The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

[joecct]

They could go into the hundreds of thousands of state and local government jobs that have been cut over the last 5 years or so. I'd rather fund local jobs than overseas ones, all else being equal.

The state/local governments lost workers because of Tax revenues did not exceed spending. Since most states have to balance their budgets, they had to cut something and the workforce is a place they hit.

So if those workers are rehired are you willing to have your take home pay further reduced by an increased local tax bite?

 

[geezer]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

And yet, even though I have been a Democratic operative in the past, I still have been able to broker a budget deal that almost everyone here can agree with. Others have as well, it's not like I'm the only one, but if an admitted Democratic operative can come up with a compromise that works and that BOTH sides think is fair, that tells you just how broken Washington is. Unfortunately, "compromise" is a dirty word in DC these days and both sides would either like to wait for a deal where they get EVERYTHING they want or have the issue to use in campaigns.

You do a good job of summing up why I'm so angry with the two major parties, (although the Republicans are worse in this regard and more appealing to me in other ways): they seem to be so fixating on "the next election" that there is no chance for the elected legislators to do any actual work of governing so long as they're keeping their party bosses happy (the actual direct bosses like Boehner and Pelosi, as well as the indirect bosses like Citibank, General Motors, the NRA, and organized labor aka The Union Goons). I think that individuals not owing their jobs to a party would HAVE to do better work than this. Wouldn't they?

 

[Priceless]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means

If I was simply living off interest from my grandfather's investments instead of Social Security (which I paid for in taxes) and an insurance policy (for which I paid premiums) would you still have a problem with my using the word "earn"?

 

[unofan]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

The state/local governments lost workers because of Tax revenues did not exceed spending. Since most states have to balance their budgets, they had to cut something and the workforce is a place they hit.

So if those workers are rehired are you willing to have your take home pay further reduced by an increased local tax bite?

Or, you know, the feds could shift however many billion it's spending on soldiers overseas to provide assistance to state and local governments. Side benefit, the salaries get spent here in the states at the local mcdonalds instead of some German or Israeli joint, increasing the multiplier effect.

 

[pirate]

If I was simply living off interest from my grandfather's investments instead of Social Security (which I paid for in taxes) and an insurance policy (for which I paid premiums) would you still have a problem with my using the word "earn"?

Yup

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Boehner has to pass MAX 300 on Heavy or he loses the gavel to Cantor.

Easy Peasy. How about getting a AA?

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

You know, I had a thought while getting ready for work about one thing that we could do to stimulate growth in our economy. How about we look towards relaxing patent laws? Today, there is so much money from inventors that are being deflected away from their inventions and placed more towards attorneys that confirm the legality of a product. Even when watching Shark Tank, it's all about the patent and the intellectual property, and that's why they're usually so desperately in need of capital, because they blew it all on a patent. I think we should be instead praising someone who can actually sell a product and let the market decide who sells the best.

 

[pirate]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

You know, I had a thought while getting ready for work about one thing that we could do to stimulate growth in our economy. How about we look towards relaxing patent laws? Today, there is so much money from inventors that are being deflected away from their inventions and placed more towards attorneys that confirm the legality of a product. Even when watching Shark Tank, it's all about the patent and the intellectual property, and that's why they're usually so desperately in need of capital, because they blew it all on a patent. I think we should be instead praising someone who can actually sell a product and let the market decide who sells the best.

Having some knowledge of a company with IP as its biggest asset, I don't know how they would have raised capital if investors felt that they could easily have been copied/infringed upon. One of the first questions in their mind is "if this is such a good idea, why hasn't somebody else already done it...and if this is a new, good idea why won't people copy it?"

Not to say your idea is bad or wouldn't work, just my first impression based on personal experience.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

If I was simply living off interest from my grandfather's investments instead of Social Security (which I paid for in taxes) and an insurance policy (for which I paid premiums) would you still have a problem with my using the word "earn"?

now you're getting it!!

soc sec and aflac isn't earned. it's received. nothing wrong with that. just like the kennedy's... not earned

 

[joecct]

Or, you know, the feds could shift however many billion it's spending on soldiers overseas to provide assistance to state and local governments. Side benefit, the salaries get spent here in the states at the local mcdonalds instead of some German or Israeli joint, increasing the multiplier effect.

Feds still spending the money. The objective is have the federal government spend LESS.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Having some knowledge of a company with IP as its biggest asset, I don't know how they would have raised capital if investors felt that they could easily have been copied/infringed upon. One of the first questions in their mind is "if this is such a good idea, why hasn't somebody else already done it...and if this is a new, good idea why won't people copy it?"

Not to say your idea is bad or wouldn't work, just my first impression based on personal experience.

I guess that's the point, and I understand that it would take a change in culture to achieve this, but perhaps we should be less concerned about whose name is on the piece and more about what the piece is. The company you speak of is basically an attention whore. With a society of enormous regulation comes a demand not for growth, but for regulation compliance. Maybe that's just my view, but I'd rather know I made a difference in the world than made a boatload of cashola.

Obviously in some cases, there are first movers. Certainly, things like the computer had to start somewhere.

 

[unofan]

Feds still spending the money. The objective is have the federal government spend LESS.

That's not what you said in the original post I responded to. You said we couldn't cut 500,000 soldiers because of the economic consequences. Which is a valid point. But you don't then get to say we need to cut federal spending after arguing we need to save 500,000 military jobs.

 

[unofan]

I guess that's the point, and I understand that it would take a change in culture to achieve this, but perhaps we should be less concerned about whose name is on the piece and more about what the piece is. The company you speak of is basically an attention whore. With a society of enormous regulation comes a demand not for growth, but for regulation compliance. Maybe that's just my view, but I'd rather know I made a difference in the world than made a boatload of cashola.

Obviously in some cases, there are first movers. Certainly, things like the computer had to start somewhere.

Get ready for Sonny Bono 2 - Copyright Bugaloo in about 5 years. Mickey Mouse's copyright is set to expire in 2019. Will be interesting to see which Congressmen Disney buys off this time.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Get ready for Sonny Bono 2 - Copyright Bugaloo in about 5 years. Mickey Mouse's copyright is set to expire in 2019. Will be interesting to see which Congressmen Disney buys off this time.

Aren't there some celebrities that have been talking about running for Congress as of late?

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

I find it extremely droll how leftists with no memory are crowing about their great "victory."

George Bush tax cuts from 2001 and 2003 have now been made permanent for everyone except those making over $400,000. No more sunset, no more temporary extension. They are in place indefinitely.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

I find it extremely droll how leftists with no memory are crowing about their great "victory."

George Bush tax cuts from 2001 and 2003 have now been made permanent for everyone except those making over $400,000. No more sunset, no more temporary extension. They are in place indefinitely.

One thing that I cannot stand is this notion of a "holiday". Based upon the steps that need to be taken, call a cut a cut, and call a raise a raise. Taxes were not cut for the middle class; they remained the same.

 

[Priceless]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

now you're getting it!!

soc sec and aflac isn't earned. it's received. nothing wrong with that. just like the kennedy's... not earned

I'm pretty sure I earned this by paying taxes and premiums. I still pay taxes. How is money from granddaddy's investments "earned" but my disability insurance is "received"? What exactly did the person do to "earn" their money? Crawl out of the uterus? Win the sperm lottery?

 

[geezer]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

you don't then get to say we need to cut federal spending after arguing we need to save 500,000 military jobs.

George Bush tax cuts from 2001 and 2003 have now been made permanent for everyone except those making over $400,000.

These are both interesting hypocrisies that the parties are forcing their elected members to adopt. First, the cold war-sized military we're running is far to large a part of the budget not to be part of the conversation. Second, it's illustrative of the (lack of) principles of our politicians that they could spend 10 years screaming and yelling about the disastrous consequences of something (Bush tax cuts) that they are now championing just because the guy in the big chair has a (D) following his name. (leaving out the vanishingly small sliver of top income where they turn "bad")
But here's my question: I thought the tax cuts "only" got a 5 year extension?

 

[Priceless]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

One thing that I cannot stand is this notion of a "holiday". Based upon the steps that need to be taken, call a cut a cut, and call a raise a raise. Taxes were not cut for the middle class; they remained the same.

You're not following Grover's logic! He explained it all so clearly. Taxes went up at 12:01AM January 1 so any Republican who voted for the fiscal cliff bill at 1:45AM in the Senate or 11:00PM in the House was voting for a tax cut. He hasn't said how he explains away all those pledge signers who voted no and apparently voted against a tax cut...

 

[Rover]

I find it extremely droll how leftists with no memory are crowing about their great "victory."

George Bush tax cuts from 2001 and 2003 have now been made permanent for everyone except those making over $400,000. No more sunset, no more temporary extension. They are in place indefinitely.

Fishy, I always love seeing your "this is really a win for the Republicans" schtick. I used to think you were only channeling Cokie Roberts. Now I think you might actually BE Cokie Roberts! I had no idea you were a college hockey fan since you grew up in DC as the daughter of a Congressman and all that.

However, I had speculated that if you took the nominal rate of 250K during the Clinton admin and indexed it for inflation, you'd be somewhere in the 300K range nowadays. Pundits once again read my postings out here and ran with it, and it turns out the # is $397K. So, in real terms, tax rates are back to Clinton era levels. Some victory for Bushonomics....

Beyond you though, this agreement did finally clean up some annoying BS, like the constant AMT patch and the doc fix. I'm no fan of Itch McConnell, but he does deserve credit for agreeing to all that. That's why the package came in at 630Bn instead of 1T or so.

Lastly, my way out of this deficit would be to put ALL tax rates back at Clinton era levels, subject to a couple of tweaks like the AMT for example. However, even I wouldn't go so far as to have them all take effect immediately. Anything to be done has to be done on a phased in approach. Whether by design or by accident we might actually be on our way to doing that. Cutting or raising $1T dollars in one year is absurd. Its not possible to do in an era of recovering growth. Do that and you get the UK, which will be in austerity and flat growth for a decade when its all projected to be over in 2018 by their govt's own projections. IMHO the budget can sustain a little over half of the yearly deficit, so about 500-600Bn, in tax hikes/spending cuts. After that the remaining gap has to be closed by a growing economy. We'd all like 5% GDP growth and 300K jobs per month, but 2.3% GDP growth and 175K jobs a month will get us there eventually too. The balancing act is deficit reduction vs growth, and we have to defer to growth in that trade off.