Only if we disregard everything Krellin says

and we have failed already...lol

Okay, I'll start with a sincere proposal. I consider myself a tried-and-true Northeast Liberal, but... I think there's merit in the Conservative dream of changing Social Security from a defined-benefit to a defined-contribution plan. I'd also be willing to reduce the corporate tax rate *and* the top marginal tax rate if it enabled us to increase capital gains to be level with that top marginal rate. I just think people who own things for a living ought to pay as much as people who work for a living. Thoughts?

hecks, you must make this for Americans only then, since you are going to compare this community to The US Congress, only Americans can really understand the problems, and also the culture surrounding the problems.

Europeans and Americans, for the most part, look at politics differently.

Agreed, I'm British and have no sense of your polarised, ridiculous conservative/liberal battles regarding gun control and tax percentages.

I think hecks offers the right kind of compromise. I'd be up for totally eliminating the corporate income tax, in exchange for taxing income from capital at the same rate as income from labour.

However, I don't think you'll see any "liberal" concede that a fiscal realignment should include no revenues whatsoever.

When we get to a vote on our plan, only Americans can vote. That's fair. But I'd suggest that we allow others to participate in the discussion as advisers, for two reasons: first, they might have some useful ideas. Second, they're going to comment anyway, so we might as well welcome it.

I dont give two shits about that corporate tax rate. makeone flat/fair tax, and do away with teh damn IRS...lol

Make certain items exempt from any sales tax at all (foods, some used cars, etc) things, that a poor family need to survive, and will not be taxes into oblivion for.

Double sales tax on ALL luxury items (yachts,, specific type cars/trucks and such)

We can certainly find some common ground HERE, since I am a Conservative, but not a fucking Neo-Con.

end all aid to every damn country in the world.

Oh, and the US should have a VAT. You can lower personal income tax rates quite a bit with a VAT, and it can be structured so that it's relatively flat on the income scale.

ah, so the non-europeans are Lobbyists?

"Make certain items exempt from any sales tax at all (foods, some used cars, etc) things, that a poor family need to survive, and will not be taxes into oblivion for.

Double sales tax on ALL luxury items (yachts,, specific type cars/trucks and such)"

The problem with that idea is that there's a constitutional amendment permitting the collection of a national income tax, but no law authorizing the collection of a national sales tax. Current sales taxes are collected only at the state or local level. So you're proposing something roughly equivalent to a national VAT?

I am not against a VAT on some items.

I am not against that hecks, but remember, I am a Conservative, but in more of a constitutionalist way, not in a GOP boot-licker way.

I do not like the Government in my business at all if I can help it.

Why should US Conservatives concede anything? They've won. They've won so complete a victory that they can no longer get a Republican president elected because every important Conservative policy already exists. As long as they keep distracting the left with ridiculously hard fought arguments over completely irrelevant things the left get emotional about I can't see it changing any time soon either.

So if we flatten out the progressive tax rate structure and introduce a national VAT, are you okay with bringing Capital gains into your flat tax structure level with income?

Also, with your flat tax plus VAT structure, do you envision budgeting overall tax revenues up slightly, roughly level, or down slightly?

Hecks, sure I am, within reason. However, I am also against certain abuse in the 'Social Spending' area also, so that needs to get fixed ASAP

Revenue up, spending down.

Well, I've offered to transition Social Security from defined-benefit to defined-contribution, which will start to help.
Under "Social Spending" I'm not unwilling to compromise. Are we talking about across-the-board cuts in benefits, or strategic cuts to eliminate administrative overhead and phase out programs that aren't working? Throw me an idea, I'll run it up the flagpole and see who salutes.

I could do without farm subsidies (and corn subsidies, in particular). But hey, then we're totally in the realm of things which are not politically possible.

Eliminating them may not be possible, but I do think we could reduce them. It would take spending a lot of political capital.
But yeah, those farm subsidies... you don't like them because they subvert the market, and I don't like them because most of them end up going to corporate farming concerns. And since you and I are never going to get re-elected anyway, let's toss them. Although, to reduce market shock, maybe we could call it a progressive phase-out over the next ten years? To compensate, we could offer small farmers (say under a certain acreage) VAT exemptions for seed and equipment, if you like the sound of that.

if you kick Monsanto the hell out of the farming industry, I may indeed agree to that.

GMO seeds suck; simple as that.

Now Oil companies need their pacifier taken away fro sure, but farmers are not exactly 'rolling in the dough' so to speak.

Well first off, we need to agree to some thigns in congress.

No bill can be more than 30 pages long (or some set amount) and 100% no pork allowed. I dont care how much it actually adds up to in the end, but you need to change the culture.

Want to set a bill for 'gun control" fine, write up the bill, and put your 'extras' in there that reflect only on THAT bill.

Lobbyists....Drown them all. Anyone from congress caught taken ANy favors from outside sources, are executed...lol

I know that seems drastic, but right now nothing is done, and they are all corrupt, because there is no fear.

Lets get down to killing the corruption in congress FIRST.

I like Hecks idea, on the size of the farm. I am okay with that one actually, as lnog as we can agree on the actual acres, and also each area is different.

A 100 acre farm in East tennessee if a good sized farm, but 100 acres in texas is not big, because different soil types.

So, you would have to scale it by region I think, or maybe by amount of production instead of land size?

Hecks, you 'size of teh farm' idea is not bad, but it wont work. A 100 acre farm that only has cows, makes less than say a 100 acre dairy farm, and that same 100 acre farm in East tennessee growing beef cows, would have to be about 5000 acres in Texas to get the same production.

And as far as crops, again, each crop produces different results, and such.

I am sure there is common ground to be found on this issue, so I can agree to cutting the pacfiers for big corporate farms without hesitation.

You raise a good point about acreage. But the variation is not only geographic, but also by type of production. There's a big difference between 100 acres of cattle ranch and 100 acres of sugar plantation.

yes, so it may need to be a combination of acres/revenue/tonnage etc

So maybe we can do some calculation based on acreage, yield per acre, and total earnings?
(If we were the real Congress, I'd just ask the CBO)

I think we're getting close to a bi-partisan Hecks-Stressed budget plan.

This is entirely too easy. Maybe we should wait until BoSox, Krellin, and Obi show up before we declare victory.

hecks, I have a small farm, so I am probably more versed in this than most here.

I only really have sheep, as most of the other things I produce are consumed by only me, family and friends (fruits and eggs and such)
My sheep however I do take to market.

I make a very very healthy profit, they are hair sheep (so no shearing required), and actually you may know them, since they are named after a Mountain your state, katahdin.

I will use 100 sheep as my point of reference. I only require 25 acres for that (as long as I rotate pastures correctly) and that many Ewes will produce about 180 lambs.

I will keep about 10 ro replace older ewes, and sell the other 170. I will get roughly, 22000 dollars for that (market rates today), and I will put less than 3500 into the entire operation for the year.

Now, if someone is doing that x10 or more, they have a HUGe profit margain, and could abuse this sytem easily.

So, you need a combination of acres/NET profit per acre, etc...

Hwecks, because I am not a neo-con. People often confuse me for such, and really I am not.

Neo-cons and far left liberals are too far apart, I am even further to the right on some issues than a Neo-con, but can drift to the middle on other issues, mainly social issues.

Oh, sheep! Neat. My wife's a big-time knitter. What kind of yarn do they make from Katahdins?

(Shameless self-promotion of my wife's knitting: http://www.prettysneakyshoes.com )