Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 118

Thread: Obama sending Congress $4T budget replete with new spending, taxes

  1. #61
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,293

    Re: Obama sending Congress $4T budget replete with new spending, taxes

    Quote Originally Posted by SlevinKelevra View Post
    providing defense?
    supporting the petrodollar?
    maintaining IS highways to bring goods to walmart?

    etc
    Have you ever looked at the U.S. Budget and the line items? Suggest you do that and then read the Constitution for the first time in your life.

  2. #62
    Sage
    Visbek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:28 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,020

    Re: Obama sending Congress $4T budget replete with new spending, taxes

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Wow, You have to be kidding. This is your argument that all dollars are the same?
    Yes, that's part of my argument. I'm also hypothesizing that you don't understand how Social Security is actually funded.


    You have no problem paying FICA(Payroll Taxes) for SS and Medicare only to have that money spent to pay for things not SS or Medicare related?
    Loaned. Since the primary alternative is having the money sit around, do nothing, and lose value to inflation, and since the intergovernment loans are included in the debt-to-GDP ratio, and since we'd just have to borrow the money anyway, I don't have a problem with the intergovernmental loans.

    (We could invest some of it in the stock market; that's a common suggestion for increasing revenues.)

    There is nothing sacred about FICA taxes. It's merely a legal construction, and a political convenience, that we specified that those taxes be used for SS/MC. If we aren't collecting enough via FICA to provide SS/MC, then our options are limited. We will have to raise taxes and/or cut benefits and/or borrow. No one really likes the first two, which is why we so often end up doing the 3rd.


    For decades we had more money coming out than going in and yet that money was spent, replaced with IOU's which someday have to be funded.
    ...yes, and we're already in the process of paying it back. Trust fund bond terms range from 1 to 15 years. Any funds borrowed before ~1999 are already paid back.


    You believe they will come from other revenue or from borrowing on which we have to pay interest?
    You prefer we conjure the funds from thin air?

    We're going to have to do something, and it's politically impossible to cut SS enough to make it solvent. We will likely have to raise revenues and cut benefits, as I've already suggested.


    That is what is wrong with this country, you have no concept of debt service, no problem with the general fund paying for your retirement, no understanding of SS and Medicare, no understanding of budgeting, no understanding of a Ponzi scheme in which someone else will pay for your retirement with their money because your money was spent?
    I hate to break it to you, but: It looks like you're the one who doesn't understand it. Again:

    CURRENT payroll tax revenues pay for CURRENT SS expenditures. That's been the case from the start.
    Intergovernmental loans are not reducing the size of the trust fund, and do not jeopardize the funds.
    There is no serious reason to believe the government won't be able to pay back the intergovernmental loans.
    There is no "Ponzi scheme."

    I also do understand debt service... in particular that government debt doesn't function the same way an ordinary person with a credit card. As long as the federal government can cover its interest payments, federal debt isn't a big issue.


    You obviously didn't read the article about the SS IOU's because if you did you would understand that there isn't enough revenue coming in to pay for SS and Medicare expenses along with the rest of the U.S. Budget. something has to give.
    Or, if you actually read what I wrote, you'd see how I have REPEATEDLY acknowledged that revenues will be less than expenditures in the near future. The expectation is that the trust fund will be gone by around 2032. Funny thing about that -- as we draw down from the trust fund, there's less to pay back! It's a problem that solves itself.


    Sorry but it your logic that doesn't make any sense and that is the way that our govt. wants it. There is a reason that people retiring in 1990 were paid for by someone else's payment. The money was spent and someone else has to pay the expense due. That by definition is a Ponzi scheme. People go to jail for that
    Thank you for proving my hypothesis: You don't understand how SS is funded.

    The benefits paid in 1990 were collected in 1990. The surplus of the program in 1990 was loaned to other parts of government, and has been paid back by now. Whatever else happens, it's highly unlikely the US government will default on its debt obligations any time soon. If it does, SS will probably be one of the least of our worries....

  3. #63
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 04:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,040

    Re: Obama sending Congress $4T budget replete with new spending, taxes

    Quote Originally Posted by Crovax View Post
    We can cure it just both sides have vested interests in not doing so.
    Which is why we cant cure it. There is no vested interest in reducing the size of govt from anyone but libertarians who make up 1% of the population. 99% want big govt in their lives, whether its liberals who want govt to control everything, or conservatives who want govt to control a little bit less. All we can do is slow it down a little. If you need proof, look at the GOP platform, which talks about saving entitlements, or the House budget which proposes increasing spending.

  4. #64
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,293

    Re: Obama sending Congress $4T budget replete with new spending, taxes

    Quote Originally Posted by Visbek View Post
    Yes, that's part of my argument. I'm also hypothesizing that you don't understand how Social Security is actually funded.



    Loaned. Since the primary alternative is having the money sit around, do nothing, and lose value to inflation, and since the intergovernment loans are included in the debt-to-GDP ratio, and since we'd just have to borrow the money anyway, I don't have a problem with the intergovernmental loans.

    (We could invest some of it in the stock market; that's a common suggestion for increasing revenues.)

    There is nothing sacred about FICA taxes. It's merely a legal construction, and a political convenience, that we specified that those taxes be used for SS/MC. If we aren't collecting enough via FICA to provide SS/MC, then our options are limited. We will have to raise taxes and/or cut benefits and/or borrow. No one really likes the first two, which is why we so often end up doing the 3rd.



    ...yes, and we're already in the process of paying it back. Trust fund bond terms range from 1 to 15 years. Any funds borrowed before ~1999 are already paid back.



    You prefer we conjure the funds from thin air?

    We're going to have to do something, and it's politically impossible to cut SS enough to make it solvent. We will likely have to raise revenues and cut benefits, as I've already suggested.



    I hate to break it to you, but: It looks like you're the one who doesn't understand it. Again:

    • CURRENT payroll tax revenues pay for CURRENT SS expenditures. That's been the case from the start.
    • Intergovernmental loans are not reducing the size of the trust fund, and do not jeopardize the funds.
    • There is no serious reason to believe the government won't be able to pay back the intergovernmental loans.
    • There is no "Ponzi scheme."

    I also do understand debt service... in particular that government debt doesn't function the same way an ordinary person with a credit card. As long as the federal government can cover its interest payments, federal debt isn't a big issue.



    Or, if you actually read what I wrote, you'd see how I have REPEATEDLY acknowledged that revenues will be less than expenditures in the near future. The expectation is that the trust fund will be gone by around 2032. Funny thing about that -- as we draw down from the trust fund, there's less to pay back! It's a problem that solves itself.



    Thank you for proving my hypothesis: You don't understand how SS is funded.

    The benefits paid in 1990 were collected in 1990. The surplus of the program in 1990 was loaned to other parts of government, and has been paid back by now. Whatever else happens, it's highly unlikely the US government will default on its debt obligations any time soon. If it does, SS will probably be one of the least of our worries....
    No, it is you that doesn't understand how SS was to be funded, by FICA which is payroll taxes and what has happened is more money came in than went out, LBJ created the unified budget to pay for the Vietnam War and Congresses after that used the unified budget to show a lower deficit than actual. So yes, Intergovt. holdings were used to show a lower deficit, replaced with IOU's that one day have to be funded. So please tell me how running a deficit and having to borrow money to fund the deficit is a good thing? We are paying OUT debt service, not in. Using your funds to pay my SS is nothing more than a Ponzi scheme and something you don't understand. As the article I posted says trillions in unfunded liabilities exist and those IOU's have to be funded. There aren't enough workers to do that so it has to be printed or borrowed. Low interest rates today hide the true costs.

  5. #65
    Kinky
    tres borrachos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 03:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    39,234

    Re: Obama sending Congress $4T budget replete with new spending, taxes

    Quote Originally Posted by LagerHead View Post
    Entitlements are not THE problem. They are A problem, among many.



    I would at least cut every single one of those, and eliminate several.
    I had the same reaction as I went down that list. Some got a "CUT THIS!", and some got a "WTH IS THIS? - ELIMINATE IT!" from me.

    $4 trillion. It scares me that we as a nation don't faint when we see that kind of a number.
    Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ~W.C. Fields

  6. #66
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Last Seen
    02-08-17 @ 04:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    6,639

    Re: Obama sending Congress $4T budget replete with new spending, taxes

    Quote Originally Posted by tres borrachos View Post
    I had the same reaction as I went down that list. Some got a "CUT THIS!", and some got a "WTH IS THIS? - ELIMINATE IT!" from me.

    $4 trillion. It scares me that we as a nation don't faint when we see that kind of a number.


    12,500 per person. It scares me when people can't scale/normalize simple data. Shall we next discuss how that compares to the rest of the "first world", and why?

  7. #67
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,293

    Re: Obama sending Congress $4T budget replete with new spending, taxes

    Quote Originally Posted by SlevinKelevra View Post
    12,500 per person. It scares me when people can't scale/normalize simple data. Shall we next discuss how that compares to the rest of the "first world", and why?
    As a wannbe socialist you have no idea what the free enterprise, capitalistic economy has generated for you and this country. One of these days you may get your wish and there is no turning back. What scares me is the belief that with an 18.2 trillion dollar debt costing the taxpayers 250 billion a year that people like you still don't believe we have enough govt. Greece would be proud of you

  8. #68
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,293

    Re: Obama sending Congress $4T budget replete with new spending, taxes

    Let me see if I have this right, we have no wars, no recession, a self proclaimed liberals booming economy and Obama proposes a record budget? That apparently only makes sense to a liberal who never believes the govt. spends enough on social programs that create nothing but dependence. Do I have that right, Obama supporters?

  9. #69
    Sage
    Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sunnyvale California
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    14,985

    Re: Obama sending Congress $4T budget replete with new spending, taxes

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Let me see if I have this right, we have no wars, no recession, a self proclaimed liberals booming economy and Obama proposes a record budget? That apparently only makes sense to a liberal who never believes the govt. spends enough on social programs that create nothing but dependence. Do I have that right, Obama supporters?
    You seem to be forgeting the existance of theongoing war on terror.
    "If you can't stand the way this place is, Take yourself to higher places!"
    Break, By Three days grace

    Hilliary Clinton/Tim Kaine 2016

  10. #70
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Last Seen
    02-08-17 @ 04:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    6,639

    Re: Obama sending Congress $4T budget replete with new spending, taxes

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    As a wannbe socialist you have no idea what the free enterprise, capitalistic economy has generated for you and this country. One of these days you may get your wish and there is no turning back. What scares me is the belief that with an 18.2 trillion dollar debt costing the taxpayers 250 billion a year that people like you still don't believe we have enough govt. Greece would be proud of you
    As a rabid internet anti-"socialism" warrior, I find it odd that you don't rail against the single largest socialist enterprise in the entire world-- wait for it--- the US Military.

Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... 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
  •