(November 21, 2011 at 5:01 am)Phaedra Wrote:(November 21, 2011 at 1:59 am)Skeptical_Nurse Wrote: The demands are ridiculous. Imo
Care to elaborate?
Using the 99% Declaration as a reference, I find some of them to be ridiculously unrealistic. I'm not going to comment on all of their demands, just a few notable examples.
For what it's worth, I'm sympathetic to the movement. I don't agree with all of the talking points.
2) (Abrogation of the Citizen's United case) This would require a Constitutional amendment, and isn't (entirely) within the power of the Federal government to accomplish. In any case, it's not going to happen "immediately" as they demand.
4) (Term Limits) Requires a Constitutional amendment. See #2.
5) (A fair tax code) I'm on board with this one. With that being said, good luck with that.
8) (Debt Reduction) Another one I'm on board with - I'm skeptical that the poorly defined goal can be achieved by 2020. They're going to have to be a bit more specific on this.
14) (End Outsourcing) I find it curious that they speak both of "ending loopholes" and "providing tax incentives". One man's loophole is anothers incentive - in other words, many of the "loopholes" that reduce corporate tax burden are intentionally codified as incentives, or are incentives that are used in unintended ways. The point is - every new incentive is an invitation to game the tax system. In addition - as long as there is economic incentive to reduce labor costs by using foreign labor, there will be those that do so. That being said, I too would like to see this practice disappear, I'm just not convinced it can be done.
17) (Foreclosure Moratorium) I've seen this one extensively discussed elsewhere, and I'm not going to attempt to reproduce all of the arguments here. I do find it to be hopelessly unrealistic.
