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 05-28-2009, 05:56 AM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,282 posts, read 16,643,271 times
Reputation: 8891

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by cuebald View Post
This board is full of complaints about the increasing National Debt. What would your proposal be to pay down the deficit? Whatever it is will involve taxes, since the government has no money of its own. The poor have no money to get. You either have to increase the tax base in both breadth and depth, or you have to tax existing wealth.

For those who don't like the Stimulus, and for those who do:

Is there a good plan for increasing the amount of money available in the economy to be taxed, or should we simply tell our creditors to take a hike? Would you like to move the decimal in our currency over a place to accommodate your plan? Educate us in what we SHOULD be doing instead of simply taking pot shots.

It's easy to sit behind a fence and throw snowballs over it and whine. Offer something constructive as a counterpoint to the current situation.
Cut government spending! Cut it drastically. This administration has spent more than any administration in American History. It's time to bring it to a screeching halt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-28-2009, 06:03 AM
 
Location: Louisville KY Metro area
4,824 posts, read 12,809,057 times
Reputation: 2116
What most people fail to understand is the ghost town effect. We read about it throughout history. When gold/silver/oil was found, towns boomed, but when the market changed, whether the gold played out, the oil was drilled out, the coal was mined out, whatever, people lost jobs. Towns became ghost towns and that phenomenon still plays out. Whether it was gold in Alaska, coal in western Kentucky, or steel in Pennsylvania, people lost jobs, home values dropped, restaurants closed, and sidewalks were rolled up.

Unfortunately we must allow this ritual to play itself out to maintain the strength of our economy and our nation. The less government involves itself, the better and faster the recovery will happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2009, 06:03 AM
 
Location: St. Joseph Area
6,237 posts, read 8,466,840 times
Reputation: 3101
But cut spending on what? There are so many things to cut (or spend money on) and specifics would help.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2009, 06:05 AM
 
Location: Columbia, SC
18,228 posts, read 10,152,753 times
Reputation: 7073
Quote:
Originally Posted by floridasandy View Post
are you honestly suggesting that there isn't waste in government spending? that all the waste has been purged?
Not in the least, but it's a matter of degree.

Will cutting out the fat be enough, or would muscle have to be reduced also?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2009, 06:06 AM
 
Location: Chicago Suburbs
3,191 posts, read 3,791,536 times
Reputation: 1161
It's simple and obvious for people that can balance a checkbook and are self-reliant, cut spending.

Sorry but our government is far too large and not transparent enough for the common taxpayer to know where all the bodies are buried to make specific suggestions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2009, 06:09 AM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,314 posts, read 39,606,455 times
Reputation: 7107
Quote:
Can spending be cut enough to create a surplus without compromising infrastructure and defense and increasing unemployment?

Smaller government would be nice
Over time yes - if you cut taxes as well. Smaller government has never been tried in the last 50 years, or ever for that matter.

Just look at the growth percentages of government expansion - that is where the problem lies.

You are not going to increase revenues by taxing individuals and business - that will only force individuals to cut their personal spending (the real engine that drives the economy) and business to cut jobs and pass along those tax increases to consumers - you must see the vicious cycle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2009, 06:12 AM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,314 posts, read 39,606,455 times
Reputation: 7107
Quote:
But cut spending on what? There are so many things to cut (or spend money on) and specifics would help.
Think about what the true purpose, authority and responsibility of the federal government is. Everything outside of that list belongs to the individual states.

The problem now is getting the bloated genie (government intrusion and expansion) back in the bottle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2009, 06:22 AM
 
12,870 posts, read 13,144,774 times
Reputation: 4453
another thing, don't allow banks to buy assets from themselves:
Banks Want Government Subsidies to Buy Assets from Themselves « The Baseline Scenario
more transparency on wall street and more prosecutions for the criminals on wall street, with recovery of as much money as possible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2009, 06:26 AM
 
Location: Chicago Suburbs
3,191 posts, read 3,791,536 times
Reputation: 1161
Quote:
Originally Posted by floridasandy View Post
another thing, don't allow banks to buy assets from themselves:
Banks Want Government Subsidies to Buy Assets from Themselves « The Baseline Scenario
more transparency on wall street and more prosecutions for the criminals on wall street, with recovery of as much money as possible.
Don't forget the politicians that are complicit in these scenarios.
Criminals in D.C.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2009, 06:28 AM
 
12,870 posts, read 13,144,774 times
Reputation: 4453
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuebald View Post
Not in the least, but it's a matter of degree.

Will cutting out the fat be enough, or would muscle have to be reduced also?
the driver of our economy is employment, since that is both where the spending and the taxes come from so clearly cutting out all of the fat would allow more money to be channeled into job creation. i don't want to get started on how little job creation has actually been generated by this wasteful spending so far.

stop giving united states money to the IMF.

eliminate all of these government subsidy programs:http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb_0611-41.pdf
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
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