Printable View
We just lost 30 special ops, including many Seal Team 6 members in a helo that got shot down. Eerily familiar territory, for those old enough to remember. This is Obama's Operation Eagle Claw. If he gets attacked by a bunny, I am going to shit myself.
As predicted long ago, this neo-marxist will be a one-termer, who BTW (also as predicted long ago) will face a primary challenger (someone of better standing than Al Gore-read my former posts to see who that will be).
Mat, I have a problem with raising tax rates period. What I don't have a problem with is tax reform which removes loopholes and deductions, lowers tax rates overall and expands the tax base to include more of the neary 50% of folks who don't pay taxes. I have no problem with totally scraping our current tax code and going to either the Fair Tax or Consumption Tax, one or the other but not both.
But back to the root of our deficite problem which S&P and everyone else has cited, we have to fix the entitlement programs. Welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security have to be changed, the debate is over on what the problem is it is now who has the guts to do it and how much to cut.
Politicians from both parties have been buying votes with entitlements for decades and it has to stop. Personally I believe if you are a ward of the state, ie accepting government assistance in any form, you lose your right to vote. Taxpayers vote, non- taxpayers don't. Believe me if the politicians had to please only the folks who paid the bills things would change.
If you really want to fix Medicare and Social Secuirty, tell the Legislative Branch, the Executive Branch, the Judical Branch and all federal employees you no longer have that wonderful taxpayer financed retirement and medical system you now have only Medicare and Social Secuity. See how long it takes them to fix it!
[QUOTE=Doppelganger; 418768]Mat, I have a problem with raising tax rates period. What I don't have a problem with is tax reform which removes loopholes and deductions, lowers tax rates overall and expands the tax base to include more of the neary 50% of folks who don't pay taxes. I have no problem with totally scraping our current tax code and going to either the Fair Tax or Consumption Tax, one or the other but not both.
But back to the root of our deficite problem which S&P and everyone else has cited, we have to fix the entitlement programs. Welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security have to be changed, the debate is over on what the problem is it is now who has the guts to do it and how much to cut.
Politicians from both parties have been buying votes with entitlements for decades and it has to stop. Personally I believe if you are a ward of the state, ie accepting government assistance in any form, you lose your right to vote. Taxpayers vote, non- taxpayers don't. Believe me if the politicians had to please only the folks who paid the bills things would change.
If you really want to fix Medicare and Social Secuirty, tell the Legislative Branch, the Executive Branch, the Judical Branch and all federal employees you no longer have that wonderful taxpayer financed retirement and medical system you now have only Medicare and Social Secuity. See how long it takes them to fix it![/QUOTE]Can you be more specific as to what cuts / reforms you would like to see in regard to SS, Medicare and Medicaid. For example, SS receipients get around $2, 000 a month. If you are a couple and both are receiving at these top rates, it can be a comfortable life (no house payments) , but if you are single (divorced, widow) , that is barely an existence. As you know, Americans are not savers, even if a majority are not paying any income tax. It is a consumer driven society where you are driven to spent money and the economy falters if we don't spend. And health care when you are over 65?
Now, reforms have to be enacted to make these programs sustainable for the future. There was talk about privatization, but you know who is going to benefit from that. It is the same people who invented the 401K.
I can tell you exactly what the problem is.
The USA pays twice as much for medical care than the next closest country. Canada and Germany.
Do we receive better medical care?
Cuba which spends 25 cents a person for medical care has a longer life expectancy than the USA.
I am a doctor in the United States and I can tell you this is a farce. If you are overweight, a smoker and an incorrigible alcoholic, go to the end of the line. No liver transplants and no chemotherapy which may add another 2 weeks to your life and no liposuction.
Same with litigation. People who are overweight, smoked cigarettes like they are going out of style and destroyed their liver with alcohol should accept their fate. Don 't blaim pharmacuetical companies.
But try to do this. It is impossible. 60% of every persons lifetime time medical cost are incurred in the last 6 months of their lifes.
Criticize Obama as much as you like but Obama is not the problem. The problem is overweight, alcolholic smokers who want state of the art medical care for their destructive lifestyles.
Obama is not the villian here. The villian is our medical delivery system.
Obama may need to read 'econmics for dummies' but Obama is not the culprit for our entitlement programs which nobody wants to address.
Put another way, I will take Obama over Perry from Texas any day of the week. Perry and his religious nonsense is scary beyond belief.
That's a better answer than the Laffer curve answer, Thanks.
[QUOTE=Doppelganger;418768]Mat, I have a problem with raising tax rates period. ![/QUOTE]
Let's start with Social Security.
First it was never meant to be an individual's total retirement.
Second, everyone gets a little statement from the Social Security Administration detailing their wages and payments in and what they can expect to receive at 62, 65+ and 70 years of age. If you can't make it on that number then you need to be taking putting away money to supplement it, I believe I read somewhere that is call responsibility for ones self.
Third the retirement age needs to be increased to match current actuarial tables. The tables we use now were fine in the 40's and 50's when folks went home and died at 62 to 68 years of age, but the population is living longer and have more productive lives. It is crazy to expect Social Security to pay for 25 to 30 years of retirement. If you want to retire early put back the funds you need and do it.
Fourth would be means testing. Millionaires and up don't need Social Security, ie Bill Gates, Warren Buffett et al. Also stop taxing Social Security Benefits!
Medicare.
Ditto for increasing the qualification age and means testing. Also I agree with El Alamo, those who destroy their health via obesity, excessive alcohol / drug consumption and smoking need to look elsewhere for assistance or at least go to the back of the line. Litigation also drives up the cost of medical care as well as the defensive medicine physicians practice to fend off litigation.
Medicaid.
For US citizens only, press one for English press 2 to be disconnected until you can speak English. We are not the Worlds ER, we simply can not afford it.
Welfare / Food Stamps.
If you're receiving either one or both you are going to have to work for it. There are plenty of tasks cities, states, and the fed pays to have done that these folks can do. Instead of Welfare it becomes Workfare. Talk about an exodus from the rolls if you require them to do something for the benefit rather than lay at home in government subsidized housing.
I have to part company with El Alamo on his observations regarding Obama. No Obama did not create the entitlement mess we are in but he is exacerbating it. ObamaCare ie Super Medicaid is not the answer, it only expands one entitlement at the expense of us all. How is that Hope and Change thing working for you now?
Am I a hard hearted cold blooded conservative, you bet your ass I am. I started working at the age of 10 and have not stopped yet.
El Alamo, Doppleganger,
Thanks, reforms for sure. When you say "cuts", you got me a little confused.
A quote by Marc Faber, the investment guru,
"The federal government is sending each of us a $600 rebate. If we spend the money at Wal Mart, the money goes to China. If we spend it on gasoline, it goes to the Arabs. If we purchase a computer, it will go to India. If we purchase fruits and vegetables, it will go to Mexica, Honduras and Guatamela. If we purchase a good car, it will go to Germany. If we purchase useless crap, it will go to Taiwan and none of it will help the American economy. The only way to keep it here is to spend it on prostitutes and beer, since these are the only products still produced in the US. I"ve been doing my part".
Obviously, from a few years ago, I thought you guys might enjoy it. You guys are obviously not doing your part.
[QUOTE=BlueFalcon;418742]I mis-spoke, errrr, mis-wrote, kinda. Long term Cap gains get preferrential tax treatment. Short term Cap gains are taxed at the individual marginal rate. I learned this the hard way during the crash of 2008. Anyway, I think the whole system is FUBAR and needs to be replaced-BF.[/QUOTE]Hey BlueFalcon, kudos for acknowledging your error. Also glad to see you using some reasoned and academic arguments, such as Laffer curve. You're OK.
I acknowledge dividends are not capital gains. But both get preferential tax treatment. Long term capital gains at 15% and qualified dividends at 15% or less. The vast majority of this benefit goes to the rich, with a corresponding huge loss in federal revenue. This simply helps the rich get richer, increasing economic inequality. Why should people with 6, 7 and 8-figure income from capital gains & dividends get a 15% tax rate? It is (yes, Jackson) basically free money relative to the work involved. Meanwhile a construction worker working his ass off may be paying a 25% or higher rate.
How do conservatives justify that? Even with these consumption tax or Fair Tax ideas, the common denominator I always see is that the wealthy benefit (or are protected). Even if it means passing more of the tax burden on the middle class and poor. You do realize that for decades now, since we started lowering top income tax rates, wealth at the top has grown far, far more than it has for everyone else. Why support trends that further increase economic inequality and plutocracy?
Please spare me the trickle-down line. The data is in, and it's a lie.
You also copped out on Matt's question about where we are on the Laffer curve. Admit it, you don't know. Historical evidence would indicate we're to the left of apex, see below.
[QUOTE=BlueFalcon]Raising taxes reduces the tax base, therefore reduces revenue.[/QUOTE]And the converse, lowering taxes increases revenue. Right? Well we have historically low tax rates now, why are revenues down? I guess it's not so automatic or simple. For some perspective look at Clinton and Bush43 eight-year data in the following chart:
[url]http://www.deptofnumbers.com/blog/2010/08/tax-revenue-as-a-fraction-of-gdp/[/url]
There are many charts and tables like this. They pretty much all show the same thing. As percent of GDP, Bush Tax Cuts never generated greater revenues than under Clinton.
We need to cut spending, AND we need to end the Bush Tax Cuts.
[QUOTE=El Alamo;418770]Criticize Obama as much as you like but Obama is not the problem.[/QUOTE]WOW. Never thought I'd read that from El Alamo !
[QUOTE]Put another way, I will take Obama over Perry from Texas any day of the week. Perry and his religious nonsense is scary beyond belief.[/QUOTE]Very interesting.
Check this out:
Perry vetoed legislation that would have made texting while driving punishable with a $200 fine. Perry called it an 'overreach' and 'government effort to micromanage the behavior of adults. '
Admit it Esten, you will not be happy until we are the Peoples Republic of American.
[QUOTE=Doppelganger;418778]Admit it Esten, you will not be happy until we are the Peoples Republic of American.[/QUOTE]Check that.
Esten will not be happy until we are all equally poor.
Thanks,
Jackson
[QUOTE=El Alamo; 418770]Obama is not the villian here. The villian is our medical delivery system.
Obama may need to read 'econmics for dummies' but Obama is not the culprit for our entitlement programs which nobody wants to address.[/QUOTE]Obama may not be "the culprit", but he is woefully unqualified and completely void of the leadership capabilities necessary to craft a solution to the problem.
That is, unless the problem can be solved with a campaign speech.
ROTFLMAO!
Thanks,
Jackson
Leadership is a very vague, if not illusionary, concept and very difficult to measure, especially in times of divided government. Most presidential scholars do not have the ISG members' knowledge to estimate that McCain or whoever would have done better or worse than Obama IN THE SAME POLITICAL AND ECONOIC CONTEXT. It is hard to define leadership and difficult to find objective indicators to meaasure the leadership. Secondly, it is highly questionable, especially to conservatives and libertarians, as to how much govt and the president, thereby including presidential leadership, could influence (=change) the whole national economy. This country is a federal nation and the presidency is only one of the three branches. Thanks.
[QUOTE=Jackson; 418780]Obama may not be "the culprit", but he is woefully unqualified and completely void of the leadership capabilities necessary to craft a solution to the problem.
That is, unless the problem can be solved with a campaign speech.
ROTFLMAO!
Thanks,
Jackson[/QUOTE]
These posts do not represent the posters' intelligence or the quality of this thread. Humbly yours,
[QUOTE=Doppelganger;418778]Admit it Esten, you will not be happy until we are the Peoples Republic of American.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=Jackson; 418779]Check that.
Esten will not be happy until we are all equally poor.
Thanks,
Jackson[/QUOTE]