Misses several core premises and has several flaws and examples are laughable, it's called inflation that happens but in the beginning that take away pay eventually evens out is true but crowds out the youth unable/unwilling to enter the job market at that lower wage at first ala the high youth unemployment in EU. When it boils down to it the wealthy will always find ways out of it so try to help the little guy. Good interesting read though.

Do you have any reference material for the model failing in France?

It's called a social contract. The alternative is savagery.

Honestly, this kind of rhetoric isn't helpful ...

Most people on both sides of the political spectrum want to improve the standards of living of everyone but they have contrasting views on how to accomplish this. On the progressive end of the political spectrum they believe in a social safety net and eliminating the possibility of failure, while on the conservative end of the scale they believe in eliminating barriers to success.

Essentially, the response to the social contract is "You give a man a fish you feed him for a day, you teach a man to fish you feed him for life". Conservatives see the solution as finding a way to empower the "poor" to find work that pays well enough to support (and improve) their standard of living rather than subsidizing them staying unemployeed or in a low paying position. It is not savagery or uncaring, it is a different and completely valid perspective.

what a bunch of non-sensical, liberal spin. I especially like the part about employees take home wages returning to the same level they'd earned 2-3 years before an additional tax increase. wow, that's just fantastic. meanwhile, inflation has raised the price of nearly eveything else. you really don't have to be an astro-physicist to notice the gaping black hole in this logic.
and Denmark? really?.. as a fiscal model the U.S. should follow. what do they have, like maybe 72 people living there?
you realize we have 350 million right?
close the book, stop listening to your college proffesor whose existence and opinions are based in theory, and jump into the real world, with a real job and real bills. afterwards if you still think paying upwards of HALF of what you earn to the government is good tax policy, I'll come back and throw you a banana... and maybe clean out your cage.

Maybe it should be? If America doesn't produce anything, and all the raw materials and labour actually come from abroad, America shouldn't BE the richest country. I feel the same about the UK, we don't actually DO anything so why do we have developed status?

America should be rich -> therefore we'll spend like we're rich is never going to permanently fix the economy. After all, economy has to be grounded in real numbers and not spreadsheets.

Raising taxes would be the correction US society needs to realise they are living beyond their means. And yes people are going to get hurt; anyone who's made the decision to be in a fluff job instead of something needed.

I don't disagree with your stance. Direct welfare should be short term (unless the person is patently unable to work), and should be focused on retraining or otherwise making the individual more able.

You are misunderstanding Marks, who is making the fallacious and reductive "taxation = theft" argument.

i certainly didnt sign this contract.

what are the terms and conditions? can i re-negociate this contract.

i really really really dont like this non-voluntary contract.

You can vote, or you can leave (though leaving violates terms of the contract as well, leading to large asset forfeiture)

then i suggest you leave, if you are going to vote people into non-voluntary contracts of which the do not want.