POSTED BY: William Stuhr (October 07, 2008 01:42 AM)
Mr. Kiplinger, I've been a fan of your informative website and magazine for years now. I have to say, that after reading your article, "a new economic agenda", I'm sorely disappointed in your world view, especially coming from a person whom I've grown to respect and trust (via your website) over the years. Although I agree with some of your points, I strongly disagree with you on your issues with our foreign policy. Sir, protecting our nation is our top priority (and has been)... I believe the solution is less government. People have to be able to calculate the processes of solving their own problems, and not relying on the government to do it for them. If someone wants good medical care and retirement benefits, then they need to get off the couch, get off welfare, and go out and get it done. Universal health care for all would be a disaster! You know as well as I, that America was not founded on made great by people leaching off of Uncle Sam. America was made great by people working hard for a living, and tenaciously demanding minimal government intervention in their lives. What you propose is nothing short of socialism......communism.

POSTED BY: Tim Toddy (October 07, 2008 10:57 AM)
How do you encourage people to cut consumption when they are raised with the expectation that this generation should be better off than the previous? Our mantra as a country has always been to "increase the standard of living." That almost always means a higher material standard. To fulfill that end requires more resources, time and money and people seem willing to strive for it to exhaustion. Until we realize that our standard of living is already more than can be reasonably expected there will be no change in our consumption. The vast majority of the world live on much, much less and quite often are happier than we are besides.

POSTED BY: RZZ (October 07, 2008 11:19 AM)
We need to create good jobs in this country by attempting to purchase American made products.

POSTED BY: SalvadorDali (October 07, 2008 11:32 AM)
How did we get to the point where having compassion and providing for the less fortunate is communism? I thought as a country we might have gotten past the fallacious ideas that "poor people are just lazy," and, "folks just need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps." This is the worst kind of victim-blaming. No one *wants* to be poor, but many are born into situations where the deck is stacked against them from the beginning. The simple fact of the matter is that people without healthcare coverage now still do receive care, but only by waiting until a real emergency arises, when they're treated at emergency room prices. Then, not only are they financially destroyed, but if they cannot pay, the hospital will pass the cost on to all other patients, raising the cost of care across the board. Universal health care coverage would increase the amount of preventative care that they receive, and drastically improve the overall health of the population. This could be done at a *lower* total cost, and individual cost to those currently paying for coverage through private companies. UHC would enable the kind of healthy, productive workforce that could get out and build the society we want to live in. Sadly, the idea of doing things for the common good has become a reason for people to cry, "COMMUNISTS!" Do people really believe that we're still living in the McCarthy era? We are all already paying for other peoples' healthcare, just in hidden fees and price increases. Bring coverage to all, increase the overall health of the US, and lower the individual's cost for healthcare.

POSTED BY: GI Joe (October 07, 2008 01:25 PM)
Why should we bailing out other countries when we can't sustain our own economy? Foreign policy funding needs to be cut by 100%. We need to stop feeding the world and start to feed our own citizens. The Bush Agenda in Iraq is a farce. Pakistan gets $10 Billion in aid, yet Pakistan harbors terrorists cells...

POSTED BY: nehushtan (October 07, 2008 01:40 PM)
William Sturh is voicing a typical, but mistaken point of view: minimal government equals freedom. Government is necessary to secure freedom, not only by defending against foreign invaders but also by defending citizens from one another. This aspect of government is often reduced by conservatives to protection of public safety and private property. However, since we all have to share a public space, other government actions are required such as regulation of environmental and food safety, as well as setting rules for the shared financial markets. Don't try to scare us with words like socialism. You already believe in socialism if you rely on the local police force and fire department instead of hiring your own security firm and fire service. We already have a mix of socialism and capitalism in the US, and the correct question is not how to "minimize" one or the other, but how to create a proper public order where each problem in society is matched by the right mix of solutions. Don't be dogmatic about government, all governments are different. Individualism cannot solve every problem... sometimes we have to work together.

POSTED BY: Larry Gutwill (October 07, 2008 01:41 PM)
Supporting the Fair Tax is excellent! If this alone was done, many of our problems, both private and government, would evaporate

POSTED BY: SalvadorDali (October 07, 2008 02:22 PM)
Another point -- the Fair Tax program is a regressive tax that would massively increase the tax burden on the middle class. President Bush's own committee on tax reform examined it, and found that it would require a sales tax rate of at least 34%, would still have problems with evasion, wouldn't reduce bureaucracy, and would make millions dependent on prebate checks from the government. I can't post URLs here apparently, but google for "tax reform panel final report" for the full analysis. Chapter 9 is the one that deals with the Fair Tax specifically, and shows why it will increase the tax burden on anyone making below $200,000

POSTED BY: Larry Gutwill (October 07, 2008 02:24 PM)
Re education, how about making it private...no government. Return the taxes collected and let families choose their schools based on each school's performance. Those parents interested in educating their kids would have to become involved by shopping for and monitoring their local schools. If a parent elected not to educate their kids, it should also be their choice. As for immigration: Build the wall; issue a national ID card to everyone legal; stop all support to illegals, like education, medical, and welfare; prosecute employers who hire illegals; send incarcerated illegal criminals back to their home country. Re health care: Also privatize it. Give us back our taxes and let us choose where and when to go for care. Medical facilities would have to compete and that would lower costs and raise service. Re Iraq, only one reason for invading was nation building. Remember of the 19 items in the congressional decree, only one was to replace Hussein. The main reason was because of the treat of WMD. When Iraq becomes a functioning democracy, it will pay us great dividends by having an ally in that region. If a nation is a threat to us, we should defend ourselves with or without support from foreign nations. And to do this, we need to maintain a modern military.

POSTED BY: Maria (October 07, 2008 02:57 PM)
...great article. It should be sent (to) the the presidential candidates.

POSTED BY: C. Lambeth (October 07, 2008 08:08 PM)
This is the most poignant and honest letter I've read of Kiplinger's. Job well done. Have YOU considered running for office? The politicians simply chase whichever way the wind is blowing. Like (Knight) Kiplinger suggests, it's time we (as the committed public) change the direction of that wind. Enough is enough. But will we put our sense of entitlement aside? That remains to be seen.

POSTED BY: SalvadorDali (October 07, 2008 09:42 PM)
Regarding privatization of education (proposed by a commenter, not the article), what of the people who suffer low or no tax burden currently? Do they receive no money to send their children to private schools? This is the *entire point* of the public schooling systems -- to enable students from lower-income families to have a chance at education. Besides this, it is in our national best interest to have an educated citizenry. Total privatization of schooling will *ensure* a widening rift between the children of the wealthy and the children of the poor. If anything, we should be providing more money to underfunded public schools. The current performance problems with public schools can be directly traced to underfunding, not government control. Total privatization of the educational system would condemn millions of children to little or no education at all, which would lock entire social groups into endless poverty.

POSTED BY: Brent LaFrenz (October 07, 2008 10:57 PM)
While everyone will agree they want a change and want these problems fixed, it will never happen because people fear the unknown. A lot of these ideas, while very good, are a drastic change from the "normal" life people have been living. It would require a major culture shift to achieve anything like this, but things always get worse before they get better and any President would have to deal with the criticisms and unpopularity until any idea would begin to hold. Something needs to get done as we cannot continue spending more than what we take in and building huge deficits. Does anyone think that the US Government will come into a situation like the current credit market? How long will other countries and investors continue lending us money? No one thought that would happen to Wall Street firms, so what is different about the US Government? We could always print money to pay bills off but that would just lead to major inflation and make the dollar devalue against every other currency out there. How dire is the situation we are in?

POSTED BY: John Anderton (October 08, 2008 03:35 AM)
I agree with many of the points listed...I don not agree with universal healthcare at all. Sure, it sounds wonderful, everyone getting access to healthcare fairly etc. But where is the money going to come from? ...straight from the pockets of the already over-taxed American public. Raising taxes is the worst thing to do in this economy. We need lower taxes and cut wasteful government spending i.e. farming subsidies. True, those farmers need federal help, but what about the majority of farms that qualify as farms, some celebrity owned, that do not produce food etc.? More money for people to spend = better business all around = better markets and a revamped economy. It is that simple, yet everyone wants to pay more taxes but don't realize it will make the problem even worse. (On) Immigration- Illegal immigrants are really, really, draining money paid in taxes reserved for American citizens. They get medical, welfare, and free education even though they are illegal in this country...They are stealing. This problem needs to be addressed asap. Cut taxes, get rid of wasteful spending by the government, and more strict anti-illegal alien programs are just the tip of the iceberg in improvements. Thank you.

POSTED BY: Kevin Brady (October 08, 2008 08:53 AM)
Great article that sums up all that should be blatantly obvious to our politicians, except for the influence of special interests. Privatization would be wonderful, but to me, is as unlikely as socialism is to actually work in a functioning society. Parents would choose not to send their kids to school and keep the money, leaving us with a large uneducated population to support. And unfortunately for us, medical care is a need by the time you're going to a hospital, not a desire....competition will not be the hospitals' primary thoughts no matter who pays the bills. Well done Kiplinger!

POSTED BY: Ken Veit (October 08, 2008 10:57 AM)
Many thoughtful and informed people have written similar articles. What is tragic is that the only ones who don't get it are the pack of jokers who we elected to represent us. Throw them all out!

POSTED BY: Eglantine (October 08, 2008 11:29 AM)
I am in favor not only of universal health care but of having one payer--the federal government. When you consider how much money is siphoned from health care dollars to insurance companies--executives, employees, and shareholders--and how most doctor's offices employ people whole sole job is dealing with insurance companies you realize how much of a health care dollar is spent on dealing with insurance companies. Having one payer would save that amount and allow it to be spent on actually providing health care. It is possible that a universal health care, single payer system would be less expensive than what we have now.

POSTED BY: Steve Wheelock (October 08, 2008 03:09 PM)
I'd replace #5, a policy of this administration that is not likely to continue, with infrastructure recovery, which I believe could lead to an economic boom. There's overlap, to be sure, with energy issues.

POSTED BY: Rodger Malcolm Mitch (October 08, 2008 03:13 PM)
A couple of Knight Kiplinger's "eight toughest problems" are wrong. For instance: "1. Overconsumption and undersaving by individuals and the federal government, as evidenced by rising personal debt, budget deficits and the resulting dependence on foreign capital." Individuals are totally different from the federal government. Ever since 1971, the federal government has had the unlimited ability to create money. Thus, the federal debt has not been, and never will be, a problem. Taxpayers never will pay it so long as taxes are not raised (Taxpayers pay taxes, not debt). There is a relationship between federal deficits and economic growth, because deficits add money to the economy. Today, our economy is starved for money, so needs deficits more than ever. "2. Soaring old-age entitlements, which, if not reined in as the baby-boomers retire, will crowd most other public priorities." The government should roll Social Security (and Medicare, too) into the general fund and pay for them exactly the same way it pays for the military, Congress, the Supreme Court and the other 400+ federal agencies....Rather than starving our older people, the government has unlimited funds to pay for these valuable programs. And oh, please no complaining that "turning on the presses" causes inflation. It doesn't, never has and never will. What causes inflation? Cutting interest rates. What cures inflation? Raising interest rates.

POSTED BY: Joe Berger (October 08, 2008 05:49 PM)
Privatize healthcare? Yeah-right. Didn't work with our banking system... won't work with healthcare. Reason: You can't trust greedy execs to do the right thing. We should learn our lesson here, as this same thing happens over and over.

POSTED BY: ted rees (October 09, 2008 12:54 AM)
I like all of those suggestions. But I would add we need to find ways to keep people employed vs. importing labor or shipping jobs overseas. The root of financial problems is a lack of production. For production, I don't see anything comparing to renewable energy. We have reached peak oil production while demand increases. This means a sea change in how the world must to run. We get triple benefit with renewable: jobs at home, energy at home, expanded clean energy consumption as the fossil fuels dry up. Any fossil fuels should be left for future generations.

POSTED BY: Kevin W. Ferere (October 09, 2008 12:57 PM)
...Everyone knows we need to save, but to many corporations and institutions are making too much money off of other people's ignorance and indiscipline. Let's correlate the education in the schools towards saving and instill healthy financial perspective into our youth for the future....

POSTED BY: Ken Hoagland (October 09, 2008 01:41 PM)
The FairTax could save our economy....Because workers take home paychecks without federal withholding, mortgage debts could be met. Eliminating all capital gains taxes would spur investment in securities. The FairTax also eliminates the price disadvantage by domestic producers that the income tax system creates. That makes American producers more competitive and keeps jobs here. Finally, elimination of the corporate income tax would spur expansion and repatriate a lot of American capital. Now if only Congress would get out of the way.

