1 - health care in a single payer system will ensure all Americans have access to insurance at an affordable rate. The ills of being uninsured have been hashed over many, many times. As have the ills of the old system and system currently in place. Without life there can be no liberty.
As would true insurance reform:
*Open state lines. Just like any other good or service, allow commerce across state lines, this forces insurance companies to be competitive with each other.
*Give groups of private individuals the same ability to get massive discounts as is given to unions. If me and a bunch of friends want to buy a policy together in order to save money, we should be able to do that, just like unions do.
*End lawsuits, hands down this massively lowers cost.That would fix the problem, as well and more importantly, it wouldn't force anyone to pay for something they don't wish to pay for and more importantly than that and most important of all, it would prevent the people from having to rely on government for their well-being.
2 - a higher consumption tax is a viable way to increase tax revenue without penalizing people with an income tax. You keep liberty i.e. choice over what you will spend and whether you will pay this tax or not. I.E. whether you will consume or save.
One of the beautiful things about true liberty is the freedom to be responsible with your money or not. This takes that away and more importantly, it lends to the government deciding what is to be considered "Responsible" and takes away that choice from you. Further, a consumption tax hurts business, if people buy less because they are being taxed on what they buy, fewer business can function, eventually the market for various industries becomes thinner and thinner, this reduces competition as well as jobs...all around a bad thing.
3 - cap and trade provides a framework by which companies can adjust their emissions levels to those deemed acceptable or pay for credits on an open market to offset overruns. Alternatively businesses that run below the 'cap' can sell and have financial incentive to remain as emissions neutral as possible. It is a viable economically sensible solution to the ongoing issue of global emissions and air quality. Air quality and emissions standards provide a higher quality of health, thus a higher quality of life and with life comes liberty.
So I start a business, I'm given "X" amount of credits, to compete with the larger business I need more credits, yet my revenue is not high enough to allow me to buy more credits, my business is screwed.
More importantly this argument has a lot to do with global warming and that's another debate.
Last thing, the biggest thing of all, this gives government absolute control over all business and industry, the very opposite of liberty.
4 - a trade tariff means China or other countries not employing a similar cap on emissions will have a higher price of goods in America. This makes American made goods more attractive and affordable and helps offset the costs of lowering or buying emissions credits. It essentially stops a double tax which curbing emissions without adding a tariff would do. Provides competitive choices for Americans to purchase foreign or American made goods.
I guess my last response covers this one as well.
5 - self explanatory but ties in with above, higher priced Chinese and third world goods and services will allow American to become a more competitive manufacturer again, coupled with an incentive to keep jobs here, that incentive being not being taxed at a higher rate and/or perhaps having a lower tax for employing Americans.
See last 2 responses.
6 - tougher regulation would stop the continued corruption we see daily from financial institutions. whether it's repackaged sub-prime mortgages, predatory loans, credit cards with fine prints costs etc. This would allow people to feel safe and understand what it is they are getting into. It would put the onus on banks and financial institutions to be upfront and honest so people can make the best decision possible and not be screwed over by some jacked up rate or fine print legal jargon.
But you're putting your trust in government, you're taking away individual responsibility, you're taking away the freedom to make your own choices. Has there ever been a government that had so much control and power over it's people, and regulation like you're speaking of is control over the people, has any government like this ever existed where the people would say, "I feel safe and protected, thank you government" has this ever happened?
Last thing, no one is saying there shouldn't be any regulation, there should be some, there needs to be a level of banking regulation for example. A set of rules to keep things honest where need be is fine, no one is against that but a set of rules that places government at the pinnacle of the market, there's no liberty in that.
