Page 18 of 39 FirstFirst ... 8161718192028 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 381

Thread: House passes huge GOP budget cuts

  1. #171
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: House passes huge GOP budget cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Read your own article and other sources on the subject. They do not cut benefits. They eliminate the costs of insurance company large profit from the equation.
    You think those insurance companies will offer the same benefits for less money?
    If you do, I've got a bridge to sell you as well.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  2. #172
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: House passes huge GOP budget cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    You think those insurance companies will offer the same benefits for less money?
    If you do, I've got a bridge to sell you as well.
    Its not going to be run by the private insurance companies anymore who just add on more overhead and profits to the costs. The payments to the doctors is the same. We are just running it more efficiently. Perhaps you should spend more time learing about it before you continue as if you know nothing about it.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  3. #173
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: House passes huge GOP budget cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Why do you people think that doing business in the US should be free?
    nothing in this country is free

    unless you're a holder in the company managed by obama's jobs czar

    leadership, anyone?

  4. #174
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: House passes huge GOP budget cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Its not going to be run by the private insurance companies anymore who just add on more overhead and profits to the costs. The payments to the doctors is the same. We are just running it more efficiently. Perhaps you should spend more time learing about it before you continue as if you know nothing about it.
    Riiiiight.

    The advantage payments are being frozen this year and then gradually reduced and the payments to doctors were not cut, a bill was passed afterward, pushed by the President no less, that restored the payments.

    You guys should follow the issues more, instead of getting caught up in the intentions.
    You all got played.
    Last edited by Harry Guerrilla; 04-17-11 at 03:15 AM.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  5. #175
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: House passes huge GOP budget cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    They aren't putting money into the system which is why our economy is struggling.
    yup, they're uncertain

    and possibly resentful

    the slasher would seize it if he had any guts

    but he won't, harry will never put a particular on paper

    this guy would, tho

    RealClearPolitics - Video - Michael Moore On Wealthy People's Money: "That's Not Theirs, That's A National Resource, It's Ours"

    if the slasher were gonna DO anything other than make excellent speeches, great speeches, he wouldn't have signed the bush/obama/clinton/boehner/mcconnell tax cuts for the rich into law TWO MONTHS AGO

    he'd have DONE something in his 2012 budget which, unlike his great and excellent speeches, is actually hard copy and REAL, published in february

    the senate would've DONE something in response to HR ONE which hurry-up-harry has been sitting on SINCE FEBRUARY

    when's the slasher gonna produce A PLAN?

    what's gonna be IN IT?

    when you ask those obvious questions you'll see the slasher's a sham

    with nothing up his sleeve

  6. #176
    Guru
    GPS_Flex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    02-11-17 @ 11:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,719

    Re: House passes huge GOP budget cuts

    Let me go on the record as an advocate for tax hikes, draconian spending cuts, draconian cuts in government regulations (state and fed) and a horrible American recession that will last for nearly 10 years.

    Medicine tastes bad but we (America) refuse to take our medicine because we have allowed the political propaganda machines of both parties to fill our heads with the idea that we can have our cake and eat it too. We think that we can build utopia because we are special, we are Americans and we are a super power that will never die.

    "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
    John F. Kennedy
    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    It would seem that the constitution is just a god damn piece of paper, to be trotted out when expedient.

  7. #177
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: House passes huge GOP budget cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    This 3% is content to ship American jobs and money overseas to increase their wealth even further.
    yup, just like the slasher's JOBS CZAR

    General Electric is so good at doing their taxes, the government pays them. In 2010, the company reported global profits of $14.2 billion, $5.1 billion of which came from the U.S. But using a combination of offshore accounts and aggressive lobbying for tax breaks, GE managed to not only pay no taxes, but get a benefit of $3.2 billion. GE spent $200 million on lobbying in the last decade. At one point, when a generous tax break was about to expire, the head of GE's tax team met with Representative Charles Rangel, then chairman of the ways and means committee, and begged for an extension on one knee. Supposedly it was a joke, but GE got its extension, and Rangel got a $30 million gift for New York City schools.
    GE Pays No Taxes - The Daily Beast

  8. #178
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: House passes huge GOP budget cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    Let me go on the record as an advocate for tax hikes, draconian spending cuts, draconian cuts in government regulations (state and fed) and a horrible American recession that will last for nearly 10 years.

