host

Your amused reaction notwithstanding, that was the fiscal status quo. You advocate anarchy because your approach is simplistic and ignores the current fiscal crisis. You resent spending programs that you find personally offensive, but you only touch on situations like needless spending on unneeded military facilities, primarily in otherwise distressed areas in southern states, and pork spending on items only justified by the political expediency of republican legislators in the federal government. Revenues were in balance with spending whether you approve their sources, or not.

The hidden "tax" on all of us now is the newly created debt caused by increased spending and tax cut exacerbated reduction in the revenue stream.
Current fiscal policy has resulted in diminshed spending power of the dollar and an increased portion of the federal budget that is obligated to pay the interst on $2 trillion in new debt in just four years. You protest against a tax that only the wealthiest havr been paying since 1916, and they still managed, in spite of the tax, to double their share of total national wealth since 1970.

You make no allowance, in your singleminded advocacy for further tax relief for the richest few, on the effect of reduction to the status quo, or about the merits of spending programs that you do not focus on, or find less repugnant than the ones that you have been indoctinated against by rhetoric of leaders you admire, as in the tired "cadillac driving, welfare queen".

You offer no consideration of the influence of the wealthy anf their lobbyists, the clout of their corporate control, their political contributions, their tax lawyers, accountants, and the advertising that they can afford to puch their agenda. They are not impacted by pension fund failures, and their consolidation of wealth in America has increased from 17 percent in 1970 to 34 percent now, a consolidation that took place largely in spite of pre-Bush era tax "reform". You are short on specifics and on fairness. Just as there are no dead bodies of people refused care due to a lack of medical insurance, littering the entrances to our hospitals, it must be that all seriously ill people are treated, despite their means or insurance coverage. All will be fed. clothed, and housed, despite your campaign for drastic cuts. You'll succeed only in making the poor beg for what they receive in a more dignified manner currently, and you may even increase costs as you increase anxiety and uncertainty among the needy. We do not fund enough mediacl clinics for the uninsured now, so a $40 treatment for symptoms of a child's sore throat is morphed into a $450 emergency room visit, the provider of last resort, paid for by the taxpayer.

Your "there" ain't "there", bear, unless you intend to preside over an America where a minority steps over the dying, dead, and starving in the streets, because we achived the tax "fairness" and spending cuts that complete the consolidation of national wealth to the already welathiest few, as you seem to champion.