Budget Puzzle: You Fix the Budget!

[deleted15807]

Fixing the budget is easy as long as you don't want to get re-elected.

 

[B_talltpaguy]

Fixing the budget is even easier if you don't have to lick the bootstraps of the rich every waking moment of your life.

 

[dandelion]

Ta dah
http://capreform.eu/return-of-the-butter-mountain/ /

It says the EU planned to buy 30,000 tonnes of butter in 2009, compared to the size of the actual butter mountain which was 1,4000,000 tonnes. Has anyone found an article saying what actually happened between jan 2009 when this seems to have become a news item and now? Googling would suggest that it just didnt happen. UK farmers continue to get out of milk production.

Don't you want to get rid of CAP?

The reason for farm subsidy is to keep farmers in business. British farm land is mostly uneconomic, including with the subsidies, If you dont mind it reverting to scrub, why dont we.....BUILD SOME MORE HOUSES!. Theres a shocking idea!

Why do we need more cheap housing? There are enough council/housing ass. properties made for families of 4-8 with only 1 or 2 people in them.

would that be the traditional sort of house with two bedrooms designed for a family of 4-8? Just how many people are there now with families this size?

Houses need to be redistributed. Housing got us into this mess, it is both a weak use of resources, & doomed to fail as a policy. We need to innovate, produce, & compete!

redistributed how? Force those with mansions to subdivide them, or put houses in liverpool suburbs onto lorries and put them down again in Surrey? I'd go with innovate, produce and compete by building more in the SE on some of this bad land.

If you really believed that fuel should get more expensive with consumption...why doesn't it?

it has. Though admittedly a fair bit of this seems to be bankers trading in futures.

If you look on water bills, the admin cost is separate - yet extortionate, & rises well above inflation each year.

Oh, thats one of the benefits of private industry. Its free to compete by raising prices.

Sacking all OFGAS, OFGEM, & OFWAT employees - for doing nothing useful at all, would make an entirely useful kindling to a bonfire of quangos.

why do you believe prices would then fall?

 

[B_VinylBoy]

Fixing the budget is easy as long as you don't want to get re-elected.

Sounds like a perfect second term issue to tackle. :wink:

 

[deleted15807]

Fixing the budget is even easier if you don't have to lick the bootstraps of the rich every waking moment of your life.

And we know they always will as long as it takes millions to run a campaign Congress is for sale.

As a follow-up some are not happy that the puzzle doesn't offer the option of soaking the rich:

In general, the NYT options on both the spending-cut and the tax-hike side tend to hit the poor and the middle classes more drastically than the rich; what’s missing here is the option to implement something much more progressive, in both senses of the word.

Soaking the Rich, Cutting the Deficit

 

[dandelion]

Sounds like a perfect second term issue to tackle. :wink:

Surely if you have a 2 term limit and it is random whether people are on their first or second term, that guarantees 50% will always be against reform.

There have been some robust debates on here over the EU and whether people in the UK like it or not. The more I learn about it, the more it seems the founders of the US had a similar deep distrust of an international government. Wonder what they would think now.

Shame no one had invented television at that time or maybe they would have sorted out the advertising issue.

 

[B_crackoff]

Ta dah
http://capreform.eu/return-of-the-butter-mountain/ /

It says the EU planned to buy 30,000 tonnes of butter in 2009, compared to the size of the actual butter mountain which was 1,4000,000 tonnes. Has anyone found an article saying what actually happened between jan 2009 when this seems to have become a news item and now? Googling would suggest that it just didnt happen. UK farmers continue to get out of milk production.

So where has most of the surplus gone? It's been reallocated as food aid to new EU entrants from the Eastern block, & dumped at reduced prices around the world. That's why CAP cost so much!
E.G http://www.spectrezine.org/europe/Holm.htm

The reason for farm subsidy is to keep farmers in business. British farm land is mostly uneconomic, including with the subsidies,

Rubbish -http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/7839980/Is-British-farming-waking-up-to-a-new-dawn.html

1 - It is essential that any country retains the ability to feed itself, & at present about 70-75% is domestic.
2 - As mentioned in the article, there is competing demand.
3 - Err - currency pressure - do you not imagine that developing nations currencies will get stronger & ours weaker, saddled by the inglorious amount of debt - building houses on our food supply is plain stupid! To think that things never change is the hubris of the doomed.
4 - Being as the UK has the best conditions for milk production in the world, & the price of milk has doubled in UK shops in just 3 years - why would any dairy farmers leave.
5 - CAP majorly supports the technically inefficient French farming methods, which leaves efficient UK farmers unable to compete.

