"We’d need some virgin territory."

we are out of luck, there isn't anymore Virgin territory left on earth. And. lets wait for things to get more heated until I finish getting my Year supply layed away and a few more guns.. and more Ammo.;)

"Again, these is interesting times. I don’t think I could wish for anything else."

I'd like it to get a little more heated. I'm ready. I don't mean war, but I do mean some tense stand-downs.

Ok...agreed.

"I disagree higher taxes are good for Pennsylvania’s future or economic recovery and believe we have additional choices other than raising taxes."

Could you share your additional choices?

Usury is criminal! The fractional reserve banking system is FRAUD! Handle that and you have made great strides. Then go after the "leaders' who went along with it.

Considering that Congress is only in session an average of 150 days a year,( a little over 4 months ) It's entirely plausible that leaders could be supplemented during this time. Instead of the $165,200 that they enjoy now for those few months. okay, so scratch the volunteer part..but
I'm not so sure that our founding Fathers had in mind the full time career political leaders that we have allowed. Washington has morphed into a friggin albatross and the only way to control it is to make it uncomfortable to stay.

...the founding fathers would have put other stipulations in.

This is what public office should be.

I've read the founders enough to know they didn't hold to that argument, Larry. Sorry, it just doesn't fly. But even if they had made such an argument, it wouldn't make it any less false.

Do you, Larry, have the monetary resources to volunteer, without pay or at a cut in pay, to serve as a U.S. representative? Neither do most ... simpletons. I can do local volunteer work, and yes it's rewarding, but that doesn't require that I give up my living to do so.

Terry,
That is exactly my point, to make holding public office LESS attractive. Look, The job of politician isn't rocket science, and it shouldn't be propped up as such. The Qualifications to become president only require you to be older then 35, naturally born in the US and have been here for 14 yrs... A senator must be at least 30, a nine year resident and live in the state he is running in... if the job was as technical as we make it out to be, the founding fathers would have put other stipulations in.

We have been programmed to think elected positions are only for a select few with highly qualified credentials.. Total BS in my book, a simpleton with character can be more effective at serving the public then a slick crafty BS'r is.

people who volunteer don't ask how much does the job pay, because they aren't there for the money,or a career. This is what public office should be.

Well, I can hardly see how removing the incentives for serving in public office can be attractive to anyone, particularly the kinds of people you're presumably trying to attract -- people with altruistic motives. I've hired a lot of people in my day, and the first thing they want to know, almost invariably, is "how much will I be paid?" Besides, any workman is "worthy of his hire." But anyway, irregardless of what kind of pay scheme is set, limitations on terms of service, etc., if we don't get back to Balanced Constitutional Government, none of it is going to matter in any event.

Michael says:

"so how do we get them to be more responsible?"

We take the profit out of being a politician and you impose term limits. If Public service is redefined as something someone does out of conviction instead of a lucrative career, then Holding public office would attract people of Character. As it is now, the primary motivating factors behind running for an elected office is Power and Money. Financially, the problem can be solved by setting salaries and Perks to emphasis public servitude. And an Oversight committee put in place to guard against abuse.
power will be limited by eliminating the ability to run for re election.
Once the term has expired, the politician is barred from running for public office again. His service to the American people will be on record, and if he served honorably, it will make a nice addition to his resume. If not, it will reflect on him much Like a Dishonorable discharge, But either way he will be judged on his merits.

Politicians will be encouraged to work for the people because public Office will no longer be a destination, But rather a springboard into private life, it can be redefined much like a hitch in the Military, you will be admired for serving your country and your discharge from public office will be made public.

Retired folks may also want to run for public office, sharing their much needed experience.

Running for public office will have consequences, it will require personal self sacrifice, Much like volunteering, But anyone who has volunteered knows the personal satisfaction you get when you volunteer your time, you walk away with a great sense of accomplishment in knowing you made a difference. Holding an Elected office can be redefined much the same way.

OKLAHOMA OK GO SOONERS, ALRIGHT COME ON DOWN TO OK. THIS OKIE HAS LAND FOR SALE OR TRADE. MAYBE WE COULD INTICE TEXAS TO JOIN US AND MAKE ONE BIG REPUBLIC.

Taxing me less then the next guy, is not an act of representation, and using taxes to drive wedges between citizens, only represents a self invited, and out of control government, that has become no better then a mob of opportunistic thieves.

"We’d need some virgin territory."

we are out of luck, there isn't anymore Virgin territory left on earth. And. lets wait for things to get more heated until I finish getting my Year supply layed away and a few more guns.. and more Ammo.;)

"How about a region rather than a single state. I like Oklahoma."

Oh, I wasn't thinking of Texas. I LOVE Texas! But my state is much too populous for such a re-invention. We'd need some virgin territory.

Take 10 million good people into a state with 700,000, like South Dakota. It'd be an easy take-over. (Dare to dream!)

I don't really care to lynch anybody, no matter how deserving I think they are. But I would like to see brought back the practice of tarring and feathering. And I ain't smiling. I highly doubt that it would take more than just a very few examples set before the message got out.

I know what you mean. Me too. But I'm quite sure it will come to that eventually.

Jeff,

How about a region rather than a single state. I like Oklahoma. The people here are good, hardworking, decent, moral, respectable people in the main. We have our dependents, of course, but they're in the large minority and I'd rather them move away than me. :-)

"Again, these is interesting times. I don’t think I could wish for anything else."

I'd like it to get a little more heated. I'm ready. I don't mean war, but I do mean some tense stand-downs.

I think we just have to let nature take its course. People won't be willing to change their individual lifestyles in the main until they're forced to do so by necessity. Again, these is interesting times. I don't think I could wish for anything else.

Solution: All the hard-working, taxpaying, productive (and if not in that list, wealthy) Americans band together as a group, pick a lesser populous state to migrate to, take it over (politically) and set policies for ourselves. Let the other 49 states go dwn the crapper.....

"... so how do we get them to be more responsible?"

A few public lynchings, maybe?

Just kidding, but seriously, "responsibility" is in the eye of the beholder. If you don't pay taxes, you certainly don't care how much the government spends, and moreover, you're probably inclined to want government to spend more.

With the ratio of non-taxpaying voters approaching 50%, you can see where this is headed.

Ok...agreed.

"I disagree higher taxes are good for Pennsylvania’s future or economic recovery and believe we have additional choices other than raising taxes."

Could you share your additional choices?

Jeff, you're right. But if the people in my circle are any indication, most everyone that 'profited' during the boom became something of a spendthrift, purchasing houses they could only afford IF the boom lasted another thirty years, more expensive vehicles, boats, four wheelers, racking up huge credit card bills, etc. They didn't rat hole anything significant for a rainy d...period either. And that is one reason I say this whole idea of raising the tax rates cannot possibly work.

But get ready, as cities and states continue to incur budget shortfalls in spite of it all, you'll see more 'drug raids' taking place, more people being stopped and ticketed on the open highways, more road blocks set up to catch people driving without their seatbelts on, etc. The last thing these governments will think of or consider is scaling back.

We're entering into some uncharted territory here. We can predict with some degree of accuracy how people will react to all of this since human nature is fairly predictable, but one never knows for sure what kind of dog lies beneath the exterior that you're pushing into a corner. It's going to be interesting to say the least.

Most governments were very wasteful with the boom we just had. During that stretch of good times, they just grew and grew. They never once acted like it would come to an end. And now that it has, they say they need more of our money. Hell, we ALL need more money.

Seriously, what they did was improvident to say the least. They saved nothing - zero, zip, nada. They just had a good, old time when times were good.

I would suggest that they need to look at themselves and be at least embarrassed, if not ashamed. Here they are, having blown through a boom time, sitting there "broke" with all sorts of bills, and they can't see that what they need to do is change THEIR situation - not OURS. They actually think it is right to come ask us to support their overgrowth.

They cannot imagine that they overgrew and that scaling back is a financially good move. They are far too entitled. What a bunch of jokers. With that mentaility, they SHOULD go bankrupt. The voters should not support people who just don't get it. The way they act about money, you just have to ask yourself, "What gene are they missing?"

Justice Marshall would be shocked to see his Statement in motion and how they are effecting the Country.

Ed Randall, This is a guy who has NEVER had a regular job, He has held an elected office for 32 years (1977 ) Before that he was in the Military ( 1968 to 1974 ) So Just how in touch is the good governor with the people he wants to tax?

Ed Randall is a perfect example of the contempt that career politicians have towards the people that elected them. At least he is Pennsylvania's problem and Not the rest of the Country's. It shows how complacent Pennsylvania people are

Not to worry, it can't possibly work. We're already taxed to the maximum sustainability possible. Any additional taxation is most definitely going to create additional budget shortfalls based on faulty "projections" of what these goofballs think they're going to collect. The thing that these morons we call "leaders" need to get into their heads is that people are not going to pay a tax that they cannot pay. Hell, make the tax hike 30%. It makes about as much sense as 16%. In any case it'll yield the same results.