U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 Yesterday, 03:43 PM
 
5,597 posts, read 3,125,980 times
Reputation: 3350

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
curious comment from someone who is advocating robbery to pay for the needs of others
Guessing your not a big fan or robin hood..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 08:55 PM
 
115 posts, read 20,688 times
Reputation: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike View Post
Just a simple question to you:

Currently, a person who is born disabled and cant work get a maximum of $700 a month to survive on, most of the time significantly less than that. Do you support cutting this further or do you think it is a disgrace that the disabled have to live in dire poverty to survive?

I am happy to answer any civil question. This one is a fair question, but complex. On one side, the truly disabled are unable to fend for themselves, and I feel for them. I give a considerable amount to children's and veteran's charities. I am not a person of zero compassion.


But, here is the rub. I do it because I want to, and because I pick the charity I choose to support. Taxation for welfare is a different matter. No one gets to pick the recipients of their tax money, or decline to contribute if they feel it is not going to be wisely spent. In addition, when you donate to a major charity a good portion goes to salaries and operating cost. When the government taxes you it goes to salaries, operating cost, waste, fraud, inefficient business practices, and usually goods and services provided by insiders. The handouts given come with strings, and the understanding the recipients will vote for the party doling out the charity.


So to answer your question, no I don't want to cut the disabled's pay. But, I would like to see a better system. However as seems to be the trend on these post, none of this has anything to do with my post, which was that you can't pay for all this by taxing the rich. They don't have enough money to pay for all this, and even if they did, they would leave before giving it all up. I do want to see spending cuts, but not in the benefits paid, just in the way it spent. This nation is already broke. Right now if you have one dollar in your pocket that you don't owe someone, you are twenty two trillion dollars richer than our government. And, that is the official number which is miles lower than the real number. We wont be able to recover that by cutting some disabled person's $700.00. We need serious draconian cuts ASAP.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:15 PM
 
Location: 15 months till retirement and I can leave the hell hole of New Yakistan
25,566 posts, read 14,237,914 times
Reputation: 6608
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmagoo View Post
We may have to start taxing the wealthy again. Oh the humanity!
we have never taxed wealth...but the high income people pay most of the taxes
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:44 PM
 
864 posts, read 415,366 times
Reputation: 2755
Are you all not paying attention? Since 2009 the Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) crowd has been in control of all the major central banks worldwide. Under MMT debt and money are interchangeable and there is no need to have any capital backing the various currencies as long as debt and liquidity is available. Debt is emitted by central banks until the economy reaches a desired level of employment. As economies grow so does the debt/money supply. The debt is simply an accounting entry, it will never be repaid, but the interest on it will of course be serviced (if necessary, by issuing more debt).

We ain’t in Kansas anymore.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:51 PM
 
20,866 posts, read 8,987,490 times
Reputation: 7216
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovecrowds View Post
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/pres...ojections.html

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/pres...ojections.html

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cha.asp

Democrats want to cover nearly 90 million from birth to 23 years old with one expensive "education" scheme after another. There will be 78 million people on retirement programs with SS, Medicare, state or local pensions.

In 2030, with the aging of the population and the millennials children being covered with free childcare, free K-12 and then free college there will be up to 168 million on one expensive scheme or another, the issue is that there will be around 355 million people.

78 million Americans in 2030 will Medicare aged, OASDI, government pensions

76.7 million children a vast majority in public schools and some Democrats want free child care for birth to 5 years old.

13.7 million in public colleges which Bernie Sanders want to make free
The way I see it....Democrats are trying to take care of our overloaded system. Republicans just want kids born without any regard to the circumstances
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:04 PM
 
1,954 posts, read 646,730 times
Reputation: 1513
Quote:
Originally Posted by natalie469 View Post
The way I see it....Democrats are trying to take care of our overloaded system. Republicans just want kids born without any regard to the circumstances
Democrats want to overload the system to break it. The Democrats' dream is to redistribute American wealth to the world.

Religious Republicans can be accused of pushing for needless babies, but increasingly other kinds of Republicans are pro-family planning. I think contraceptives are the best way to keep welfare costs down. I think the carte blanche people have to produce babies is what causes most of the misery in society.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:36 PM
 
7,737 posts, read 4,428,107 times
Reputation: 10068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avondalist View Post
Democrats want to overload the system to break it. The Democrats' dream is to redistribute American wealth to the world.

Religious Republicans can be accused of pushing for needless babies, but increasingly other kinds of Republicans are pro-family planning. I think contraceptives are the best way to keep welfare costs down. I think the carte blanche people have to produce babies is what causes most of the misery in society.
Democrats want to tax and spend.

Current Republican platform seems to be to just bankrupt the country as the way to ‘fix’ entitlements because they’re not brave enough to pursuit actual cuts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:45 PM
 
1,954 posts, read 646,730 times
Reputation: 1513
Quote:
Originally Posted by notnamed View Post
Democrats want to tax and spend.

Current Republican platform seems to be to just bankrupt the country as the way to ‘fix’ entitlements because they’re not brave enough to pursuit actual cuts.
Raising taxes and reducing spending would destroy either party.

Why do you act as if fiscal health is only the Republicans' responsibility, and thus only they should bear the cost of trying to balance the budget? Democrats don't get a pass when it comes to out of control spending just because they support it more.

The only time in recent memory we have been in a fiscally healthy condition was the late 90s, when both parties compromised.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:54 PM
 
Location: Mexifornia
982 posts, read 802,556 times
Reputation: 1023
Quote:
Originally Posted by miquel_westano View Post
What a joke that is. If you took everything the wealthy in America had, all 100%, you couldn't fund America for a year. We don't need to tax anyone more. We need to spend less. That starts by ending this insane idea we should give everyone free stuff. There is no constitutional right to getting free education, healthcare, food or anything else. While helping the needy may be virtuous, it doesn't alleviate poverty.

In addition we need to find a way to incentivize people to have smaller families if they can not afford to care for large families without government assistance. The world including the USA is over populated. I don't believe in communist style rules like one child per family. But I believe our system should give tax incentives for having small families, not large ones.

We need to stop the flow of money from producers to non producers, and this should start with our government. The biggest drain on our economy is the government. Every penny they spend was taken from taxpayers. The system is so bloated with waste and corruption, I would bet it spends at minimum twice what it would have to if it were run properly. And they want control of more, like health care and energy.

I am so tired of this, tax the rich mantra. It is not only not going to happen, but even if it did, it wouldn't work. The rich would simply flee the country. They can afford to leave anytime they want. And even if you seized all their money, it wouldn't do anything to save our economy. That money would be gone in less than a year, and the jobs the wealthy create would be gone with it. Then the only ones left would be the middle class and poor. Then the middle class become poor and the poor become the starving.

the poor can't be taxed because they have no money. The rich use all of the tax "loopholes" to avoid paying as little tax as possible. Which leaves the middle class.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:56 PM
 
7,737 posts, read 4,428,107 times
Reputation: 10068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avondalist View Post
Raising taxes and reducing spending would destroy either party.

Why do you act as if fiscal health is only the Republicans' responsibility, and thus only they should bear the cost of trying to balance the budget? Democrats don't get a pass when it comes to out of control spending just because they support it more.

The only time in recent memory we have been in a fiscally healthy condition was the late 90s, when both parties compromised.
Did I deny that the Democrats tax and spend because I thought I called that out?

Republicans want to pretend they are the party of fiscal conservatism, they need to start acting like it when in power and not just squawk about it when not in power.

Both parties should be destroyed. Eating all the political fallout of fixing the debt they created should be their mea culpa on the way out.

Last edited by notnamed; Yesterday at 11:42 PM..
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

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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top