If you dont mind it reverting to scrub, why dont we.....BUILD SOME MORE HOUSES!. Theres a shocking idea!

Half the nations "wealth" is locked up in houses. Their prices WILL fall again, yet the debt secured WILL NOT. As I've said, it's neither exportable, nor productive. It doesn't add to wealth at all, because to buy a house - THE EQUIVALENT AMOUNT OF DEBT IS MAGICKED UP FROM THIN AIR!

would that be the traditional sort of house with two bedrooms designed for a family of 4-8? Just how many people are there now with families this size?
redistributed how? Force those with mansions to subdivide them, or put houses in liverpool suburbs onto lorries and put them down again in Surrey?

You've misunderstood. I'm talking about Govt. owned/subsidised properties, & no they should never be sold off, but Labour were just as bad as the Tories.

Any business engages in capital rationing. Therefore you should share out housing stock on that basis. Not just initially, as has been the case, but perpetually. People are given 3 bed houses when in need, but when the kids have flown the nest, they must be moved to a smaller dwelling. It's not a bloody home for life, it's a safety net based on social need.

When you account for the subsidised rent, free repairs, & free refurbishment in all council accommodation - tell me what is the full net benefit of not working & knocking out kids.

All of these things are not included in the Rowntree foundations poverty calculations, whereas they clearly provide a massive benefit.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1329276/Abu-Hamzas-home-40k-makeover-paid-taxpayers.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Sell that one house, & you could build at least 15 more houses, in the North if you really wanted!

The SE is packed with people. 5000/km2 in London! Building residential houses does not produce any long term wealth. That's the sort of thing you can afford when you're in surplus.

it has. Though admittedly a fair bit of this seems to be bankers trading in futures.

Gas futures are a rip off - don't do them, they operate in a separate universe to other futures. However, it's nothing to do with bankers in the long run, only predicted demand, & greed & fear.

Oh, thats one of the benefits of private industry. Its free to compete by raising prices.

The problem clearly lies in the service operating contracts - not privatisation itself, & no I don't think essential monopolies should be fully privatised ever. However

why do you believe prices would then fall?

Quangos are set up to provide Governments an expedient excuse. Bringing authority in house would return responsibilty, & therefore direct accountabilty to the electorate at least.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

Surely if you have a 2 term limit and it is random whether people are on their first or second term, that guarantees 50% will always be against reform.

There have been some robust debates on here over the EU and whether people in the UK like it or not. The more I learn about it, the more it seems the founders of the US had a similar deep distrust of an international government. Wonder what they would think now.

Shame no one had invented television at that time or maybe they would have sorted out the advertising issue.

It was a cheeky response. The logic being that if you only have two terms in office and if you're serious about fixing the economy, unless it's an emergency you'd wait till your final term to address it. That's providing you're playing typical political politics and you're actually elected for the second term, of course.

 

[dandelion]

So where has most of the surplus gone? It's been reallocated as food aid to new EU entrants from the Eastern block, & dumped at reduced prices around the world. That's why CAP cost so much!
E.G http://www.spectrezine.org/europe/Holm.htm

The link seems to be a rant against intensive farming which incidentally says animal farming needs to be severely cut back. I dont see a word about what happened to this supposd mountain. Intervention stocks were originally intended to be bought and sold to regulate the market. Dumping abroad happened because intervention failed. Has it now?

Rubbish -http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/7839980/Is-British-farming-waking-up-to-a-new-dawn.html

And that one says british farming is on its knees. it says half of all british dairy farmers went out of business in the last 10 years and more plan to.

1 - It is essential that any country retains the ability to feed itself, & at present about 70-75% is domestic.

And this is exactly the reason governments of all varieties have been subsidising farming since the war.

3 - Err - currency pressure - do you not imagine that developing nations currencies will get stronger & ours weaker, saddled by the inglorious amount of debt - building houses on our food supply is plain stupid!.

well actually we dont need to. Only a tiny percentage of land is required. But to take your figure, even if we can produce 75% of the food we need, does that mean we choose 25% to starve, or all starve slowly for a while untill 25% die?

