Sequester
-
Nothing.
I think this was the plan all along. This way people can say they didn't want to make cuts but had no choice since it was written in to law.
Of course.
No one, and I mean no one, should have a problem with across the board 3 percent cut.
No matter how vital you think your own slush fund may be I'm sure you can find a couple percent worth of waste.
Heck gets so angry because it's a simple truth and bears repeating.
The President and the Democrats don't think they need to be serious about budgetary matters. Why should they? Most, or at least many, of their constituents don't really have a stake in it.
Your party governs by cartoon.
The president, naturally, want's to punish his detractors and reward his followers.
I'm not necessarily saying that a Republican administration wouldn't do something similar.
Of course we can bicker about that when it happens.
Right now it's your cartoon.
WSS
Of course.
No one, and I mean no one, should have a problem with across the board 3 percent cut.
No matter how vital you think your own slush fund may be I'm sure you can find a couple percent worth of waste.
Heck gets so angry because it's a simple truth and bears repeating.
The President and the Democrats don't think they need to be serious about budgetary matters. Why should they? Most, or at least many, of their constituents don't really have a stake in it.
Your party governs by cartoon.
The president, naturally, want's to punish his detractors and reward his followers.
I'm not necessarily saying that a Republican administration wouldn't do something similar.
Of course we can bicker about that when it happens.
Right now it's your cartoon.
WSS
This is poorly thought out and pathetic on a whole host of levels, but what else is new? Also enjoy the "I know you are but what am I?" It really makes me wonder why I even bother.
There is no 3% cut on the table. Steve is just making this up, then saying his plan is better than the sequester, which is like saying "Eating cookies is better than eating shit." And then doing a victory dance.
You're also accusing the President, who has a plan you can go read if you like, and the Democrats of not thinking they need to be serious about budgetary matters, while you're obviously not being serious about budgetary matters, instead choosing to imagine another simple solution to a complex problem that doesn't solve anything and then doing a victory lap, just like you did in the global warming thread.
You. Don't. Know. What. You're. Talking. About. Old. Man.
-
Why think about it? You guys know your base.
I don't think even you believe we can bleed enough from " the rich" to get back to prosperity, but that's not the goal. Power is.
WSS
Oh, for God's sake. You've lost your mind. Obama has made you lose your mind. Remember what you accused Shep of doing during the Bush years? That's you now.
-
Oh please. You've heard this ridiculous Chicken Little rhetorical.
These clowns, your clowns in particular, don't want any restrictions on spending ever for any reason.
I suspect you see the danger and you can see that the real problem isn't going to be touched.
And apparently you don't care.
You just want to force the enemy to raise taxes again and then scream gotcha!
It's all campaign crap, pal.
Right down to you channeling James Carville.
WSS
-
Steve, you have to stop saying stuff that isn't true:
"These clowns, your clowns in particular, don't want any restrictions on spending ever for any reason."
This. Is. Not. True.
Go look at what's being proposed and come back to me. Or go look at the deal that was very close to being signed between Obama and Boehner.
The rest of it is more proof that I'm right. You have completely lost your mind, and see everything through this warped "Obama is an evil and power hungry sociopath" lens, just like the most clueless Bush-hater from 2005. Congrats.
-
Actually, "sociopath" is pretty close to the truth about Obamao.
Fast and Furious ....Benghazi.....
now, the NRA has it's hands on a "Justice Dept" memo saying that Obamao's intentions on gun control will
need to include a national registration, and a complete BAN.
And Obamao, by his own press weinei liar spokesman.... said it was Obamao's choice.
So now, let the sequester roll - if Obamao won't stop spending us into a financial crisis we have never seen in the history of our country.
Must be sad to blindly support a dirtbag marxist president, heckbunker.
This whole Obamao admin is a corrupt bunch of somebeeches.
Oh, and Obamao's guy, who used to be our Lt. Gov of Ohio - HATES the 2nd amendment,
and he is now openly admitting that they are looking at the legal right to TAKE OVER EVERYBODY's IRA's and 401K's.
Obamao is now out of control - a marxist pig he is.
-
BTW, Obamao reneged on that deal. He moved the goalposts in
an infantile outburst of demanding everybody "negotiate" by giving up and giving him everything he wants.
Didn't work. Good thing.
-
http://www.whitehouse.gov/winning-the-future/fiscal-framework
"Step 4: A fairer tax plan that closes loopholes and isn't rigged for those who can game it???"
Sales tax only. Boom, done. - except that isn't his plan. His plan is a dog & pony show.
However, this
based on the values of shared responsibility and shared prosperity.
is fucking-ass terrifying. -
Because a "sales tax only" is a bad idea, Leg.
You're also dissing the part of the proposal that adheres to what Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan proposed to do, and that's to raise money by closing loopholes on high income earners.
“High-income earners use most of the loopholes. That means they can shelter their income from taxation." - Paul Ryan
"I can tell you that people at the high end, high income taxpayers, are going to have fewer deductions and exemptions." Mitt Romney
That should be a part of the plan that both sides could agree on.
-
Obamao got his tax rates raised on the rich?
Now, he is just dishonestly going for broke with the loopholes also.
After that, he'll just move the yardstick again.
Obamao is an out of control radical marxist pig.
There is no legit defense of him, heckbunker. Huge fail.
-
Because a "sales tax only" is a bad idea, Leg.
You're also dissing the part of the proposal that adheres to what Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan proposed to do, and that's to raise money by closing loopholes on high income earners.
“High-income earners use most of the loopholes. That means they can shelter their income from taxation." - Paul Ryan
"I can tell you that people at the high end, high income taxpayers, are going to have fewer deductions and exemptions." Mitt Romney
That should be a part of the plan that both sides could agree on.
Because a "sales tax only" is a bad idea, Leg.
A 10% sales tax based on 2012 consumer spending would yield roughly the same as personal income tax receipts of the same year.
Adjust corporate tax structure so that loopholes close as Ryan/Romney suggested. They currently account for 1/3 of income tax receipts. That could increase to 1/2 without much fuss.
Based on our current "spend what you don't have" culture I'd bet my kingdom (see?) that the sales tax receipts would surpass current income tax receipts without even breaking a sweat. Keeping more of what you make? History shows that boosts spending at least and probably spurs some investment.
This eliminates the financial caste system of our country and the political horseshit that goes along with it.
-
Because a "sales tax only" is a bad idea, Leg.
A 10% sales tax based on 2012 consumer spending would yield roughly the same as personal income tax receipts of the same year.
Adjust corporate tax structure so that loopholes close as Ryan/Romney suggested. They currently account for 1/3 of income tax receipts. That could increase to 1/2 without much fuss.
Based on our current "spend what you don't have" culture I'd bet my kingdom (see?) that the sales tax receipts would surpass current income tax receipts without even breaking a sweat. Keeping more of what you make? History shows that boosts spending at least and probably spurs some investment.
This eliminates the financial caste system of our country and the political horseshit that goes along with it.
A 10% sales tax based on 2012 consumer spending would yield roughly the same as personal income tax receipts of the same year.
Adjust corporate tax structure so that loopholes close as Ryan/Romney suggested. They currently account for 1/3 of income tax receipts. That could increase to 1/2 without much fuss.
Based on our current "spend what you don't have" culture I'd bet my kingdom (see?) that the sales tax receipts would surpass current income tax receipts without even breaking a sweat. Keeping more of what you make? History shows that boosts spending at least and probably spurs some investment.
This eliminates the financial caste system of our country and the political horseshit that goes along with it.
Exactly. Everyone needs to contribute. We don't now.
I think if more people were involved in paying for their own benefits, et cetera, they might think harder about the taxing and spending.
But hey, that's the idea right?
As to the sales tax I can see the benefits.
Just remember how easy it is to bump it up a half or a whole percent.
Of course if someone actually had to pay it it might be a concern, huh? Like if you don't smoke a cigarette tax sounds like a fine idea.
And most states have 6, 7 or 8 already right?
A couple things I do like but could probably live without in a grande bargain are these:
I like mortgage interest deductions I think it promotes home ownership which I believe to be a positive.
Eliminating that deduction could be a potential nightmare for the housing market.
And I like keeping cap gains low enough to spur investment.
It's a good idea to have some equity in life and not rely solely on Big Brother.
I know big brother doesn't see it that way but...
And Heck, you don't have to be deranged to see that things are fucked up.
WSS
-
Not to mention no more Amazon.com...
WSS
-
It would put all those tax accountants and preparers out of business. I'm all for a National Sales Tax. Do away with the pain in the ass filing every year. Everyone pays the same amount. The Government gets the money immediately. No more April headaches.
-
no one wants to touch the tax code -
it is swollen to ridiculous recessive language that I doubt any loophole
that is on the chopping block will have any effect on the overall debt.
They'll just want more direct taxation anyway! twisted reason? it worked in the past, it'll work down the road...
trouble is, we lost around 50 million taxpayers through abortion since 73 alone.....
so we also have 20 million less taxpaying workers- getting unemployment assistance instead.
I like Dr. Ben Carsons simple flat rate system along with what Diehard, Legacy and WSS about simplifying tax rates....
but we also need a stronger private business driven economy and less big government IMO
-
Because a "sales tax only" is a bad idea, Leg.
A 10% sales tax based on 2012 consumer spending would yield roughly the same as personal income tax receipts of the same year.
Adjust corporate tax structure so that loopholes close as Ryan/Romney suggested. They currently account for 1/3 of income tax receipts. That could increase to 1/2 without much fuss.
Based on our current "spend what you don't have" culture I'd bet my kingdom (see?) that the sales tax receipts would surpass current income tax receipts without even breaking a sweat. Keeping more of what you make? History shows that boosts spending at least and probably spurs some investment.
This eliminates the financial caste system of our country and the political horseshit that goes along with it.
A 10% sales tax based on 2012 consumer spending would yield roughly the same as personal income tax receipts of the same year.
Adjust corporate tax structure so that loopholes close as Ryan/Romney suggested. They currently account for 1/3 of income tax receipts. That could increase to 1/2 without much fuss.
Based on our current "spend what you don't have" culture I'd bet my kingdom (see?) that the sales tax receipts would surpass current income tax receipts without even breaking a sweat. Keeping more of what you make? History shows that boosts spending at least and probably spurs some investment.
This eliminates the financial caste system of our country and the political horseshit that goes along with it.
National sales taxes have some positives, but I wouldn't want to do it in the way you describe because it'd be hugely regressive. It shifts the tax burden on to the lower and middle classes, and off of the people who can most afford to pay it. Unless you're proposing some ways to mitigate that then all you're doing is figuring out a new way to shift the tax burden off of the wealthy and on to the poor and middle class.
And how it would eliminate the "financial caste of our country" or "political horseshit" I have no idea. You'll have to explain. You're talking about the battle over tax rates? We don't have an income inequality problem because we have an income tax, and we'd have an even bigger income inequality problem if we shifted to a national sales tax. We'd be making that problem worse.
Again, we've talked about this before, but the reason the tax code is screwed up isn't because we have different rates. The reason the tax code is screwed up is because of the other 900 pages of complexity. The rate structure isn't the complicated part.
But in general I'm all for shifting taxes away from things like income and investment and on to other things. I'd prefer pollution to consumption, but could get on board for both. It depends on how you do it. Right now, this is really just being proposed by Republican Governors as a way to shift the tax burden off of the wealthy, which is the reason they get up in the morning.
-
Meanwhile, the marxist pig in our WH ordered the release of hundreds of jailed illegal immigrants....
because of the sequester that hasn't even happened yet...
the sequester he wanted because he...
wanted to release all the illegals?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/26/illegal-immigrants-released-detention-centers-sequ/
-
And you can't find very many economists who think mortgage interests deductions are a good idea.
-
Here are the tax loopholes and how much they cost. See which ones you want to eliminate, or trim. Pretty soon you'll see why Romney and Ryan wouldn't name which ones they wanted to trim - because they're all popular.
-
Steve, you have to stop saying stuff that isn't true:
"These clowns, your clowns in particular, don't want any restrictions on spending ever for any reason."
This. Is. Not. True.
Go look at what's being proposed and come back to me. Or go look at the deal that was very close to being signed between Obama and Boehner.
The rest of it is more proof that I'm right. You have completely lost your mind, and see everything through this warped "Obama is an evil and power hungry sociopath" lens, just like the most clueless Bush-hater from 2005. Congrats.
Steve, you have to stop saying stuff that isn't true:
"These clowns, your clowns in particular, don't want any restrictions on spending ever for any reason."
This. Is. Not. True.
Go look at what's being proposed and come back to me. Or go look at the deal that was very close to being signed between Obama and Boehner.
The rest of it is more proof that I'm right. You have completely lost your mind, and see everything through this warped "Obama is an evil and power hungry sociopath" lens, just like the most clueless Bush-hater from 2005. Congrats.
Come on man, you sound like a idiot, and I don't think you are.
All the President proposes is tax increases but willy worms around when it comes to cutting spending.
Tax all the rich people making more than 100K a year at 100% and your still not going to balance anything.
Oh, by the way....100k a year isn't rich.
-
Here are the tax loopholes and how much they cost. See which ones you want to eliminate, or trim. Pretty soon you'll see why Romney and Ryan wouldn't name which ones they wanted to trim - because they're all popular.
Here are the tax loopholes and how much they cost. See which ones you want to eliminate, or trim. Pretty soon you'll see why Romney and Ryan wouldn't name which ones they wanted to trim - because they're all popular.
Good, you agree, you can't cut most or all of those. All have benefit that impact other areas.
You have to cut spending....the Federal Government is a sham.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login