Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    5:31 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: What Good Is Cutting Taxes While The Government Is In Debt??? Back to Topics
SemiSteve

Champion Author
Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 15, 2014 9:35:56 AM

Makes no sense. Here's what does:

We should all be paying more until it is paid off.
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,718
Points:333,350
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2014 9:20:31 PM

It doesnt suprize me that liberals try to reuse a failed idea.
You contsantly retry failed ideas and expect a different result each time.
It seems you have something against learning from past mistakes whether they are your own or some one elses.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 14, 2014 1:42:00 PM

"Ever wonder why when times get tough republican policy all of a sudden becomes a good idea to liberals? "

--It was perplexing that Democrats used a failed Republican idea for universal health care.

Nice numbers, SE3.5. It should be noted that number of people in the USA in 2013 is also a greater number than all previous years. Would not a nation of more people need to spend more?
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,718
Points:333,350
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Feb 14, 2014 12:56:00 PM

If cutting taxes is such a stupid idea then why is the state of New York running an advertising campaign inviting people to come there and open a tax free business and then pay no tax for 10 years?
We all know they are up to their eyeballs in debt.

Ever wonder why when times get tough republican policy all of a sudden becomes a good idea to liberals?
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:24,208
Points:3,811,865
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 6, 2014 8:41:27 AM

"It is all a matter of too much spending"

Repost:

Federal government spending (in billions) in current dollars for the last 20 years according to the CBO:

1992-1,381.5, 1993-1,409.4, 1994-1,461.8, 1995-1,515.8, 1996-1,560.5, 1997-1,601.1, 1998-1,652.5, 1999-1,701.8, 2000-1,789.0, 2001-1,862.9, 2002-2,010.9, 2003-2,159.9, 2004-2,292.9, 2005-2,472.0, 2006-2,655.1, 2007-2,728.7, 2008-2,982.5, 2009-3,517.7, 2010-3,456.2, 2011-3,603.1, 2012-3,537.1

2013 -3,684.9 (highest ever)
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 5, 2014 1:46:05 PM

"It is all a matter of too much spending, not a matter of revenue."

--It is a mistake to think our immense nation's national budget; under the control of our highly convoluded political system and intricate form of self-government, which allows the powerful elite to exert extraneous control over the process, as our commercial for-profit media sensationalizes only the irksome tidbits, could be so simple.
Profile Pic
Pielededrac
Champion Author Florida

Posts:2,408
Points:728,015
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 4, 2014 10:43:24 PM

It is all a matter of too much spending, not a matter of revenue.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 4, 2014 10:18:40 PM

Makes sense;

-when greatest concern is mainly for one's own interests.

Now certainly one must know and one must understand that the more one earns the more taxes one is going to be obligated to pay.

And naturally it follows that such an individual is going to be opposed to any tax increases for said category.

Being one of the most fortunate members of a fine nation carries certain obligations. Yes it is true.

Most would be freely willing to have such problems.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:24,208
Points:3,811,865
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 4, 2014 4:59:23 PM

"How would you define the term rich?"

I don't have to define it, because I am not into the class warfare thing. I just like to know the definition others apply so I can know if they are coming after me.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 4, 2014 4:27:43 PM

'Rich' is a subjective term. Everybody is richer than somebody else and everybody is poorer than somebody else. It is a matter of perspective. John McCain was asked the same question and replied that rich meant $10 million. We don't know if that refered to income or net worth.

Here's what I have in mind with those terms...

Rich: annual income over 6 figures, up to a million. (100K - 1000K)

Super-rich; mega-rich (same): annual income over a million.

How would you define the term rich?
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:24,208
Points:3,811,865
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 4, 2014 4:08:03 PM

"We need to increase taxes on the rich"

You write that a lot. In this and other topics you write about the "rich", the "super rich", and the "mega rich". Would you care to define those terms for us?
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 4, 2014 12:10:40 PM

Cutting taxes has NEVER been shown to increase job creation. All it does it make the rich richer. They take it; they keep on doing what they would have done anyway; and they don't even say thank you. Then they demand more tax cuts.

Government spending can keep the economy going when the private sector has shut down.

We need to increase taxes on the rich because they are the only sector that can afford to pay more without impacting their family spending. The rich typically spend only a small portion of their income on needs and taxes and are able to keep/invest the larger portion. That investment has not been shown to create jobs. Jobs are only created in reponse to consumer demand. Consumer demand will be greater if there is more money circulating in the hands of those who would spend a greater portion of their income, ie, the middle and especially the poor.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:24,208
Points:3,811,865
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 4, 2014 12:01:25 PM

"(in trillions)"

Should have typed (in billions).

2013 -3,684.9 billion which is 3.6849 trillion.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:24,208
Points:3,811,865
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 4, 2014 8:31:49 AM

We have a spending problem!

Federal government spending (in trillions) in current dollars for the last 20 years according to the CBO:

1992-1,381.5, 1993-1,409.4, 1994-1,461.8, 1995-1,515.8, 1996-1,560.5, 1997-1,601.1, 1998-1,652.5, 1999-1,701.8, 2000-1,789.0, 2001-1,862.9, 2002-2,010.9, 2003-2,159.9, 2004-2,292.9, 2005-2,472.0, 2006-2,655.1, 2007-2,728.7, 2008-2,982.5, 2009-3,517.7, 2010-3,456.2, 2011-3,603.1, 2012-3,537.1

2013 -3,684.9 (highest ever)

[Edited by: SE3.5 at 2/4/2014 8:31:08 AM EST]
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,051
Points:1,914,260
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Feb 3, 2014 11:38:13 PM

SS: "Heard of the sequestration? "


Sequestration didn't cut a single dime. All it did was slow the rate of growth by a fraction of a percent.



mudtoe
Profile Pic
kx250
Champion Author Michigan

Posts:3,904
Points:1,239,780
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Feb 3, 2014 10:00:33 PM

"OK work with me here.
We are all part of a nation which is heavily in debt.
Let's look forward, not back."

Good idea.
Instead of raising taxes first, how about first tackling
waste, fraud, and abuse?

Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,463
Points:1,556,575
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Feb 3, 2014 9:43:40 PM

Spending has been cut - where??????

We are now over 17 TRILLION DOLLARS in debt. About 34% of that debt is since Obama took office - he has not cut spending at all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,623
Points:831,930
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 3, 2014 5:38:36 PM

What good is raising taxes while business is hurting and few are hiring?

I notice that those touting how good the economy is doing and using the Dow Jones as their benchmark are conspicuously silent.

[Edited by: teacher_tim at 2/3/2014 5:38:09 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 3, 2014 5:33:12 PM

Spending has already been cut. And the unintended consequences have been felt. The economy took a hit. The recovery is not as bright as it might have been.

cutting spending involves cutting government programs. That means firing people. That adds more to unemployment. Wrong thing to do while we are trying to reduce unemployment. Adds more people to the job market. Makes it tougher for people to find a job.

Adds to unemployment compensation pay-out. That adds to the government debt.

Basically the government is going to be paying people whether the government gets something in return for it or not. Might as well get something in return for it.

Cutting taxes means less revenue collected. Makes the deficit higher. We are then further away from being able to pay down the debt. We need more revenue to lower the deficit and get to where we can pay down the debt. After we pay down the debt then we will be spending less on interest and then we can cut taxes.

Responsible people understand this. They know the power of delayed gratification.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 1, 2014 3:34:24 PM

Heard of the sequestration?
Profile Pic
nstrdnvstr
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:40,958
Points:4,626,725
Joined:May 2001
Message Posted: Feb 1, 2014 7:03:50 AM

What makes no sense is not cutting spending when we are in so much debt. Why increase taxes when there is no corresponding spending cuts?
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2014 2:52:09 PM

Agreed.

And that is why the federal govt is so deep in debt.
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,051
Points:1,914,260
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2014 2:21:09 PM

SS: "We have been cutting taxes for decades. Especially on the rich. "


Half the people pay no taxes, but the rest still aren't paying their fair share huh?


mudtoe
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2014 2:10:41 PM

We have been cutting taxes for decades. Especially on the rich. And all the while the federal debt has grown. It was hoped that by making things easier for the rich that they would create jobs. We now can easily see that the exact opposite has happened. The rich have tried every means possible to cut jobs because, like paying lower taxes, this helps them to increase their wealth.

It is time to recognize this and reverse it.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2014 2:07:32 PM

If we ended the dole (as we should) demand for shelter and food would skyrocket. Existing shelters would not be able to cope. And they are faith-based, which is an issue.

We can reduce the federal outlay for combatting poverty by ending the dole and setting up non faith-based facilities to feed, clothe and house those in need. They will not be as nice as getting a check and renting your own place. This will serve as the motivation for people to go out and find work.

It's called tough love.

This would help solve poverty and reduce federal debt.
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,801
Points:2,468,275
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jan 27, 2014 8:53:13 AM

Most of the organizations I am familiar with do not get government funding and the few I have checked up on that do, only get a porting of coverage.

Many homeless refuse to go to shelters except in dire cases... I was amazed that they can get welfare without an address (reliable source)...

Several organizations I am familiar with our faith based.. PADS, Pacific Garden Missions, and Breakthrough Ministries... Many refuse help, and unfortunately many have mental illnesses that go untreated...
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 27, 2014 7:51:31 AM

Oh they go to shelters. Hundreds of meals served daily around here. Cut the dole. Build or set up the facilities in existing empty buildings. Quit making poverty so cushy and quit rewarding child bearing. Raise the min wage. Get the poor working. Tax them a little. Wanna get serious about fed debt this is one way to do it and fight poverty too.
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,801
Points:2,468,275
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2014 9:05:02 PM

"Reb4, I oppose the dole. Rewarding child bearing only gets more applications for free checks. I also agree with job training but I don't see enough jobs for the poor to take. They will be on the street. Should we let the needy freeze and starve or should we provide food and shelter"

SemiSteve, you really are not remotely familiar with what you are attempting to discuss, are you...

Do you have many homeless in Tampa???? We have quite a few in Chicago... and most do not want to go to shelters... Why would they want to go to poor houses???
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,051
Points:1,914,260
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2014 8:39:24 PM

Well, I know of one job that really needs doing that we should be requiring able bodied people on the dole to be helping with. We are in dire need of a physical barrier on our southern border, and even if these people are unskilled, there are a whole lot of them; so they should be put to work building that barrier, sort of like a WPA project from the 1930s. That way they could earn some of the current freebies they are getting and the country gets something it desperately needs. Sounds like a win/win to me.


mudtoe
Profile Pic
magpie2013
Champion Author Milwaukee

Posts:4,147
Points:142,395
Joined:Apr 2013
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2014 8:35:25 PM

How else can the senators give themselves a pay raise?????
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2014 5:07:39 PM

Reb4, I oppose the dole. Rewarding child bearing only gets more applications for free checks. I also agree with job training but I don't see enough jobs for the poor to take. They will be on the street. Should we let the needy freeze and starve or should we provide food and shelter?

Maybe we should only help them if they agree to be sterilized?
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,801
Points:2,468,275
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2014 4:08:40 PM

smisteve, you crack me up...

Build poor houses??? What do you perceive that to be??? I think properly performed job training and assistance is appropriate... but for a limited time... not forever...

Raise taxes on the rich... ??? Ha, Ha, Ha, isn't that what the liar Obama said he was going to do? When my wife asked me why her pay check was so much smaller the beginning of last year... I told her it was because Obama said she was one of the rich... LOL

Cliff, the George W Bush was commissioned in 2009... The problem with cutting any spending is no one wants to give up "the Bacon"...

Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,051
Points:1,914,260
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2014 3:08:58 PM

ss: "How does that reduce the bloated MIC? "


Actually, defense spending as a percent of GDP is falling. Wealth redistribution on the other hand is rising at an ever increasing rate. Guess which curve is a threat to the continued existence of the United States?


mudtoe
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2014 2:04:37 PM

I don't think the solution is as simple as cutting off the needy. How does that reduce the bloated MIC?
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,051
Points:1,914,260
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2014 11:35:29 AM

Simple solution. Stop paying people not to work and stop paying people for having babies they can't afford to take care of. If we did just those two things the budget would be balanced. We have created a nation of moochers who are breeding little moochers at an alarming rate. It needs to stop, now.


mudtoe
Profile Pic
Cliffisher
Champion Author Wisconsin

Posts:30,503
Points:3,769,000
Joined:Sep 2003
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2014 11:07:03 AM

Ooops!

What's a few billion between friends.

The latest and newest carrier, the George H.W. Bush cost $6.2 billion.
Profile Pic
Cliffisher
Champion Author Wisconsin

Posts:30,503
Points:3,769,000
Joined:Sep 2003
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2014 10:59:23 AM

Need a new latest and greatest fighter jet?
$35 million each?
Military doesn't want any?
Congress, No problem and if you vote it down we will tag you as anti-military.
Have to keep the donations coming in.

Need a new aircraft carrier?
$3 billion a piece.
The military doesn't want it?
Congress, to bad, give me two of those puppies.
And the anti-military crap is the same as above with a tad of anti-Israel thrown in for good measure.
No problem. Have to keep those maga-buck donations flowing in.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,463
Points:1,556,575
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2014 11:06:02 PM


steve we can agree on some of that stuff ---

We should legalize all drugs. Why tax it? Take all taxes off booze adn cigarettes too. The only taxes should be individual income taxes.

Leave the minimum wage alone. Its bad enough at present - dont make a bad situation worse. The best way to deal with the minimum wage is to make more and better paying jobs. Turn business loose and get government back to a small lean machine instead of a bloated overbearing monster.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2014 10:35:48 PM

Stop spending on the dole: Build poor houses instead: decrease spending.

Stop spending on bloated military build-ups. We would still have the largest forces and the most power: decrease spending.

Legalize and tax cannabis: increase revenue.

Tax the rich more: increase revenue.

Make everyone, even the poor, pay something. Increase revenue.

Raise the min wage so they can do it.

Presto. Every body gets something; everybody gives up something; financial house in order.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,463
Points:1,556,575
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2014 4:17:42 PM

What are the consequences of bad fiscal policy?
.
>>>The huge currency devaluations that hit Venezuela and Argentina last week could be seen coming a mile away. This is a warning to the U.S. about big-government spending policies financed by printing money.

The markets have given a resounding vote of no confidence to many emerging-market currencies, triggering sell-offs as far flung as Turkey, Russia and South Africa.

But nowhere were the losses as catastrophic as those in two socialist Latin American countries that have thumbed their noses at fiscal discipline, ruthlessly used printed cash to expand their states and treated their citizens as cash cows, gleefully chasing out thousands of the most productive.
.
.
.
Sure, governments will blame speculators, while others, like economist Joe Stiglitz, will call currency devaluations "restoratives" for balance of payments crises.

But the reality is, they are terrible events that destroy a nation's savings, hitting small savers who cannot move money abroad the hardest.

That's the money that becomes a nation's seed capital for new enterprises and future economic growth.

And they inevitably lead to inflation. For 2012, Venezuela's inflation surged to 56.1%, its central bank said. In Argentina, the rate was 28%, according to a watchdog.

These man-made disasters are due to governments spending more than they have to buy votes. In Argentina, spending rose 50% in the past decade, and in Venezuela it surged 60% in just the past year.

The numbers are so hard, and crisp and predictable, it's astonishing anyone could be surprised by them.

And that's what brings to mind the U.S. and its money printing — M2 money supply is up 34% since President Obama took office — to finance its multi-trillion-dollar expansion of government. Who's minding the store?<<<

Sooner or later you can no longer make fiat money with no backing other than pretty speeches that few believe in anymore.

[Edited by: flyboyUT at 1/25/2014 4:20:48 PM EST]
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,801
Points:2,468,275
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2014 2:05:58 PM

We don’t have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven’t taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much. — Ronald Reagan
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,801
Points:2,468,275
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jan 22, 2014 11:52:33 PM

"Actually, reb, the "flat out LIE" is your insinuation that we are "giving the impression that the USA is only spending within our means". I never wrote or implied that."

Nickhammer, lets try to bring this discussion with some facts and figures...

summary of receipts, outlays and surplus/deficits 1940-2016

Nickhammer said: "Revenue from the previous year, which had gone down in only 2 of the previous 40 fiscal years, went down 5 times in 9 years beginning with FY 2001. This has left us with a revenue shortfall of several hundred billion dollars per year."

2001, 1,991.1, 1,862.8, SURPLUS - 128.2 revenue, spending and surplus down *surplus*
2002, 1,853.1, 2,010.9, deficit - 157.8 revenue went down after 2001, spending up
2003, 1,782.3, 2,159.9, deficit - 377.6 revenue went down again (still), spending up
2004, 1,880.1, 2,292.8, deficit - 412.7 rev & spend & deficit up...
2005, 2,153.6, 2,472.0, deficit - 318.3 rev & spend & deficit up
2006, 2,406.9, 2,655.0, deficit - 248.2 rev & spend & deficit up
2007, 2,568.0, 2,728.7, deficit - 160.7 rev & spend & deficit up
2008, 2,524.0, 2,982.5, deficit - 458.6 rev down, spend and deficit up
2009, 2,105.0, 3,517.7, deficit -1,412.7 rev down, spend and deficit WAY UP!!!
2010, 2,162.7, 3,456.2, deficit -1,293.5 rev up, spend down (slight) deficit up!!!

The problem Nick is we keep spending and spending and spending...

Street Rider, that is the bottom line is getting people back to work... it's not getting much better...


SemiSteve, if everyone could be made to pay their fair share that would be great... but we also need to cut expenses... look at the numbers... We've been spending more than we have brought it for too many years... are you saying it would be worse??? if we didn't keep going into debt more?? How does that make any sense man? Please explain that?

NickHammer, you seem to think cutting spending would put a stranglehold on the economy??? tell me how is the debt not doing that?? Tell me what company or family could go through this kind of record for a decade??? hmmm?



[Edited by: reb4 at 1/22/2014 11:59:08 PM EST]
Profile Pic
streetrider
Champion Author Gary

Posts:10,536
Points:152,295
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Jan 21, 2014 7:45:43 PM

Semisteve

We should all be paying more until it is paid off.

Lets try what really works putting people back to work at good paying jobs, lets think thrice on our military expenditures.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 21, 2014 1:48:43 PM

reb4 the wealthiest have seen the greatest tax cuts over the decades as federal debt has soared.

I think it was a mistake to cut their taxes. Had we not done that federal debt would be much lower.

And thank you NickHammer. Totally agree.
Profile Pic
NickHammer
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,763
Points:3,209,495
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2014 10:23:54 AM

>>Semi steve and NickHammer seem to be giving the impression that the USA is only spending within our means... which is a flat out LIE.<<

Actually, reb, the "flat out LIE" is your insinuation that we are "giving the impression that the USA is only spending within our means". I never wrote or implied that.

What I DID write was that cutting spending puts a stranglehold on our economy and that modest spending increases will both reduce our deficit AND be better for the economy.

A perfect model for this is the Clinton years. There was a $255 billion deficit in FY1993. Spending increased EVERY year under Clinton, but only at an annual rate of 3.55%. But revenue increased at an annual rate of 7.05% and the annual deficit got smaller every year until we had a surplus. THAT is what I am proposing.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:24,208
Points:3,811,865
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2014 10:07:16 AM

Back to the topic: "What Good Is Cutting Taxes While The Government Is In Debt???"

Gives me more money to spend, thus increasing the tax take of my state and local government, allowing them to fix the potholes in my streets, thus saving me money on car repairs, which in turn gives me more money to spend, thus increasing the tax take of my state and local government, allowing them . . .

[Edited by: SE3.5 at 1/17/2014 10:06:11 AM EST]
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,801
Points:2,468,275
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2014 9:35:31 AM

SemiSteve,

Please tell us all what your last post has to do with the topic?

Do you want to change the topic???
or maybe confused and meant to post in another of your topics?

[Edited by: reb4 at 1/17/2014 9:34:24 AM EST]
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2014 9:08:04 AM

Do tell us when taxes have been lower in the last 50 years.

Tell us when the wealthiest have paid less.

And then tell us when they have been richer.

As the wealthiest Americans have increased their wealth, and paid less and less taxes, over the SAME PERIOD of decades, US debt has soared. And over the SAME PERIOD, the middle and poor have lost wealth.

The government, the middle, the poor have all lost out as the rich have gained.
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:24,801
Points:2,468,275
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jan 17, 2014 8:52:23 AM

"Way to fact-slap 'em, man.

When there is a lot of debt the thing to do is pay it down. If ya ran up a big credit card bill, ya can't 'unspend' it down. Ya gotta PAY it down."

What about the xxxxxxx debt?

Semi steve and NickHammer seem to be giving the impression that the USA is only spending within our means... which is a flat out LIE.

THE USA is racking up debt even with the increases in taxes on Most Americans (not just the "rich")...

Why, because there was no appropriate decrease in spending to help control the runaway debt...

Currently the debt is not being paid off... it is increasing...

WHY, because we are SPENDING TOO MUCH!!!

Why because no one can cut spending!!!!

Do this in real life... go to a bank and try to continue to rack up the debt that US is doing...

Won't last...

NOPE!

But NickHammer and SemiSteve think they raise taxes and now they can increase spending...
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,549
Points:449,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 16, 2014 10:58:15 PM

NickHammer: "I have to laugh every time I read that. Revenue from the previous year, which had gone down in only 2 of the previous 40 fiscal years, went down 5 times in 9 years beginning with FY 2001. This has left us with a revenue shortfall of several hundred billion dollars per year. Even as a percentage of GDP, FYs 2009-2012 were the lowest since 1950.

Could spending be lower? Sure. But it's already gone down an unprecedented 3 times in the last 4 years (vs. just 1 time in the previous 54 years). Cutting spending will continue to keep a stranglehold on the slowly improving economy, whereas modest spending increases (say 2-3%) will still lower the deficit, lower spending as a percentage of GDP, allow revenue to catch up, and give the economy the chance to take off. "

--Right on! Say it like it IS!

Way to fact-slap 'em, man.

When there is a lot of debt the thing to do is pay it down. If ya ran up a big credit card bill, ya can't 'unspend' it down. Ya gotta PAY it down.

The government needs more money. Cutting taxes means less revenue. Less revenue isn't gonna pay it down.

The idea of cutting taxes to pay down the debt makes as much sense as eating cake to lose weight.

Cutting taxes sounds great. So does eating cake.

If ya want results ya gotta do the work.

Sooner or later ya have to eat your meat. Ya can't live on desert.

How can ya have any pudding if ya can't eat your meat?

How can ya pay down the debt if ya won't pay any money?
Profile Pic
sissurf
Champion Author Virginia Beach

Posts:24,927
Points:2,296,780
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 16, 2014 3:00:16 PM


"Stop spending on stupid stuff!

"We cut Veteran services, meals on wheels --- FOR WHAT?"

I agree with you, e_jeepin, these are two areas, I don't want to see go either. Here some people worked all their lives, and just because they can't work because of a disability, or being elderly is no excuse to stop helping them out, either through meals on wheels, or closing down a commissary on military bases. Military men and woman live pay check to pay check as it is to support not only themselves, but their families. Anyone that gives their life for us, should be more respected.

If only politicians would stop spending waste. There would be plenty of money for every thing.

We even have a church that is foreclosing because of not enough people giving and too many people needing. The church has been here for decades.

If churches go, then what?!
Post a reply Back to Topics