4 - Being as the UK has the best conditions for milk production in the world, & the price of milk has doubled in UK

Yet dairy farmers continue to close down. Did you see the reports that someone is now starting a vast dairy factory farm, where the animals will never go out? So much for a good climate helping, the only way they can make it pay is with the animals in pens.

5 - CAP majorly supports the technically inefficient French farming methods, which leaves efficient UK farmers unable to compete.

Nonsense. They have a better climate. They dont get any more money than the british.

Half the nations "wealth" is locked up in houses. Their prices WILL fall again, yet the debt secured WILL NOT. As I've said, it's neither exportable, nor productive.

Nonetheless a house is real tangible wealth. As you say, currently grossly overvalued compared to its actual construction costs, but still more intrinsicly valuable than a piece of paper saying you own some company shares.

It doesn't add to wealth at all, because to buy a house - THE EQUIVALENT AMOUNT OF DEBT IS MAGICKED UP FROM THIN AIR!

Then there is no such thing as wealth, because this is true for everything.

Any business engages in capital rationing. Therefore you should share out housing stock on that basis. Not just initially, as has been the case, but perpetually. People are given 3 bed houses when in need, but when the kids have flown the nest, they must be moved to a smaller dwelling. It's not a bloody home for life, it's a safety net based on social need.

The system used to work ok, it is the huge shortage which is causing problems now. A modicum of compassion is very valuable.

Gas futures are a rip off - don't do them, they operate in a separate universe to other futures. However, it's nothing to do with bankers in the long run, only predicted demand, & greed & fear.

So what is the proper name for the people who engage in this then?

 

[B_crackoff]

Here you go dandelion - the CAP - read from economic comparisons on.

Does the CAP Fit? British and French social models in comparative perspective, part 1 - The Henry Jackson Society[

QUOTE=dandelion;3107223]The link seems to be a rant against intensive farming which incidentally says animal farming needs to be severely cut back. Oh the carbon paranoiacs!

I dont see a word about what happened to this supposd mountain.
Where do you think it goes -it's dumped or labelled aid.
Intervention stocks were originally intended to be bought and sold to regulate the market. Dumping abroad happened because intervention failed. Has it now?

Dumping abroad is an EU policy. See top.

And that one says british farming is on its knees. it says half of all british dairy farmers went out of business in the last 10 years and more plan to.

Thank you the Labour Government, & thank you the major supermarkets for screwing farmers. When milk was 21p a pint, farmers lost 3p - does that sound subsidized?

Most of those farmers sold their land the way you'd like it - barn conversions, estates etc!

And this is exactly the reason governments of all varieties have been subsidising farming since the war.

No they haven't except on specific lines, & taking into account we have always paid more into the EU - effectively there has been no subsidy at all since membership - & that which there is is to counter other EU subsidised foodstuffs.


well actually we dont need to. Only a tiny percentage of land is required. But to take your figure, even if we can produce 75% of the food we need, does that mean we choose 25% to starve, or all starve slowly for a while untill 25% die?

What? 30% of food is wasted. Add 30% on to 75%!! Furthermore, iit doesn't mean some products can't be imported - it sets a minimum. I've not heard of anyone dying from consuming only 75% of their calorie intake. Lol.

Yet dairy farmers continue to close down. Did you see the reports that someone is now starting a vast dairy factory farm, where the animals will never go out? So much for a good climate helping, the only way they can make it pay is with the animals in pens.

Because of bloody subsidies & Supermarket controls! Exactly how do you think importers do it?:smile:

The Big Question: Is the UK running out of food - and what can we do about it? - News, Food & Drink - The Independent

Nonsense. They have a better climate.

What for - sun tans, skiing? What's that got to do with apples?:wink: Could you furnish me with proof of superior crop yields? You can't - apart from grapes & olives.

They dont get any more money than the british.

That's laughable, they get far more 22%vs9%- the fact is they are grossly inefficient - cost/animal/potato etc is all higher in France without subsidies. The fact that they are crapper than us at manufacturing means they devote more land to paysant farming.

Being paid not to cultivate a field yet shove blueberries down a thrushes throat pays well

Nonetheless a house is real tangible wealth. As you say, currently grossly overvalued compared to its actual construction costs, but still more intrinsicly valuable than a piece of paper saying you own some company shares.

How many people own the deeds to their house?! 10%? A house always needs reinvestment & repairs too. It's not a wealth creator in a non inflationary environment. I think my Gold company shares are worth more - they own a specific right to the product of investment. How many houses are standing after 200 years? It's not really a hereditary investment whereas shares are.

Then there is no such thing as wealth, because this is true for everything.

I'd say there was intrinsic wealth in intellect, commodities, metals, & the capacity to manufacture & deliver these - as it has been proven through history.

The system used to work ok, it is the huge shortage which is causing problems now. A modicum of compassion is very valuable.

The compassion exists to continue providing shelter - no one ever promised homes for life, & I would expect those who had benefited to have the decency to make way for others more needy than themselves, or in the same boat as they'd been 25 years before!

So what is the proper name for the people who engage in this then?
Well it's states, agents of states, big manufacturers etc. It's just supply & demand, & anticipating future prices, & ensuring supply - the problem is with the way the quarters closing price, & next opening price jump.[/QUOTE]

 

[B_talltpaguy]

And we know they always will as long as it takes millions to run a campaign Congress is for sale.

As a follow-up some are not happy that the puzzle doesn't offer the option of soaking the rich:

In general, the NYT options on both the spending-cut and the tax-hike side tend to hit the poor and the middle classes more drastically than the rich; what’s missing here is the option to implement something much more progressive, in both senses of the word.

Soaking the Rich, Cutting the Deficit

When the rich own the media whores pimping the story, there's no mystery as to how the 'media discussion' about this issue becomes hopelessly slanted to favor the rich.

 

[dandelion]

Here you go dandelion - the CAP - read from economic comparisons on.Does the CAP Fit? British and French social models in comparative perspective, part 1 - The Henry Jackson Society[

and what is your point? I see they again accuse the CAP of unfairly subsidising french farmers because they get more money than any others. Of course they do: France has more farm land than any other EU country. The susbsidy is pretty even, the same number of euros per acre. So it is not an unfair subsidy favouring anyone. Then the other fact, France pays more into the EU than it gets back. So it pays its own subsidy.

I dont see a word about what happened to this supposd mountain.
Where do you think it goes -it's dumped or labelled aid.

I dont know where it goes. Thats why I asked. I said before, the way intervention is supposed to work is food is bought up when cheap and sold again when prices rise.

Dumping abroad is an EU policy. See top.

That 2006 article is 4 years old and surpluses have been falling for some time. Set aside was abolished because there were....shortages!

Most of those farmers sold their land the way you'd like it - barn conversions, estates etc!

? your point? Farmers no longer employ anyone so they have sold off all the farm cottages and buildings?

What? 30% of food is wasted. Add 30% on to 75%!! Furthermore, iit doesn't mean some products can't be imported - it sets a minimum. I've not heard of anyone dying from consuming only 75% of their calorie intake. Lol.

Britain nearly starved twice, in ww1 and ww2. something about interruption of food imports?

Because of bloody subsidies & Supermarket controls! Exactly how do you think importers do it?:smile:

I think its fundamentally because theres too much milk production. We import milk. Er, I guess they must have good milk producing climates too. Or maybe their cows live in sheds like ours. What you really mean by saying the UK has a good climate for milk is that the fields grow bugger all well except grass. (and not the smoking kind, though it would be a very useful crop)

The Big Question: Is the UK running out of food - and what can we do about it? - News, Food & Drink - The Independent

Says food production is 61% and falling.

What's that got to do with apples?:wink:

The british apple farming business is dead. Ever heard of French Golden delicious?

How many people own the deeds to their house?!

Are we talking national wealth or personal indebtedness? Actual property is one of the few national assets it is hard for owners to take abroad when they leave. We who are still here get to use it whoever owns it.

The compassion exists to continue providing shelter - no one ever promised homes for life,[/QUOTE]What you are saying is you want to reduce what we do for the poor. Its a choice.

 

[B_crackoff]

Dandelion - you clearly haven't read the article properly.

You have a bizarre idea that irrespective of proof production & economies of scale in the UK & France are comparable - the article emphatically states that they are not.

If all the subsidies were rent asunder, France could not compete agriculturally in Europe but the UK could.

I myself bought into the Single Farm Payment Scheme - I literally own(well rent & not a lot of!) farmland that cannot be used for farming - it is a massive & deliberate con, & is extensively used in France, & some by new estates in the UK with no intention of ever farming.