    Medicine tastes bad but we (America) refuse to take our medicine because we have allowed the political propaganda machines of both parties to fill our heads with the idea that we can have our cake and eat it too. We think that we can build utopia because we are special, we are Americans and we are a super power that will never die.
    I agree with everything but the regulation cuts. At least at the fed level. Most of the stupid regs I see are at the state level. I certainly don't want less inspections at meat plants.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  9. #179
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: House passes huge GOP budget cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by washunut View Post
    The deficit as a % of GDP during the 80s was never close to what it has been the last three years. As a matter of fact if you go back the last thrity years the deficit has not been as high in any year as it has been in each of the last three years.
    the deficit in february, 11, was greater than that for all of 2007

    U.S. sets $223B deficit record - Washington Times

    Deficit for Fiscal 2007 Slides - Real Time Economics - WSJ

  10. #180
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    01-18-13 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,631

    Re: House passes huge GOP budget cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Say what? How does existing law define any compliance with the definition of fair? Everyone's definition of fair varies. Is it fair that the rich pay more because they earn more? It is fair that the rich pay more because they own vast majority of assets in this country? It is fair that everyone pays the same amount? The problem with people like Turtle is that they define fair as they please and do not stick to that definition. I have no respect for people who unilaterally change their definitions based on how badly they are losing an argument.
    Damn, that must give you fits when you look in the mirror.

    There's a reason "fairness" isn't codified in law and why "fairness" is not a good basis for defining law in the first place.

    "Fairness" is defined by mobs of uneducated greedy people seeking freebies. It's easier to define "equality", easier to regulate equal applications of the law, and easier to see where the cheats are happening.

    An example given to the Mayor by a flaming socialist on another board was that some fund manager allegedly made $1,800 million dollars in one year and "only" paid 30% in taxes on this. He claimed it was totally "unfair".

    The Mayor wanted to know what was "unfair" about one man paying over six hundred million dollars in taxes in one year. If that doesn't embody "fairness", how can anyone on the left even begin to define the term they throw around like mashed potatoes at a food fight?

    It's not up to the govenrment to determine what a "fair" payment is. The government can't define fair, it can only balance the assorted compromises and develop an average value of fairness that will shift with the political currents.

    The Mayor presented his views on fairness and income already. You are not arguing with those, you're whining that you can't argue them. Which is only fair.

    That shouldn't be a problem as the COTUS doesn't cover that. Furthermore, taxation in excess of spending isn't necessarily a bad idea.
    Yes, it's a bad idea. It siphons capital needed for growth and creates an asset the politician are as likely to leave alone as a six year old boy is to leave the scab on his knee alone. Guaranteed, they're both going to be a pickin'...

    For instance, states do this all of the time. They deposit the surplus into rainy day funds which generate income which can be used for disaster, stimulus or budget balancing.
    And then,....and then, along comes Willy Brown, the Democratic State legislature, and wuss named Wilson, and the state begins running uncontrollable deficits becuase once that keg is finally tapped, the drunkards start prominsing the brewery that they'll pay later for more beer today.

    While it's pretty in theory, if you don't examine it closely, funds in excess of current and projected expenses, which must be locked up tight from prying politicians, are funds that are actually best left in the hands of the people who earned them.

    Don't want the state to pay for that disaster looming? Pay for the fixed tangible assets needed to cope in advance. Don't expect that money left lying around will be lying around when it's needed. Look at all those states who supposedly had "pension funds", oh, gee, they're gone.

    IMO, building a surplus is far preferable then deficit spending. I'd rather have the fed tax more, build a surplus fund and use that surplus fund for stimulus spending during recessions then borrow money.
    The Senate in the 1980's decided that the Social Security funds being accrued for future obligations should be used to buy Treasuries. The same government decided that, gee, look at all that money that just came in. And spent it.

    That's the natural fate of all rainy day funds, friend. The politicians steal it. It's what they do.

    Listen, and understand! Those politicians are out there! They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead. - From the film "Mr. Terminator-Smith Goes to Washington"

    At least with that method we stay in the black. As Japan shows us, bad stuff happens. Going in to debt to fix that is not preferable when you can build up a safety fund during good times. What I vastly dislike about the Tea Party is that they don't seem to understand this .
    Those Americans understand it just fine. And they're realists and know that a Congress that has proven it's perfidy cannot, by definition, be trusted to do the right thing. Allowing the United States Congress to hold "surplus" money is just as stupid as asking a heroin addict to hold onto your retirement funds.

    And for the same reason.

    Can you explain why you would trust Congress to do what Congress has proven it refuses to do, namely, handle money maturely?

    The rich also own the greatest portion of asset.
    Yeah, fancy that.

    Just because a man owns money isn't an excuse to rob him. At some point the graduated tax scale becomes nothing more than a mugging, and the wealthy cease engaging in commerce and focus on capital preservation, and that's when the job creation comes to a grinding halt.

    That does not logically follow.
    Yes, it does. Anytime a mere 2% of the population is coerced to provide 50% of the national funding, they're being taxed excessively and the nation has to re-examine it's priorities. Be for real. 150,000,000 people in the US are getting a free ride.

    To quote Captain John Smith:
    Countrymen, the long experience of our late miseries, I hope is sufficient to persuade every one to a present correction of himself, and think not that either my pains, nor the [investors'] purses, will ever maintain you in idleness and sloth. I speak not this to you all, for diverse of you I know deserve both honor and reward, better than is yet here to be had: but the greater part must be more industrious, or starve, how ever you have been heretofore tolerated by the authorities of the Council, from that I have often commanded you. You see now that power rests wholly in myself: you must obey this now for a Law, that he that will not work shall not eat (except by sickness he be disabled) for the labors of thirty or forty honest and industrious men shall not be consumed to maintain an hundred and fifty idle loiterers.


    Actually it's both.
    No. It's clearly a spending issue. When confiscating the earnings of everyone will net only 1/3 of the amount needed to cover the spending, then the issue isn't the taxes, the issue is the spending. Anyone attempting to run their business or their family's budget in such a fashion is in for a rude surprise.

    Come again? 50% don't pay federal taxes? You got this where? Last I checked, payroll taxes are federal taxes. And only around 45% of the country is not working. Actually 10% of the population is carrying 55% of the burden.
    So you feel there's such a huge difference between 45% and 50% that you've refuted my claim? That forcing 10% rather than 2% to carry such a huge fraction of the burden is soooo much fairer that you can again claim to refute the point being made, which is that too damn many people in this country are free loaders expecting more handouts stolen from those who work?

    Read the quote from Captain Smith carefully, it defines the founding sensibility of the entire American experiment.

    As for no "rational" definition, well that is your opinion.
    Yes, that's rational, the Mayor's opinion is.

    Take this for example: The economy is basically a machine to generate material wealth.
    The economy is a machine to generate material wealth for the people who earned it.

    To be specific.

    But that does through the two-inch Snap-On combination wrench into your argument, doesn't it?

    The economy is kept going by taxes that support the economy and regulate it so that it functions properly. Now, who should pay the majority of taxes in such a system? Those who own very few of the total wealth or those who own the majority of the wealth?
    Gee. How pretty. You've just described the libertarian system of limited government with a laissez-faire approach to business in which the minimalist necessary controls are funded by those profitting most from the existence of those protections.

    Too bad what we're really discussing is the parasitic lamprey policies of cancerous unconstitutional entitlement spending that's devouring the nation and destroying it's ability to survive, as all cancers andn leeches do.

    So much for your "no rational definition of fair is going to allow this."

    Pbbfttt! The example you cited was your own strawman that had nothing to do with the realities facing the nation and the current budget processes. Social Security has nothing to do with regulatory requirements to prevent fraud and contract infringements among commercial enterprises. Nor does Medicare, Medicaid, AFDC, the NEA, NPR, PBS, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the Public Education System, and any of the other completely unconstitutional programs the producers are taxed to fund.

    Your own attempt to define "fairness" excluded those and included only those items the Mayor would consider as fair.

    So much for your attempt to reject the Mayor's superior ability to reason.

    Which is nothing more than speculation.
    No, clearly when the average man is being taxed at fifty percent of his earnings, the only position he can occupy on the Laffer Curve is the side wherein increased taxation leads to decreased government revenues.

    [quote]Taxation =/= theft. [quote]

    It certainly does when the destination of the collected revenues is illegal programs such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid...the list is three lines up, dude...

    That depends how you look at things. See my earlier example.
    The Mayor looks at things and sees the crashing end, and he doesn't want that for his children and grand children.

    If you keep up the notion that taxation = theft, you are not worth talking you.
    If you keep posting strawmen like that, you're going to have to buy a new farm.

Page 18 of 39 FirstFirst ... 8161718192028 ... 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
  •