, but ME or VT or RI could if they really wanted to. ME especially could head down that road - it is not substantially demographically different than NH. But then again, ME has a culture all its own.

For a state the size of MA or bigger to do it would take time and have to be done around the same time as other big states so that all of the corporate tax rates and income tax rates flipped about the same time to avoid weird temporary advantages.

just imagine what the guys in 1775 would think about whats happened in the place that started the grand experiment known as The United States - over a 2 penny tax on tea? - what would they do? i think they'd want to burn washington to the ground and start again - just my ole yankee .02

I think they'd be shocked that we had an empire. Not to mention cars, aeroplanes and cell phones. But I think they'd be more incensed at how screwed up we made debt at all levels private and public. Algebra hasn't changed. Compound interest is the same. Even very early historical empires knew that debt holidays were necessary when the system became unbalanced...holy books are full of examples.

I think that's the first thing they'd point out if they had a chance to study the system. Debt is a bigger drag than taxes are now.

All empires end in financial hell. The bean counters and money changers take over just before the fall. There is always short time to put them in check before they topple the whole structure with debt in an attempt to appropriate the empire to themselves. They always do it with the complicity of politicians. They always push the common folk too far, precipitating collapse.

Austerity's coming. The second dip will be here by spring. The world does not have a leader strong enough to push the international financial system into writing off debt to keep it afloat. It may be too late for one to arise before all hell breaks loose. EJ seems to think so - and that's enough to keep me up thinking.

[dcarrigg]

Re: The top marginal income tax rate: 100 years at a glance

and what? no more on this one?

THE MOST SIGNIFICANT ISSUE OF THE PAST 30 YEARS OR SO, AND MOST OF THE OPINIONATED CROWD IS OVER ARGUING ABOUT RACIST CAVEMEN?

come on, fer chrisakes!!

we need to have more on this topic OR THERE IS NO HOPE FOR 'change _anybody_ will believe in'

or is it cuz most agree with me and dcarrigg, that NH's formula WORKS?

This gave me a good belly-laugh!

But seriously, we can look at specific policies, see them work, and replicate them. We just have to leave our prejudices at the door.

First thing is first, creditors need to take a haircut. It's plain, it's simple, it's true. Argue against it philosophically until you're blue in the face if you want.
It won't change the fact that there is too much debt. The math doesn't work. It needs to be written off. If it is not, we all loose.

But there is so much more that can be done if we're objective.

Maybe, if NH has better results without income tax and sales tax, we don't need them either. Maybe if stricter medicaid eligibility criteria is rough, but not the end of the world, it's time to copy NH. Maybe all liquor should be sold in state stores. Maybe cigarettes too. Who knows? All I know is that there is evidence out there, and what's happening now isn't working.

Maybe liberal arts colleges can exist with nothing more than journal subscriptions, laptops, a sparse room, a library, and an auditorium. Maybe we don't need college to be like club med. I've seen way too many college kids see their standard of living drop after school gets out. Maybe student loans can only pay tuition? Maybe state schools take a new philosophy and try to give a great education while being as cheap as possible with facilities rather than competing with the ivys?

If healthcare is half the cost north of the NH border - and it's crippling us here - then maybe, even if there's a quality reduction, it's time to take a look at what works and what doesn't up in Canada. Here's the novel part: copy what works! I'm certainly sick of hearing "the US has the best [insert whatever here] in the world!" It used to be true. Now it might not be.

[lektrode]

Re: The top marginal income tax rate: 100 years at a glance

This gave me a good belly-laugh!

as i thot it would and _was_ my intention, sir.

But seriously, we can look at specific policies, see them work, and replicate them. We just have to leave our prejudices at the door.

right - but i guess the rest of em are too tired to-day/nite from bangin on serge and mr c1ue over at caveman central - tho serge wasnt too far off the mark, he just a bit too over the top/ un-PC for most of em, kinda like mr steve (never mind me), but in a diff category..

had to laff when someone remarked that he thot this place was 'a bit right of center'
(and i observed that only one with a left of center POV could possibly think such)

First thing is first, creditors need to take a haircut. It's plain, it's simple, it's true. Argue against it philosophically until you're blue in the face if you want.
It won't change the fact that there is too much debt. The math doesn't work. It needs to be written off. If it is not, we all loose.

no argument from me on that one - was quite frankly OUTRAGED when the bernank (or was it hank - its all gettin blurry already - part of their plan, no doubt) bailed out AIG so GS could get cashed out 100cents on the dollar for counterparty risk BS paper they had no biz/right/sanction/license (or capital) to write = 100% FRAUD and then some get bonuses to do 'the workout' ???

WTF, over?

the kleptocracy lobby scored BIG on that play - and more of the MoFo's should be in jail

the rest of this sounds reasonable to me - so why dont we jam on this one some more, shall we?

the topic is TAXES, WHO PAYS EM AND HOW MUCH = 'FAIR'

and the problem in my mind isnt the rates, so much as it is the 'exemptions' and 'credits' and deductions - esp considering that the 'entitlements' are the main issue, so the FICA is the solution - and sheer insanity to allow everything beyond the first 106k to escape it and the only FAIR way to cover or 'insure' that the working/middle class doesnt end up homeless/destitute and starving (mr steve) is to levy the FICA on all forms of 'income' - at least until that account 'balances' and THEN MAKE SURE THE POLITICAL CLASS CANT SIPHON IT OFF TO OTHER BS/pandering/votebuying PROGRAMS

But there is so much more that can be done if we're objective.

Maybe, if NH has better results without income tax and sales tax, we don't need them either. Maybe if stricter medicaid eligibility criteria is rough, but not the end of the world, it's time to copy NH. Maybe all liquor should be sold in state stores. Maybe cigarettes too. Who knows? All I know is that there is evidence out there, and what's happening now isn't working.

+1

Maybe liberal arts colleges can exist with nothing more than journal subscriptions, laptops, a sparse room, a library, and an auditorium. Maybe we don't need college to be like club med. I've seen way too many college kids see their standard of living drop after school gets out. Maybe student loans can only pay tuition? Maybe state schools take a new philosophy and try to give a great education while being as cheap as possible with facilities rather than competing with the ivys?

If healthcare is half the cost north of the NH border - and it's crippling us here - then maybe, even if there's a quality reduction, it's time to take a look at what works and what doesn't up in Canada. Here's the novel part: copy what works! I'm certainly sick of hearing "the US has the best [insert whatever here] in the world!" It used to be true. Now it might not be.

[dcarrigg]

Re: The top marginal income tax rate: 100 years at a glance

the topic is TAXES, WHO PAYS EM AND HOW MUCH = 'FAIR'

and the problem in my mind isnt the rates, so much as it is the 'exemptions' and 'credits' and deductions - esp considering that the 'entitlements' are the main issue, so the FICA is the solution - and sheer insanity to allow everything beyond the first 106k to escape it and the only FAIR way to cover or 'insure' that the working/middle class doesnt end up homeless/destitute and starving (mr steve) is to levy the FICA on all forms of 'income' - at least until that account 'balances' and THEN MAKE SURE THE POLITICAL CLASS CANT SIPHON IT OFF TO OTHER BS/pandering/votebuying PROGRAMS

A simple and logical fix. Let me take it one step further: Let's have FICA taxes applied to each an every overseas (foreign national) employee an American company hires. It's not protectionism - simply solvency.

[charliebrown]

Re: The top marginal income tax rate: 100 years at a glance

As other pointed out, these are maringal rates, what was the effective rate in 1960? Also, taxes are increasing everywhere else.
In Illinois, my first paycheck was taxed at 2% in the 70s. Now it is 5%, SS, and medicare withholding have been raised. sales tax has gone from 5% to 7.75%, on a wider class of products. Utility taxes have increased, more local and state services have fees. Property taxes have gone from from 5K in 1996 to 8k in 2010.

[lektrode]

Re: The top marginal income tax rate: 100 years at a glance

As other pointed out, these are maringal rates, what was the effective rate in 1960? Also, taxes are increasing everywhere else.
In Illinois, my first paycheck was taxed at 2% in the 70s. Now it is 5%, SS, and medicare withholding have been raised. sales tax has gone from 5% to 7.75%, on a wider class of products. Utility taxes have increased, more local and state services have fees. Property taxes have gone from from 5K in 1996 to 8k in 2010.

hell thats nuthin - the fed 'income tax' started as 1% (on incomes above 4k) - in what year? and who was in charge of congress in 1913? and what _else_ did they do that year? to 'fix' the problems with the biz cycle???

its almost funny, eh? how we hear 'the rates are the problem' cuz they too low?
but deficit spending 3 trillion in 2 years to 'fix the banking system' (never mind health care) ISNT ENOUGH, accoding to slugman & co???

http://mises.org/daily/1597

At first the revenue raised by the new income tax was disappointing: only $28 million in 1914. But then it accelerated. $41 million the next year, when the top rate was 7%, and nearly $68 million in 1916, when it was raised to 15%.[16] Eventually more than $1 billion would be pulled in by the income tax during the whole of World War I, when the rates were raised to 67% in 1917 and 77% in 1918, and make the hated tax the permanent feature it has become today.[17]
After the war, the top rate would fall to 73%. In the 1920's it fell to a low of 24% in 1929 but never again got as low as the pre-war rate of 7%. What would Americans do for a 7% rate today, one wonders? Hoover and the Republicans raised the rates to 25% in 1930, then to 63% in 1932. Under the corporate statism of the New Deal, [and the dems in charge, once again] rates leaped to 79% in 1936, 81% in 1940, finally exhausting itself at 94% in 1944–1945.

(funny how the author of this piece specifically ID's the party involved a raising of the rates, when he conveniently omits that detail in the next sentence, so i 'fixed' it for him)

[mooncliff]

Re: The top marginal income tax rate: 100 years at a glance

The top tax rate is informative, but what we really want to see is how much was actually paid rather than the rate, since that can be circumvented if you have good accountants.

[lektrode]

Re: The top marginal income tax rate: 100 years at a glance

A simple and logical fix. Let me take it one step further: Let's have FICA taxes applied to each an every overseas (foreign national) employee an American company hires. It's not protectionism - simply solvency.

that would go 'over big', ya think?
maybe just propose the first part and then, if that doesnt result in the congressional lobbiest brigade to put on pointy white hats and go on a 'torchlight parade' thru DC, there might be a snowballs chance...

whats funny about this thread, is that nobody seems interested in discussing it - again i say its because for most, actually paying for this .gov 'of ours' seems to be an abstraction - it definitely not 'real' for the DC aristocracy, otherwise something would be happening - maybe its the heat?

[dcarrigg]

Re: The top marginal income tax rate: 100 years at a glance

that would go 'over big', ya think?
maybe just propose the first part and then, if that doesnt result in the congressional lobbiest brigade to put on pointy white hats and go on a 'torchlight parade' thru DC, there might be a snowballs chance...

whats funny about this thread, is that nobody seems interested in discussing it - again i say its because for most, actually paying for this .gov 'of ours' seems to be an abstraction - it definitely not 'real' for the DC aristocracy, otherwise something would be happening - maybe its the heat?

Yeah, it was 110 degrees f in my place two days ago. The heat it rough - but you saw my energy usage. You don't get that using A/C.

Long story short, you're right, it would go over like the Hindenburg on a NJ morning. Still, we will change or loose. The US needs to see the forest through the trees.

But at least here we're coming up with ideas. I don't know why there's no interest. When there was a bill to put Glass-Steagall back there was a lack of interest too.

Interest in solving problems has never been strong. Interest in whining about them always has. Hence Opera has huge ratings and the damn racist caveman thread wins.