POSTED BY: Karen Heitman (October 09, 2008 04:39 PM)
I feel the FairTax would be a huge boon to our economy, especially now. We need simplicity and transparency which the FairTax would give us. The only people against it are Congress and lobbyists. Now, doesn't that tell us something?

POSTED BY: Aaron (October 09, 2008 07:44 PM)
To SalvadorDali, the FairTax is only regressive and shifts the tax burden if you change its make up. The tax panel did that by not even including the elimination of FICA taxes. Most Americans pay more in those regressive payroll taxes than income taxes...

POSTED BY: Charlie (October 09, 2008 09:00 PM)
...I have an idea.....let's shrink government, reduce taxes, and fend for ourselves. Let's allow a free people to truly be free. Whatever happened to Jefferson's concept of the "pursuit of happiness"?

POSTED BY: Jeff Locke (October 09, 2008 09:36 PM)
The Fairtax is the answer to every problem espoused except for cutting spending because it is revenue nuetral in its design....our constitution doesn't allow the development of a nanny state. That distortion began with FDR and we have descended down that slick slippery enabled slope of socialism ever since. And if you read closer Mr. Joe Berger, the author (Knight) Kiplinger was not suggesting the privatization of healthcare...Eliminate No Child Left Behind as a failed government intervention ploy and return education to local control and local oversight.

POSTED BY: Alex Fisher (October 10, 2008 09:42 AM)
Kiplinger has it right-- we need to get rid of this insane tax code. The FairTax is the best alternative I've seen so far. ..I read Neal Boortz' book about it and agree it's the way to go.

POSTED BY: Julie (October 10, 2008 01:10 PM)
Yes, the fair tax is the remedy for this disaster! Not just short term fix but would strengthen our economy for the long haul.

POSTED BY: Jim Bennett (October 10, 2008 02:04 PM)
The four objectives of tax policy are: 1) Transparency, 2) Efficiency, 3) Fairness, and 4) Economic Growth. The Fair Tax is the only tax, existing or proposed, that meets all four policy objectives.

POSTED BY: Beverly LaCross (October 10, 2008 02:56 PM)
...THE PEOPLE WANT OUR FREEDOM BACK AND BUSINESS COME BACK TO THE USA!WE CAN BE WORLD LEADERS AGAIN!

POSTED BY: Don Belk (October 10, 2008 04:35 PM)
The Fair Tax is the way to go. Also, start in kindergarden teaching self reliance, a do it yourself attitude and I would rather go hungry and do the best I can than be beholden to anyone or anything else, especially "government".

POSTED BY: Wes Jones (October 10, 2008 06:26 PM)
Do me this 1 favor. Add up all of your purchases for the last month or estimate what your average monthly purchases are and add 23% tax to your total...Write down how much the 23% is. As you know, this already includes the tax you paid on the purchase receipts. So now, go to your paychecks for the month and see how much income tax has been removed. subtract the Net from your gross income. Now ask yourself this? Would I be paying more taxes under the Fairtax plan? Would I need to file ever again?...

POSTED BY: lea (October 10, 2008 08:44 PM)
Great ideas...the most important being the idea of moving to a consumption tax. I love this idea!!...This may be the only way to turn our economy around and stop our slide toward socialism.

POSTED BY: UnleashProsperity (October 11, 2008 04:07 PM)
The FairTax will go a long way toward ensuring our economic recovery, without penalizing those who earn less (via the prebate) ...I am an everyday middle-class American and have been a long time supporter, and many respected economists and Congressmen are backing this solution...

POSTED BY: Adam Yomtov (October 13, 2008 06:27 AM)
Very well written article. I especially agree with the section on True Fundamental Tax Reform and abolishing our federal income tax system...Call your congressman and demand the FairTax!

POSTED BY: howard (October 18, 2008 02:21 AM)
Knight Kiplinger calling for universal health care? I cannot believe my eyes! Good agenda for energy and foreign policy. If more moderates from both politcal parties could be this pragmatic, this country could regain its prominent role in the world. But it appears that the Republicans would rather call these kind of ideas "socialism" and keep up mired in decline.