so why not keep the tax reductions, while increasing the tax deductions that reagan took away? think about it,it would be interesting....every capitlist dream. it would be like a "hail mary" to capitalist and a good "i told you so" to people like you...;)<quoted text>
Sorry, but manipulating monetary and fiscal policy is what Central Banks and Treasury Departments do. We've been doing it here since Hamilton, long before there even was a Karl Marx. Now you can debate appropriate policy (Keynes and Hayek seem to be the two most debated schools of thought), but blaming the sitting president is a little deceitful because Keynes is the prevailing economic theory for both parties. You sound like you need to look to the Libertarian candidate (Johnson) for someone you can get behind.
But, newsflash, the government spending isn't going to stop and deficits aren't going to drop under either party unless the economy takes off again...everyone sees what happened to Europe when they turned off the government spigots, and it ain't pretty. So your choice is to either spend that money domestically (Obama) or militarily (Romney). To put it in more concrete business terms, Obama wants to develop new products and customers, while Romney wants to reduce global competition and barriers. Obama is the internet company, Romney is the industrial manufacturer; so invest in whichever you think will perform better.
if it didnt work, it would end the capitalist america. if it did.........hahahaah