| Author | Message | ||
     Reindog |
Buellinmke, Nice trolling. All you did was insult while adding nothing substantive. Why are you here except to entertain m2me? | ||
| M2me |
How far could you march? All the way to Washington...or maybe just across the living room to the keyboard? I missed that one. That's totally awesome! There's been some really funny stuff on the old BadWeb lately!  Here ya go Mountainstorm:  | ||
| Sifo |
Funny thing - King George ignored a bunch of middle aged guys with loose talk about fighting tyranny. You can see their names in my 8:52 pm post. Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it. | ||
| M2me |
Buellinmke, Nice trolling. All you did was insult while adding nothing substantive. Why are you here except to entertain m2me? Will you stand in armed opposition to us? Are you willing to fight and die? Answer the question!!! I thought everyone was here to entertain me. I thought that BadWeb was for my entertainment. Isn't it? Now that's substantive! | ||
| Reindog |
That's "mister dirty old white man" to you, sir.  I resemble that remark even though I am unsure why you bring race to the party. That is so undude of you. | ||
| Blake |
Typical "Progressive"/Socialist reactions. To them freedom is apparently a joke, never worth fighting for. Their "bravest" tactic is to wage juvenile personal attack on an Internet forum. It doesn't get more pathetic. Behaving like a juvenile earns you treatment in kind. So, listen up children. This forum has rules. If you lack the maturity to honor them, then have the integrity to avoid posting here. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/mar/05/bil d-open-letter-greece-papandreou Ouch. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&si d=aSDLV4EUnj8k Although I hope we are far from this level of nasty. It does match with my view that while we could, in time, ease the entitlement mentality in the public, ( it would take time, education, and effort ) the associated reductions in the gargantuan federal bureaucracy would lead to violence. | ||
| Sifo |
Although I hope we are far from this level of nasty. It does match with my view that while we could, in time, ease the entitlement mentality in the public, ( it would take time, education, and effort ) the associated reductions in the gargantuan federal bureaucracy would lead to violence. A few things are certain. First things will always change. Government is always unsatisfied with the status quo. Government will either make new laws that further restrict the people, or it will strike laws from the books giving people more freedom. Secondly government almost never strikes laws from the books. It is much more satisfying as a politician to make new law that they can hang their names on to show what they "produced". History show with countless examples that governments over time become more and more oppressive. Lastly history shows that eventually there will be a revolt to reset things. Blood will be spilled. There will be a new struggle for power. Sometimes this work out for the better, sometimes for the worse. In the years following 1776 a very wise group of people struck a very good balance that has proven itself as one of the greatest governments the world has seen. Since that time the first two points I made have been slowly but surely working their ways, bit by bit depriving people of their liberties. Currently we are heading toward an economic disaster that many seem to think can be solved by confiscation of property to be redistributed to others. This scheme does not have a good track record in history and has lead to bloodshed and collapse of governments many times in the past. I see no reason to believe that the USA is immune to the powers that have so persistently effected governments of the past. Just as gravity pulls at an object to bring it back to the earth these forces will pull us deeper into tyranny until the inevitable finally happens. I make no claim to know the schedule for these events to make their place in history, but I am quite certain that much of this history is already written for the USA. | ||
| Buellkowski |
Since the Greek issue is about public debt, let's set aside "tyranny" talk and focus on our own numbers.  From these charts we see a $1.4 trillion shortfall in 2009. Imagine we were in a position where our government was forced to significantly reduce the 2009 deficit from $1.4 trillion down to $400 billion. Given these charts, how would you do it? | ||
| Aesquire |
Every scenario I come up with, and you COULD cut a trillion dollars (2009 only) by dumping the entire remaining stimulus plan, and cutting the bureaucracy, you might get away with NOT cutting provided services, this year, but you would jack unemployment by 10%. ( all those laid off federal workers. ) Next year you have zip additional to spend. Nothing. You have to cut spending by not a Trillion$, but 2 Trillion. Only by raising revenues with an improved economy, ( doable, look at Kennedy.) can you spend more money. They made promises they can't keep with money they didn't have. Can we repossess D.C.?? | ||
| Buellkowski |
Income tax receipts were less than defense + interest combined, yet some would claim that the U.S. populace is overtaxed? | ||
| Blake |
That doesn't sound right. Defense spending pales in comparison to entitlements. | ||
| Aptbldr |
Where does homeland security spending fit in pie above? Methinks it's buried in "other mandatory spending", and that homeland security is a new name for defense spending. | ||
| Aesquire |
Huh? 782 + 187 = 969 billion, right? Receipts are 2.105 trillion + right? ( we'll just assume the charts are not BS. ) But... even though you did the math wrong... Yep, WE are overtaxed. Absolutely. More than half my income goes to taxes. I could do better, but I don't make enough to do the dodges that rich people bribe politicians to give them. ( also, almost all the big time politico's are rich themselves. I'll bet none of them write a check to the IRS to ease YOUR tax burden. ) The Interest is because the politicians stole the money from us multiple times. See Social security. They stole all the money. Spent it. Left an IOU that the Supremes decided they didn't have to pay back, and spent it again. It's been a Ponzi scheme, and they lie to you about it. We could cut defense if we didn't have 2 religious wars where fanatics are trying to conquer the world. Tell the Islamo-fascists to go treat their women better, the Communists to get a legit job, and Europe to settle their own stupid differences, and we can cut defense spending. ( of course every time we try that approach, Europe loses a generation to slaughter & war. They really have a bitter history. } Ah, where's Pax Romana when you need it? | ||
| Buellkowski |
Income tax receipts were less than defense + interest combined My math is correct. I was referring to the blue portion of the receipts chart, the revenue that comes from our checkbooks via our tax returns ($915 billion). That figure does not pay for our defense expenditures and the interest we owe. If anyone believes these charts are faulty please post better ones. I don't have the numbers, but I would guess that the lion's share of "entitlements" (Medicare/Medicaid + Soc Sec) are consumed by seniors. Would you kill Medicare/Medicaid completely to reduce the deficit? | ||
| Aesquire |
No, I'd combine them.... which then results in govt. lay offs..... riots, Greece..... You are correct that the old consume most of the medical costs. Although SSI revenues are counted separate in the above chart, Congress spends them as if they were not.... ( hence the Ponzi scheme ) I do see your point. Going on the incorrect assumption that the SSI revenues will go to SSI and any left over go to supporting future SSI output, ( a base lie, but let's pretend ) that leaves individual income taxes and corporate taxes, ( which are also paid by you, just hidden ) to barely pay for defense and interest..... hmmm. So, which do you think would be more effective? Kill all the old people, or kill all the govt. workers?  ( quick analysis shows that govt. workers consume more, and old folk have a higher NRA membership level....so I say the Govt. workers have to go. Let me know how that works out, I'll be in the cabin in the woods.....or in a Van down by the river...  (Message edited by aesquire on March 07, 2010) | ||
| Blake |
Matt (BuellKowski), If you had stated "personal income tax receipts" were less than defense + interest combined, you would be accurate according to your charts. However you stated simply "income tax receipts" were less than defense + interest combined." As "income tax" includes both personal and corporate, your statement is false. Since all corporate taxes are passed on to the consumer, it is deceptive to employ only personal income taxes in a comparison. Also, the "defense spending" you use includes special war-fighting expenses, not just the annual budget of our defense department, so that too is misleading. When the wars have wound down and ended, defense spending will return to around 18% of our federal budget, less than even social security alone. Honesty is good. http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2011/assets/defense.pdf Total proposed defense budget for 2011 is $548.9 billion, a 3.4% increase over that for 2010. The following shows the breakdown for the 2010 federal budget.  Entitlement spending plus interest on the debt--the massive debt is required only to support the massive entitlement spending--exceeds 60% of the federal budget. It is an outrage. Then consider that in addition to the above federal spending, we also support another block of state entitlement spending for medicaid. It is outrageous that we've allowed our freedom to be trampled by Progressives/Socialists who intend and have so far succeeded in "progressively" fundamentally changing the United States of America from a nation that most cherishes and reveres liberty to one that is concerned only with "social justice", "redistributive change", in simple terms welfare for all, in familiar terms, "from those according to their ability, to those according to their need." A flat tax would absolutely work. Get rid of the separate social security, medicaid, medicare taxes (in reality all just welfare taxes); roll them into the income tax, the rate would be around 23%. Fair for all, even for all. Everyone pays their part. Tax stock, commodities, futures, options, and all the market trades at 0.3%. This will put an end to low margin day-trading and excessive speculative trading that corrupts our free markets. (Message edited by blake on March 08, 2010) | ||
| Blake |
 | ||
| Oldog |
Blake I presume that the 60 % includes social security, in 15 years and I am being a bit un relaistic, I at one time thought to retire, I like all other tax paying working citizens have paid into social security, I disagree on the point that its an "entitlement" to those of us who have paid into it, with the understanding that we would be able to collect, we are truly entitled to OUR MONEY, as its the only retirement money that the various "civil courts" cant get. ( we wont go into the issue of the various elected parasites that raided it and those ramifications ) | ||
| Hootowl |
Congress already spent the money you gave them. They have spent mine as well. At this point, I'm willing to eat the loss rather than continue to pump more money into a lost cause. I want to stop paying for a forced public retirement fund that I have little to no hope of every receiving benefits from. Social Security is a ponzi scheme, and if there were any justice in the world, the folks in congress that decided to pilfer the money would be in jail right next to Madoff. | ||
| Drkside79 |
Don't worry Oldog I'll still be putting in for you in 15. | ||
| Blake |
I'd relinquish my claim on any SS benefits but would agree to continue to fund the program for all those who are 48 years young and older if they'd kill the program now for the rest of us. | ||
| Buellkowski |
Hello, Blake.  Thanks for posting the more-detailed chart. I purposely did not include corporate income tax receipts in my earier statement. I should have explained why: 1.) corporate income tax is assessed on corporate profits, not corporate income (I paid the same for my car whether or not the manufacturer made a profit), and 2.) you cannot say that all corporate income tax receipts came from U.S. consumers. For example, fictional aerospace manufacturer "Boebus" pays tax on profits from airplanes sold to China. I do not know what percentage of the $138 billion receipt cited in my chart came from U.S. consumers. Please post the figure if you happen to find it as it could bolster your assertion. I agree, honesty is definitely good.  Your point in regard to extra "war-fighting" defense expenses is taken. Cease the war-spending and you cut the annual deficit by $200 billion or more. That's 1/5 of the way to the $1 trillion deficit cut my exercise calls for. What else could we do meet the $1 trillion proposed goal in an effort to forestall Greek-style forced austerity and civil discord? Ceasing collection of SS taxes, maintaining the 2009 level of all other Federal tax/fee collections, and suspending all SS, Medicare/Medicaid, and unemployment/welfare disbursements seems to do the trick, but there would certainly be noise in the streets. | ||
| Sifo |
Blake I presume that the 60 % includes social security, in 15 years and I am being a bit un relaistic, I at one time thought to retire, I like all other tax paying working citizens have paid into social security, I disagree on the point that its an "entitlement" to those of us who have paid into it, with the understanding that we would be able to collect, we are truly entitled to OUR MONEY, as its the only retirement money that the various "civil courts" cant get. ( we wont go into the issue of the various elected parasites that raided it and those ramifications ) Oldog, If you think it's "your" money go ask for it and see what happens. If it's truly yours you have a right to it. If you could do this I would do it today. I would happily walk away with only the money I put in, no interest required. It will never happen though because all the money that I have put in is money that has been confiscated from me by the government. I have no say in what happens to that money at this point. Does that sound like something that I or you still own? Drkside79, you are getting set up to not only pay for SS benefits for Oldog, but also the whole baby boomer generation. This is going to be the biggest strain on the SS system since it was started. Wait, make that the biggest strain on the tax payers since SS was started. Now you are about to also take on government health care for the baby boomers too! Add to that the national debt that BO is racking up and you are not going to have much left for yourself. I'm sure glad I'm at the tail end of my earning career. I thought I got screwed pretty bad, but you are really going to get it. | ||
| Reindog |
No problem. Just get rid of the old folks to solve the unsustainable spending. That is when the Death Panels get formed to see who's going to become Soylent Green. It won't be called something as truthfully descriptive as "Death Panel" but "Fair Distribution of Precious Health Care Resources". Or something like that so you can watch your tumor grow while an illegal gets taken care of because they are more "deserving". Or they voted for the correct person in power. The Left is going to be in utter disbelief and shock when the shower doors are locked behind them for their "delousing" by the Government. The Left and Right will be cast away and only those with ties to the Politboro will receive proper benefits. Just like what happened over time in the Soviet Union. This is human nature in a system devoid of checks and balance. | ||
| Alchemy |
23% flat tax seems way too high. As a more strict conservative I would like a flat tax (as I have heard suggested) of about 11%. I think most of the tax law would have to be abandoned but this would be a clean start. Can anyone discuss the facts of an 11% flat tax and what few if any tax deductions would be allowed? I would love to get rid of dependent deductions. I see no reason to subsidize humans breeding. Can't seem to stop it if you try. As well as mortgage deductions business deductions and all corporate taxes across the board I would guess. All individuals pay taxes on a level playing field. | ||
| Sifo |
That is when the Death Panels get formed to see who's going to become Soylent Green. It won't be called something as truthfully descriptive as "Death Panel" but "Fair Distribution of Precious Health Care Resources". The official name is "End of Life Counseling". At least that's what they call the death panels for our wounded soldiers in the VA medical system. Our veterans deserve better. Normal citizens will probably get worse. | ||
| Blake |
It makes sense to help enable families. | ||
| Aesquire |
Gee, Blake that's my argument for gay marriage! Well, also Dolly Parton's great line, "why should we be the only ones that suffer?" Right now, between federal, state, county, and sales taxes, I pay better than 55%. ( quite a bit better....) If I was richer I'd actually pay less, since I could afford to "dodge" some of that tax, and it would be worth my while to do so. I'm not sure that a single fixed flat tax is the best idea. ( or a single progressive tax, or any other scheme ) It makes sense to me to tax for what the govt. needs to do it's job. No less, not much more, ( and only to pay off past debt.) It's a slippery slope. If we agree that a tax break for, say, mortgage interest to promote home buying is good, where do we stop? Using taxes to "encourage" social change or punish bad behavior has no end. See D.C. I'm not hardcore on this, I just see the abuse, and warn you that you should know what road you are paving with the best of intentions. | ||
| Hootowl |
I agree. Deductions are the government's way of encouraging or discouraging behavior. Not their job. No deductions, no credits, flat tax. People are going to continue to get married and have children even if the child tax credit goes away. People have been doing that far longer that tax credits have been around, and we seem to have arrived in the present with no shortage of offspring, birthrates among differing races aside. |
