Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-26-2008, 10:34 AM
 
Location: Alexandria, VA
1,774 posts, read 2,810,406 times
Reputation: 213

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by paperhouse View Post
I agree that military spending must be cut SIGNIFICANTLY, but we can't just add back to social programs with money we don't have.
Where is the money collected going? The IRS collects billions of dollars every month through corporate taxes and payroll taxes as well. Where is this money going.....besides paying civil workers whom i think pay one another through federal taxation
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-26-2008, 10:36 AM
 
Location: Greenville, SC
5,238 posts, read 8,799,596 times
Reputation: 2647
Quote:
Originally Posted by paperhouse View Post
And Obama plans to spend how much more?
Wasn't this the same argument against Bill Clinton - the last administration to demand a balanced budget?

Obama - and the whole world - realizes that not every program can be passed. He also has voted for and pledged a balanced budget.

I can not for the life of me understand how the Republicans are viewed as fiscally prudent or conservative.

Barack Obama's Record
  • PAYGO: Obama voted in 2005, 2006, and 2007 to reinstate pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) federal budget rules.
  • No-Bid Contracts: Obama has introduced and helped pass bipartisan legislation to limit the abuse of no-bid federal contracts.
  • Against Raising the Federal Debt Limit: In 2006, Obama voted against misguided Republican efforts to raise the statutory debt limit at the same time the Republicans were pushing through massive debt-financed tax cuts for the wealthy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2008, 10:37 AM
 
Location: Albemarle, NC
7,730 posts, read 14,166,021 times
Reputation: 1520
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnestorr View Post
Where is the money collected going? The IRS collects billions of dollars every month through corporate taxes and payroll taxes as well. Where is this money going.....besides paying civil workers whom i think pay one another through federal taxation
http://throb.typepad.com/special/2004%20US%20Budget.jpg

warning, it's a big image. Really big.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2008, 10:40 AM
 
Location: Albemarle, NC
7,730 posts, read 14,166,021 times
Reputation: 1520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art123 View Post
Wasn't this the same argument against Bill Clinton - the last administration to demand a balanced budget?

Obama - and the whole world - realizes that not every program can be passed. He also has voted for and pledged a balanced budget.

I can not for the life of me understand how the Republicans are viewed as fiscally prudent or conservative.
]
First of all, not all Republicans are the same. If you'd stop repeating that over and over, you'd see that one in particular, Ron Paul has voted against more spending than Savior Obama.

If Obama pledges a balanced budget and the current 2008 budget just submitted is $2-350 billion in the hole already, how can he make a single claim that he will add anything? He has to start cutting from day 1. You know, most of the costs of the Iraq war isn't included in the actual budget, right?

Bush budget won't fully fund Iraq war - David Rogers - Politico.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2008, 10:49 AM
 
Location: Western North Carolina
8,054 posts, read 10,649,866 times
Reputation: 18965
And where is the chart showing how much we owed per person BEFORE the current administration took office in 2000? ?

The old line that Democrats are the "big spenders" and Republicans are "fiscally conservative" doesn't have a leg to stand on anymore. I would much rather be spending the money domestically here in this country than having it go down a black whole (and billions of it unaccounted for) in Iraq. There has been more pork spent during these Bush years than ever before in our nation's history. We are now the biggest debter country in the world. As my Business Law professor said "All bills have to eventually be paid".

Democrats , the "TAX and SPEND" party.

And Republicans? Well, they just DINE AND DASH.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2008, 10:51 AM
 
Location: Greenville, SC
5,238 posts, read 8,799,596 times
Reputation: 2647
Quote:
Originally Posted by paperhouse View Post
First of all, not all Republicans are the same. If you'd stop repeating that over and over, you'd see that one in particular, Ron Paul has voted against more spending than Savior Obama.

If Obama pledges a balanced budget and the current 2008 budget just submitted is $2-350 billion in the hole already, how can he make a single claim that he will add anything? He has to start cutting from day 1. You know, most of the costs of the Iraq war isn't included in the actual budget, right?

Bush budget won't fully fund Iraq war - David Rogers - Politico.com
Ron Paul isn't in it anymore. Get over it. He's an unelectable looney.

Yes I know the war is not in the budget. It's equivalent to the American people having a giant credit card debt with a bad interest rate. You know the first thing they tell you when you are trying to get out of debt? Stop using your credit cards and pay that debt off first.

The Iraq War is like having a teenager with unlimited American Express card. Some adult needs to take that card away and start being sensible about where our money goes.

The other thing is he wants to repeal the Bush tax cuts, and hopefully Congress will add some taxes as well. No "wartime" nation has ever been able to cut taxes. It's ludicrous. We pay less in taxes than any other civilized nation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2008, 10:54 AM
 
Location: Albemarle, NC
7,730 posts, read 14,166,021 times
Reputation: 1520
Quote:
Originally Posted by montanamom View Post
And where is the chart showing how much we owed per person BEFORE the current administration took office in 2000? ?

The old line that Democrats are the "big spenders" and Republicans are "fiscally conservative" doesn't have a leg to stand on anymore. I would much rather be spending the money domestically here in this country than having it go down a black whole (and billions of it unaccounted for) in Iraq. There has been more pork spent during these Bush years than ever before in our nation's history. We are now the biggest debter country in the world. As my Business Law professor said "All bills have to eventually be paid".

Democrats , the "TAX and SPEND" party.

And Republicans? Well, they just DINE AND DASH.
I understand the sentiment. I don't agree with hardly any of Bush's spending projects. Even under his administration, entitlement spending has increased. He is not a conservative regardless of what he says.

Quote:
President Bush seems intent on following the LBJ model by making entitlement spending even more overgrown. In a fiscally reckless act, Congress and President Bush enacted the $550 billion (over 10 years) drug bill even though the budget is deep into deficit and Medicare already has a huge financing shortfall. Not only is the new drug program the biggest expansion in Medicare since its inception, it's virtually certain that the $550 billion price tag is a low-ball estimate. Despite the massive cost, some on Capitol Hill now want to expand these entitlements in the name of Katrina victims.
Reason Magazine - Bush the Budget Buster

Again, that doesn't address how Obama is planning to increase spending on all of his programs when the budget is already in a deficit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2008, 10:59 AM
 
Location: Albemarle, NC
7,730 posts, read 14,166,021 times
Reputation: 1520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art123 View Post
Ron Paul isn't in it anymore. Get over it. He's an unelectable looney.

Yes I know the war is not in the budget. It's equivalent to the American people having a giant credit card debt with a bad interest rate. You know the first thing they tell you when you are trying to get out of debt? Stop using your credit cards and pay that debt off first.

The Iraq War is like having a teenager with unlimited American Express card. Some adult needs to take that card away and start being sensible about where our money goes.

The other thing is he wants to repeal the Bush tax cuts, and hopefully Congress will add some taxes as well. No "wartime" nation has ever been able to cut taxes. It's ludicrous. We pay less in taxes than any other civilized nation.
Thanks for your opinion. Given who you support, I think I'll be just fine sticking with my chosen candidate. At least Paul understands that economically, we have to cut spending across the board and isn't making stump speeches promising people the world knowing he can't deliver.

Iraq is a huge issue. So is Afghanistan. So are the 170 military installations we operate around the world.

The tax cuts have run their course. We need new ones to generate capital investment for small businesses and companies. If we're going to get manufacturing back in gear, we can't force these companies to pay into an insurance program that they can't afford already. Prices go up, wages go down, boom, major inflation, which we are already seeing the beginnings of.

Increasing the tax burden on Americans who are fighting to keep their homes and lives in order is going to be a hard sell. Why isn't Obama telling the truth? Why doesn't he talk about the change in taxes that will occur. Does he hope we won't notice or care?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2008, 11:38 AM
 
Location: Southern New Jersey
1,725 posts, read 3,116,438 times
Reputation: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by montanamom View Post
And where is the chart showing how much we owed per person BEFORE the current administration took office in 2000? ?

The old line that Democrats are the "big spenders" and Republicans are "fiscally conservative" doesn't have a leg to stand on anymore. I would much rather be spending the money domestically here in this country than having it go down a black whole (and billions of it unaccounted for) in Iraq. There has been more pork spent during these Bush years than ever before in our nation's history. We are now the biggest debter country in the world. As my Business Law professor said "All bills have to eventually be paid".

Democrats , the "TAX and SPEND" party.

And Republicans? Well, they just DINE AND DASH.
The republicans always held back the democrats, they still do even if they are themselves guilty of overspending. You didn't disprove that Democrats are guilty of taxing and spending btw. Why hasn't the Democratic controlled congress ended the war????

We are clinging onto Cold War commitments that are irrelevant, we need to close down military bases around the world. Eisenhower warned of a military-industrial complex that would not dissolve itself after the Cold War ended, turns out he was right.

McCain is more of the same - I agree that Obama is different, he is a change. The question is...will it be a change for the better or worse? You don't think that a majority of domestic programs are a black hole as well?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2008, 11:41 AM
 
Location: Western North Carolina
8,054 posts, read 10,649,866 times
Reputation: 18965
As far as healthcare goes, I don't hear ANY of the candidates discussing the real problem which is the COST of health care. They keep talking about ways to cover those that are uninsured. I want to know why it costs so dang much to begin with? It wouldn't have anything to do with GREED within the health and pharmaceutical industries would it? Why in the world does it cost thousands and thousands of dollars just to go in the hospital and have a normal baby delivery for instance? Why is a Tylenol $20.00 per tablet on your hospital bill? Why do CEO's over healthcare companies and health insurance companies have to be paid mind blowingly large salaries, bonuses, and severance pay?

One of the reasons I cannot support Hillary is because she has received more contributions from the healthcare industry than ANY other candidate. I suspect THAT is the reason for her plan for MANDATED health insurance coverage, rather than the Government subsidized universal health care she supported during her husband's Presidency. Insure more people, yes, ask health care profiteers to take a little less cream off the top? Oh no, we wouldn't want to ask them to do that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:08 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top