tax cuts or tax hikes

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

if it were so easy to fix the excess spending by attacking "waste and fraud," wouldn't we have done it by now?

Congress has not even passed a budget for 2 years .
i do not think that it would be easy because they can not stop spending even now Obama wants to put us 17 trillion in the hole. what happens next year?

What happens????

Millions of idiots will miss the rapture on Dec 21st... again and have to confront paying off all the debt they ran up in the last 30 years of VOO DOO DOO economics

[champu 1]

Quote

Cut EVERY PROGRAM 10%. Freeze spending at that level, adjust only for inflation...

This may just be unfortunately imprecise use of the word "program," but across-the-board percentage cuts often don't work out for the best. Buying 90% of a bridge, for example, is dumb for what should be obvious reasons. Also, what might take one person 20 hours could take five people 3 hours or could take ten people 2 hours. So while you can demand efficiencies in some cases, underfunding things can just as easily end up costing us more in the long run.

Deciding on specific whole things that we just don't want and axing them outright is more difficult to defend politically, but is where we'll reap the greatest benefits. Demanding that "The Military" or "Entitlements" or some other non-monolithic category of spending be cut by x% doesn't really do anything but display a poorly thought out disdain for said category of spending.

[sfzombie 3]

while you make a couple of valid points, on the whole you're on the wrong track. while it may be more effecient to cut whole programs, but that is what got us into this mess: nobody can agree on which programs to cut. that ends up with nothing being cut or no budget being passed, so the only feasible way to do anything is to cut 10%. they should start at the top and layoff every 10th man for a month and then switch out, that way nobody gets fired and everyone shares the cut.

http://kitswv.com

[champu 1]

Quote

while you make a couple of valid points, on the whole you're on the wrong track. while it may be more effecient to cut whole programs, but that is what got us into this mess: nobody can agree on which programs to cut. that ends up with nothing being cut or no budget being passed, so the only feasible way to do anything is to cut 10%. they should start at the top and layoff every 10th man for a month and then switch out, that way nobody gets fired and everyone shares the cut.

They've already axed three 10-11 figure programs from my industry, so... sorry, I don't buy that it can't be done.

It doesn't take that many people to agree in order to get rid of something, it takes appropriation committees that don't have chairpeople with egregious conflicts of interest.

[billvon 2,991]

>I would cut EPA ...why ? because laws should be legislated only by congress.

That's $8 billion, or .5% of our deficit (and .2% of our spending.)

>Dept. education ..

$70 billion, or 1.9% of our spending.

>let the states handle it.

They do already. All education is paid for by states.

>2. Military in half for starters ( 900 bases is way too many )

OK, now you've cut 9% of our spending; now we're getting somewhere.

>We could tax all the billionaires and get 1 trillion dollars from taking all they
>have and then what ?

Then we'd balance the budget. Now, combine that with significant cuts in all programs across the board, and we might be able to start paying off some of those debts. Better yet, take half that much from them, cut across the board to make up the difference, and start paying off the debt that way.

[marks2065 0]

Quote

>I would cut EPA ...why ? because laws should be legislated only by congress.

That's $8 billion, or .5% of our deficit (and .2% of our spending.)

>Dept. education ..

$70 billion, or 1.9% of our spending.

>let the states handle it.

They do already. All education is paid for by states.

>2. Military in half for starters ( 900 bases is way too many )

OK, now you've cut 9% of our spending; now we're getting somewhere.

>We could tax all the billionaires and get 1 trillion dollars from taking all they
>have and then what ?

Then we'd balance the budget. Now, combine that with significant cuts in all programs across the board, and we might be able to start paying off some of those debts. Better yet, take half that much from them, cut across the board to make up the difference, and start paying off the debt that way.

If the states already pay for education why do we have a department of eduacation?

[DanG 1]

Quote

...eduacation?

Irony much?

- Dan G

[billvon 2,991]

>If the states already pay for education why do we have a department of eduacation?

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt there and assume that was a joke.

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

>Dept. education ..

$70 billion, or 1.9% of our spending.

>let the states handle it.

They do already. All education is paid for by states.

This is just plain not true. About 10% of (primary and secondary) education spending comes from the Federal government. The exact percentage differs depending on what website you consult and when their figures are from. That is roughly double the percentage from 1990.

It remains primarily a state funded enterprise but the federal contribution is substantial (and of course comes with substantial strings and regulatory mechanisms)

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[billvon 2,991]

>This is just plain not true. About 10% of (primary and secondary) education
>spending comes from the Federal government.

I think it's far, far less than that, and one could argue that much of the assistance that states get from the federal government (via programs like "no child left behind) is in the form of standardized testing, teacher development etc. However, you're right in that there is some; I should have said "the vast majority of education is paid for by states."

[rushmc 23]

Some Info

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/04/freeing-schools-from-washingtons-education-overreach

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[marks2065 0]

Quote

>If the states already pay for education why do we have a department of eduacation?

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt there and assume that was a joke.

If the states are taking care of eduacation why do we need a department at the fed level also? paying for the state board and a fed board seems to be a waste of our money. Maybe the fed needs to set min guidelines and let the states do the rest. would save alot of money.

[marks2065 0]

Quote

>If the states already pay for education why do we have a department of eduacation?

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt there and assume that was a joke.

Name 1 student taught by the board of education, show me one class room that the feds actually set up and pay the teachers and faculty. the fed board of education teaches nobody.

[hwt 0]

Quote

>I would cut EPA ...why ? because laws should be legislated only by congress.

That's $8 billion, or .5% of our deficit (and .2% of our spending.)

>Dept. education ..

$70 billion, or 1.9% of our spending.

>let the states handle it.

They do already. All education is paid for by states.

>2. Military in half for starters ( 900 bases is way too many )

OK, now you've cut 9% of our spending; now we're getting somewhere.

>We could tax all the billionaires and get 1 trillion dollars from taking all they
>have and then what ?

Then we'd balance the budget. Now, combine that with significant cuts in all programs across the board, and we might be able to start paying off some of those debts. Better yet, take half that much from them, cut across the board to make up the difference, and start paying off the debt that way.

___________________________________________


Last budget i heard, Obama asked for 3.8 trillion for one year... that is almost twice the amount of total worth of those rich people counting what the country takes in taxes..... now that you have robbed the rich and made them poor... you more people on the dole as your way just broke them. now what ?? and next year??
Why would anyone want to pull money out of the economy just to have the government throw it away on waste , fraud and bribes..
no we have a spending problem period!

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>This is just plain not true. About 10% of (primary and secondary) education
>spending comes from the Federal government.

I think it's far, far less than that, and one could argue that much of the assistance that states get from the federal government (via programs like "no child left behind) is in the form of standardized testing, teacher development etc. However, you're right in that there is some; I should have said "the vast majority of education is paid for by states."

According to ed.gov, Federal spending is 8.2%, State spending is 48.3% and local spending is 43.5%.

So, yes...the vast majority of school spending comes from within the state, if not necessarily from state gov't.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

now that you have robbed the rich and made them poor...

The last decade (or three) saw probably the most vast upward transfer of wealth in our history.

Quote

Why would anyone want to pull money out of the economy...

That money is not in the economy. It didn't "trickle down". That's the problem.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

now that you have robbed the rich and made them poor...

The last decade (or three) saw probably the most vast upward transfer of wealth in our history.

Quote

Why would anyone want to pull money out of the economy...

That money is not in the economy. It didn't "trickle down". That's the problem.

It's not a zero sum game, and billvon has debunked it thoroughly enough in the past.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 2,991]

>If the states are taking care of eduacation why do we need a department at the fed level also?

I don't think we do - at least, not at its current size. At most we need someone who can collect statistics, provide very general guidelines for scholastic performance, design standardized tests etc. But it could be 1/10 the size it is now.

[billvon 2,991]

>Last budget i heard, Obama . . .robbed the rich and made them poor... . .
> . people on the dole as your way just broke them . . . throw it away on
>waste , fraud and bribes..

And this is why we will never solve the budget problem. No one wants to solve it; they just want to make political speeches.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

now that you have robbed the rich and made them poor...

The last decade (or three) saw probably the most vast upward transfer of wealth in our history.

Quote

Why would anyone want to pull money out of the economy...

That money is not in the economy. It didn't "trickle down". That's the problem.

It's not a zero sum game, and billvon has debunked it thoroughly enough in the past.

I missed that. I'd be interested to see that "debunking".

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

now that you have robbed the rich and made them poor...

The last decade (or three) saw probably the most vast upward transfer of wealth in our history.

Quote

Why would anyone want to pull money out of the economy...

That money is not in the economy. It didn't "trickle down". That's the problem.

It's not a zero sum game, and billvon has debunked it thoroughly enough in the past.

I missed that. I'd be interested to see that "debunking".

Bill has commented several times showing where, while the rich have gotten richer, so have the poor. Lawrocket made a very good response to the theory as well in one of the tax threads - don't recall which one.

Additionally, wealth != income - it's a smokescreen used to vilify the wealthy by implying that they've somehow *taken* something from the poor.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[devildog 0]

Quote

>Last budget i heard, Obama . . .robbed the rich and made them poor... . .
> . people on the dole as your way just broke them . . . throw it away on
>waste , fraud and bribes..

And this is why we will never solve the budget problem. No one wants to solve it; they just want to make political speeches.

I think it's more people don't like the answers, not that it can't be solved.

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

now that you have robbed the rich and made them poor...

The last decade (or three) saw probably the most vast upward transfer of wealth in our history.

Quote

Why would anyone want to pull money out of the economy...

That money is not in the economy. It didn't "trickle down". That's the problem.

It's not a zero sum game, and billvon has debunked it thoroughly enough in the past.

I missed that. I'd be interested to see that "debunking".

Bill has commented several times showing where, while the rich have gotten richer, so have the poor. Lawrocket made a very good response to the theory as well in one of the tax threads - don't recall which one.

Additionally, wealth != income - it's a smokescreen used to vilify the wealthy by implying that they've somehow *taken* something from the poor.

MMMMMMM TRICKLE MMMMMMMMMM



getting lots oif your Trickle Mikee???

[billvon 2,991]

>I think it's more people don't like the answers, not that it can't be solved.

There's a lot of truth to that, I think. Republicans don't want to hear that taxes have to go up. Democrats don't want to hear that we have to cut favorite programs.

And yes, raising taxes is bad. No one likes paying taxes. And yes, cutting programs is bad. No one likes when their favorite program gets cut. But until both sides are willing to do both of them then nothing will happen.

[mirage62 0]

The real issue is TRUST

When your going broke you should cut your expenses and get a second job... or

CUT SPENDING and RAISE TAXES

But most higher income earners have zero faith that if they raise taxes - to help pay off the debt - that the gov won't spend more.

Truth is you can make a class warefare "Only raise the taxes on people who make $250,000 per year...." but unless you raise these taxes REALLY high you still aren't going to bring in enough to fix the problem and at some point you will kill the drive to work.

We all ate like pigs...ALL....and we ALL are going to have to pay.

Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little