The British apple business is dead! Golden delicious? The UK has the most varieties & the best tasting apples in the world due to its fortunate maritime climate.

GD taste of nothing, however they look more standardised for pseudo twats like Stephen Fry - the shill who advocated the homogenic approach to produce of the EU & supermarkets on QI before it all went tits up.

Rough apples make cider. Lots of it - which idiots now want to tax to the hilt.

All the articles say world demand for food will massively increase & therefore it's essential we produce more of our own.

Britain nearly starved in the 30s because it relied on the Empire. The 2nd world war brought the realisation that we should never be dependent again. PEST risks.

Farmers sold up because they weren't supported by the Govt. cap worked against them because French farmers with fewer cows in bigger fields got more subsidy/pint/milk, & the supermarkets had a screw to their head, & Labour know nothing of agriculture whatsoever. They were doubly enticed by the prospect of magicked money allowing them to sell their farms for conversions etc.

About 80-90% of people don't own their homes, the bank does, though they have the rights & obligations to a financial instrument on the property.

You must try & understand this. a £Trillion was created out of thin air. It was not borrowed from anyone. This inflated asset prices - economics 101 re scarce resources. However, it is hardly a real wealth, as the purchasing power of other currencies has increased against the £. The debt obligation remains the same.

We are facing a crisis of repossesions soon - first when all the Govt jobs go, then when the service sector related jobs go, & interest rates rise AS THEY MUST. Then we'll have to take on all the global bank liabilities that idiot Gordon Brown underwrote.

Here you go - I knew about this 18 months ago - the effect will hit here too!

http://pragcap.com/zillow-home-price-decline-surpass-great-depression

We haven't even got a foot into the door of doom & gloom, which is why it's time to be practical, not aspirational.

 

[dandelion]

You have a bizarre idea that irrespective of proof production & economies of scale in the UK & France are comparable

I didnt pass judgement on who farms most efficiently. I just said they all get the same subsidy, which is fair. What else they do afterwards is rather up to them.

If all the subsidies were rent asunder, France could not compete agriculturally in Europe but the UK could.

I think all you might be saying is that last century british farming went through some very bad patches indeed and after ww2 placed a high premium on efficiency. The 100 acre family farm next to us is uneconomic, just as it would be in France, but you are probably saying there are a lot more small French farmers. They still all only get a subsidy beased on the size of their farm. So ,say, on 10 acres you get £1000. On 100 you get £10,0000. On 1000, £100,0000. Ten acres isnt going to be viable. 100 just barely (assuming the farm does also make some money). 1000 acres, youve got pay for two or three guys full time and some equipment before you earn a penny from growing anything.

I myself bought into the Single Farm Payment Scheme - I literally own(well rent & not a lot of!) farmland that cannot be used for farming - it is a massive & deliberate con, & is extensively used in France, & some by new estates in the UK with no intention of ever farming.

Nice, isnt it? but are you really getting enough money from that small amount of land to live on?

The British apple business is dead! Golden delicious? The UK has the most varieties & the best tasting apples in the world due to its fortunate maritime climate.

yeah,yeah, so why have all the orchards been grubbed up if they pay?

GD taste of nothing, however they look more standardised for pseudo twats like Stephen Fry - the shill who advocated the homogenic approach to produce of the EU & supermarkets on QI before it all went tits up.

yeah yeah tell it to the supermarkets who want all their apples to be perfect in appearance but taste doesnt matter. Funnily enough we have a golden delicious and it tastes a lot better than ones which come from the supermarket, but I digress. Last time I bought a really good apple it was cox, slightly shriveled, from a farm shop. SUpermarket would throw them out.

All the articles say world demand for food will massively increase & therefore it's essential we produce more of our own.

yes, thats why there are subsidies. Notwithstanding the peculiarities of the system, by and large farmers grow stuff because it pays more than not growing stuff. Even airports graze animals on their approaches. I do not see how the farm next to us would work without the subsidy. They would give up any attempt at farming and the land go back to scrub.

Britain nearly starved in the 30s because it relied on the Empire. The 2nd world war brought the realisation that we should never be dependent again.

But we are. Only real solution is reduce the population masively. No one is interested in policies intended to do this.

Farmers sold up because they weren't supported by the Govt. cap worked against them because French farmers with fewer cows in bigger fields got more subsidy/pint/milk,

Is that another way of saying French farm land is cheaper so farmers have more of it per cow?

They were doubly enticed by the prospect of magicked money allowing them to sell their farms for conversions etc.

There is a zero tolerance policy on building in the countryside in the UK, which has VASTLY hiked up the value of countryside properties. Sell off a workers cottage which is worth more than all your land? You bet! The other reason farming is so difficult is precisely because there is not such thing as a cheap workers cottage any more. In a sensible world, someone who has 10 acres and wanted to work it might reasonably think well, Ill use a bit to build somewhere there to live.

You must try & understand this. a £Trillion was created out of thin air. It was not borrowed from anyone. This inflated asset prices - economics 101 re scarce resources. However, it is hardly a real wealth, as the purchasing power of other currencies has increased against the £. The debt obligation remains the same.

I didnt say the paper value was wealth, I said the actual bricks and mortar put together in handy shapes is wealth. The banks go down and the paper value -or debt- becomes nothing. But the physical house still exists.

We are facing a crisis of repossesions soon

This is the issue, yes. This is why the EU is currently squirming over ireland. Not for ireland's benefit but for everyone elses, in trying to avoid this danger.

first when all the Govt jobs go, then when the service sector related jobs go, & interest rates rise AS THEY MUST.

Everyone is praying for a recovery of the private sector. Blair converted to Catholicism, but maybe he was too late.

Then we'll have to take on all the global bank liabilities that idiot Gordon Brown underwrote.

He had no choice. I hope someone in the meanwhile has been working on the doomesday amelioration plan.

 

[B_crackoff]

Hey, I'm all for cutting population, which would be helped by limiting aid, & reducing per capita benefits here.

SFPs are at the wildly different rates, but the major problem is that inactive farmers get the same amount as active farmers. Inactive farmers shouldn't be paid at all, & farmers should be paid per unit/tonne/litre etc at a rate which takes into account that members normal costs of living.

GB had plenty of choice - it'll all come to pass anyway, but now he's saddled us with the debt.

The risk was widely known for years, & it was certain from 18 months before. A lack of planning, thought, or strategy was the only thing in which he was successful.

Come on, it was the biggest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in history!

Why has no one ever been jailed? FFS even by lying to the shareholders about their banks positions is a criminal offence.

BTW - I think the Romans saw their roads as wealth - but the Brits & Saxons saw them as chimney stacks & hearths, & ripped them up!

 

[D_Martin van Burden]

Wow, that was actually pretty fun.
Budget Puzzle: You Fix the Budget - Interactive Feature - NYTimes.com

 

[dandelion]

Hey, I'm all for cutting population, which would be helped by limiting aid, & reducing per capita benefits here.

abolishing child beneefit might help. Also child tax allowances.

SFPs are at the wildly different rates,

a few years ago i looked at the numbers and the amount of money france got was precisely in proportion to the farm land area, as compared to the Uk or anyone else.

but the major problem is that inactive farmers get the same amount as active farmers.

This is the reformed system! The unreformed system said you got more if you grew certain crops. The result was that everyone went for the crops which had most subsidy, and we got mountains. Now farmers are free to choose year by year what they want to grow without interference. The system never paid according to how much you produced, because that would benefit farmers with the best land more than farmers with the worst land, the opposite of what you would want. The intervention system imposed a minimum price, which helps farmers according to what they grow, but again led to those mountains. Mostly they scrapped the specific payments because the GATT people said it was unfair competition.

Come on, it was the biggest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in history!

Hmm. well yes, it amounts to that, but on the other hand was that not what was happening anyway?

Why has no one ever been jailed? FFS even by lying to the shareholders about their banks positions is a criminal offence.

Perhaps because, all in all, the shareholders are content?

BTW - I think the Romans saw their roads as wealth - but the Brits & Saxons saw them as chimney stacks & hearths, & ripped them up!

Roman roads were the tool which created the empire.

everyone else, I agree, the tax selector is fun. But it seems so academic since no US politicians seem willing to apply any cuts.

 

[midlifebear]

. . . . But it seems so academic since no US politicians seem willing to apply any cuts.

I don't know if it's "academic", but I think it is WAY FUNNY that Rep Boehner is having a hard time finding Republicans willing to fill all the seats on the Finance Committee that will decide what gets cut and what doesn't. :biggrin1: