View Poll Results: How much do you care about balancing the federal budget (in the medium/long term)?

Voters
27. You may not vote on this poll
  • I am a Republican/conservative; low taxes are more important than a low deficit

    1 3.70%
  • I am a Republican/conservative; a low deficit is more important than low taxes

    10 37.04%
  • I am a Democrat/liberal; high spending is more important than a low deficit

    7 25.93%
  • I am a Democrat/liberal; a low deficit is more important than high spending

    9 33.33%
Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 114

Thread: How much do you care about balancing the US federal budget?

  1. #71
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,804

    Re: How much do you care about balancing the US federal budget?

    cutting spending is sustainable and will ultimately control the deficit. Jacking up taxes has no future in doing that and will soon (if not already) lead to lower revenues either directly or indirectly



  2. #72
    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: How much do you care about balancing the US federal budget?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    cutting spending is sustainable and will ultimately control the deficit.
    Assuming private sector spending can compensate. Which in the current short term is not applicable. Clinton benefited greatly from massive private spending that overcompensated for the reductions in welfare reform and defense spending. Currently however, corporations are sitting on over a trillion in cash and personal savings rates are relatively off the scale for America suggesting that private spending will not step in for public outflows. Therefore, public spending cuts will logically result in a higher deficit as unemployment rises reducing inflows and causing mandatory spending to increase.

    Jacking up taxes has no future in doing that and will soon (if not already) lead to lower revenues either directly or indirectly
    Better then defaulting.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  3. #73
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO 81506
    Last Seen
    05-30-11 @ 07:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,236

    Re: How much do you care about balancing the US federal budget?

    Quote Originally Posted by earthworm View Post
    The problem is caused by 20 plus years of trade imbalance, and of course, the wars....so many...so expensive and so wasteful. Yet, our "leaders" cannot see this!
    More like political survival gotcha games. The side in power has to look strong because the other side will damn them as weaklings if they don't. That's why we're still in Afghanistan and Iraq, when there is really nothing to gain by staying there, no real threats, only suppositions of what might happen if we leave.

    ricksfolly

  4. #74
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,804

    Re: How much do you care about balancing the US federal budget?

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Assuming private sector spending can compensate. Which in the current short term is not applicable. Clinton benefited greatly from massive private spending that overcompensated for the reductions in welfare reform and defense spending. Currently however, corporations are sitting on over a trillion in cash and personal savings rates are relatively off the scale for America suggesting that private spending will not step in for public outflows. Therefore, public spending cuts will logically result in a higher deficit as unemployment rises reducing inflows and causing mandatory spending to increase.


    Better then defaulting.
    not jacking up taxes is going to cause a "default"

    corporations are sitting on case because they are worried about the direction Obama might take. The top 2% already pay too much of the tax and adding to that without jacking up taxes on the majority of the voters will only signal to the majority of voters that deficit reduction (LOL-the dems have no interest in cutting spending that gains them votes and plenty of republicans are as bad as well) is not their burden and they won't push for it since they don't have to pay for it-at least not now



  5. #75
    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: How much do you care about balancing the US federal budget?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    not jacking up taxes is going to cause a "default"
    Not reducing the debt will. And at our level of debt, we will have to follow the Europeans in slashing spending and raising taxes.

    corporations are sitting on case because they are worried about the direction Obama might take.
    Not really. Corporations are sitting on money because there's no demand to expand. Even with pending legislation and taxes, corporations will expand their general operations if demand is there. Macy's will expand stores if there is additional demand regardless of such pending legislation. Intel will building another Module if processor demand is taking off independent of pending legislation. The problem is lack of consumer demand.

    The rest of your post is your standard classism. Not worth responding to.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  6. #76
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: How much do you care about balancing the US federal budget?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    not jacking up taxes is going to cause a "default"

    corporations are sitting on case because they are worried about the direction Obama might take. The top 2% already pay too much of the tax and adding to that without jacking up taxes on the majority of the voters will only signal to the majority of voters that deficit reduction (LOL-the dems have no interest in cutting spending that gains them votes and plenty of republicans are as bad as well) is not their burden and they won't push for it since they don't have to pay for it-at least not now
    Highter taxes = more power for the government.
    More spending = more power for the government.
    Lower taxes = less power for the government
    Less spending = less power for the government.
    Everything is thus explained.

  7. #77
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,804

    Re: How much do you care about balancing the US federal budget?

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Not reducing the debt will. And at our level of debt, we will have to follow the Europeans in slashing spending and raising taxes.



    Not really. Corporations are sitting on money because there's no demand to expand. Even with pending legislation and taxes, corporations will expand their general operations if demand is there. Macy's will expand stores if there is additional demand regardless of such pending legislation. Intel will building another Module if processor demand is taking off independent of pending legislation. The problem is lack of consumer demand.

    The rest of your post is your standard classism. Not worth responding to.
    classism is what motivated 98% of the posts demanding higher taxes on the rich. I will give you credit-you at least can make an honest argument in favor of tax hikes that MAY NOT be motivated by envy. That puts you in a very rare class.



  8. #78
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: How much do you care about balancing the US federal budget?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    classism is what motivated 98% of the posts demanding higher taxes on the rich.

    If it werent for classism, the Democrats would not exist.

  9. #79
    All Warm and Fuzzy
    FluffyNinja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Miss-uh-Sippie
    Last Seen
    10-21-17 @ 04:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    4,831

    Re: How much do you care about balancing the US federal budget?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    That is right. It can be easily fixed by raising the ceiling a small amount on income taxed for Soc.Sec. and raising the retirement age a year or two. I can promise you that Congress and thousands of economists already know this.
    So your answer is basically to raise the tax and make the retirees wait until......when.......age 80 or so? No adjustments need to be made to let's say, disability payments or SS disability qualifications, or any other aspects of the program? So we who ARE working just pay more, those who DID work just wait longer. Got it
    And according to your estimates, how long before this brings SS back into the "black?"
    "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." - Dr. Carl Sagan

  10. #80
    Professor
    Cassandra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Maine
    Last Seen
    11-02-17 @ 02:39 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,319

    Re: How much do you care about balancing the US federal budget?

    Quote Originally Posted by FluffyNinja View Post
    So your answer is basically to raise the tax and make the retirees wait until......when.......age 80 or so? No adjustments need to be made to let's say, disability payments or SS disability qualifications, or any other aspects of the program? So we who ARE working just pay more, those who DID work just wait longer. Got it
    And according to your estimates, how long before this brings SS back into the "black?"
    Boy this is really exasperating. I brought up S.Sec. to explain why it is not like medicare- it can easily be made self-funding. It has provided a surplus until recently. There are lots of ideas about how to fix it- expand the payroll tax, increase the retirement age a year, reduce benefits to high earners -or some combination- take your pick. Congress needs to get on with it.

    Now, moving on to Medicare- the real liability along with military spending. I would just like some Repub voter/poster to man up and explain to me how they think Repubs in Washington have any credibility in the deficit reduction front. They passed the Medicare Prescription Drug benefit w/o a mechanism to pay for it. They cry "death panels" at any suggestion that Medicare needs sensible rationing. They refuse to raise taxes. They always vote to throw money in the direction of military spending. I am just trying to figure out what is motivating people to vote Repub- a third party, I could understand but Repub? The party of big spenders??!

Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... 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
  •