Page 15 of 23 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 227

Thread: GOP makes $2.2 Trillion Counteroffer to Obama - includes revenue increases

  1. #141
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: GOP makes $2.2 Trillion Counteroffer to Obama - includes revenue increases

    Quote Originally Posted by RLWSNOOK View Post
    Now we are getting somewhere... we can talk about the issues now rather than blaming someone...

    I think there are a lot of individuals who should not be getting social security and medicare as they do not need it (they are well off enough to survive without it)...
    I have read about this idea from conservative think tanks as step 1 to getting the wealthy exempted from mandatory FICA contributions. I do not believe that would be beneficial for the middle class.

    I think we should have come home day 1 from Iraq and Afghanistan, not stayed on pretty much the Bush Timeline.
    You should have run for president then, because no viable candidate was proposing a quicker withdrawal than the one we chose.

    I think we should have and still should pay congressmen and senators (along with the president and VP) 1 dollar per year, like many CEO's in 2008-9 took...
    I think we should make the congress and president's benefit package the same as the worst benefits package in America.
    I disagree, then only the rich could afford to hold public office. If we are just talking wishes and not what politically feasible, I wish that Congress had limit of 8 years just like the president.

    I think we should stop subsidizing farmers to not plant farm land when we are seeing food prices rise.
    Are you referring to the efforts to control erosion of farm land?

    I think it's BS that the two wealthiest counties in the us Are suburbs of Washington DC. I think we should have a website that draws connections to lobbyist funds and votes that will help those lobbyists. Showing the congressmen, senators and presidents what they take and how they lean and how they vote...
    Then you are opposed to Citizen's United, and other corporate lobbyists influence as am I.

    I think we should look into the future rather than the past year to look how to pay for what we spent aka fiscal cliff. Something called plan for the future or budget...
    Wouldn't you need a functional Congress to do that?

    There are a lot of things that I would do differently than how Obama did them... Would I have run a deficit over what could be blamed on bush, very likely.... Would I continue to ignore our over 120 trillion in unfunded liabilities and add more liabilities to the mix... no way..
    I had hoped you would eventually get back to my question, of how you would realistically cut 3 trillion dollars in spending and how you would create the revenue to pay for what you now claim are "120 trillion in unfunded liabilities."?
    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

  2. #142
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,401

    Re: GOP makes $2.2 Trillion Counteroffer to Obama - includes revenue increases

    Quote Originally Posted by RLWSNOOK View Post
    Ha I love to debate politics but when it comes down to this stuff it's like common sense. The problem is there is so much money at stake keeping us from changing that it makes it very difficult..

    Hence my solution on a website... This doesn't sound like much but if you make a lobbyist register every point they are trying to lobby for, you link money given to politicians and you show how much that money effects them to the public you remove all power that money ever had...

    The thing that bothers me most is that there are so many wealthy people who come out of the Washington DC area, because there is so much money involved with this whole game... I'm glad it attracts brilliant minds, but we get into these battles, as I'm sure you've read these threads of chess matches of how we can make the other side look bad, rather than what are the real issues at hand and how can we solve them...

    As for wars and defense spending, if you notice few states ever ask to reduce defense spending, liberal states will say they are against wars but never vote to reduce defense spending, there is a reason for that... the defense spending goes to all states, provides industry in all states... It's something we need to discuss as a nation, are these jobs, jobs to create war ships and bombs and military equipment needed, or can we find a better use for these funds for these workers, for these factories... Imagine if we built things that we could sell around the world, and this money actually had some use other than to employ people it actually generated a return and was self sustaining... That's the kind of budget I'd be looking at... We need to find ways to transfer these factories...
    The defense industry is one of the worst "investments" as far as employment goes. As far as jobs created per dollar it is at the bottom of the list. It is also the worstoffender when it comes to graft and corruption. We spend entirely too much on defense and much of it is wasted.

  3. #143
    Student
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    CT
    Last Seen
    05-14-13 @ 09:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    271

    Re: GOP makes $2.2 Trillion Counteroffer to Obama - includes revenue increases

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    I have read about this idea from conservative think tanks as step 1 to getting the wealthy exempted from mandatory FICA contributions. I do not believe that would be beneficial for the middle class.



    You should have run for president then, because no viable candidate was proposing a quicker withdrawal than the one we chose.



    I disagree, then only the rich could afford to hold public office. If we are just talking wishes and not what politically feasible, I wish that Congress had limit of 8 years just like the president.



    Are you referring to the efforts to control erosion of farm land?



    Then you are opposed to Citizen's United, and other corporate lobbyists influence as am I.



    Wouldn't you need a functional Congress to do that?



    I had hoped you would eventually get back to my question, of how you would realistically cut 3 trillion dollars in spending and how you would create the revenue to pay for what you now claim are "120 trillion in unfunded liabilities."?
    Well you don't need to cut 3 trillion per year (that is the 4 year figure)...

    Another thing I didn't mention is I think we need to re-tool or re think our defense spending, it isn't going away, liberal states and conservative sates have defense contracts... we have tons of factories and employees who are building things we do not need however we don't want to get rid of them as they provide jobs... I'd look towards those, figure out what we really need and then transform the ones that are not needed (which my guess is a lot of them) into making a product that could be manufactured and sold. That would not only reduce our budget but would make part of the budget self sustaining to a point... (it would take much smarter individuals than myself to figure out what these factories or workers could make though and sell). 2013 defense spending budget is $672.9 billion... my guess is you could cut that in half if we brought our troops home, but still keep people working just making something else that is able to be sold. (ultimate goal would be for these to run 100% independent of the government)...

    This is the farm subsidy it is stuff like this that bothers me: Farm Program Pays $1.3 Billion to People Who Don't Farm
    I'm sure there are 100's of other programs just like this, that could be cut as well...

    One of the major drains to our deficit is also Social security, for a while it was bringing in more than it spent, in 2010 that changed.. Social security is an unfunded liability in that we have promised money to people we do not have. The money going in today goes to pay people today, there is no investing going on, and we have more money going out today than coming in today.. The difference btw Social security and Madoff is Madoff couldn't force people to pay and he couldn't pay people less than they put in. So we need to figure out a way to make this program an investment program one where we actually invest the money and get a return so the retirement savings is there for people. I think American's all know that this program is broke and likely are willing to take a haircut (some of the younger generations that is) and in return I'd expect the older generations to pitch in as well and take a haircut as well)... It was a program set up to pay out the last 2 years you were alive, now it pays out 20 some odd years. This isn't sustainable... Simple fixes need to happen or no one will have it in the future.

    Same thing goes for medicare we pay in 30 dollars and get out 100 dollars in benefits... I do not understand this program nearly as well, but we need to make it so 100 dollars goes in and 100 dollars comes out...

    Social security and Medicare are two of the largest problems with our national debt biggest expenditures Social security being 882.7 Billion and medicare and medicaid 940.9 billion in 2013. Again I do not understand the medical side of things nearly as well, but I do understand simple math, money coming in doesn't equal money going out... Health insurance though is a business one that the private sector has run for years, so I'm willing to bet there are solutions that solve this problem...

    So asking me how i'd get the budget balanced is very difficult... As I don't really have the budget... But these are all ideas, places that could be cut.

  4. #144
    Student
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    CT
    Last Seen
    05-14-13 @ 09:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    271

    Re: GOP makes $2.2 Trillion Counteroffer to Obama - includes revenue increases

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    The defense industry is one of the worst "investments" as far as employment goes. As far as jobs created per dollar it is at the bottom of the list. It is also the worstoffender when it comes to graft and corruption. We spend entirely too much on defense and much of it is wasted.
    Yet liberals and conservatives alike will not vote to reduce defense spending because a portion of that money goes to just about every state... why would you vote to reduce the amount of money given to and jobs in your state?? We will never reduce defense spending unless we figure out a way to re-tool or re-work our defense sector to produce something that can produce a product and sell it.

  5. #145
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: GOP makes $2.2 Trillion Counteroffer to Obama - includes revenue increases

    Quote Originally Posted by RLWSNOOK View Post
    Well you don't need to cut 3 trillion per year (that is the 4 year figure)...

    Another thing I didn't mention is I think we need to re-tool or re think our defense spending, it isn't going away, liberal states and conservative sates have defense contracts... we have tons of factories and employees who are building things we do not need however we don't want to get rid of them as they provide jobs... I'd look towards those, figure out what we really need and then transform the ones that are not needed (which my guess is a lot of them) into making a product that could be manufactured and sold. That would not only reduce our budget but would make part of the budget self sustaining to a point... (it would take much smarter individuals than myself to figure out what these factories or workers could make though and sell). 2013 defense spending budget is $672.9 billion... my guess is you could cut that in half if we brought our troops home, but still keep people working just making something else that is able to be sold. (ultimate goal would be for these to run 100% independent of the government)...
    I agree with you completely there, with the realization that it is just not going to happen until our society evolves more than it has to this point.

    This is the farm subsidy it is stuff like this that bothers me: Farm Program Pays $1.3 Billion to People Who Don't Farm
    I'm sure there are 100's of other programs just like this, that could be cut as well...
    While this is only $1 billiion a year, I agree that policies like this which was are not there to encourage a positive outcome should be eliminated. I wonder why this, or any suggestions to cuts spending was not included in the GOP counter offer to the President. Have you actually read the GOP proposal (4 page letter), and the complete lack of any specificity?


    One of the major drains to our deficit is also Social security, for a while it was bringing in more than it spent, in 2010 that changed.. Social security is an unfunded liability in that we have promised money to people we do not have. The money going in today goes to pay people today, there is no investing going on, and we have more money going out today than coming in today.. The difference btw Social security and Madoff is Madoff couldn't force people to pay and he couldn't pay people less than they put in. So we need to figure out a way to make this program an investment program one where we actually invest the money and get a return so the retirement savings is there for people. I think American's all know that this program is broke and likely are willing to take a haircut (some of the younger generations that is) and in return I'd expect the older generations to pitch in as well and take a haircut as well)... It was a program set up to pay out the last 2 years you were alive, now it pays out 20 some odd years. This isn't sustainable... Simple fixes need to happen or no one will have it in the future.

    "Social Security isn't responsible for the federal deficit. Just the opposite. Until last year Social Security took in more payroll taxes than it paid out in benefits. It lent the surpluses to the rest of the government.

    Now that Social Security has started to pay out more than it takes in, Social Security can simply collect what the rest of the government owes it. This will keep it fully solvent for the next 26 years. "

    "oday, though, the Social Security payroll tax hits only about 84 percent of total income.

    It went from 90 percent to 84 percent because a larger and larger portion of total income has gone to the top. In 1983, the richest 1 percent of Americans got 11.6 percent of total income. Today the top 1 percent takes in more than 20 percent.

    If we want to go back to 90 percent, the ceiling on income subject to the Social Security tax would need to be raised to $180,000.

    Presto. Social Security's long-term (beyond 26 years from now) problem would be solved."

    Robert Reich: Budget Baloney: Why Social Security Isn't a Problem for 26 Years, and the Best Way to Fix It Permanently

    Same thing goes for medicare we pay in 30 dollars and get out 100 dollars in benefits... I do not understand this program nearly as well, but we need to make it so 100 dollars goes in and 100 dollars comes out...
    Health care costs are the problem. Privatizing would only add to the cost for consumers.

    "It is generally agreed that this industry adds 15 to 20 percent to the cost of its premiums to pay for its business overhead and profits, whereas the administrative costs of Medicare are less than 5 percent. "
    Medicare and Private Health Insurance - NYTimes.com

    Social security and Medicare are two of the largest problems with our national debt biggest expenditures Social security being 882.7 Billion and medicare and medicaid 940.9 billion in 2013. Again I do not understand the medical side of things nearly as well, but I do understand simple math, money coming in doesn't equal money going out... Health insurance though is a business one that the private sector has run for years, so I'm willing to bet there are solutions that solve this problem...

    So asking me how i'd get the budget balanced is very difficult... As I don't really have the budget... But these are all ideas, places that could be cut.
    As shown, SS has an easy fix to make it solvent for the long term. in order to most effectively deal with our health care cost we will eventually have to up grade to UHC as every other industrialized nation has had to do to lower health care costs.
    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

  6. #146
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The darkside of the moon
    Last Seen
    05-24-14 @ 05:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,905
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: GOP makes $2.2 Trillion Counteroffer to Obama - includes revenue increases

    Quote Originally Posted by jonny5 View Post
    The top 5% are already paying for the majority of the countries spending. What would satisfy you? The rich paying 75% of taxes? 90%?
    Interestingly the last time the US was in really good shape those were the tax rates on the rich. Things started to go downhill when we started lowering the tax rates on the rich. I think it was kennedy who lowered the rate from the 90s to the 70s. 20 years later the tax rate on the rich is even lower and bingo we are in a recession that keeps coming back over and over again.

    The fact is that a higher rate will not cause the starvation of the wealthy. they wills till make much more money every year than any middle or poor class person. The fact is the so called redistribution of wealth creates consumer demand. trickle down economics is complete fail where push up economics raises the status of everyone including the rich. There is a reason for this. poor people who get money consume. That consumption makes demand. that demand means a need for more production and distribution. That means rich people hire or new businesses come about to fill the need. trickle down fails because the rich get the money, they don't have a reason to hire because there is no demand, and they keep the money. Less demand actually means it is harder on small businesses to get customers, and the large businesses own everything which makes monopolies. All of that is terrible for growth, and it causes massive stagnation because the one percent cannot create enough demand to drive business forward so they just end up buying weak companies and absorbing their wealth while spitting out nothing.

    But you spend the rest of your life trying to bribe the rich for a piece of their pie through tax cuts and corporate welfare. They have you scared and ignorant and that is just where they want you. They give you false promise of a great life if only you get that expensive college degree, and then they don't hire you. Really what is the chain? Oh if only you had a college degree, oh we want a 4 year degree, oh now it is a masters, oh don't you have a PhD, sorry we just hired that guy he is the nephew of the CEO sorry. You are really gullible, and what is sad is that the people who know are trying to protect you from your own ignorance and poor election choices. But what do I expect from a person in a state who went for rick scott and alan west. Yeah, there were a pair of honest and good people. One is involved in felony medicare fraud, and the other was kicked out of the military for being really stupid. Do you know how stupid you have to be to get kicked out of the military for being too stupid to be cannon fodder?

  7. #147
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The darkside of the moon
    Last Seen
    05-24-14 @ 05:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,905
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: GOP makes $2.2 Trillion Counteroffer to Obama - includes revenue increases

    Quote Originally Posted by RLWSNOOK View Post

    Another thing I didn't mention is I think we need to re-tool or re think our defense spending, it isn't going away, liberal states and conservative sates have defense contracts... we have tons of factories and employees who are building things we do not need however we don't want to get rid of them as they provide jobs... I'd look towards those, figure out what we really need and then transform the ones that are not needed (which my guess is a lot of them) into making a product that could be manufactured and sold. That would not only reduce our budget but would make part of the budget self sustaining to a point... (it would take much smarter individuals than myself to figure out what these factories or workers could make though and sell). 2013 defense spending budget is $672.9 billion... my guess is you could cut that in half if we brought our troops home, but still keep people working just making something else that is able to be sold. (ultimate goal would be for these to run 100% independent of the government)...
    Think some of these through for a change. Putting these people into manufacturing goods for the country to consume is a death sentence for their jobs. One of the reason defense costs so much is we spend a lot to keep americans employed. If these companies had to compete with foreign manufacturers like China without guaranteed military contracts they would have the same trouble every other American manufacturer has. The jobs would be outsourced for cheap labor and the americans would be out of work. this is because you don't need to pay american salaries around the world. Overinflated salaries do not work in a world market full of cheapo labor, and when automation is making manufacturing jobs require less and less human work hours.

    What needs to be done is we need jobs here at home. There is a solution. it is called infrastructure development. there are a ton of projects that would make jobs that have to be done here; A new electrical smart grid, medical care for all, high speed rail networks, and high speed data networks. All of those things create jobs here. If we wanted to we could even retool those manufacturing jobs and require the US make the needed items here at home to provide even more jobs. this is not just a matter of the jobs we hire directly for. More jobs means more demand for goods which means increases in every sector of our economy. republicans blew it for us when we had an opportunity to get government healthcare for everyone. Imagine all the jobs that would have been created to deal with the demand for medicine that would have increased by 10s of millions of customers. You would not just need doctors. You would need nurses, orderlies, janitors, receptionists, accountants, record keepers, computer professionals, computers, construction of new facilities, maintenance people, drivers to get cripples, homecare people, and so many others. That was jobs and all we had to do was to kill off the insurance company CEOs. Oh, but that is socialism and jobs are evil.
    Quote Originally Posted by RLWSNOOK View Post
    This is the farm subsidy it is stuff like this that bothers me: Farm Program Pays $1.3 Billion to People Who Don't Farm
    Another idea you don't think through. those subsidies are there for a reason. It is because the free market doesn't like farmers very much. You are a farmer. Every year you have bills and expenses, so every year you have to make money. You are like every american and you want the most you can get so you farm your land and sell your goods. Unfortunately we don't need all of those goods here in america. We have more farmland than we need. I know that sounds amazing, but it is true. So as every farmer wants to make the most they farm the most of their land creating a huge oversupply that drives their prices down. meanwhile they trash out their land which needs time to recover every few years from the crops. So we have 2 things this system creates. poor farmers who cannot get value from their crops, and a dustbowl.The reason these subsidies are there is because it actually helps farmers to survive and allows land to have time to recover it's nutrients for plants. Farming is a renewable resource, but it does take time to renew the land.

    Under a system of socialism we could use the land by need rather than greed and the farmers would not have to worry. So we create a sort of capitalist socialism which I admit does not work very well. There are certain systems which work much better under design and not by capitalism. Farming would seem to be one of them.

    Quote Originally Posted by RLWSNOOK View Post
    I'm sure there are 100's of other programs just like this, that could be cut as well...

    One of the major drains to our deficit is also Social security, for a while it was bringing in more than it spent, in 2010 that changed.. Social security is an unfunded liability in that we have promised money to people we do not have. The money going in today goes to pay people today, there is no investing going on, and we have more money going out today than coming in today.. The difference btw Social security and Madoff is Madoff couldn't force people to pay and he couldn't pay people less than they put in. So we need to figure out a way to make this program an investment program one where we actually invest the money and get a return so the retirement savings is there for people. I think American's all know that this program is broke and likely are willing to take a haircut (some of the younger generations that is) and in return I'd expect the older generations to pitch in as well and take a haircut as well)... It was a program set up to pay out the last 2 years you were alive, now it pays out 20 some odd years. This isn't sustainable... Simple fixes need to happen or no one will have it in the future.
    Again, you are not thinking of the reality. you have a system which is taking in money. Government and others see that income and want it, but it already has a purpose. one of the problems is that through things like investment and banking they figure out a way to get that money. They allow that money to be raided for other projects under the promise it will be paid back with interest. Sounds like a great idea on the surface to allow idle money to work for the economy and for SS to get more return than normal. the problem arises in that those loans and investments don't end up getting paid back. Social security should not be touched. privatising retirement has also failed because the way they do it is to form that future retirement money into other investments which are supposed to be good investments and as people found out they were selling them toxic loans the banks didn't want to get stuck owning.
    Quote Originally Posted by RLWSNOOK View Post
    Same thing goes for medicare we pay in 30 dollars and get out 100 dollars in benefits... I do not understand this program nearly as well, but we need to make it so 100 dollars goes in and 100 dollars comes out...
    the problem with that idea is the people who medicare covers are not employed. The money for that comes from the present workers to cover the retired people. You cannot get more money from people who live on a income based on a finite savings. What really needs to be done is a reform int he medical industry. medical costs in all areas are way out of control, and then you pile on an insurance company who is giving money out to shareholders and executives and the problem gets even worse.
    Quote Originally Posted by RLWSNOOK View Post
    Social security and Medicare are two of the largest problems with our national debt biggest expenditures Social security being 882.7 Billion and medicare and medicaid 940.9 billion in 2013. Again I do not understand the medical side of things nearly as well, but I do understand simple math, money coming in doesn't equal money going out... Health insurance though is a business one that the private sector has run for years, so I'm willing to bet there are solutions that solve this problem...
    private for profit health insurance companies are one of the huge problems with the medical industry. obama took a good step in forcing them to pay out most of their money to their customers. I think it should either be made into a government run and provided system, or at least toss it into the NFP category and remove investors and high paid corporate executives from it.

  8. #148
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: GOP makes $2.2 Trillion Counteroffer to Obama - includes revenue increases

    Quote Originally Posted by tererun View Post
    You know what would make that even better? if they slapped some tax increases onto the rich. Then we could actually have a real conservative budget instead of a pretend conservative budget which still spends lavishly and wastefully on the rich. hey, if we all have to buckle our belts and pay down our debt then the rich can tone down their spending too.
    So you believe that the money is going to be spent paying down the debt?
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  9. #149
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The darkside of the moon
    Last Seen
    05-24-14 @ 05:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,905
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: GOP makes $2.2 Trillion Counteroffer to Obama - includes revenue increases

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    So you believe that the money is going to be spent paying down the debt?
    Even if it isn't they can still pay with us.

  10. #150
    Educator Klown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-14-12 @ 04:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    982

    Re: GOP makes $2.2 Trillion Counteroffer to Obama - includes revenue increases

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Worth noting - that $800 Bn is the amount that the CBO said we would get from repealing the Bush tax cuts on upper income earners.
    The Federal Reserve is a private financial instrument

    Who owns it?

    Who controls it?

    Who prints money out of thin air and then is able to lend it out at whatever interest rate they want?

    Who is bailed out by the tax payer when they get too greedy and totally wreck the economy and financial systems with their money laundering rackets and derivative scams.

    Don't worry your poor little head with a lazy 800 billion

Page 15 of 23 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... 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
  •