2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Sorry, this argument doesn't fly. Given the debt and the deficit we've already spent the money. I've said it a thousand times before I'll say it again. Cut something legitimately that isn't funded through it's own tax (payroll taxes) and we can talk. Until then you're just raiding from Social Security and Medicare to pay for stuff that nobody wanted in the first place.

That's why Democrats start with defense and Republicans start with entitlements. What Republicans fail to acknowledge is that they raided Social Security and Medicare to pay for other things (Prescription Drugs, NCLB, Wars including the Cold War) etc. because they refused to raise taxes to pay for those things. Now they want to use that regressive tax to continue to pay for that **** instead of paying for it through income taxes which is where it should have come from in the first place.

Read the entire paragraph of what I said again. I'm not talking about what's already been spent. I'm talking about NEW spending. Turn off your "republican alert" klaxon and pay attention.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

That's right, she IS a Cornell grad. Has she ever been the Commencement speaker???

How should I know? I went to the other school in the ECAC that wears red & white.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Read the entire paragraph of what I said again. I'm not talking about what's already been spent. I'm talking about NEW spending. Turn off your "republican alert" klaxon and pay attention.

New spending is needed every year. Highways, roads, other public works projects. There's no way around that. Get back to me when the Republicans actually cut something that matters to them or raises taxes to actually pay for something that matters to them. I'll be dead before either happens.

 

[MinnFan]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Sorry, this argument doesn't fly. Given the debt and the deficit we've already spent the money. I've said it a thousand times before I'll say it again. Cut something legitimately that isn't funded through it's own tax (payroll taxes) and we can talk. Until then you're just raiding from Social Security and Medicare to pay for stuff that nobody wanted in the first place.

The problem with that is we have $86 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities with those programs. Even if those excess taxes had been put in a "lock box" it would still only have bought us an extra decade before the programs went belly-up. Cuts definitely need to be made elsewhere as well, but those are the programs that will ultimately bankrupt the country.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

New spending is needed every year. Highways, roads, other public works projects. There's no way around that. Get back to me when the Republicans actually cut something that matters to them or raises taxes to actually pay for something that matters to them. I'll be dead before either happens.

Still think I'm a G-O-Pig, eh?

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

The problem with that is we have $86 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities with those programs. Even if those excess taxes had been put in a "lock box" it would still only have bought us an extra decade before the programs went belly-up. Cuts definitely need to be made elsewhere as well, but those are the programs that will ultimately bankrupt the country.

It's 86T total debt, 70T in liabilities that are not realised with those programs. In any case, the point still stands. The five death words of anything economically related: "We'll pay for it later."

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

The problem with that is we have $86 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities with those programs. Even if those excess taxes had been put in a "lock box" it would still only have bought us an extra decade before the programs went belly-up. Cuts definitely need to be made elsewhere as well, but those are the programs that will ultimately bankrupt the country.

Simple. Raise Payroll taxes or cut benefits. Problem solved. That DOESN'T solve the problem of raiding that money to pay for **** and then wanting to balance the books on the **** by raiding the same money.

Hello, is anybody home?

Actually it could be argued the war machine is just as responsible for bankrupting the country.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Be careful with this... when I first read it, it seemed as if you want to steal from rich because they have stockpiles that were already taxed (and we'll assume for the sake of argument that taxes were paid on them). That's where you run into the issue of people not wanting to gain capital because they'll be harassed for having it. There's nothing wrong with having money and being an investor. I would think it'd be a better idea, if there's a small business owner that happens to meet one of these whales, to pitch an idea for investment, that way it benefits all parties concerned.

I don't think anyone's saying tax the investment itself...but rather just the earnings. The burden on income should be shared by everyone. This is true for income earned on labor...and it should be for income earned on money.

The biggest problem is that a significant number of these things are not being well targeted, and results in a bunch of wasted money and handouts. If we're going to be spending government dollars to give people an opportunity to re-tool skills, we should do it with the end goal of making money off the person (in the form of collected taxes, of course). Personally, I think those sorts of loans should be merit- and plan-based instead of solely need-based, like it is for private scholarships. As a taxpayer, I'd MUCH rather see my tax dollars go towards a comp sci or engineering scholarship than a music scholarship, because I know that there's a better chance that that person will be footing a tax bill and could potentially go towards reducing my burden in the future.

This retooling our labor is arguably the top opportunity for the US economy. As the cold war has disappeared and the war on terror is very limited in scope, IMO our need for military has shrunk. As we enter a 21st century world of stiff international business competition based on our labor pool (where we're losing on many fronts), the need for retooling our workforce is greater than its ever been. This is one of the few areas where the federal govt shouldn't be cut.

 

[MinnFan]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Simple. Raise Payroll taxes or cut benefits. Problem solved. That DOESN'T solve the problem of raiding that money to pay for **** and then wanting to balance the books on the **** by raiding the same money.

Hello, is anybody home?

Actually it could be argued the war machine is just as responsible for bankrupting the country.

The solution for that is to allow people to put their money into private accounts that would not be able to be raided by the gov't and would also be able to be passed along to their heirs. Chile has had a lot of success doing this. Galveston, TX is also a good case study on how effective this can be. As it stands right now, these is nothing stopping congress from disolving both SS and Mecidare overnight.

Defense spending is at historical lows as a percentage of GDP. Thats not to say that there isn't room to cut, but its the growth of the rest of gov't that is the primary driver of our current problems.

 

[unofan]

The problem with that is we have $86 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities with those programs. Even if those excess taxes had been put in a "lock box" it would still only have bought us an extra decade before the programs went belly-up. Cuts definitely need to be made elsewhere as well, but those are the programs that will ultimately bankrupt the country.

Without changing anything else, social security is solvent indefinitely at 85% of current benefits. Up the retirement age and increase the amount of wages on which it is collected by relatively little, and it's solvent at current benefits for the next 50+ years.

Medicare is the bigger issue. But that's also because healthcare expenses in general are going to be a major issue for everyone, private and public alike.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

The solution for that is to allow people to put their money into private accounts that would not be able to be raided by the gov't and would also be able to be passed along to their heirs. Chile has had a lot of success doing this. Galveston, TX is also a good case study on how effective this can be. As it stands right now, these is nothing stopping congress from disolving both SS and Mecidare overnight.

Defense spending is at historical lows as a percentage of GDP. Thats not to say that there isn't room to cut, but its the growth of the rest of gov't that is the primary driver of our current problems.

No. Insurance isn't private accounts. Two different things.

I love how you guys always use the percentage number when it suits your argument and never when it doesn't. We spend more on the military then the rest of the world combined. If you're going to use that argument for military spending than you cannot deny that I pay more in taxes than Mitt Romney.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

I don't think anyone's saying tax the investment itself...but rather just the earnings. The burden on income should be shared by everyone. This is true for income earned on labor...and it should be for income earned on money.

One thing to remember, when it comes to earnings, is that if there are investors involved, the earnings are actually taxed twice. They are first taxed at the business level (whether it's claimed as individual self-employment or corporate; depends on the business) as with the earnings of any business, and then when they are paid as dividends, they are taxed again. Obviously you're trying to paint it as the investors looking like crooks, when it's really the government being greedy pigs when it comes to business earnings, especially if you're not touching things on the business end. If investors cash out or businesses check out, the government loses revenue, and the pig gets slaughtered. Obviously a compromise was reached in 2003 to encourage long-term investment in that you would only be able to take the lower rate if you kept your stake for a certain period of time. Remember that these investors technically have ownership in the company where they invest (assuming it's equity stock and not royalties; royalties are still treated at the traditional levels), so they're in effect paying, assuming a .06 state tax rate, .41 + (.21 * .59 * percentage of earnings allocated as dividends) on those net earnings. They're already sharing more of a burden on income than people that are only taking labour and royalties.

If you want to talk about "sharing the burden", perhaps we should look at earners that aren't paying anything at all, such as GE. How are they getting away with what they're doing? From there, close the loophole.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

The solution for that is to allow people to put their money into private accounts that would not be able to be raided by the gov't and would also be able to be passed along to their heirs. Chile has had a lot of success doing this. Galveston, TX is also a good case study on how effective this can be. As it stands right now, these is nothing stopping congress from disolving both SS and Mecidare overnight.

Defense spending is at historical lows as a percentage of GDP. Thats not to say that there isn't room to cut, but its the growth of the rest of gov't that is the primary driver of our current problems.

Also, defense is ~20% of the federal budget the same as SS or Medicare.

 

[MinnFan]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

No. Insurance isn't private accounts. Two different things.

I love how you guys always use the percentage number when it suits your argument and never when it doesn't. We spend more on the military then the rest of the world combined. If you're going to use that argument for military spending than you cannot deny that I pay more in taxes than Mitt Romney.

Unfortunately, SS isn't insurance. If it was it would be guaranteed. In fact, the way that it was held up during Supreme Court challenges was to specifically state that it wasn't insurance. Of course, the "insurance" of SS was against living too long but that has changed over time as well.

You pay the exact same amout of taxes as Romney for the same kind of income, but that is a different arguement. Like I said, I believe that cuts need to be made to the military. However, when you are talking about excess spending by the gov't percentage of GDP is the best way to look at programs because it shows you how much of a burden they are putting on the budget.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

No backlash?

In Wisconsin teachers had their pay cut dramatically and people relished it. I've seen that first hand as I have relatives in Wisconsin and the conversations I've had with them along with the letters to the editor I've seen in their newspapers verifies my assessment. People were hell bent to drag teachers down to their private sector level. IMO not realizing that teachers benefits were by proxy raising everyone's standard of living through competition in the marketplace of jobs. Where teaching could be a second profession for me down the road, I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole now.

For which all of those potential students in your economics classes should be profoundly grateful. If teachers think they're worth more pay and benefits, let them get it the old fashioned way. . .by earning it. As opposed to putting compliant officials in public office who are only too willing to fund gold plated pension and benefits plans out of the pockets of helpless taxpayers, in order to keep themselves in office. FDR said public sector employees should not be allowed to unionize, and he was right.

In Wisconsin the draconian cuts of which you complain left teachers will better pension and health care benefits than most. And the people of Wisconsin elected, then re-elected the Governor who lead the fight against teacher excesses. Evidently you've got a problem with democracy, too. What the people of Wisconsin were "hell bent" to do is slow down the runaway train of teacher benefits, carved out of the rear ends of Wisconsin taxpayers. "Competition?" For public sector employees? Surely you jest.

 

[MinnFan]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Also, defense is ~20% of the federal budget the same as SS or Medicare.

And under Kennedy defense was 60%. Given the current projections, by something like 2040 SS and Medicare will make up 80% of the budget.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

No. Insurance isn't private accounts. Two different things.

I love how you guys always use the percentage number when it suits your argument and never when it doesn't. We spend more on the military then the rest of the world combined. If you're going to use that argument for military spending than you cannot deny that I pay more in taxes than Mitt Romney.

You pay more than a couple million in taxes each year?

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

In a perfect world, neither they nor corporations would be spending millions on political campaigns. Sadly as this past election has proven, you do yourself no good by unilateraly disarming. I don't like it either, but that's the current situation unfortunately.

I'm all for booting bad teachers, of which I had my share over 12 years of public school. The problem I have is the criteria used to send them packing. For example, a lot of people want to compare private school vs public school to make a point, which I find to be ridiculous. Private schools only have to take the kids they want, and presumably have more parent involvement since they're paying the tuition. Public schools have to take everybody, even the kids counting down until their 16th birthday when they can drop out.

Next there's an emphasis on improving test scores, which is all well and good except for when you consider new students entering the system for which English is not their primary language. Those kids will bring down your test scores and that's not the fault of the teacher.

So unfortunately I don't have a lot of good answers on this one. Perhaps you could provide bonuses on a schoolwide basis and then let the principal/headmaster distribute them.

Bottom line in Roverworld: teachers aren't responsible (to any extent) for the manifest failures of public education in America. Just keep shoveling the money at them. Who knows? Maybe the kids will magically begin to learn.

I remember vividly an interview in which Donahue was questioning Joe Clark about the drug dealers he had tossed out of school. Wondering what was going to happen to them. Clark mentioned adult education, the military, work (shudder). And when Donahue persisted, Joe pointed out that he had 2500 kids to worry about, and the futures of a handful of 19 year old "sophomores" weren't his problem.

The argument about private schools taking whom they choose is right out of the teachers union handbook. For years teachers unions in Chicago opposed Marva Collins' famed West Side Prep, using that same argument. It was bull sh*t then and it's bull sh*t now. Private schools don't have the luxury of essentially unlimited funding. They can't raise taxes to pay for their whims. They have to compete in the market place. Same with parochial schools. For generations, poor Protestant kids in Chicago have gone to parochial schools to at least get a chance at an education.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

You pay more than a couple million in taxes each year?

Gentlemen, I rest my case.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

And under Kennedy defense was 60%. Given the current projections, by something like 2040 SS and Medicare will make up 80% of the budget.

And I just fixed SS and Medicare for the 1,000th time. You still haven't told me how you're going to pay for the bloated defense budget.