LookieNoNookie
Posts: 12216
Joined: 8/9/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:
ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie
quote:
ORIGINAL: DomKen
While it would likely slow the growth of the economy (depending on how the tax income was spent), I cannot see any way it would take "away any incentive to succeed and continue to keep other people employed."
The budget deal BNoehner, Cantor et al walked away from was $2.50 in spending decreases for every dollar of new revenue. So Obama was ready to deal and it was your party that wouldn't close the deal, due mostly to Gover Norquist and his pledge.
Bud...lemme tell you something....for the first time (it will likely be the last but....) I agree with you on the presumption that a slight increase in tax rates will raise revenues without affecting significantly those who pay same but....we can't increase tax rates if we don't put some kind of gawdamn cap on these pricks in DC.
Now, with that said, let it also be known that I posted a graph some while back that showed (contrary to many of my Republican friends assumptions...and SHOCKING to those who presumed that I always take the side of Republicans but....) over the last 50 years....(Tazzy....NOTE my next comment....in full) BUT FOR THE LAST FOUR years which are and will (hopefully) remain an anomaly...and were handed to Obama.....Republicans spend WILDLY more than Democrats.
We all...Democrats and Republicans alike....need to demand that these fuck for brains spend less.
Ron Paul said it best when asked "How would you control the deficit and the debt?" and he said....
"Simple....I'd cap their spending at exactly what they had last year and keep it that way until they get it right" (I forget the rest).
Of course we need to control spending but it is clear that no amount of cutting, that leaves various sacred cows mostly untouched, will balance the budget.
We have to dramatically shrink defence and national security spending. However that spending does ceate jobs and shrinking the uniformed military will put a lot of low skill people out of work as well. So it will be hard to do it except gradually. One way out, in the short term, is to shift some of that spending to infrastructure projects which is probably the best way government has to create jobs and economic stimulus.
The rest of the discretionary federal budget is pretty lean but we could certainly trim a few tens of billions without cutting services the people demand. SS, Medicare and Medicaid have to be tweaked to insure the viability of the programs but that won't result in much in the way of cost savings.
That does leave revenue increases. The ones most likely to generate substantial revenue is returning the top tax rate to the 2000 level and eliminating the carried interest exemption (it might be time to look at treting short term capital gains as simple income as well).
Gawdammit....that's twice now....
Yes...but....we have to stop the spending.
It's argued by Liberals and Republicans alike (and trust me, the Democrats are only heels behind) that we can't lower spending without cutting GDP, and....there, they are correct.
If government spending drops by 10% (we'll assume for the sake of this argument that Government spending approaches 50%, which, it currently, by the way, exceeds) then GDP drops by 5% unless private spending picks up the slack, which, at the current moment, they can't. But...that WILL lower your standard of living. Now the question is...are you prepared for that?
You pour concrete. Fewer govt. employees will be able to afford fewer backyard patio's.
Fewer patio's poured by you....is fewer FORD trucks you can buy. And so it goes.
But at some point....we have to take our medicine.
Yet...the government of the United States, in a race with China among others will not stand for same. Gawd forbid they sell more shit than we do!
Now the base question is this....Do you give a fuck if China sells more shit than you do?
I personally don't.
There was a time when Britain sold more shit than anyone else. They were the King of the hill even as shortly ago as 1937.
(Last time I checked, they're still buying houses and 57 inch flat screen TV's).
Guess what?
Britain's still here, a secondary, but in fact, World power.
Do I give a shit that China sells more shit than us?
FUCK no! We're still buying shit so....it's pretty much a gawdammed fact that they're someday going to be the next King of the hill whether we wait for it to happen or cause it it.
What I care about is this: That we can protect our shores....that we can stop bad guys from doing shit to people in Kansas, Chicago, Seattle, San Diego, Miami and New York (among all other cities and communities in our country).
Can we do that with drones? Instead of men in the field?
Yeah, I suspect we can.
Can we protect our shores with less funding than we've spent in the past?
I suspect we can but....I also suspect that Ron Paul was right....we don't belong "there".
We shouldn't be there....and the reason why so many people want us dead is because we're always in their shit.
So....can we do more with less....yeah I think we can. Do we need to be the world's police? Not with the world growing wealthier by the day thanks to technology.
Do we need to help where possible? The United States, on a personal level, not including govt. expenditures, are the worlds largest benefactor. Individuals in this country give more personally to solve more problems, to save more people from harm to help more people from tsunamis, earthquakes and the like....than any other country combined.
On Earth.
Because we have more...and we need on a real basis, less.
Yeah, we need to give more because...we've singularly benefited more than any other group on earth....and we do.
The least of us has more in one cupboard than the rest of the world on average has in their entire home. That's one of the reasons we give more.
We're better educated, and I find it amazing how often we fight about stoooopit shit when the rest of the world needs our largesse.
Wouldn't it be great if we just fucking quit fighting about the stooopit shit that grates on all our nerves and started focusing on the things that actually mattered?
And wouldn't it be equally as great if we stopped these Grover Norquiost fucks who want to put a gawdamned brake on the whole system and simply said.....
EFUCKING NUFF!
< Message edited by LookieNoNookie -- 10/14/2012 4:56:37 PM >
|
RE: CEO to Workers: I May Fire You if Obama Wins - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread