, cbae wrote

*snip*

The economy is in shambles because the people with money aren't spending. The government needs to spend it for them. How many times does this need to be explained to you? Even my 5 year old doesn't need to be told something more a couple of times before he finally "gets it". 

If people choose not to spend, its their decision. Taking that money by force will lead to even less spending. So basically your solution is for the government to take all.

I'll make you repeat this many times, so maybe eventually it will penetrate that thick skull of yours that government taxation and regulation is what brought us this crisis in the first place and that more tax and more government, like you are proposing, will only make the problem worse. We are headed for a triple dip, dispite of all the government spending.

And what exactly will reducing "worker protections" do other than put workers in greater harm and cost society even more?

I'm in favor of more regulations to prevent large corporations from ever holding the entire economy hostage unless we bail them out ever time they f*ck something up. You're not in favor socializing corporate losses are you? Because it sure sounds like you are.

I agree. We have many worker protection schemes here in Holland. It's very expensive to hire a person, minimum wage, and it takes years or a bucketload of money to fire somebody.

I also agree that large coorperations should not deserve special treatment. But you are twofaced in this issue. It's government regulations that enaable these coorperations to take the economy hostage. It's their companies the extra tax gets spent in.

So you can't be for the one and against the other.