Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 118

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

  1. #81
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 05:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,213

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Then prove it? I have posted the link to the budget. Defense in 2014 was 600 billion dollars.
    Nuclear weapon funding is done under the department of energy, Veterans Affairs isn't included in that budget, the Treasury Departments payment for pensions isn't included, the State Departments budget includes military related assistance to other countries, a lot of counter terrorism funding goes to the FBI and Homeland Security, NASA includes a budget for intelligence-gathering. That 600 billion dollars is just for the Department of Defense.
    “Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes

  2. #82
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,299

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Visbek View Post
    ugh.

    What I'm pointing out is the separation of taxes isn't real. It's a political convenience. A federal tax is a federal tax, and it would be much simpler to stop breaking it up like we do now. I.e. instead of wasting our time with intragovernmental loans, and absurd claims like "Social Security is broke!" we could just talk about how much it costs us, how much we are willing to pay for it, and how to pay for it.



    And yet, somehow neither SS nor the federal government melted down between 1970 and 1993.

    If you've been reading my posts, you'll see I don't really have an issue with a truly unified budget. In fact, I'd say it makes more sense. There's no real need to split up tax payments for different spending.



    OMG NOOOOO!!!! Not a DEFICIT!!!



    1) It allows the government to provide services, typically those requested by voters, without raising taxes.

    2) Borrowing from the trust fund, yet again, doesn't pose a problem. We might make an argument there are better uses of those funds, or cheaper ways to borrow, but there is no real reason to fear that the trust fund won't be repaid.

    3) Individuals and institutions around the world have been throwing money at the US government for years, loaning money to the government at zero interest rates. Since inflation is positive, that means those people are paying the government to borrow their money. In turn, US government bonds and securities are regarded as the safest investment in the world.

    4) Governments are not like individuals, who are expected to pay off a mortgage or a credit card in a specific time frame. Governments can borrow indefinitely, and roll over debt for as long as someone's willing to lend the money. Deficits only really become an issue when we can't raise enough revenue to pay the interest.

    5) As noted, deficit hawks have been screeching since the early 80s. That's thirty years of predictions of doom that haven't come about. After a few decades, the FUD starts to wear a bit thin.

    6) If we ran a $50 billion/yr surplus starting in 2015, it'd take the federal government over 360 years to pay off the debt. It's not happening in our lifetimes. You might wanna deal with that.

    7) Last but certainly not least: Most of the states, and some cities, require balanced budgets. What does that produce? More often than not, states that can't run deficits deliberately underfund their state pensions. <Neo>Woah.</Neo>


    This doesn't mean that all budget issues magically go away. What it means is that deficits and debt are mostly a pseudo-problem, unless things get so bad that we can't pay the interest. The real issue is whether we want to provide certain services, and how much we want to tax our citizens. Scare tactics about SS shortages and "Ponzi schemes" and all this other bull**** ultimately distract us from the much more basic questions.



    I do understand it, which is why I know that it's not a Ponzi scheme.

    Again: Instead of borrowing from the private sector, we're borrowing from the trust fund. The money is basically sitting there doing nothing. Letting it sit there, doing nothing, benefits no one.

    The reason why we classify SS as having "unfunded liabilities" is because of exactly what I'm discussing -- expenditures are greater than revenues. Treating this like a horror show is not real. It's a direct result of separating out SS taxes from other types of taxes.

    The way SS is set up, it's like having two jobs, and declaring that the funds from one job can only be used for the mortgage, and everything else is paid out of your second job. If your first job cuts your hours, would you default on your mortgage? No, because money is money, and income is income. You'd pay the mortgage out of both jobs.

    There is no real reason to separate these taxes anymore. I don't pay a tax specifically for military, a second tax for education, a third tax for interest payments, and so on. These are mere political and accounting fictions. They're not real.

    Speaking of unfunded liabilities, all those states that can't run deficits? They wind up, wait for it... underfunding their state pension fund liabilities. Who'da figured that might happen?
    You call it borrowing, borrowing from who and how is that borrowing repaid? How are those bonds going to be funded and paid for in cash in addition to all the other budget items? You think separation of taxes isn't realistic? Then you are part of the problem and ignore how SS was sold and originally paid for. the rest of your novel is just that fiction. By the way we already borrowed from the trust fund and that is why we have trillions in unfunded liabilities

  3. #83
    Sage
    Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sunnyvale California
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    14,992

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    What cutback would that be if Obama simply accepted the fiscal year 2014 numbers which was 3.5 trillion dollars? for some reason we need another 500 billion dollars for social engineering and creating more dependence?
    Let us not pretend that we don't know what programs are the likely targets for conservative budget cutters.

    Social security

    Medicare

    Medicaid

    Unemployment

    Food stamps

    Federal education programs

    All these seem to draw particular attention.
    "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

  4. #84
    Sage
    Visbek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 05:28 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,020

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

    Sorry, one more thing.

    Let's say I have life insurance. I pay $2000/yr, and my policy pays $100,000.

    The insurance company doesn't take my premiums, put it in a tiny hidey-hole, and return those funds to me. They pay the CURRENT life insurance collectors with my money.

    Whatever is left over from the year's revenues does not sit around, doing nothing. The insurance company invests it, including lending it to people who may or may not pay back in full and/or on time. If the insurance company is having an off year, they may borrow to cover some of those expenses. Or, rather than withdraw money from an investment that pays a 10% return, they might borrow at 2% to pay off the collectors.

    And yet, no one refers to commercial insurance as a Ponzi scheme. Huh.

  5. #85
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,299

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13 View Post
    Let us not pretend that we don't know what programs are the likely targets for conservative budget cutters.

    Social security

    Medicare

    Medicaid

    Unemployment

    Food stamps

    Federal education programs

    All these seem to draw particular attention.
    Looks like a pretty good list to me. You seem to have a problem understand that results matter and all you have done is give your politicians authorization to use your money how they see fit not on programs that were for the intended use. There is a reason SS and Medicare are underfunded and your answer is throw more money at it without finding where the money went in the first place

    You also don't seem to understand personal responsibility. I suggest you ask yourself do we need all those programs to help those TRULY in need or do we need those programs to give the politicians more money to spend

  6. #86
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,299

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Visbek View Post
    Sorry, one more thing.

    Let's say I have life insurance. I pay $2000/yr, and my policy pays $100,000.

    The insurance company doesn't take my premiums, put it in a tiny hidey-hole, and return those funds to me. They pay the CURRENT life insurance collectors with my money.

    Whatever is left over from the year's revenues does not sit around, doing nothing. The insurance company invests it, including lending it to people who may or may not pay back in full and/or on time. If the insurance company is having an off year, they may borrow to cover some of those expenses. Or, rather than withdraw money from an investment that pays a 10% return, they might borrow at 2% to pay off the collectors.

    And yet, no one refers to commercial insurance as a Ponzi scheme. Huh.
    The Federal Govt. isn't an insurance company, they took your money through payroll taxes to fund a retirement supplement for you. that money was never supposed to be put on budget but rather in a lock box. That didn't happen and people like you have no problem with that money being spent. You also have no idea where the funds are going to come from to pay for future long term retirees since there aren't enough workers to pay those retirees with existing dollars.

  7. #87
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,299

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

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    Nuclear weapon funding is done under the department of energy, Veterans Affairs isn't included in that budget, the Treasury Departments payment for pensions isn't included, the State Departments budget includes military related assistance to other countries, a lot of counter terrorism funding goes to the FBI and Homeland Security, NASA includes a budget for intelligence-gathering. That 600 billion dollars is just for the Department of Defense.
    Department of energy 5 billion dollars

    VA is separate funding and retirement and medical for all Military personnel 150 billion

    Dept of State has nothing to do with military defense but if you want to eliminate it, great, do so. 47 billion dollars

    I could go on but you are going to tie everything to defense and that is total ignorance. Doesn't really matter because you aren't going to ever come up with enough to justify a 4 trillion dollar budget. We spent 3.5 trillion in 2014 so why the 500 billion increase?

  8. #88
    Sage
    Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sunnyvale California
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    14,992

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Looks like a pretty good list to me. You seem to have a problem understand that results matter and all you have done is give your politicians authorization to use your money how they see fit not on programs that were for the intended use. There is a reason SS and Medicare are underfunded and your answer is throw more money at it without finding where the money went in the first place

    You also don't seem to understand personal responsibility. I suggest you ask yourself do we need all those programs to help those TRULY in need or do we need those programs to give the politicians more money to spend
    It seems to me that you are the person who needs to understand the meaning of personal responsibility.

    Do I justify giving my money to the federal government with the expectation that it will benifit me personally? No

    I give my money to the federal government so that it can implement policies that are beneficial to society and the needs of all citizens, not just myself.

    And unless I know for certain where exactly does the government spend its money, I cannot support propositions that blindly slash monatary amounts.
    "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

  9. #89
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 05:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,213

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Department of energy 5 billion dollars

    VA is separate funding and retirement and medical for all Military personnel 150 billion

    Dept of State has nothing to do with military defense but if you want to eliminate it, great, do so. 47 billion dollars

    I could go on but you are going to tie everything to defense and that is total ignorance. Doesn't really matter because you aren't going to ever come up with enough to justify a 4 trillion dollar budget. We spent 3.5 trillion in 2014 so why the 500 billion increase?
    It's not total ignorance...I'm not saying we should cut or increase the budget for defense...but the defense of the nation is a much bigger portion of the pie than just the slice that goes to the Department of Defense. Anti-Terrorism is one of the main components of keeping the US safe a large potion of that occurs in Homeland Defense and the FBI. Minus debt spending (yes...defense spending has contributed to the national debt) total defense spending is pretty close to a trillion dollars. That's the amount we spend keeping the nation safe from terrorism and foreign threats.
    “Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes

  10. #90
    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 iliveonramen View Post
    That's the amount we spend keeping the nation safe from terrorism and foreign threats.
    And to keep the petrodollar in place and the global oil supply flowing.

Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... 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
  •