Jump to content
Baseops Forums
Sign in to follow this  
HeloDude

Taxes, the Deficit/Debt, and the Fiscal Cliff

Recommended Posts

Guest

"When Beltway politicians claim they want a "balanced" approach to reducing the deficit, what they really mean is raising taxes to finance this new higher spending level," is explicitly what I want

I know you do.

But that's a problem...by more than $1,000,000,000,000 dollars so far this year.

It is unsustainable. We will become insolvent. That is worse than bad.

The rest of the article is premised around, "But if growth is slower as a result of the higher tax rates, then the revenue will be lower too," which is debatable

Man, you missed the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great point. That's super helpful. Problem solved.

The invitation to accept your award is forthcoming.

Thanks for including me in such nice company. My point was that rhetoric is not helpful in situations like the one we're in and often times is misleading at best. There are lots of people who are very smart when it comes to the economy and good arguments have been raised on both sides of the issue. It's kind of hard to evaluate them when you're confronted with more bullshit and hot air than facts both in the mainstream media, and in casual discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So wait, are your criticizing the President for signing these cuts into law (and Congress for passing the law), or what? Figured you'd be supportive of cuts of this type, maybe I'm reading your positions wrong. Or is this just, "Haha, Obama did something potentially bad, EXPLAIN IT!?!"

I'm fine with the change; 18 full-time semesters is 6 years of benefits. If you're going to school part-time, which I imagine your working mom would be doing, you get to partially count your part-time semesters until you reach what is now 12 full semesters worth of credits (vice 18 full semesters previously).

My point was the democrats are trying to "help the poor" as you have argued many times how does this help them? I'm not against it, I just remember the president saying that we shouldn't be cutting spending on education, yet what it this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

It's kind of hard to evaluate them when you're confronted with more bullshit and hot air than facts both in the mainstream media, and in casual discussion.

And by bullshit in casual discussion I assume you mean things such as...

Hey, you guys know who else was a Socialist? Ronald Reagan. I mean jesus, the man raised taxes somewhere between 8 and 11 times depending on which sources you look at. Apparently that's now the threshold for calling someone a socialist. So there you have it folks; Reagan was secretly in cahoots with the Soviets all that time....whoda thunk?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest one

Wrong.

How am I wrong? Just for some contrast, food assistance costs 25.6 billion dollars per year to fund and childcare costs 4.2 billion dollars to fund. The typical family on welfare does not use childcare assistance because there are many alternatives for the aid and it is more difficult to qualify for.

The chart depicts the scenario as if it is a typical situation. I am sure there are situations that allow people to receive all that aid but it is not the norm. The graph is illustrating childcare as being the most costly, which it is, but overall childcare aid accounts for less than 5% of total welfare costs because the number of recipients of that aid is very low.

Edited by one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And by bullshit in casual discussion I assume you mean things such as...

Touche....My statement was tongue in cheek though. I routinely hear ridiculous shit come out of the mouths of people who are supposed to be educated and they are dead serious. I'm sick of the "Obama's a Socialist and here's why..." argument. An argument against the man's policies should be able to stand on it's own. All you do (not you specifically) when you start an argument like that is shut down the listening capabilities of anyone who doesn't already agree with you. BTW this isn't just directed at conservatives--there's plenty of ridiculous left wing bullshit out there as well as evidenced by watching 15 minutes of MSNBC at any time of day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Obama asked for the power to raise the debt ceiling without congressional approval today.

Great idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I think all checks and balances should be removed from the system.

I kind of like the direction Morsi is going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I read this stuff and I ask myself "Do he really believe the stuff he types? Do he really not understand the purpose of or need for the Stautory Debt Limit?"

Please don't respond. I ask myself these questions. And the answer saddens me because I know the answers apply to not just one person but to tens of millions of people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest one

I read this stuff and I ask myself "Do he really believe the stuff he types? Do he really not understand the purpose of or need for the Stautory Debt Limit?"

Please don't respond. I ask myself these questions. And the answer saddens me because I know the answers apply to not just one person but to tens of millions of people.

I didn't go to the fancy Harvard Business School like you but I do have 6 undergraduate credits in economics from the best online school the Air Force's money can buy. Even with all the knowledge that $1500 in tuition assistance can get you, I can't figure out why the statutory debt limit is currently important. I can see how it was important in 1917 when the government actually cared about what it meant to have a debt but at this point our debt is so high that raising it means very little. I think that raising the debt limit would have been more important trillions and trillions of dollars ago but at this point what is the difference between 16 trillion and 16.5 trillion?

I don’t think our government understands the importance of the statutory debt limit so why should I? This was never even in the news until it was used as a political weapon.

I wrote a lot of that stuff in jest but I think our president just wanted to avoid any negative economic impacts that will happen if the House holds the debt ceiling hostage again. Checks and balances are important but so is protecting our economy from a destructive House.

Edited by one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Educate me then...blah blah blah

I'm begging you, if you think the debt ceiling is such a great policy, defend it. Blah blah blah.

Ah ha! I knew there was some connection. It all makes sense now.

Which is why this comment makes sense.

I read this stuff and I ask myself "Do he really believe the stuff he types? Do he really not understand the purpose of or need for the Stautory Debt Limit?"

Please don't respond. I ask myself these questions. And the answer saddens me because I know the answers apply to not just one person but to tens of millions of people.

Out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I read this stuff and I ask myself "Do he really believe the stuff he types? Do he really not understand the purpose of or need for the Stautory Debt Limit?"

Please don't respond. I ask myself these questions. And the answer saddens me because I know the answers apply to not just one person but to tens of millions of people.

I don't know why you sound so surprised...or maybe you're not, you're just disgusted and disappointed. I could have told you 9+ months ago that Nsplayr thinks this way. He's a classic liberal who honestly believes more and bigger government is the answer--he truly believes that government knows best and that government creates prosperity. He believes that poor people are poor, not because of bad choices, but because there are wealthy people keeping them poor. Never mind that study after study points to the fact that out of wedlock children are more likely to grow up in poverty (a bad decision), that drug and alcohol abuse (bad decisions) often lead to poverty, dropping out of high school...and on and on.

The left has done a fantastic job in building their base by giving out handouts...again, their entire convention was based on it. The more people they get on the government dole, the better. Even the President campaigned on the fact that successful people are only successful because of the government...and therefore they owe the fruits of their labors to the government. And now the Dems, lead by the President, said that he won't give up any new spending cuts even when he gets increases in tax revenue/rates.

And then when I call Nsplayr out on asking what he does for charity (time and monetary), he avoids answering the question. If he truly believes in wanting to help the less fortunate, then he should be living as close to a Mother Theresa in his free time as possible. But guys like him truly believe that bigger government is the answer....hence why he doesn't support States' Rights as that takes away from a larger federal government. At least I respect Nsplayr for being up front and honest. What's funny is that he serves in a military that practices inequality all the time with O's vs E's...just a side thought.

The problem is...I don't think that 51% of the country was 'duped' this last election. I believe this is the era we are living in--that bigger government is the answer. I don't think I need to put up the stats again--the rising demographics are the majority of the folks on welfare and having out of wedlock children. It's the perfect recipe for those who want more people dependent on the government. It's not a question of when all these entitlements will bankrupt the country...the question is when.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest one

I don't know why you sound so surprised...or maybe you're not, you're just disgusted and disappointed. I could have told you 9+ months ago that Nsplayr thinks this way. He's a classic liberal who honestly believes more and bigger government is the answer--he truly believes that government knows best and that government creates prosperity. He believes that poor people are poor, not because of bad choices, but because there are wealthy people keeping them poor. Never mind that study after study points to the fact that out of wedlock children are more likely to grow up in poverty (a bad decision), that drug and alcohol abuse (bad decisions) often lead to poverty, dropping out of high school...and on and on.

The left has done a fantastic job in building their base by giving out handouts...again, their entire convention was based on it. The more people they get on the government dole, the better. Even the President campaigned on the fact that successful people are only successful because of the government...and therefore they owe the fruits of their labors to the government. And now the Dems, lead by the President, said that he won't give up any new spending cuts even when he gets increases in tax revenue/rates.

And then when I call Nsplayr out on asking what he does for charity (time and monetary), he avoids answering the question. If he truly believes in wanting to help the less fortunate, then he should be living as close to a Mother Theresa in his free time as possible. But guys like him truly believe that bigger government is the answer....hence why he doesn't support States' Rights as that takes away from a larger federal government. At least I respect Nsplayr for being up front and honest. What's funny is that he serves in a military that practices inequality all the time with O's vs E's...just a side thought.

The problem is...I don't think that 51% of the country was 'duped' this last election. I believe this is the era we are living in--that bigger government is the answer. I don't think I need to put up the stats again--the rising demographics are the majority of the folks on welfare and having out of wedlock children. It's the perfect recipe for those who want more people dependent on the government. It's not a question of when all these entitlements will bankrupt the country...the question is when.

Shitting on Nsplayr aside, do you think raising the debt ceiling is that big of a deal? We all know it has to happen and it has never not been raised when needed in recent history.

Edited by one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I can see how it was important in 1917 when the government actually cared about what it meant to have a debt but at this point our debt is so high that raising it means very little. I think that raising the debt limit would have been more important trillions and trillions of dollars ago but at this point what is the difference between 16 trillion and 16.5 trillion?

Holy shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest one

Holy shit.

Like I said, mostly in jest.

Our debt is so high right now it is insane. Having a ceiling doesn't mean anything if you keep raising it.

What is the difference if the president raises the debt ceiling or if Congress does it? Economically, there is no difference.

Edited by one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shitting on Nsplayr aside, do you think raising the debt ceiling is that big of a deal? We all know it has to happen and it has never not happened in recent history.

I'm not shitting on him...he has clearly laid out what he believes. I think he is hypocritical by saying he truly believes in reducing inequality, and then calls out how this country does not do enough to reduce inequality....but then won't say what he personally does to reduce inequality. Either he should lead by example or own up to the fact that he is similar to Biden. Again, he's the one preaching inequality.

But to answer your question...the best analogy I can give is a smoker having another cigarette when they're already experiencing lung problems. Of course another pack one day might not make a big noticeable difference, but eventually, if they don't stop, it's going to kill them, and sooner rather than later. And it will be even worse if they increase their smoking habit. Anybody who thinks we can incur unlimited debt forever with no negative impacts to our country/economy is smoking crack. If unlimited debt was no problem, then every country would be doing it and flourishing. You don't have to look at Greece as the only example, look at several other European countries.

Nsplayr talks about Congress capping their spending habits (which I fully agree)...unfortunately Medicare/SS spending is not voted on, it pays out whatever the bill is. Trust me, I blame the GOP for a lot of the problems as well, but right now they're the only ones even talking about reducing spending.

I honestly hope sequestration goes into effect...right now it's the only spending cuts that are going to happen if you take the President and Dem leaders at their word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest one

I'm not shitting on him...he has clearly laid out what he believes. I think he is hypocritical by saying he truly believes in reducing inequality, and then calls out how this country does not do enough to reduce inequality....but then won't say what he personally does to reduce inequality. Either he should lead by example or own up to the fact that he is similar to Biden. Again, he's the one preaching inequality.

But to answer your question...the best analogy I can give is a smoker having another cigarette when they're already experiencing lung problems. Of course another pack one day might not make a big noticeable difference, but eventually, if they don't stop, it's going to kill them, and sooner rather than later. And it will be even worse if they increase their smoking habit. Anybody who thinks we can incur unlimited debt forever with no negative impacts to our country/economy is smoking crack. If unlimited debt was no problem, then every country would be doing it and flourishing. You don't have to look at Greece as the only example, look at several other European countries.

Nsplayr talks about Congress capping their spending habits (which I fully agree)...unfortunately Medicare/SS spending is not voted on, it pays out whatever the bill is. Trust me, I blame the GOP for a lot of the problems as well, but right now they're the only ones even talking about reducing spending.

I honestly hope sequestration goes into effect...right now it's the only spending cuts that are going to happen if you take the President and Dem leaders at their word.

I completely agree with you and most of what Rainman is saying, I just put more blame on our Congress the last ten or 15 years than our presidents during the same time period.

I am all for cutting the budget but a lot of you talk about cutting food assistance and Medicare. I can understand cutting these things if we exhaust all other options first but we need to get our priorities straight. Let’s cut Pell grants out entirely before we talk about stop feeding people. The Pell grant costs more than our federal government’s entire food assistance program and it provides a pretty vital service to many. I don’t care if you believe that some people deserve to starve in the United States, you can at least admit it looks bad on our country to have hungry people, especially children. I just think we should cut the luxuries before we start cutting things that are necessities for many.

All that being said, there is room to reform everything to a certain degree. It is important to identify waste in different welfare programs and cut that.

Edited by one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, I do not mean to shit in everyone's Cheerios , but politics, debt ceiling, and possible economic collapse aside... I feel we have real issues plaguing this country. It seems the Air Force Board for the Correction of Military Records has determined PYB is not a lunatic and has removed all the derogatory information from his records that kept him from making O-5. Now he is meeting a supplemental board. Oops, meant to put this in the WTF Thread.

On the surface, it would appear that receipt of multiple letters of counseling and reprimands would indicate questionable judgment and an unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations. However, when each incident is reviewed on its own merit, it would appear Subject is fully aware of the U.S. Constitution and has openly challenged what he perceives to be a violation of either his own rights or those of other American citizens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest one

Wow, I didn't know he had derogatory information in his records. I just remembered a lot of back and forth on here and then everything he ever wrote just disappearing.

Was all of that because of stuff he wrote on here?

ETA: Nevermind. My mind has been blown. A ruined career over a parking ticket. Pretty funny that he doesn't actually know how to pick his battles.

http://www.pickyourbattles.net/

Edited by one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I didn't know he had derogatory information in his records. I just remembered a lot of back and forth on here and then everything he ever wrote just disappearing.

Was all of that because of stuff he wrote on here?

You missed a lot and be glad it is all gone. If you must know... go here http://www.pickyourbattles.net/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deficits don't matter. It is just money we owe to ourselves!

And China.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...