Challenge to telerion, palynka, kazetnagora, sh76

Originally posted by Melanerpes
The effort to cut Social Security was a great example of just how hard it is to actually make an effort to reduce the size of government.

The big problem is that seniors vote at very high levels, and there's a lot of them, and they have political clout. As an ever greater percentage of the population are seniors, this problem will only become more chal ...[text shortened]... educing the size of Social Security and Medicare in a way that would be politically doable?

1) Raise the retirement age. People are living longer and are healthier in their 60s. 70 is the new 65.

2) Have the payroll tax pick up again at $250k of income.

I don't have the numbers off hand; but I bet those two will go a long way towards saving social security.

Originally posted by eljefejesus
I'll answer your scenario and give you an alternative scenario as well.

First, let's say you create two options, one is bad, the other is worse. In your scenario, one option is to raise taxes to pay for current levels of overspending that creates deficits. These taxes mean less profits are left for those who saved and invested, and more subsidies fo ...[text shortened]... hat a libertarian would like to see as a start, we need to move in that direction.

The kid should cut its spending, the libertarian philosophy is for the government to turn back the clock and roll back the spending, at its practical, moderate, feasible end.

one problem I have with a lot of "philosophies" is that it's all just a lot of academic word-play - unless you can produce policies that people will vote for and legislators will pass. Otherwise you end up with lots of wisdom (possibly of the highest quality) that won't travel very far from the textbook that contains it.

the libertarian philosophy calls for significant cuts in government spending. But how do we actually do that? How do we get candidates to make SPECIFIC proposals of various cuts that will MEANINGFULLY reduce the size of government? How can we get the very people that benefit from such programs to accept those cuts? - and if the cuts are large, there will be lots of beneficiaries to convince.

and - how does a libertarian present a general philosophy of "less government" while at the same time emphasizing that government does indeed do many good things, some of which may even warrant an increase in spending. There needs to be a criteria that will allow voters to readily differentiate between the "muscle" and the "fat" - so that when we make cuts, we're only cutting the fat.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
[b]but not sure where your going with the goods you named as consumer goods will exist in a market economy and will avoid the shortages created in socialist-leaning economies.

I don't understand what you mean with this.

Example, just because the government could benefits its people by improving access to education and investing in education ...[text shortened]... b]

Why not? And why the adjective "extreme"? Is there any "extreme" health care today?

On the first one, you probably don't understand what I was saying because I didn't understand what you were saying either: "but not sure where your going with the goods you named..."

On the second, We are agreed on the possibility/promise of vouchers as an experiment.

On the third, there is no extreme medical coverage YET, but there likely will be, as in people will be forced to pay more taxes or fines to pay for expanded medical coverage.

Still, maybe it will end up moderate, will have to see...

Originally posted by Melanerpes
The effort to cut Social Security was a great example of just how hard it is to actually make an effort to reduce the size of government.

The big problem is that seniors vote at very high levels, and there's a lot of them, and they have political clout. As an ever greater percentage of the population are seniors, this problem will only become more chal ...[text shortened]... educing the size of Social Security and Medicare in a way that would be politically doable?

These are all good points,

I have to agree with many of the options mentioned, raise the retirement age, if only for certain ages where it may be more politically feasible.

It is a pickle to not have people feeling cheated, but at the same time, it's such a huge burden/cost...

I say with expanding retirement age for the young, then work up to a slightly less politially feable group... also extend out into the future the options for people to retire with more money monthly.

Originally posted by sh76
1) Raise the retirement age. People are living longer and are healthier in their 60s. 70 is the new 65.

2) Have the payroll tax pick up again at $250k of income.

I don't have the numbers off hand; but I bet those two will go a long way towards saving social security.

Reasonable... probably necessary.

Originally posted by Melanerpes
[b]The kid should cut its spending, the libertarian philosophy is for the government to turn back the clock and roll back the spending, at its practical, moderate, feasible end.

one problem I have with a lot of "philosophies" is that it's all just a lot of academic word-play - unless you can produce policies that people will vote for and legislato ...[text shortened]... n the "muscle" and the "fat" - so that when we make cuts, we're only cutting the fat.[/b]

lots of questions that all philosophies could ask themselves, including the philosophy that one can keep approving every additional spending bill indefinitely and that the adding costs don't make each additional program less affordable... which puts many people in a bind...

reductions will occur when the issue is made relevant and conveyed well to people, as in Ross Perot and his campaign emphasis on the national debt.

Really, it all just starts with taking your positions and making a good case that convinces people, and in politics there is always compromise.

It is said that there are 2 things people should see getting made: laws and sausages.

Laws and politics are often dirty, and there must be compromise, but every succesful politician must compromise to get varying groups united to move some legislation. starting with medicare and social security may be a tall order, but there is room to start cutting.