• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama, Republicans reach deal on fiscal cliff; Senate vote expected tonight

Republic Now! said:
It's much easier to control your spending then it is your revenue. You can do things to try to increase your revenue, but there is no guarantee of success. You can largely be certain that spending cuts will be successful.
Click to expand...

With the amount of debt we have, just one or the other will not be enough. Don't forget it took 30 years of too much spending and too little revenue to create our debt problem. It will take 30 years of the opposite to solve our debt problem. There are no magic fixes.
 
Catawba said:
With the amount of debt we have, just one or the other will not be enough. Don't forget it took 30 years of too much spending and too little revenue to create our debt problem. It will take 30 years of the opposite to solve our debt problem. There are no magic fixes.
Click to expand...

Here's a magic fix:


Spend less.

Wow!
 
Republic Now! said:
Here's a magic fix:


Spend less.

Wow!
Click to expand...

Since the problem wasn't created by spending alone, it can't solved that way alone. And, I am willing to cut our most wasteful spending. Let's cut military spending in half and stop waging $2 trillion dollar wars of choice.
 
apdst said:
I would say that $4 million dollars vacations,
Click to expand...
I would agree vacations on the taxpayer time is a waste of money

deer underpasses
Click to expand...
I would disagree that this is a waste of money.
1.)It saves lives. Many people die from cars hitting deers, and trust me in the state of Kansas deers are considered a pest.
2.)It helps keep the natural environment

and turtle tunnels should be at the top of the list.
Click to expand...
Never heard of turtle tunnels.


But i think in my opinion the right place to start would be our giant military industrial complex, corporate welfare, and oil subsidies.
 
Catawba said:
Since the problem wasn't created by spending alone, it can't solved that way alone. And, I am willing to cut our most wasteful spending. Let's cut military spending in half and stop waging $2 trillion dollar wars of choice.
Click to expand...

We cant cut a dime from the military.How would we be able to deter any imaginary boogiemen?:2wave:
 
Wait. What's getting cut?
 
Republic Now! said:
Yes, starting by not spending 1.2 trillion more than I take in until I manage to increase my revenue.
Click to expand...

Like I said, the bills don't go away. Nor do responsibilities.
 
Whipsnade said:
We cant cut a dime from the military.How would we be able to deter any imaginary boogiemen?:2wave:
Click to expand...


When the Republicans recently voted unanimously to spend almost as much next year as the rest of the world combined on military, I knew they were no more concerned about the national debt than they were when they voted unanimously for the $2 trillion dollar optional war in Iraq.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
I would agree vacations on the taxpayer time is a waste of money


I would disagree that this is a waste of money.
1.)It saves lives. Many people die from cars hitting deers, and trust me in the state of Kansas deers are considered a pest.
2.)It helps keep the natural environment
Click to expand...

Promote more deer hunting; raise bag limits for hunters; decrease the population and actually creat revenue from the sell of hunting licenses. Problem solved.


Never heard of turtle tunnels.
Click to expand...

You didn't hear about $3.4 million being spent on turtle tunnels in Florida?

Turtle Tunnel

But i think in my opinion the right place to start would be our giant military industrial complex
Click to expand...

Why? The so called military industrial complex creates technology that keeps our sons and daughters safe on the battlefield. Definitely does something for the country, because in war, it's always the best and brightest that die firstest and the mostest.

corporate welfare
Click to expand...

Like the half billion+ plus dollars pissed away on Solyndra? Or GE supposedly not paying any income taxes, because of billions in green energy tax credits and breaks?

I couldn't agree more. If "alternative energy" is such a great idea, the private sector should already be developing the technology and wouldn't need any government subsidies to get off the ground. They sure as hell wouldn't flop, even with government subsidies.

oil subsidies.
Click to expand...

I would agree...in in fact, they actually existed. Since they don't, let's just concentrate on real money wasting programs vice immaginary subsidies.

I think we should concentrate on doing away with million dollar projects, such as studying dino-doo-doo in China and the study of Alaskan grandparents.
Click to expand...
 
Whipsnade said:
We cant cut a dime from the military.How would we be able to deter any imaginary boogiemen?:2wave:
Click to expand...

You do know that it was the military that located and killed UBL. Right?
 
GhostlyJoe said:
I don't get this. Corporations are -- by definition -- separate entities from the ownership. That's the whole point of limited liabability. That's the price you pay for protection, as an investor, from whatever liabilities a corporation may accrue.
Click to expand...

Owe some taxes and see how seperate the corporation is from the ownership. ;)
 
Whipsnade said:
We cant cut a dime from the military.How would we be able to deter any imaginary boogiemen?:2wave:
Click to expand...

On December 6, 1941 the thought of an attack by the Japanese was thought to be impossible. The reason we spend on our military is for the occasions that happens the day after.
 
Objective Voice said:
That's simple: To help pay down the national debt and get our deficit under control.

I get the GOP ideological mindset that says that the best way to pay down the debt is to have more people working thus paying into the Treasury via federal income taxes, but since unemployment is still high and we know that spending cuts alone won't solve the problem AND the only class of wage earners who have made money during the recessionary period has been the wealth/investor-class, it makes sense that those who CAN afford to pay more now should do so.

You can't tell me that all those millionairs and billionairs who contributed BILLIONS to both Pres. Obama, Mitt Romney, as well as every other congressmen and Senator who was up for election/re-election couldn't have put that money to better use by either paying higher wages or re-investing back into their businesses when "consumer confidence" was the problem that stiffled consumption. SuperPACs be damned!

So, I really don't want to hear that the wealth-class is having financial problems or that you're somehow being treated unfairly. Spare me you sorrow.
Click to expand...

Perfectly summarized. Thanks.
 
GhostlyJoe said:
Corporations are -- by definition -- separate entities from the ownership. That's the whole point of limited liability. That's the price you pay for protection, as an investor, from whatever liabilities a corporation may accrue.
Click to expand...
I hope very much after the skewering received in this thread that no one on the right bothers to trot out the "taxed twice" argument again.
 
Objective Voice said:
That's simple: To help pay down the national debt and get our deficit under control.

I get the GOP ideological mindset that says that the best way to pay down the debt is to have more people working thus paying into the Treasury via federal income taxes, but since unemployment is still high and we know that spending cuts alone won't solve the problem AND the only class of wage earners who have made money during the recessionary period has been the wealth/investor-class, it makes sense that those who CAN afford to pay more now should do so.

You can't tell me that all those millionairs and billionairs who contributed BILLIONS to both Pres. Obama, Mitt Romney, as well as every other congressmen and Senator who was up for election/re-election couldn't have put that money to better use by either paying higher wages or re-investing back into their businesses when "consumer confidence" was the problem that stiffled consumption. SuperPACs be damned!

So, I really don't want to hear that the wealth-class is having financial problems or that you're somehow being treated unfairly. Spare me you sorrow.
Click to expand...

The only way to control the deficit, is to cut spending. Raising taxes won't work, because the more money the government has, the more it wants to spend. At some point, there won't be anyone to tax.

Creating more tax payers--preferrably through more employment--is the best shot at creating more revenue. The government needs to get it's boot off the throat of private business and let them do what they do best...make money! Money that can be taxed...creating more revenue Raising taxes on job creators sure as hell isn't going to create more jobs and thus, more taxpayers.
 
Objective Voice said:
That's simple: To help pay down the national debt and get our deficit under control.

I get the GOP ideological mindset that says that the best way to pay down the debt is to have more people working thus paying into the Treasury via federal income taxes, but since unemployment is still high and we know that spending cuts alone won't solve the problem AND the only class of wage earners who have made money during the recessionary period has been the wealth/investor-class, it makes sense that those who CAN afford to pay more now should do so.

You can't tell me that all those millionairs and billionairs who contributed BILLIONS to both Pres. Obama, Mitt Romney, as well as every other congressmen and Senator who was up for election/re-election couldn't have put that money to better use by either paying higher wages or re-investing back into their businesses when "consumer confidence" was the problem that stiffled consumption. SuperPACs be damned!

So, I really don't want to hear that the wealth-class is having financial problems or that you're somehow being treated unfairly. Spare me you sorrow.
Click to expand...

The only way to control the deficit, is to cut spending. Raising taxes won't work, because the more money the government has, the more it wants to spend. At some point, there won't be anyone to tax.

Creating more tax payers--preferrably through more employment--is the best shot at creating more revenue. The government needs to get it's boot off the throat of private business and let them do what they do best...make money! Money that can be taxed...creating more revenue Raising taxes on job creators sure as hell isn't going to create more jobs and thus, more taxpayers.
 
ReformCollege said:
Considering we are raising taxes
Click to expand...

Ohh tickle me pink we are raising taxes by 4.6% on a very very small percentage of the population.. . And we are raising the estate tax on 5.1 million by 5%... Ohh the humanity. :lamo
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Ohh tickle me pink we are raising taxes by 4.6% on a very very small percentage of the population... Ohh the humanity. :lamo
Click to expand...

And most importantly, not cutting spending. So we look like we are "raising taxes" but its really just a coverup for NOT CUTTING SPENDING.
 
SO WAIT. We gave up tax hikes AND NOTHING'S GETTING CUT?!?
 
Objective Voice said:
Considering that the GOP viewed a tax increase on wage earner making $250K to be a negative for small businessowners, I'd say raising that threshold to $400/$450K to be a win for them. They also got to keep the rate on the estate tax higher than Democrats wanted and kept capital gains relatively in tact despite the 5% increase on $400/$450K wage earners.
Click to expand...

I want to punch you in the face. You don't want me to punch you in the face. So I punch you in the stomach instead...it's a win for you! Because that logic works great.....
 
Zyphlin said:
I want to punch you in the face. You don't want me to punch you in the face. So I punch you in the stomach instead...it's a win for you! Because that logic works great.....
Click to expand...

Yeah. This may make permanent alot of tax rates (which is good), but it's crap for "compromise"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom