• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Key republican bolts from debt ceiling talks

donsutherland1 said:
Americans for Tax Reform (the organization for which many Republicans signed onto a pledge not to raise taxes) isn't concerned strictly with tax rate increases. By that definition, the closure of loopholes or elimination of deductions/preferences/credits that would have a net impact of increased revenue, even as tax rates would not be changed, would constitute a "tax hike" that is opposed by those who signed the pledge.

ATR's Pledge States (the underlining is mine in order to better illustrate the issue in contention):

I, _____, pledge to the taxpayers of the (____district of the) state of ______ and to the American people that I will: ONE, oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rate for individuals and business; and TWO, oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.
Click to expand...

Yup... I heard about this on TV this morning. sad really. No deal is going to be brokered here if the GOP doesn't even take one hit here. For those of you in the GOP here, we democrats have already done enough We have agreed to cut beyond what we want to and you know democrats do not like cutting. So what does the GOP do? Where is what they agree to in this?
 
Gargantuan said:
Because Biden has been involved in every single deficit reduction bill for the past 35 years he's been a senator.

And again, this isn't about raising taxes. It's about closing loopholes. Stop being stupid & read the topic.
Click to expand...

Moderator's Warning:
Careful with the personal attacks.
 
Gargantuan said:
It's not taxing industry. It's getting rid of subsidies and loopholes, which are something that a real fiscal conservative would be opposed to - because in reality that's picking winners and losers. Subsidize one corporation but let the other out in the dust - leave them all to do what they need to do without government aid, and without getting gigantic tax receipts from Uncle Sam and not paying anything.
Click to expand...

Liberals are ALL about picking winners and losers....as long as they get to pick. Again, will this reduce unemployment, stop avoiding the NO answer that you are forced to give me. Grow a pair.
 
American said:
Liberals are ALL about picking winners and losers....as long as they get to pick. Again, will this reduce unemployment, stop avoiding the NO answer that you are forced to give me. Grow a pair.
Click to expand...

I'm working on a posting showing subsidies and the makeup of the Congresses and the Executive to show our friend here that it is the liberals who are the pickers of winners and losers.

Example: 1933 Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 - House: Dems - 311 Reps - 117 Farm-Labor - 5. Senate: Dems - 60 GOP - 35 Farm-Labor - 1 Executive - FDR.

Agricultural policy of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
73rd United States Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Don't see how that's relevant. You are simply dodging the issue of this discussion. I wasn't around in 1933 unfortunately.
 
Gargantuan said:
Don't see how that's relevant. You are simply dodging the issue of this discussion. I wasn't around in 1933 unfortunately.
Click to expand...

Not sure why you don't see the relevance. You made a brash, incorrect statement about Republicans picking winners and losers and I am just showing the incorrectness of your position. Previously, I made a comment about the incorrectness of your position, but I must have been too calm in my response as you did not reply. So, I thought I would try to be a tad more confrontational in my approach.

I just gave an example, even if it was an early example. There are many more examples and many of them are far more current. Just because an event was before your time, does that mean it is not representative of a truth? After all, for a person born yesterday, wouldn't events of even five years ago be too old? I thought I would go back to the beginning of the subsidy era. Isn't it best to go back to the beginning in order to better understand today?
 
Could somebody send me a crow to eat? I have misread a posting by Gargantuan and have posted material refuting what I thought he had said. When I reread the posting a minute ago, I found that I was in error.

Gargantuan, I apologize. I now see why you did not find my comments relevant. My mistake. I should have read more carefully.

Just to be sure on what you were saying, are you in favor of getting rid of all subsidies and tax loopholes for all companies? Do you consider deductions as subsidies?

Incidentally, I agree with you on doing away with tax loopholes and subsidies; however, I bet we disagree when I tell you I would end all taxation on companies.
 
Gargantuan said:
Because Biden has been involved in every single deficit reduction bill for the past 35 years he's been a senator.

And again, this isn't about raising taxes. It's about closing loopholes. Stop being stupid & read the topic.
Click to expand...

I guess you got 'baited' into that personal attack, huh :rolleyes:

In any case... after claiming no one would see a single dime of increased taxes during his presidency, guess what Obama's solution for fixing the deficit is...

yup.

tax increases.

Obama: Republican Leaders Must Bend on Taxes - NYTimes.com
 
For the fourteen thousandth time now, tax increases do not simply mean increase in tax rates. Anything that would increase revenue is a tax increase.
 
Gargantuan said:
Debt ceiling: Key Republican bolts debt ceiling talks - Jun. 23, 2011



I'm sorry but this is absolutely ridiculous. Democrats control the senate and the White House. That's 2/3. You guys control 1. We already have agreed to cutting medicare and other entitlements, and you won't even give us tax increases in the form of cutting loopholes and subsidies? Is the GOP kidding?
Click to expand...

You don't need any tax increases, simply cut the hundreds of billions of of dollars in waste, fraud and abuse. I simply can't understand anyone making a good case for raising taxes when the Waste, Fraud and Abuse in Government continues at that level. It makes no sense at all.
 
Waste fraud and abuse is nothing in the long term. Medicare/medicaid/social security will dig us into a ditch no matter if we cut discretionary spending to 1%.
 
Gargantuan said:
Waste fraud and abuse is nothing in the long term. Medicare/medicaid/social security will dig us into a ditch no matter if we cut discretionary spending to 1%.
Click to expand...

Go to the link in my post. Also there is $60 to $90 billion dollars in Maedicare fraud every year. If they can't get a handle on that kind of money going right down the rat hole, they don't need any more money.
 
Prof. Peabody said:
Go to the link in my post. Also there is $60 to $90 billion dollars in Maedicare fraud every year. If they can't get a handle on that kind of money going right down the rat hole, they don't need any more money.
Click to expand...

right......the very corporations and individuals that no one wants to raise taxes on defraud medicare. ain't america grand?
 
liblady said:
right......the very corporations and individuals that no one wants to raise taxes on defraud medicare. ain't america grand?
Click to expand...

Oh, you think that only corps. and the "evil rich" defraud these programs? that's a hoot!


j-mac
 
Gargantuan said:
For the fourteen thousandth time now, tax increases do not simply mean increase in tax rates. Anything that would increase revenue is a tax increase.
Click to expand...

So not spending as much is a tax increase huh?
 
liblady said:
right......the very corporations and individuals that no one wants to raise taxes on defraud medicare. ain't america grand?
Click to expand...

Then put a stop to it! How and can resonable person expect to ask others to pay more money in taxes when hundreds of billions of tax dollars disappear down the rathole of fraud and abuse? Please tell that to the American taxpayer.

"Well we understand we are wasting hundreds of Billions of dollars on waste, fraud and abuse, but we just don't have enough anymore. We need more money from YOU while we ignore the waste." Please take that to the American taxpayer in this economic climate.
 
Unfortunately billions of dollars of waste is not the solution to this problem. Do you have a point that waste and stupid programs need to be cut? Sure. But the idea that they actually make up a big percentage of our deficit woes is laughable. Entitlements need to be seriously reformed. They are growing out of control and they are unsustainable in their current form. Cutting waste could be a big part of taking care of that problem, but it can't be the sole solution. I heard a democratic congresswoman talking on Elliot Spitzer's program a few weeks ago and she said that medicare can become solvent if you cut waste. Is she kidding? Even Spitzer said that's retarded.
 
Gargantuan said:
Unfortunately billions of dollars of waste is not the solution to this problem. Do you have a point that waste and stupid programs need to be cut? Sure. But the idea that they actually make up a big percentage of our deficit woes is laughable. Entitlements need to be seriously reformed. They are growing out of control and they are unsustainable in their current form. Cutting waste could be a big part of taking care of that problem, but it can't be the sole solution. I heard a democratic congresswoman talking on Elliot Spitzer's program a few weeks ago and she said that medicare can become solvent if you cut waste. Is she kidding? Even Spitzer said that's retarded.
Click to expand...

The very Idea we should have to pay more taxes while the waste, fraud and abuse goes on is laughable. Please campaign on THAT platform in Nov 2012, you'll get the same results you got in 2010.
 
apdst said:
This year, me and my company made 40 grand in profit, after deductions. And, you want me to pay more?

yeah! That's going to encourage small business growth.

BTW, what was your tax bill for 2010?
Click to expand...

Did you only make 40k this year? Is that what you took home? If thats the case, your company is NOT PROFITABLE. Unless you aren't working for your own company.
 
xpiher said:
Did you only make 40k this year? Is that what you took home? If thats the case, your company is NOT PROFITABLE. Unless you aren't working for your own company.
Click to expand...
LOL. Are you and She-wolf one and the same? If he made 40K profit he is profitable. Now if he had lost 40K then Shewolf would argue he was profitable...Higher learning, dontcha know?
 
Misterveritis said:
LOL. Are you and She-wolf one and the same? If he made 40K profit he is profitable. Now if he had lost 40K then Shewolf would argue he was profitable...Higher learning, dontcha know?
Click to expand...

Profit is the money left over after everything is paid, including salaries. If he works for his own company and all the money he makes is all the profit his company earns, and he only makes 40k/year, then his company is not profitable. It basically breaks even.

If he does not work for his own company, instead has a manager who is paid salary, and after all is paid out 40k is left which he pockets, then his company is profitable.

I'm trying to determine which one it is.
 
Gargantuan said:
Waste fraud and abuse is nothing in the long term. Medicare/medicaid/social security will dig us into a ditch no matter if we cut discretionary spending to 1%.
Click to expand...

You mean Obamacare will
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom