The Native American states would be dependent on the US, and living conditions on the reservations would remain the same. Besides, I'm not a anti-nationalist, I don't want to oppress minorities but I won't give them a country.

New tax system:

Under $20,000 a year/person over 18 - 2% tax rate
$20,000-$50,000 a year/person over 18 - 5% tax rate
$50,000-$100,000 a year/person over 18 - 10% tax rate
Over $100,000 a year/person over 18 - 15% tax rate

No. A superprogressive tax rate is the stupidest thing ever. You don't think big businessmen go bankrupt? They go bankrupt the most, from these superprogressive tax rates pushed by stupidheads. And that hurts the lower workers, then, for not getting jobs. Heck no. Now, I'm not for flat rates, another superstupid thing, so let's compromise with progressive tax: a constant % rate. Under my liberal estimates, everyone would have to pay 28% tax on average. However, that's not counting government-run businesses, and taxes for alcohol and other drugs, so to speak, "vices", which would be heavy.

Unemployment would plummet to about 2%, with about 196,000,000 Americans working to make an average of about 100,000$ a year.

Ha ha ha. First, there is no unworking problem in America, second, there's no way to make money out of nowhere, except for inflation, and inflation has it's own problems.

Completely get rid of corporate subsidies for large businesses (If you are in S&P 500, you don't deserve money from the government).

Rid money gifts almost in full from the government, especially welfare??? Hello, they're stupid folk who aren't going to give anything back, just money down the drain there, far more so than giving money to big businesses. Only thing government should give money gifts to is for energy companies in clean alternative energy: wind, Sun, water-electricity (in some settings).

Maybe instead of giving welfare, you should allow people to work jobs that nobody wants to do in exchange for a subsidy of like 10k a year bonus.

Oh wait, that's already in existence, called getting a job, you lazy bums.

Illegal immigrants with high skills must get a high skilled job or leave, low skilled illegals must get a low skilled job or leave. That would reduce the amount of
people to deport by about 25%, increase jobs by about 3-4 Million.

Heck no. Open borders for everybody. This centrist selfish thinking of only your folk, your countryfolk, this is evil. Don't think about your country winning. Think about folk winning. Everybody wins in open borders.

Leave TPP, it hurts US Freedom and takes our jobs elsewhere.

Absolutely not. It's competition, and it shows how fat the average slob is in America, if they can't compete internationally. It's a free-market, it promotes competition, the only grounds America shouldn't join is if they still have minimum wage and "worker's rights". Throw those anticapitalist effigies out of the window, they are fattening the American folk.

20% Tax on all American-Based companies moving outside of the border - definitely no subsidies to them, unless they move back in.

Gifts to maybe countries moving into America, but I wouldn't punish moving out. You know how they punish moving out in Eritrea? By shooting you in the back, as policy.

DEA eliminated, plan to decarcinate 750,000 criminals and send them through rehab, tear down jails, build up Rehab clinics with free drugs, pay attention to getting
better instead of isolation. For non-violent drug related crimes, force to a clinic instead of a jail.

I agree, but not for tearing down gaols. Legalise all drugs.

What the everliving hell? So someone who is told from day one of their lives that America is great, that America defends and is the protecter of liberty, that goes through a government controlled school system, and is broken and brainwashed by the military, deserves to die of starvation?

Adolf Hitler is widely believed to have been mentally ill, growing up in abusive settings, getting a poor diet as a starving artist in Wien. But I'm not going to pardon him just for being brainwashed, nor any killers. Y'know, about 40% serial killers were physically abused by their families as children, and 80% psychologically abused by their families. I don't pardon serial killers, just as I don't pardon legal paid ones.

Letting then die on the streets would be the ultimate sin, they were pretty much fed one perspective their entire lives and conditioned into being subservient to the government, and after we have no use of their services, you propose their deaths? What the fuck

Mm, how most serial killers are, too, except they realise that they're terrible folk since they're not told that serial killers are the bravest folk and should be honoured, and kill themselves for their terrible misdeeds. Anyhow, I don't propose killing them, I just propose not helping those rats' arses.

Getting it up to date makes it extremely vulnerable to hackers and glitches, very dangerous.

No, it means getting properly trained folk, encryption systems, and supervisions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Y1ya-yF35g

A militia does not have the ability to sustain a military campaign overseas.

They do if they have missiles or ships, but moreover, they have the knack to war themselves. Innocent Americans.

I seriously doubt the government could stage a actual invasion of the US by either Mexico or Canada without cooperation from those two, and a sizable military.

Media manipulation along with a few false flag attacks. And even so, I am against military drafts under all settings. I am for stopping civilian deaths under all settings.

Edited 3/28/2016 06:35:23

And your comparison with Sweden is showing your total ignorance in socioeconomics: show blatant facts, trustworthy reviews and works as well as unquestionable figures before inventing your own version of things and saying bullshit as usual Major, and "America owns Europe" One more reason to count you with the other blind over-nationalist folks of this forum.

The Nordic countries mostly got most their success since before socialism, as being capitalist strongholds in Europe up to the 1970s, and now it's in great-deed riding off that.

One more ground to count you as a deaf Far-west Eurocentrist communist folks of the forum.

Most of the Sweden stuff was a joke. Especially the America owning Europe part. Anyways, Sweden is pretty weak in most terms and can't engage in any wars against others because of timidness and weakness. But ethnic cleansing, woo boy that's another story.

Also, the only way to be a non-nationalist in your eyes is to be a America hating socialist that loves the government.

As for the Natives, they deserve their own independent states, there was no real agreement and they were forced to join and assimilate by arms and violence. They at least deserve a self determination referendum.

They do if they have missiles or ships, but moreover, they have the knack to war themselves. Innocent Americans.

So a local militia will get cargo ships, fill them up with soldiers, get the planes and ships across the Atlantic with no foreigners stoping them, land somewhere and start fighting people, then get people back home to start sending ships over with ammunition and food, all the while fighting no one for no reason?

Edited 3/28/2016 06:43:17

They at least deserve a self determination referendum.

Why? They did not live when the Native tribes were beaten and had their land's taken, they were not injured in those wars. If it's a matter of ethnicity, does that mean I get to vote in hypothetical Basque referendums, or that people can simply have their own countries because of their ethnicity? That's dumb, we're all talking hairless apes that are made of the same stuff, get used to it. Existing does not mean you get to be your own country.

Nordic countries have nowadays the highest human development index of the whole world, and this is not because of pure capitalist policies but because they also implemented social policies would you deny this now Juq and Major? Then prove it, I am waiting for actual facts and not random subjective points as you used to do.

Edited 3/28/2016 06:50:11

I have told you before, you chose to ignore it.

Sweden: In the late 1800s, started to become like a modern capitalist country - corporations, banks, but not so much of give the poor more drugs and monies. In the 1920s to 1930s, was a capitalist stronghold, and was one of the least affected countries by the Great Depression. Everyone was rich. In 1960, Sweden taxed less than most NATO did, but had the second highest income by head in the world. But then, in the 70s or so, the socialists began to do their ways. A crisis lasted in the 1970s until the 1990s. Sweden's growth was very much behind NATO, until they basically said enough is enough and greatly cut government spending. Then, Sweden grew much faster than the NATO countries, but now it is relatively going down again, with socialism's coming back. But now, what is Sweden's income by each head, 10th or something? Luckily, many Swedes are coming to their senses and want to push out the Bolsheviki. TLDR Sweden's always been rich, but less richer when the socialists were in power.

Norway: Was the same country as Sweden until 1905, when it peacefully gained independence. Norway actually did grow more when the red flags came (in the 1950s to 1960s), but this is mostly since the 1950s was when Norway first started exporting petroleum in big amounts. Today, if Norway lost all its funds from petrol and fish (both of which are in lowering), Norway's GDP by each head would be about like Romania or Gabon. Norway has done some wise things with its economy, too, though, and in some cases, innovates. Norway has began to push out the Soviets, too (though they are still going to be there for a while). TLDR: Fish and petrol.

Denmark: One of the most well-off countries since the 1600s. The first country to become agriculturally independent (that is, there became little corelation between bad harvest and deaths at the same time) in the early 1800s. No minimum wage by law. In the late 1800s, Denmark economically grew about as fast as Sweden - above average in Europe. It was a top market for foreign investment. Some socialist programmes in the 1900s curbed trade a bit, but it was not much. The Red-Flags laneded on Denmark in the late 1950s, though. They made many more socialist programmes, and Denmark then, like Sweden, decelerated in the 1970s. In the 1980s, the Democratic Socialists were kicked out of the National Gathering, and replaced by more moderate leftists, who fixed things a bit (no minimum wage, f.e.). It has basically stayed the same ever since. TLDR: Ditto Sweden, but poorer a bit.

Meanwhile there will still be the middle class who are living the office space life.

You say like that's a bad thing

Let those scum die. We're not going to respect psycopathic killers. Frankly it's disgusting how much soldiers are respected everywhere, and I'd like more not to pay folk for killing folk. Now, I'd be kinder if this was an antigeneven draft, but there isn't in America, so yeah, let them rot.

This is one of the sickest things I've ever seen on this forum. Are you freaking serious? Let 1.5 million people die just because they were affiliated with a military branch? Most of them are just average people who had no other way to earn money, most of them have never even actually killed someone.

You call them psychopathic killers, but you're the one who's advocating what surmounts to the murder of over a million people. Might want to rethink this particular line of logic.

One more reason to count you with the other blind over-nationalist folks of this forum.

MGSB, a Nationalist? Sure, and I'm a Progressive Liberal.

Seriously though, do you read any of his posts? MGSB is just about the opposite of a Nationalist. I'm starting to think you don't know what the word really means by the way you casually label darn near everyone with it.

Let those scum die. We're not going to respect psycopathic killers. Frankly it's disgusting how much soldiers are respected everywhere, and I'd like more not to pay folk for killing folk. Now, I'd be kinder if this was an antigeneven draft, but there isn't in America, so yeah, let them rot.

Wow I can't believe I'm saying this...I now like Paugers more than Жұқтыру.

One more reason to count you with the other blind over-nationalist folks of this forum.

He's a libertarian not a nationalist. Your political labeling is always counterproductive and dead wrong. At this point you may as well call me a fascist.

But Jai: you think borders should be a thing. FASCIST ALERT!




/sarc

Also when he said let them rot, I seriously doubt many would actually die. Maybe be poor, but not mass deaths.

Edited 3/28/2016 16:06:46

Cause that makes it so much better??

have told you before, you chose to ignore it.

Ignore what? You are the one ignoring my requests: not giving again any accurate facts, sources or figures nor supporting your arguments with anything worth it. Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Norway are economically not competitive and suffering from their socialist model, I say prove it, what you have again written is not proving that their model does not work at all.

what is Sweden's income by each head, 10th or something?

Income by each head this is all you've got? This is the only figure ("10th or something", even not precise or rigorous here) and data supporting your whole empty paragraph (since you just give your own biased story of Sweden and other Nordic nations without any other figures nor relevant arguments supported by sources). Income by head or GDP are inadequate measures since they are giving average measures, a country like the US have great inequalities and with a high number of rich people (billionnaires and millionaires) it can make the overall data higher, whereas it does not prove at all the great majority of American citizens are living better than in Nordic countries, it measures income, but not equality, it measures growth, but not destruction, and it ignores values like social cohesion and the environment, it is in fact an inaccurate, untimely, and vague indication of economic activity. So if you want to talk about economics try better and find more accurate measures and datas.

And last but not least, comparing the Swedish model with Bolshevism or Communism is a total idiocy, are you that ignorant?

He's a libertarian not a nationalist. Your political labeling is always counterproductive and dead wrong. At this point you may as well call me a fascist.

Explain how is it counterproductive? nationalism and libertarianism can mix together Jai.