Won't cut and paste--but quick load--
--Time to pay the piper
http://budget.house.gov/republicans/press/2007/pr20070322b.pdf
--Time to pay the piper
http://budget.house.gov/republicans/press/2007/pr20070322b.pdf
They are back
- Thread starter DOGS THAT BARK
- Start date
Love the source. I'll answer as if the source is completely accurate, just for fun.
DTB: I thought this plan would give you a boner since the middle and lower classes would have to pay more taxes.
Why do you think we would need billions of dollars in extra tax revenue? Hmmm. A war that costs billions might be a clue. Wars aren't free.
It may be the subject of an attack by morons, but the fact of the matter is our country is in debt.
If you want to make an argument against raising taxes that makes sense, try an angle that argues it is impossible to make a dent in it after the MOST FINANCIALLY IRRESPONSIBLE ADMINISTRATION in the history of the United States of America crushed any hopes of ever getting out of the hole.
DTB: I thought this plan would give you a boner since the middle and lower classes would have to pay more taxes.
Why do you think we would need billions of dollars in extra tax revenue? Hmmm. A war that costs billions might be a clue. Wars aren't free.
It may be the subject of an attack by morons, but the fact of the matter is our country is in debt.
If you want to make an argument against raising taxes that makes sense, try an angle that argues it is impossible to make a dent in it after the MOST FINANCIALLY IRRESPONSIBLE ADMINISTRATION in the history of the United States of America crushed any hopes of ever getting out of the hole.
Last edited:
There are two ways to solution Gman
Cut spending (smaller gov) increase taxes (bigger gov)
You have your preference and I have mine.
--however will side with you on source being being biased.
Cut spending (smaller gov) increase taxes (bigger gov)
You have your preference and I have mine.
--however will side with you on source being being biased.
Throw out the "bias" and party affiliations and what would you do? Cutting spending and raising taxes would probably be the most efficient and logical, at least from where I'm standing.
Or, in Wayne's World, the answer is to simply ignore the deficit because it doesn't matter, increase spending on some things that are important to him, cut spending on anything else, and most importantly, cut taxes at a time of funding a war on Iraq and the bigger war on terra that has no boundaries, limits, or end that can ever be implemented (Iraq).
Wayne's World, Wayne's World, Waaaaaaayyyyyyyyne's World...:Yep:
Wayne's World, Wayne's World, Waaaaaaayyyyyyyyne's World...:Yep:
hasn't the deficit been cut in half over the last few years ?
i think it will be a very big mistake by the democrats if taxes go up....
i think it will be a very big mistake by the democrats if taxes go up....
We need to throw old tax system out. Start with S Forbes/B Stein flat tax. Yes taxes on those at $350000 and up will go up. Biggest affect is on those at $500000 and up. Not hurting anyone who's doing very well. It's time to remember that wars cost money and you need to come up with it to pay for it. Deficit they say now cut in half last 4 yeas. I say not when you put 600 billion Iraq war price tag in the mix. And so to most financial people. And this statement cut spending. We can't cut enough to dig out of any hole this deep.
Just a quick point. Both Forbes and Stien are strong Republicans.
Just a quick point. Both Forbes and Stien are strong Republicans.
Last edited:
AR, I don't know where you got that, but I'd like to see it. I found countless references to the highest escalation in our National Debt on record under Bush. I'm sure there are plenty of sources to back that up - and dispute it.
Where I REALLY find fault with the thinking the debt is just a cost of doing business, and is no big deal, and we need to cut spending, etc., is that the third largest outlay of our tax dollar goes to pay on the interest to creditors on our national debt. Essentially, a third of our tax money pays for the debt. It dwarfs what we spend on things like education, transportation, etc. Cut that, and we have plenty of extra money to put in plenty of areas - defense and homeland security, for example. Conservatives SCREAM about cutting taxes, and this is one of the most sensible ways that could actually pay for THAT. It makes no sense to me. It's all connected, and conservatives take no responsibility for this. You and I can't afford to pay 1/3 of our incomes to pay for debt, and hope to make any headway.
Where I REALLY find fault with the thinking the debt is just a cost of doing business, and is no big deal, and we need to cut spending, etc., is that the third largest outlay of our tax dollar goes to pay on the interest to creditors on our national debt. Essentially, a third of our tax money pays for the debt. It dwarfs what we spend on things like education, transportation, etc. Cut that, and we have plenty of extra money to put in plenty of areas - defense and homeland security, for example. Conservatives SCREAM about cutting taxes, and this is one of the most sensible ways that could actually pay for THAT. It makes no sense to me. It's all connected, and conservatives take no responsibility for this. You and I can't afford to pay 1/3 of our incomes to pay for debt, and hope to make any headway.
Budget Deficit vs. National Debt
"Suppose you want to spend more money this month than your income. This situation is called a "budget deficit". So you borrow. The amount you borrowed (and now owe) is called your debt. You have to pay interest on your debt. If next month you don't have enough money to cover your spending (another deficit), you must borrow some more, and you'll still have to pay the interest on the loan. If you have a deficit every month, you keep borrowing and your debt grows. Soon the interest payment on your loan is bigger than any other item in your budget. Eventually, all you can do is pay the interest payment, and you don't have any money left over for anything else. This situation is known as bankruptcy."
so yeah, he added 1/2 as much to the debt (that he doubled in 6 years) as his accountants expected to add. I am not very impressed. Its the overall debt that is killing us.
"In Fiscal Year 2006, the U. S. Government spent $406 Billion of your money on interest payments* to the holders of the National Debt. Compare that to NASA at $15 Billion, Education at $61 Billion, and Department of Transportation at $56 Billion."
"Suppose you want to spend more money this month than your income. This situation is called a "budget deficit". So you borrow. The amount you borrowed (and now owe) is called your debt. You have to pay interest on your debt. If next month you don't have enough money to cover your spending (another deficit), you must borrow some more, and you'll still have to pay the interest on the loan. If you have a deficit every month, you keep borrowing and your debt grows. Soon the interest payment on your loan is bigger than any other item in your budget. Eventually, all you can do is pay the interest payment, and you don't have any money left over for anything else. This situation is known as bankruptcy."
so yeah, he added 1/2 as much to the debt (that he doubled in 6 years) as his accountants expected to add. I am not very impressed. Its the overall debt that is killing us.
"In Fiscal Year 2006, the U. S. Government spent $406 Billion of your money on interest payments* to the holders of the National Debt. Compare that to NASA at $15 Billion, Education at $61 Billion, and Department of Transportation at $56 Billion."
Hmmm Gman and here I thought you were going to give us some facts (instead of opinion)on where the #'s were incorrect.
I would be interested--as I am with you on part of source showing things in worst light--would be interesting to see what you find so we can devise happy medium.
I have agreed in past on spending by this admin and hopefully election results will get them back to what got them here--their contract with america--however I think that may be impossibily with any poltician.
However I believe I know the worser of evils--primarily because one party lean tward socialism and their voting block being all for it-- for obvious reasons--by the way did you know Hilliary promised universal healthcare if elected
--if you think intermittant cost of wars is prohibited--consider escalating non ending expenses--
---then consider who's going to pay for it--won't be my generation--baby boomers gonna kick back on your gravy train and let you foot the bills--for as long as you can
Is hard for me to compredend how people are for higher taxes--but then again matbe not----
Give and Take
Taxpayers in high-income households get the least benefit from their tax dollars ? while people in the lowest-income bracket get an eight-to-one windfall.
The nonpartisan "Tax Foundation" says households making less than $23,730 per year get $8.21 back for every dollar paid in taxes. Middle-income households ? around $42,000 to $65,000 ? receive $1.30 for each tax dollar. And households earning more than $99,500 per year get back just 41 cents per tax dollar.
The money comes in the form of benefits such as Social Security and Medicare ? and services such as police protection and education.
I would be interested--as I am with you on part of source showing things in worst light--would be interesting to see what you find so we can devise happy medium.
I have agreed in past on spending by this admin and hopefully election results will get them back to what got them here--their contract with america--however I think that may be impossibily with any poltician.
However I believe I know the worser of evils--primarily because one party lean tward socialism and their voting block being all for it-- for obvious reasons--by the way did you know Hilliary promised universal healthcare if elected
--if you think intermittant cost of wars is prohibited--consider escalating non ending expenses--
---then consider who's going to pay for it--won't be my generation--baby boomers gonna kick back on your gravy train and let you foot the bills--for as long as you can
Is hard for me to compredend how people are for higher taxes--but then again matbe not----
Give and Take
Taxpayers in high-income households get the least benefit from their tax dollars ? while people in the lowest-income bracket get an eight-to-one windfall.
The nonpartisan "Tax Foundation" says households making less than $23,730 per year get $8.21 back for every dollar paid in taxes. Middle-income households ? around $42,000 to $65,000 ? receive $1.30 for each tax dollar. And households earning more than $99,500 per year get back just 41 cents per tax dollar.
The money comes in the form of benefits such as Social Security and Medicare ? and services such as police protection and education.
Last edited:
Only DTB would actually use the word "windfall" when describing a family earning under $23,000 in a year. ....Yeah, those greedy families living at the poverty line just aren't satisfied until they take everything, are they?:142smilie
Point was to show why many would befor taxes increase and could equate it to a raise.--
Been dealing with public and business's for 24 years now and have yet to see the 1st taxpayer that was for an increase in taxes--yet am amazed at all the cyber clan with their prosperous cyber jobs that are for tax increase.
I find tax threads quite revealing--Show me a person for taxes increases and you will be looking at person who in all probabilty pays little or no taxes in "the real world" and there are 42.5 million of them in the U.S.
Been dealing with public and business's for 24 years now and have yet to see the 1st taxpayer that was for an increase in taxes--yet am amazed at all the cyber clan with their prosperous cyber jobs that are for tax increase.
I find tax threads quite revealing--Show me a person for taxes increases and you will be looking at person who in all probabilty pays little or no taxes in "the real world" and there are 42.5 million of them in the U.S.
Point was to show why many would befor taxes increase and could equate it to a raise.--
Been dealing with public and business's for 24 years now and have yet to see the 1st taxpayer that was for an increase in taxes--yet am amazed at all the cyber clan with their prosperous cyber jobs that are for tax increase.
I find tax threads quite revealing--Show me a person for taxes increases and you will be looking at person who in all probabilty pays little or no taxes in "the real world" and there are 42.5 million of them in the U.S.
i like to know who you think is for higher taxes? I do know somebody in here who is for higher deficits and debt tho.
Point was to show why many would befor taxes increase and could equate it to a raise.--
Been dealing with public and business's for 24 years now and have yet to see the 1st taxpayer that was for an increase in taxes--yet am amazed at all the cyber clan with their prosperous cyber jobs that are for tax increase.
I find tax threads quite revealing--Show me a person for taxes increases and you will be looking at person who in all probabilty pays little or no taxes in "the real world" and there are 42.5 million of them in the U.S.
Any educated person would be willing to pay more taxes if the alternative is a complete economic collapse. I believe the collapse is inevitable at the current rate and am willing to help remedy the issue. That probably makes me more patriotic than yourself and I guess I could start saying that you hate our freedom and America, but I don't wish to stoop to your tactics. Anyone that argues against raising taxes is selfish, unrealistic, and arguably unpatriotic.
Smurph What I meant by cyber- is anonomous that can be and do anything to verify the unverifiable--
Your exempt from that class--we know you
------------------------------------------
"Any educated person would be willing to pay more taxes if the alternative is a complete economic collapse."
"Anyone that argues against raising taxes is selfish, unrealistic, and arguably unpatriotic."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Believe a few people back in 1776 would disagree
Then I'll assume all these educated patriotic people you allign with have surely been sending in extra on their taxes the past years as proof of commitment--right!
--and haven't heard much from your party of late on the tax cut- collapsing econmy--hurting jobs ect--thought you would have learned your lesson also.
--did you ever consider looking at other socialist economies and seeing how they stack up--do the educated folk think that would be relevent.
Then riddle me this--how come your educated voting block have your largest % of demographical voters in the under $15,000 income (63%) and we won't get into your 90% catagories.
I think I'll just have to stick with my uneducated logical-57 year experience of never hearing a person that pays taxes wanting to pay more--most believe they can don't need taxes and the gov to take care them like the educated.
Your exempt from that class--we know you
------------------------------------------
"Any educated person would be willing to pay more taxes if the alternative is a complete economic collapse."
"Anyone that argues against raising taxes is selfish, unrealistic, and arguably unpatriotic."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Believe a few people back in 1776 would disagree
Then I'll assume all these educated patriotic people you allign with have surely been sending in extra on their taxes the past years as proof of commitment--right!
--and haven't heard much from your party of late on the tax cut- collapsing econmy--hurting jobs ect--thought you would have learned your lesson also.
--did you ever consider looking at other socialist economies and seeing how they stack up--do the educated folk think that would be relevent.
Then riddle me this--how come your educated voting block have your largest % of demographical voters in the under $15,000 income (63%) and we won't get into your 90% catagories.
I think I'll just have to stick with my uneducated logical-57 year experience of never hearing a person that pays taxes wanting to pay more--most believe they can don't need taxes and the gov to take care them like the educated.
Believe a few people back in 1776 would disagree
Then I'll assume all these educated patriotic people you allign with have surely been sending in extra on their taxes the past years as proof of commitment--right!
--and haven't heard much from your party of late on the tax cut- collapsing econmy--hurting jobs ect--thought you would have learned your lesson also.
--did you ever consider looking at other socialist economies and seeing how they stack up--do the educated folk think that would be relevent.
Then riddle me this--how come your educated voting block have your largest % of demographical voters in the under $15,000 income (63%) and we won't get into your 90% catagories.
I think I'll just have to stick with my uneducated logical-57 year experience of never hearing a person that pays taxes wanting to pay more--most believe they can don't need taxes and the gov to take care them like the educated.
Are you comparing creating a new government to one that is a financial disaster? Do you think the guys from 1776 would agree with Faith Based Initiatives? I'm sure they would be very impressed by the war mongering, financial instability, and the merging of church and state.
I'll start sending in "extra" money on my taxes when Bush's daughters are deployed to Iraq for duty. Until then, I will support an increase in taxes and pay what I owe.
My party? How many times do I have to say that I'm not a Democrat before it sinks in? In a two party system, I can despise one and still not be a member of the other. That might be a concept too advanced for you to comprehend, but give it a shot.
When did we become a socialist country? Increasing taxes to help alleviate the debt makes us a socialist country? To answer your question, checking out "other" socialist countries is irrelevant.
Here you go riddler: Once again, I'm liberal, not a Democrat.
You are a lamb. You'll follow along with the rest of the selfish "not my problem" crowd until we reach a complete financial crisis. Your "logical" mind is isn't very logical is it when you consider that the government's income comes from taxes and our debt is spiralling out of control, but you don't think we need to raise taxes. Logical indeed.
Gmr, im sure you are a liberal and a conservative like 99 percent of the country. The neocon's play the word game for the braindead to fall for. Somehow they made liberal a dirty word and the clueless have fallen for it. We got guys like Weasal who fall for these pretty worded bills like the Patriot Act. Now we find another provision in this sham of a bill that somehow protects what Gonzales has pulled off. What this has to do with terrorism i have no idea but somehow the sneaks got in the bill and the Dems fell for it.
I'm afraid you continue to lose me.:com:Smurph What I meant by cyber- is anonomous that can be and do anything to verify the unverifiable--
Your exempt from that class--we know you
------------------------------------------
)
Wait, am I exempt from the anonymous or the verifiables? Which cyber class am I?
