Page 158 of 159 FirstFirst ... 58108148156157158159 LastLast
Results 1,571 to 1,580 of 1585

Thread: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

  1. #1571
    Sage
    Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-06-13 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    17,002

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    So the financial considerations mean nothing here. It is balanced and should not be a consideration unless you can prove that allowing someone to marry a person of the same sex will somehow cause major damage to our economy. (And this means proof, not simply belief that it will. Most economists agree that allowing same sex couples to marry would in fact be beneficial to our economy.)
    me paying you $5 makes no difference to the economy than me paying $5 to Walmart instead. When the government spends $5 on someone new that is $5 less it pays to some else which is a public cost. In the system as a whole, however, it makes no difference just like not extending the benefits makes no macro difference.

  2. #1572
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Fisher View Post
    me paying you $5 makes no difference to the economy than me paying $5 to Walmart instead. When the government spends $5 on someone new that is $5 less it pays to some else which is a public cost. In the system as a whole, however, it makes no difference just like not extending the benefits makes no macro difference.
    And that would be $5 to a person who is married to someone of the same sex rather than someone of the opposite sex.

    But it has been studied and proven that even the government will benefit financially (most likely, at least a little bit) from same sex couples being recognized as married.

    http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/fil...exmarriage.pdf

    What Is the Fiscal Impact of Gay Marriage? - Bloomberg

    How Gay Marriage Can Help Reduce America

    Even if this just helped the states alone, and had no affect on the actual federal coffers directly, it would still help the country because states that are less likely to go under (aka, have more money) are also less likely to need help from the federal government.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  3. #1573
    Sage
    Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-06-13 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    17,002

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    And that would be $5 to a person who is married to someone of the same sex rather than someone of the opposite sex.

    But it has been studied and proven that even the government will benefit financially (most likely, at least a little bit) from same sex couples being recognized as married.

    http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/fil...exmarriage.pdf

    What Is the Fiscal Impact of Gay Marriage? - Bloomberg

    How Gay Marriage Can Help Reduce America

    Even if this just helped the states alone, and had no affect on the actual federal coffers directly, it would still help the country because states that are less likely to go under (aka, have more money) are also less likely to need help from the federal government.

    Are you willing to cut whatever the added expense is out of the Food stamps or eliminate earned income credit to pay for it? If so, have at it. Have all the liberal programs you want just so long as they are paid for by cuts in other liberal programs.

  4. #1574
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Fisher View Post
    Are you willing to cut whatever the added expense is out of the Food stamps or eliminate earned income credit to pay for it? .
    What adderd expense? Everything rouge linked to indicated a savings not added expense. Or did you not bother with reading the links?

  5. #1575
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Fisher View Post
    Are you willing to cut whatever the added expense is out of the Food stamps or eliminate earned income credit to pay for it? If so, have at it. Have all the liberal programs you want just so long as they are paid for by cuts in other liberal programs.
    Neither thing you just said will be required. What part of "the federal government will benefit financially by allowing same sex couples to marry" do you not understand? If they are benefiting from it, then there is no need to cut anything. If you disagree, prove it with actual research, numbers showing exactly how much in every part of government will be likely affected by same sex couples being allowed to marry.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  6. #1576
    Sage
    Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-06-13 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    17,002

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    What adderd expense? Everything rouge linked to indicated a savings not added expense. Or did you not bother with reading the links?
    If gay spouses get the $259 death benefit that they otherwise would not get, that is an added expense. There is no way to argue that it is not. If a SSspouse of a military member entitles them to spousal benefits, then that is an added expense to the public. That it offsets an expense being paid by someone else somewhere else does not mean that it is not an added public expense that would otherwise not be incurred.

    This may shock you, but I have looked at the reports before today

  7. #1577
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Fisher View Post
    If gay spouses get the $259 death benefit that they otherwise would not get, that is an added expense. There is no way to argue that it is not. If a SSspouse of a military member entitles them to spousal benefits, then that is an added expense to the public. That it offsets an expense being paid by someone else somewhere else does not mean that it is not an added public expense that would otherwise not be incurred.

    This may shock you, but I have looked at the reports before today
    Except, just like most spouses nowdays, most same sex spouses earn their own Social Security benefit and that kicks in prior to the spousal benefit. Most spouses do not qualify for the spouse benefit because they have their own.

    Plus, what's the difference if it is going to a same sex spouse rather than an opposite sex spouse?
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  8. #1578
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Fisher View Post
    If gay spouses get the $259 death benefit that they otherwise would not get, that is an added expense. There is no way to argue that it is not. If a SSspouse of a military member entitles them to spousal benefits, then that is an added expense to the public. That it offsets an expense being paid by someone else somewhere else does not mean that it is not an added public expense that would otherwise not be incurred.

    This may shock you, but I have looked at the reports before today

    Go read rouge's links. Sheesh talk about not seeing the forest for the tree.

  9. #1579
    Sage
    Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-06-13 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    17,002

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Except, just like most spouses nowdays, most same sex spouses earn their own Social Security benefit and that kicks in prior to the spousal benefit. Most spouses do not qualify for the spouse benefit because they have their own.

    Plus, what's the difference if it is going to a same sex spouse rather than an opposite sex spouse?
    We have more money in the pool if they remain single, ergo it is an expense to the imaginary social security trust fund. What is wrong with cutting all added expenses from food stamps if they do not exist?

  10. #1580
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Fisher View Post
    We have more money in the pool if they remain single, ergo it is an expense to the imaginary social security trust fund. What is wrong with cutting all added expenses from food stamps if they do not exist?
    Not true. Because the money comes from other places and goes to other places. Plus, think about how many more of those orphans/foster children can be placed with married parents, requiring less money by the government to support. Plus, when married legally, couples are required to report both their incomes when it comes to applying for assistance, not just their own with a single person. There are so many things that will benefit the federal finances, and you can't show otherwise. You have one single thing that might face a little hardship, but you fail to answer simple questions concerning it. What is the difference if they are allowed to marry a person who is of the same sex rather than getting those same benefits for marrying someone of the opposite sex?
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

Posting Permissions

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