Boo Radley
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 37,066
- Reaction score
- 7,028
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
So, again, YOU believe government is the answer? You want Obama to hire people? Right? :coffeepap
Nor have I claimed they don't. I have instead showed you why and why the wealthy should pay more. I also showed that the lower income people do pay taxes, and do pay federal taxes, so they do contribute.
Then post the list of cuts? You continue to buy the rhetoric and ignore the substance. I never see substance from you, just feelings.
Nor have I claimed they don't. I have instead showed you why and why the wealthy should pay more. I also showed that the lower income people do pay taxes, and do pay federal taxes, so they do contribute.
So, again, YOU believe government is the answer? You want Obama to hire people? Right? :coffeepap
Dude, you just aren't following the news very closely. These things I'm saying aren't like some obscure pieces of information, they have been front page items on every major news source...
For example, Obama's current $3 trillion deficit reduction proposal includes $580 billion in cuts to entitlement programs.
Back in April he proposed a $4 trillion deficit reduction proposal included $2 trillion in spending cuts.
Here is a $2 trillion deficit reduction package he proposed in July that was 83% spending cuts.
For you to be sitting there pretending Obama isn't proposing spending cuts is just ridiculous. What, do you live on an iceberg? Are you only getting your news from such hyper partisan sources that you are literally just oblivious to the things that go on in the country?
Trolling again? you seem to do that a lot. That is what you got out of that video? No wonder we have a problem in this country today. This President has destroyed the confidence in the American private sector and the only way he can get re-elected is to create such class warfare that the dependent class will come out in droves to re-elect him, then what? Destroy the private sector, create so much dependenc on the govt. then what? Is that what you really want? If so, say so then I would have more respect for you.
How much more? Higher marginal rate, higher capital gains rate, more FICA and Medicare taxes, which of these are you calling for. Maybe an easier question is what do you think the effective tax rate should be for wealthy ( definition please) and how you propose we get there.
No. You blame Obama for jobs. This im[plies you think only the president, or government can fix employment. As the only way they can do this is to hire people, I have to conclude you want Obama to hire people. Is this or is this not what you believe?
I think going back to the pre Bush tax cuts is a simple and reasonable answer.
I think going back to the pre Bush tax cuts is a simple and reasonable answer.
So you want to get rid of all of the Bush tax cuts. I can agree with that, never thought we should have had a tax cut when we were fighting wars in two countries.
After saying that, this whole tax issue is a sideshow. The country has been in decline for 30 years, propped up with debt until the system fell apart.
I think going back to the pre Bush tax cuts is a simple and reasonable answer.
Your "hero" Bill Clinton seems to disagree with you
Clinton: Don’t Raise Taxes :: :: FITSNewsFITSNews
I blame Obama for destroying the incentive in the private sector to create jobs. Govt. policy affects job creation since business cannot print money like the Govt. can. You don't seem to understand that business creates a long term plan and more regulations, higher tax potential, class warfare, Obamacare don't foster confidence on the part of the private sector. they aren't going to hire until Obama is fired.
Explain to me why Medicare and SS are on budget still to this day and why would you support cutting those programs that you are paying into if you have a job? That is bs.
As for spending cuts in other areas, there are no such cuts as he uses the baseline which is the current budget and reduces the growth thus calling it a savings.
So you are proposing increasing taxes on all taxpayers?
First, he's not my hero. I voted for Bob Dole. Second, someone saying something you like alone isn't enough. Try addressing the points I have made. :coffeepap
I personally would, but if I was going to target someone not to, it would middle and lower income folks and not the wealthy. I would accept either as an improvement, maybe a compromise.
You would be wrong. Business functions on a different incentive system. if there is a customer willing to spend, business will provide the product regardless of what obama does.
I spent 35 years in the business world so please don't try and tell me how business functions. Companies are going to provide goods and services with less people and right now economic growth is meager and doesn't warrant expansion of their labor force.
teamosil;1059816611]I totally agree. In my view, he has conceded WAY too much to the Republicans like that. Now, his thinking is that the Republicans are pushing for far more severe cuts to those programs than this, so maybe he can compromise with them and find middle ground. But what he doesn't appear to be learning in my view is that the Republicans of today can't be compromised with. I'd take a more hard line against them and not include any cuts to Social Security at least. But what I don't get is why if you are against cutting them at all you would possibly vote Republican... That makes no sense. You seem to have the sides backwards.
Of course. That's what both sides are doing- measuring the cuts against the current budget. Doesn't really make sense to measure them against current spending. Since we're in a recession and fighting two wars, if you just measure against current spending, no change in policy at all would look like massive deficit reduction. Revenues will come up and expenses will go down. So, you measure against the planned budget, current revenue projections and current expense projections. That's the only logical way to look at it.
For example, much is made of him counting the withdrawls from Iraq and Afghanistan as spending cuts. Well what he did was to withdraw troops faster than planned and count the difference. What you are calling for- measuring against current spending- would mean not only counting that amount, but also counting the already planned reductions in troop levels.... Instead of $1.1 trillion, it would count as much MORE. On top of that he could count the revenue projections based on the projected economic recovery as revenue gains.
I dunno. I know that is kind of a tricky concept. Think it through a bit before you reply please. It's the opposite way around from what you were thinking. Counting against the current plan generally results in LOWER numbers than counting against current spending would.
here we go again....did you own the company? i believe that answer was no....you were a low level manager, you didnt make the 'BIG' decisions, you carried out the orders of your superiors. your supposed 35 yrs of experience has no relevance in this thread.I spent 35 years in the business world so please don't try and tell me how business functions. Companies are going to provide goods and services with less people and right now economic growth is meager and doesn't warrant expansion of their labor force.
I spent 35 years in the business world so please don't try and tell me how business functions. Companies are going to provide goods and services with less people and right now economic growth is meager and doesn't warrant expansion of their labor force.
Don't know if you did or didn't, but I'm corect about what I said. Business isn't waiting around on the president if they ahve customwers. Sorry, but you're wrong.