Would it be easier to govern spending than it would to govern accumulating wealth?

Get used to hearing "too big to fail" for a while yet.

As talks of a bailout for the auto industry heat up, six governors have signed a letter asking the Treasury and the Fed to give funds to GM and Chrysler.

The six states are Michigan, Delaware, Kentucky, New York, Ohio, and South Dakota. Our focus has been on Congress recently, but it wouldn't hurt to contact these governors if you are in their states and tell them that you are tired of your tax dollars being handed out to failing businesses.

Of course, no mention is made in Congress of lightening up or eliminating some of the red tape that the federal government has put on the auto industry.

Now... if we could just claim these bailouts on our tax forms as charitable donations.

www.campaignforliberty.com

In theory, yes. In practice, no. There are too many interests with their hands out for government funds, making it very hard politically. Also note your concern is way out of date; the big spenders now are the GOP types in the present administration. (Bail out = 750 billion, for example.)

Further, revenue comes from the entire economy; the budget is a much smaller amount.

So what your saying is that Republicans that aren't rich do not benefit from the programs in place? Of course your taking care of them aren't you.

Yeah that's it.

I just want to keep my 401K and what little else that I have that I have worked so hard for.