results in--
- Thread starter DOGS THAT BARK
- Start date
Can someone explain to me where the taxes collected on gasoline goes? I was always under the assumption it went to infrastructure. This is huge amounts of money. We should have the best roads and bridges in the world with this type of cash comin in. Where is that money going?
................................................................
I heard on the radio that the oil companies make
7 cents a gallon and the US Gov collects .38 per gallon
It comes out to about 40 billion I think
They put it in the same place they used our Soc Sec money that they stole
Sponge:
As far as I know, the gas tax is supposed to go to roads, etc.
Is it actually going there? I have no idea and what KOD says is correct - same place the SS $ is spent.
As I mentioned in other threads.....
US citizen is taxed more than enough for there to be no deficit. it is how the money is allocated that is wrong.
Cutting spending will not get the US out of the hole we are in. There has to be a paradigm shift in the way business is done in Washington. Until the umbilical cord between banks and politicians is cut, that will not happen.
As far as I know, the gas tax is supposed to go to roads, etc.
Is it actually going there? I have no idea and what KOD says is correct - same place the SS $ is spent.
As I mentioned in other threads.....
US citizen is taxed more than enough for there to be no deficit. it is how the money is allocated that is wrong.
Cutting spending will not get the US out of the hole we are in. There has to be a paradigm shift in the way business is done in Washington. Until the umbilical cord between banks and politicians is cut, that will not happen.
............................................................
Bingo
Its a pity we all must have the feeling that there is probably nothing the fawk we can do about their spending and political meandering. Its too entrenched in both partys.
There is too much power and money at stake for them to even think about changing it.
If we started gathering to object , they would problaby shoot us down just like every goverment in the world holding on to their wealth and power.
Remember Kent State. No one would believe that would have happened.
Noticing this, I'm wondering how you felt/feel about the Citizen's United ruling allowing corporations unlimited access to the political process moving forward. Do you think that was a positive step for democracy, and was a correct ruling for the common voter? Serious question, I'm not attacking here.
In some ways I can agree we could have let the banks and insurers fail because of their own actions. However, I cannot think that it would have been a good thing for our country and the world economy - and I do think it could have been disastrous in many ways. Who the Hell knows what would have happened? There was and is plenty to suggest much of the economy and other economies might not have recovered at all, and it could have caused much worse conditions for everyone.
The economy is still in rough shape with many bad things being prevented. It has caused (in my opinion) a higher unemployment rate that I think will never go back to 4 or 5% - as companies are learning to become more streamlined, relying on fewer employees and outsourcing to other nations. I don't pretend to know what the numbers could have been, but I don't think disaster would have been positive for anyone.
So - IMHO, we should have let all the banks on Wall Street and around the world fail and then prosecuted them for their criminal activity. Perhaps then, when it was being rebuilt, a new and real system of checks and balances in the financial system could have emerged so that risk was rewarded but losses had consequences as well.[/QUOTE]
Agree 100%
Agree 100%
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
Here's a breakdown of most of the Stimulus Funding:
Energy Programs: $58 billion
$32 billion: Fund a smart electricity grid
$20 billion-plus: Renewable energy tax cuts and a tax credit for research on energy efficiency and clean energy, plus a multiyear extension of the green energy production tax credit
$6 billion: Weatherize modest-income homes
Tax Cuts: $258 billion
?A payroll tax credit of $500 a person, or $1,000 for married couples. By targeting payroll taxes, the credit would benefit low-income working families who have payroll taxes withheld from their paychecks but don't earn enough to pay income taxes, says Tom Ochsenschlager, vice president of taxation for the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
?A $2,500 tax credit for the first four years of higher education. This credit would replace the current lineup of education tax credits and deductions, such as the Hope and Lifetime Learning Credits.
?A $7,500 first-time home buyer's credit. Last year, Congress approved a $7,500 credit for first-time home buyers, but there's a catch: The money has to be repaid in equal installments over 15 years, starting in the second year after the home is purchased.
The stimulus bill would eliminate the repayment requirement, but the home would have to be purchased by July 1.
Education: $141.6 billion
$62 billion: To school districts through various programs, including $21 billion for school modernization
$39 billion: State aid to school districts and public colleges and universities to prevent cutbacks to key services
$15.6 billion: To states for hitting performance measures
$25 billion: Fund to help states to prevent layoffs of "critical" public employees, including teachers
Infrastructure: $90 billion
$30 billion: Highway construction
$10 billion: Rail and transit projects
$31 billion: Modernize federal and other public buildings for long-term energy savings
$19 billion: Water projects
Aid to the Poor and Unemployed: $102 billion
$43 billion: Increased unemployment benefits and job training
$39 billion: Health insurance and Medicaid coverage for the unemployed
$20 billion: Increase in food-stamp benefit by 13%
Healthcare: $111.1 billion
$87 billion: Help states pay for Medicaid, which provides health care for low-income residents
$20 billion: Computerize health records to prevent medical mistakes
$4.1 billion: Provide preventive care and to evaluate the most effective medical treatments
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
Here's a breakdown of most of the Stimulus Funding:
Energy Programs: $58 billion
$32 billion: Fund a smart electricity grid
$20 billion-plus: Renewable energy tax cuts and a tax credit for research on energy efficiency and clean energy, plus a multiyear extension of the green energy production tax credit
$6 billion: Weatherize modest-income homes
Tax Cuts: $258 billion
?A payroll tax credit of $500 a person, or $1,000 for married couples. By targeting payroll taxes, the credit would benefit low-income working families who have payroll taxes withheld from their paychecks but don't earn enough to pay income taxes, says Tom Ochsenschlager, vice president of taxation for the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
?A $2,500 tax credit for the first four years of higher education. This credit would replace the current lineup of education tax credits and deductions, such as the Hope and Lifetime Learning Credits.
?A $7,500 first-time home buyer's credit. Last year, Congress approved a $7,500 credit for first-time home buyers, but there's a catch: The money has to be repaid in equal installments over 15 years, starting in the second year after the home is purchased.
The stimulus bill would eliminate the repayment requirement, but the home would have to be purchased by July 1.
Education: $141.6 billion
$62 billion: To school districts through various programs, including $21 billion for school modernization
$39 billion: State aid to school districts and public colleges and universities to prevent cutbacks to key services
$15.6 billion: To states for hitting performance measures
$25 billion: Fund to help states to prevent layoffs of "critical" public employees, including teachers
Infrastructure: $90 billion
$30 billion: Highway construction
$10 billion: Rail and transit projects
$31 billion: Modernize federal and other public buildings for long-term energy savings
$19 billion: Water projects
Aid to the Poor and Unemployed: $102 billion
$43 billion: Increased unemployment benefits and job training
$39 billion: Health insurance and Medicaid coverage for the unemployed
$20 billion: Increase in food-stamp benefit by 13%
Healthcare: $111.1 billion
$87 billion: Help states pay for Medicaid, which provides health care for low-income residents
$20 billion: Computerize health records to prevent medical mistakes
$4.1 billion: Provide preventive care and to evaluate the most effective medical treatments
So, an appropriate examination would be to go state by state with the money they received, and what those in each state CHOSE to do with the money - IF - it went for different things. Guessing the governors and legislators were pretty selective in what THEY wanted the money moved from and to.
Another thing to look at would be republican governors and legislators that supposedly wanted to strongly refuse government funding for different things the past few years, then showed up to take credit for the projects that got done because of it. Not sure which would be a longer list.
I do know Pawlenty was a master at moving money appropriated (or already collected) for one department in Minnesota and moving to other areas AFTER budgets were done to make his numbers look better or to fund projects he wanted to see get done. I would be very concerned about him getting control of a federal budget for those reasons. I see he's now flip-flopping on his environmental stances he was so proud of when campaigning and acting as governor. Not to mention his stance on importing drugs from Canada and state negotiating for lower drug prices. Just wait til some of the conservatives get a good look at some of the things he did over the years. Not saying I personally don't agree with all of it (lower prices on drugs, state/federal negotiations for lower prices, etc.). But I know some won't like it - or didn't when a democrat was talking about it.
Another thing to look at would be republican governors and legislators that supposedly wanted to strongly refuse government funding for different things the past few years, then showed up to take credit for the projects that got done because of it. Not sure which would be a longer list.
I do know Pawlenty was a master at moving money appropriated (or already collected) for one department in Minnesota and moving to other areas AFTER budgets were done to make his numbers look better or to fund projects he wanted to see get done. I would be very concerned about him getting control of a federal budget for those reasons. I see he's now flip-flopping on his environmental stances he was so proud of when campaigning and acting as governor. Not to mention his stance on importing drugs from Canada and state negotiating for lower drug prices. Just wait til some of the conservatives get a good look at some of the things he did over the years. Not saying I personally don't agree with all of it (lower prices on drugs, state/federal negotiations for lower prices, etc.). But I know some won't like it - or didn't when a democrat was talking about it.
Chadman:
I am deadset against money in politics. It has ruined this country. Be it by banks or corporations or unions.
Chadman:
Had "Wall Street' failed - the ripple effect would have been global. Global Depression no doubt.
However, I think the 'cure' has been worse and has not fixed the patient. They have effectively managed to put a band-aid on a bullet wound, and have re-enriched a certain class of people while Joe Commoner is still struggling.
I could get into the macro-economic factors but that would get boring.
IMHO, the US economy is not on sound footing and with all the black swans circling - European debt crisis, the melt downs in N. Africa and the Middle east, municipal debt worries in the US, the federal deficit - once one domino goes, they will all go and it will be much worse than the financial crisis in 2008. They could manage to prop this up until 2016 or so but the wheels WILL fall off.
I am deadset against money in politics. It has ruined this country. Be it by banks or corporations or unions.
Chadman:
Had "Wall Street' failed - the ripple effect would have been global. Global Depression no doubt.
However, I think the 'cure' has been worse and has not fixed the patient. They have effectively managed to put a band-aid on a bullet wound, and have re-enriched a certain class of people while Joe Commoner is still struggling.
I could get into the macro-economic factors but that would get boring.
IMHO, the US economy is not on sound footing and with all the black swans circling - European debt crisis, the melt downs in N. Africa and the Middle east, municipal debt worries in the US, the federal deficit - once one domino goes, they will all go and it will be much worse than the financial crisis in 2008. They could manage to prop this up until 2016 or so but the wheels WILL fall off.
