Page 12 of 54 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 538

Thread: U.S.: In state of denial over taxes?

  1. #111
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: U.S.: In state of denial over taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Actually, I'm not. I'm looking at both sides. You can not actually get to talking about a deficit if you don't look at revenue. Without revenue, all you have is spending. To GET to the point of talking about a deficit you must take spending into account because it is the money left over between the amount of revenue brought in and the amount you spend that creates said deficit.

    I am looking at the total picture, and that total picture includes SS spending in total spending and SS revenue in total revenue.
    Actually, you are only looking at one side. You refuse to look at SS on its' own and refuse to acknowledge all the money that SS has contributed towards reducing the deficits and the national debt. You insist on one viewpoint, to the exclusion of others.


    Irrelevant to the fact that running 1.4 Trillion Dollar deficits and continuing to balloon the debt benefits NO ONE in this country...not corporations, not the majority of americans, not anyone. You desperately wish to turn this into a class warfare argument with me, you're not going to. I've already stated, numerous times here and on this forum, that the military spending needs to be cut. Its one of the two big elephants in the room. Its a huge issue. And yet it is still less than half the size entitlement spending is.
    But you refuse to admit that most of that entitlement spending (ie SS) is fully funded with dedicated revenues.

    I could be your mirror image as a hyper partisan hack and counter your ridiculous "OMG THE CORPORATIONZ!!!!11!1eleventyone!" scream by pointing out that there is clear, indisputable, unquestionable responsability placed on the Federal Government to pay for a military. But I'm not doing that, because that's not what we're discussing. I'm not discussing what should and shouldn't get money. I'm discussing the fact that we can't afford to keep spending what we are spending regardless of the reasons for it.
    IMO, we can't afford to kill the economy by stopping spending during an economic downturn with so many out of work. The way out is to grow the economy and that takes spending money

    Would it be nice and wonderful and feel good and rainbows and unicorns if we could give every american free health care and a free house and $50,000 salaries for doing nothing? Absolutely. That doesn't mean we should or can do it though.
    If we had a universal, single payer health care system, we could save about 33% on our health care expenditures and get better outcomes.

    But I do appreciate your emotional rant about rainbows and unicorns. It really makes your arguments sound more rational


    Blah blah blah hyper partisan bull**** blah blah blah.
    It has to do with the facts; facts you cant seem to respond to or refute


    Wow, a blog site for "blue" arkansas. I'm sure that's a reputable source. Again, you mistake "posting pictures" for "debating". Give me the link to where those numbers are generated. Its absolutely right though, however its numbers are so large on the side that it doesn't show it. Your graph backs up what I said...that if you remove everything but entitlements we still run a deficit, albiet a small one.
    So you can't refute any of the facts, so you attack the messenger. The graph identifies the source of the #'s it uses

    Here's the dishonesty here however. It shows all over those things equalling about 1.5 trillion dollars. Yep, that's correct. Here's what it doesn't show. That 2.1 trillion dollars goes to entitlements. Again, you cherry pick like the hyper partisan you are. The wars in Iraq, the Bush-Era Tax Cuts (though now the Bush AND Obama Era Tax Cuts) TARP, they do factor into the deficit. So does Social Security, Medicare, SCHIP, Unemployment, and all the other things we spend money on. Those things don't magically come out of some other pot of money that is other than the revenue the country generates.
    SS does not factor into deficits except to reduce them, with the exception of one year and that is due to the economic downturn. Less people working means less people paying into SS. The way to solve this is to grow the economy, and that requires spending money, not cutting spending.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  2. #112
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,013

    Re: U.S.: In state of denial over taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Thanks to bush tax cuts, the wars in Iraq and Afhanistan, and spending programs passed under bush* by republicans
    And TARP, which Obama continued, and the Wars, that Obama continued and expanded upon, and the tax cuts that Obama continued, and the spending programs that Obama's continued all of which is dwarfed by various entitlements that democrats and republicans have both continued.

    That's nothing.
    Its still a deficit, and that's with unreasically cutting the budget of every single federal agency to $0. Which is different than your original claim that all of the deficit is essentially Bush's fault.

    No, almost every year it reduces the budget by billions. And your surplus # does not include the interest the trust fund earns. More sophistrys
    Didn't you just say, like literally just up the post a few lines, that "billions" was "nothing"?

    Really, my surplus's actually have referenced links and backup. Yours has....well, your credibility and nothing else. The same one that claimed that $50 billion was "nothing" but then clapped SS on the back for reducing the budget by "billions". The same one that claimed a 2.4T deficit was really 12T with no back up. The same one that suggested it was Defense that was causing all the deficit when cutting everything but entitlements would still run a deficit.

    I'm sorry, your words don't matter much.

    And I was wrong. It's not a $12T surplus

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/29/1000366/-$22-trillion-Social-Security-surplus-revealed-on-C-SPAN
    Lets see, what's more reliable. The DAILY KOS, a liberal blog dedicated to pushing a liberal agenda and known to slant things or I don't know...the Social Security Administration. The SSA, that shows a $2.6 Trillion surplus not 22 Trillion.

    Sorry again, but I'll take the SSA's own numbers over DailyKOS's review of a random bloomberg economists numbers that isn't shown with any detail or insight into how he came to said numbers.

  3. #113
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: U.S.: In state of denial over taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Actually, I had many arguments. Its rather obvious based on your posts why you chose to ignore them.

    I had the argument that even if we believed your ridiculous comment, and even if we made dozens of other departments spend all their money on defense, that it STILL doesn't equal to what the cost of entitlements sans SS equal, let alone when you add social security into it. I had the argument that even if we did have a portion of every non-entitlement budget going towards defense spending it'd STILL be less than entitlements.

    And so your counter is to...bitch about the wealthy? What about my posts had ANYTHING to do with the wealthy. I know you wish to back peddle and attempt to play the "wealthy" line as if its a get out of free card or a Draw 4 in Uno. Its not. Especialy in a situation where I've not even talked about the wealthy. I'm talking about entitlements vs defense spending, not upper vs lower class, not wealthy vs poor.

    Entitlement spending, and defense spending, both need to be addressed and people need to get out of denail over it. Entitlement spending needs to be cut, yes cut from the "wealthy" and from the "poor" and from the "middle class" as well. It simply needs to be cut.
    I agree. It is abundantly clear that entitlement spending needs to be cut and military spending needs to be cut. Would you also agree that taxes need to be raised, or do you think we can solve this problem through cuts alone?

  4. #114
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,013

    Re: U.S.: In state of denial over taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    So? He is still not right on everything... he totally ignores the Bush tax cuts and the two unfunded wars Bush started. Both of these have had a massive impact on the deficit and the debt load we have today. All he is blaming is the usual suspects of the US right while ignoring the "favourites" of the US right.
    How have I ignored them?

    I stated specifically here and in other threads talking about this that Defense Spending definitely has to be addressed and reduced and acknowledged completely that the War in Iraq and Afghanistan helped contribute to the deficit...however, they along with ALL DOD spending account for less than half of what entitlement spending costs. They attribute to the deficit, but so does SS, medicare, etc.

    The Bush and Obama Tax Cuts do affect it as well, however again are a small drop in a much larger pool. We'd need to raise tax revenue by 70% to break even with the amount we're spending currently. The Bush Tax cuts would not do that.

    Seriously, I'm not ignoring the "right wings favorites". Over 1/2 of our spending is entitlements. Add defense to that and its 3/4ths of our spending. We're insane to think that the solution to our financial problems is going to come anywhere other than those two places right now, and that includes revenue raising. Sure, taxes may need to be on the table...I've spoken support for various methods of tax increases in a number of threads...but its absolutely secondary to reducing military spending and reforming entitlements. As I've said elsewhere, find a way to cut both to 1/3rd of their current levels and we'd get our spending to a point where other methods...such as tax increases, waste removal, and cutting of luxury programs like foreign aid...would actually have a substantial effect.

    But if we cut away EVERYTHING but entitlement spending right now we'd still be running a deficit. If we cut every bit of defense spending we'd still need 35% more revenue brought in. Look at the Revenue generated prior to the Bush Tax Cuts...it was not 35% higher than what we have now I can almost garauntee.

  5. #115
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: U.S.: In state of denial over taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    And TARP, which Obama continued
    The spending on TARP under Obama was authorized while bush* was president.

    , and the Wars, that Obama continued and expanded upon, and the tax cuts that Obama continued, and the spending programs that Obama's continued all of which is dwarfed by various entitlements that democrats and republicans have both continued.
    Obama did not expand upon the Iraq War, which was supposed to last "weeks, not months or years". And he surged in Afghanistan because bush* fumbled the ball there. He extended the tax cuts at the insistence of republicans and spending on HSA, TSA, Medicare D, etc are the responsibility of bush* and republicans.



    Its still a deficit, and that's with unreasically cutting the budget of every single federal agency to $0. Which is different than your original claim that all of the deficit is essentially Bush's fault.
    It's a deficit that our economy can easily deal with and it doesn't require cutting every fed agency to 0.

    And I never said the entire deficit is bush*'s fault. That is fiction


    Didn't you just say, like literally just up the post a few lines, that "billions" was "nothing"?
    No, I said a specific amount (ie $48 billion). Nice try


    Really, my surplus's actually have referenced links and backup. Yours has....well, your credibility and nothing else. The same one that claimed that $50 billion was "nothing" but then clapped SS on the back for reducing the budget by "billions". The same one that claimed a 2.4T deficit was really 12T with no back up. The same one that suggested it was Defense that was causing all the deficit when cutting everything but entitlements would still run a deficit.
    More fictions. I have posted links to back up what I said.

    I'm sorry, your words don't matter much.
    Well, if someone on the internet says so, it must be true!!


    Lets see, what's more reliable. The DAILY KOS, a liberal blog dedicated to pushing a liberal agenda and known to slant things or I don't know...the Social Security Administration. The SSA, that shows a $2.6 Trillion surplus not 22 Trillion.

    Sorry again, but I'll take the SSA's own numbers over DailyKOS's review of a random bloomberg economists numbers that isn't shown with any detail or insight into how he came to said numbers.
    If you weren't so busy trying to win an internet debate, you would have read the article and realized the # came from a reputable, non-leftwing source.

    Try reading it this time
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  6. #116
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,739

    Re: U.S.: In state of denial over taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by SheWolf View Post
    What about the Kerry's? They were accused of doing that...
    I was being a smartass...stop messing up a perfectly snideful joke!

    I have read similar things about the Heinz's...I think Kerry just married into it so dont know if he is as guilty as the Kennedy's. Wealthy people of all political bent have a tendency to protect their wealth for their own posterity, regardless of the public image they like to portray.

  7. #117
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: U.S.: In state of denial over taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    How have I ignored them?

    I stated specifically here and in other threads talking about this that Defense Spending definitely has to be addressed and reduced and acknowledged completely that the War in Iraq and Afghanistan helped contribute to the deficit...however, they along with ALL DOD spending account for less than half of what entitlement spending costs. They attribute to the deficit, but so does SS, medicare, etc.

    The Bush and Obama Tax Cuts do affect it as well, however again are a small drop in a much larger pool. We'd need to raise tax revenue by 70% to break even with the amount we're spending currently. The Bush Tax cuts would not do that.
    He doesn't ignore them. He dismisses them. And no one has suggested raising taxes to 70%. That's a straw man


    Seriously, I'm not ignoring the "right wings favorites". Over 1/2 of our spending is entitlements. Add defense to that and its 3/4ths of our spending. We're insane to think that the solution to our financial problems is going to come anywhere other than those two places right now, and that includes revenue raising. Sure, taxes may need to be on the table...I've spoken support for various methods of tax increases in a number of threads...but its absolutely secondary to reducing military spending and reforming entitlements. As I've said elsewhere, find a way to cut both to 1/3rd of their current levels and we'd get our spending to a point where other methods...such as tax increases, waste removal, and cutting of luxury programs like foreign aid...would actually have a substantial effect.
    Maybe??

    And the SS portion of entitlements, which make up the largest share, are fully funded by any reasonable projection.

    But if we cut away EVERYTHING but entitlement spending right now we'd still be running a deficit. If we cut every bit of defense spending we'd still need 35% more revenue brought in. Look at the Revenue generated prior to the Bush Tax Cuts...it was not 35% higher than what we have now I can almost garauntee.
    There is no need to balance the budget. We can run deficits far into the future. The problem is the size of the deficits. Your argument is based on a fallacy.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  8. #118
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,013

    Re: U.S.: In state of denial over taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    The projection (and it's only one of two projections) depend on a 10 year growth rate so low that the US has not grown so slowly at any time during our lifetimes. And this deficit can be eliminated by getting rid of the FICA tax cap.
    No, it relies on the fact that the trend of the past 30 years continues, that being of a relatively low birth rate that is mostly steady but trending lower.

    Where did I say it didn't?
    No where directly, which is why I said you forgot to mention rather than said you mentioned the opposite. You simply ignored that bit of information because it didn't help what you were trying to imply, which was that SS would always not just pay for itself but run a surplus.

    I posted a link that shows I was wrong about the $12T surplus. It's $22T
    Yes, you posted a DailyKOS analysis of a random econimist with no information at all as to how he got his numbers. I meanwhile actually posted a truly non-partisan source, the actual agency that overseas said surplus.

    You're banking on a long term trend that has not occurred in our lifetime. You are assuming that the next ten years will be like the Great Dpression.
    No, I'm assuming the next 10 years will follow what's been happening for the past 10 to 30 years. Which has been low birth rates, lowering death rates, and increasing life expectancy. You're banking on things happening contrary to long term trends because it suits your position.

    Not, the projection depends on growth below what we've experienced during our lifetimes

    There Is No Social Security Crisis
    Really? I've made it a point not to go grab onto NRO or Heritage information, yet you're going to throw out a magazine focused on writing things specifically from a liberal perspective?

    Shocker, a staunch liberal writing for an admittedly biased magazine leaning decidingly liberal thinks social security is fine.

    I'm shocked. Shocked I say!

  9. #119
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,739

    Re: U.S.: In state of denial over taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by SheWolf View Post
    Which entitlements are you talking about? I am talking about the ones we all pay into and all benefit from... like SS.

    Again, we pay low tax rates... Nearly half of American households paid no federal income taxes but still paid there SS taxes, and a lot of right wing people even support a tax increase with the fair tax. It's true that giving people all these tax credits has spoiled people and they will be pissed to give them up, and all the politicians are scared to be the one to ask them to do it. But another issue is, a lot of the biggest tax credits like EIC is given to low income families, and that is afforded by the higher tax taxes the wealthier pay. If our nation becomes more prosperous and successful, and as the income gap decreases there will be more high income tax payers anyway. I am going to be paying higher taxes in the future, because I finished college and will only be making more and more money each year. I personally don't have a problem with that...
    I think if it was just the paid for programs we wouldnt have as much concern. SS still has a lot of folks that draw out of it money they have never paid in but thats probably one of the more secure forms of 'entitlement' and as such...its not so much an entitlement as it is a ridiculously low yield investment account. Medicare/Medicaid, Welfare, those are more the entitlement programs that keep everyone jumping. Ive read where states Medicaid costs are continuing to climb and are expected to be 30-40 % of their overall expenditures. Not healthy.

  10. #120
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,739

    Re: U.S.: In state of denial over taxes?

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    You're right, it wasn't you who said corporations, so I edited the post, but not soon enough for you to quote it. My bad

    However, the discussion was about corporations, until you tried to change it to families.

    And no, the Kennedys' were not a corporation. They owned corps, but they weren't a corp. Saying so is sophistic.

    And corps are neither left nor right. They are economic entities designed to make a profit
    Geeesh...I wasnt changing it to families...i was being a smartass. I LIKE pointing out to all the ideologues that bleat on about evil corporations that their liberal Gods are just as guilty of the **** they accuse evil capitalists of doing.

Page 12 of 54 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •