One fundamental problem with this idea: It will be impossible for anyone to construct models that say they will create a balanced budget... unless we're just re-hashing other people's ideas, at which point the brainstorming groups are useless.

> Justinian I wrote:

> Break the trusts!

That's exactly what you would be doing... specifically, breaking the fundamental trust between the international business community and the United States.  It's extremely rare in a modern global economy for a nation to get away with seizing assets as a revenue source and be able to retain trust with businesses... largely because that becomes an expected precedent.  That's probably the quickest method to get international investors to tell the United States to shove off... not to mention discouraging local business people from developing businesses (why build a big business if you know the government is fully willing to seize assets whenever it has financial problems).

You're about 8 posts late, dpeng...

Like China?  As opposed to North Korea or Cuba?

*giggle*

And here's my political theme song, to keep this game going!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ&ob=av2e

That's about as much "your line" as the Bible is "Joe4444's book"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk

Done. 

After talking with Genesis... un-closed!

> [TI] Primo wrote:

> 2) If the taxes are used for something beneficial for the richer as well (infrastructure, education and even povery reduction to an extend), they won't mind paying these taxes so much. If the money is carelessly thrown around into dark pits of nothingness (development aid to corrupt governments), that will cause resistance.

Oh, I forgot about this one.

The big problem here is that government programs are public resources.  The rich can say "yeah, that's a good program... no worries."  However, once the program is passed, there's nothing to force any individual rich person to produce the taxable income required for that public resource.  Thus, the incentives to reduce taxable income would still exist... bringing us back to Flint's argument.