Let us make a little scenario about a progressive agenda.

Let's say Bush offers to put a 50% tax on all income, with no exceptions for anyone. That 50% will be split evenly between every citizen above the age of 18 in the United States.

The GDP is roughly 10 trillion dollars. If 5 trillion dollars were split between the 216 million people above the age of 18, then everyone would get about $23,000.

There is a catch though. He will also get rid of social security, unemployment aid, student assitance for college, the minimum wage, cheap housing, and food stamps.


Would you take him up on his offer? Why?

edit: almost forgot unemployment aid.

/sarcasm :9

That's preposterous. Its the antithesis of Bushian economics. 50% sales tax and abolish income tax I can believe.

Free $23K? Sure I'd take it in a heartbeat.

would the 23 grand be taxed? its not alot of money either way, but most people can live verry well on 2 grand a month, that plus even the added income of after this 50%tax being around another 5 grand, that would be decent living money, but on the scocial side, the money would in effect replace scocial security for the elderly with garaunteed money, the minimum wage could be lowered because people would be getting money from the goverment, but it would kill the program itself, cheap housing could be aleviated because of this, and it could in effect replace food stamps, as for education assistance, that should stay because as you say, the money would come from a tax on all income and lower national education levels meand lower national income, wich means the 23 grand level would drop, and with lower incomes propped up by no minimum wage would collapse the system itself, but if you found a way around those last two, it would be a stable system

He takes orders from the Neocon's and the drug lobby..and the religious zealots..any progressive agenda is out of the question..
He wants to return his corporate masters to the days of the 1880's when the country was under gang rule by corporate outlaws..
any progressive agenda if we could appoint a magnamous soveriegn...
health care for all and protecting jobs and environment...without a vibrant creative, industrial sector to finance everything there is nothing..but, your surely won't get than under Bush and his corporate monopolists...
with a successful economy with decent wages...free education for all as we have in most of the industrial world...education does us all good..including the corporate world.

there are military; transportation (air traffic control, highway maintenance, locks-dams and river channels); Homeland inSecurity, etc

We can argue how much $ the federal government should be spending
but some of each those things are needed and they aren't going to be free.

What do you think I am, a republican?

a one time pay-off of 23K will not feed a family AND send yourself or your kids to college AND pay the rent AND cover retirement... nor will it take the place of a living wage....for the entire span of a persons life.

Now, if you mean 23K per year per adult in the family...that's different.

This leaves exactly zero dollars to run the government. In some cases that would be good--he wouldn't have any money to prosecute his illegal wars. But in most cases it would be exceptionally bad.

Also, the rich wouldn't go for it at all--the CEO of Wal-Mart is not going to be happy about the prospect of his sending in a check for forty million dollars (or whatever is half of everything he makes in one year) so he can get one for $23,000 in return.

Since Bush is property of the rich, anything they wouldn't like wouldn't happen.