Texas Governor Reaffirms States’ Rights Under 10th Amendment!!!!

[Lorizael]

No, that assumes parents take a much greater role in their children's education, which is one reason why they are both wealthier and their children are better educated.

Wow. Where are you getting all this from? Do you have any stats to back up the assertion that rich parents take a greater role in their children's education, that this leads to the children being better educated, and that this is somehow related to the parents being wealthier?

Considering that Americans - especially our moderately wealthy suburbanites - work harder than anyone else in the world, wouldn't that suggest that they might not have as much time for their children as the lazy, jobless welfare moms would?

1. It's compulsory. That would be like saying the draft is voluntary.

2. If its compulsory, then it's hardly consented.

Taxes are not compulsory. You are only required to pay taxes if you have an income, own anything, or buy anything.

[Ramo]

The bulk of ours is as well, but it is the difference between 39% of gdp and 62% of gdp

And by the way, there is more than 2 trillion in state & local debt outstanding. Adds 15+% to your public debt figures.

True, but that still puts us below the OECD mean.

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/5/51/2483816.xls

[Ramo]

If the people are wealthier, you can tax them at a lower rate to acheive the same amount of money oer capita necessary for upkeep.

1. Once more, they have higher taxes/GDP. In your libertarian paradise, government is a larger portion of the economy than in the US.
2. Fancy toys that generate revenue (called New York, LA, San Francisco, Chicago, Boston, etc.) require more upkeep than crappier toys that generate less (called Melbourne, Canberra).

[TCO]

Go AIP!!

[Zkribbler]

You miss the point.

1. America is wealthier then Australia.

2. Australia has sufficient taxation to cover their bills.

Therefore, America would need a lower taxation rate then Australia to acheive the same result as Australia.

You forget, we need to have a military that costs more than the rest of the world's put together. Pow, pow, pow, k'ching, ping, kapow!

[KrazyHorse]

The bulk of ours is as well, but it is the difference between 39% of gdp and 62% of gdp

And by the way, there is more than 2 trillion in state & local debt outstanding. Adds 15+% to your public debt figures.

True, but that still puts us below the OECD mean.
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/5/51/2483816.xls

Barely. And only because of basketcases like Italy and Japan

[SlowwHand]

What KH is saying, for you math geniuses not, is that something doesn't add up.

[Ramo]

Barely. And only because of basketcases like Italy and Japan

True. But do you really think that's a dangerously high ratio? And there are serious advantages we have over Europe: higher GDP growth rate (mostly due to immigration) and lower debt interest.

[BKWM]

Honestly, Ben, no one cares what you think.

Most people on the internet dont care what anyone else on the internet thinks, so that should go without saying.

[Nugog]

Australia isn't some hell-hole.

Some of us would disagree with that statement.

[KrazyHorse]

True. But do you really think that's a dangerously high ratio? And there are serious advantages we have over Europe: higher GDP growth rate (mostly due to immigration) and lower debt interest.

I agree that it is not dangerous yet. But it is starting to get into a regime where it becomes so. The most important part of that spreadsheet is the Net Debt Interest table.

The numbers for the US are not at all high....yet. But that includes the effect of very low interest rates. It will start to be a problem if interest rates go up (which they will in a while).

When that happens, and assuming that the debt as a percent of GDP continues to grow (which it certainly will for the foreseeable future) then you can have net interest payments placing significant constraints on the government.

You are fast approaching the point Canada was at in the mid-90s when government debt reached a scale where it became THE political issue. For much of the next decade it remained such. The government cut spending massively in order to pay down the debt (more importantly to stop it from growing in nominal terms, allowing GDP growth to take care of it).

I think it would be better to think about it BEFORE it reaches that point.

[FrostyBoy]

I just came up with a brilliant idea.

Now here me out on this; nuke Texas to high hell, nuke southern New Mexico and southern Arizona. You might lose a few cities in the process, but that's okay, they're ****ty cities anyway. This way you will solve the Texan problem and the Mexican immigrant problem, any Mexicans who try to cross the border, will die of radiation.

I'm pretty sure this is a fantastic idea

with any luck, the nukes will split North America and Central America across the border.

unfortunately, there is a possibility of mutant mexicans which you will have to deal with, luckily however, we have all been trained, having played Fallout 3. Texas will be one big Fallout Amusement Park for the whole family.

[Dr Strangelove]

If Texas secedes let's form an international coalition to embargo it. A couple years without income should subdue them nicely. A little extreme poverty should do wonders for their understanding of reality.

[DinoDoc]

If Texas secedes let's form an international coalition to embargo it. A couple years without income should subdue them nicely. A little extreme poverty should do wonders for their understanding of reality.

Oil producing nations never get embargos.

[Dr Strangelove]

How much oil does Texas pump these days?

If it's more than 12 miles off their shores we get dibs on it.