Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [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 04-18-2016, 04:05 PM
 
Location: moved
13,660 posts, read 9,724,335 times
Reputation: 23487

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
Here is the thing; everyone complains about a bloated and inefficient federal government. But when it comes time to make cuts they want the "other person's" bloat and whatever cut, but not what benefits themselves.

Military spending is spread around the nation for just that reason; closing bases, ending weapons and other programs could bring hurt from Maine to California, so in the end no one in Congress wants to have that fight.
Military spending is a delectably excellent source of well-paying, high-quality manufacturing jobs - precisely the sort of jobs whose passing the so-called Middle Class much bemoans. For security reasons, these jobs can't be offshored. Then there's the engineering-jobs, and so forth. How much of academic research in America is funded via defense spending? How many new small businesses are thriving due to the military's Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) program? Cut defense, and you cut some of the most attractive and remunerative salaried positions in America - in the private sector.

One person's inefficiency is another person's prized livelihood. This is why we can't cut spending on our way to prosperity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-18-2016, 04:09 PM
 
Location: Texas
44,259 posts, read 64,397,970 times
Reputation: 73937
Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
Here is the thing; everyone complains about a bloated and inefficient federal government. But when it comes time to make cuts they want the "other person's" bloat and whatever cut, but not what benefits themselves.


Military spending is spread around the nation for just that reason; closing bases, ending weapons and other programs could bring hurt from Maine to California, so in the end no one in Congress wants to have that fight.


Three biggest areas of the federal budget that need to be addressed are military spending, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. You can wring a good amount of savings from each by cutting waste, abuse and whatever, but at what cost and to who? There are still communities that haven't recovered from the last round of base closings, and some never did or will.
I don't mean line item.

I mean paying too much for a service, mysteriously misplacing 5 million bucks here and there, ridiculous lifelong pensions for govt employees/politicians, limos, parties, private vehicles, blah blah blah.
Efficiency is never a priority when it comes to spending someone else's money.

I think that if we were responsible, we could actually have all the programs and benefits we do have for a lower cost.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2016, 06:03 PM
 
Location: London
12,275 posts, read 7,145,579 times
Reputation: 13661
In my household combined, we see less than 70% of what we earn. So that's around 30% of our income going to taxes.

We save 60% of the rest, meaning 40% of our after-tax income goes to living expenses.

40% of 70%, is 28%. 28% of our gross income goes to living expenses, while more than 30% goes to taxes.

Yep. That sounds about right to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2016, 06:04 PM
 
Location: Texas
44,259 posts, read 64,397,970 times
Reputation: 73937
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohhwanderlust View Post
In my household combined, we see less than 70% of what we earn. So that's around 30% of our income going to taxes.

We save 60% of the rest, meaning 40% of our after-tax income goes to living expenses.

40% of 70%, is 28%. 28% of our gross income goes to living expenses, while more than 30% goes to taxes.

Yep. That sounds about right to me.
Same here.
It's not even close.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2016, 12:44 AM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
15,293 posts, read 17,696,491 times
Reputation: 25236
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant View Post
Why? First, because our income taxes are actually lower than in most of the developed world. And second, because we have a huge stratum of persons whose jobs and livelihood depend on the complexity and inefficiency of "the system". And I don't mean public-sector employees; I mean persons involved in record-keeping and compliance and administration and so forth.

Health care is expensive because it supports so many jobs. Before we grouse and vex over how much of our GDP we spend on health-care, relative to how little actual health benefit we derive, we should consider: what percentage of American jobs are related to health-care? If we had a more efficient system – with lower prices for consumers (that is, the patients), how many people would lose their jobs, or sustain a pay-cut?
Service jobs are the easiest to eliminate, because there is no infrastructure investment in their position. Hospitals dealt with having to treat anyone who walked into the Emergency Room by closing the Emergency Room. It's not uncommon for someone to be an hour and a half to two hours from the nearest ER. While medical expenditures are inflating rapidly, services are being pruned along with the number of people being employed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2016, 12:46 AM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
15,293 posts, read 17,696,491 times
Reputation: 25236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
Most all of us will get Medicare.
If we ever figure out how to fund it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2016, 04:01 AM
 
Location: Purgatory
6,395 posts, read 6,282,580 times
Reputation: 9924
I personally spend way more on housing than food and clothing (and even taxes in most years) combined.

Same for most who live in my area.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2016, 05:56 AM
 
4,345 posts, read 2,796,960 times
Reputation: 5821
America has always been separated from the rest of the world equally by oceans and by ideas. Enlightenment thought didn't originate here but it grew here. A man's life, liberty and property were his by right, not by a sovereign's grace. They inhered in him prior to society and society existed and developed to better preserve these rights.

The country grew with this. The rest of the world proceeded along various paths. Free from foreign entanglements didn't just prevent costly adventures. It allowed our unique nature to develop. By the early 20th Century we were the most prosperous nation in the world, from top to bottom.

Since the income tax, we've staggered from one disaster to another. WWI.........Iraq. Not one of these, and the latter are not independent of the earlier, would have ended as it had, gone on the way it did, or started at all without the income tax.

If we were able to spend 100 times the cost of taxes on food, shelter, housing and TV it would still not be enough to erase the stain income taxes have placed on the world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2016, 06:28 AM
 
17,401 posts, read 11,984,970 times
Reputation: 16155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
Most all of us will get Medicare.
Medicare, like SS, is insurance that is paid for throughout a person's life, not an entitlement.

Next.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2016, 06:31 AM
 
Location: Florida
4,103 posts, read 5,429,452 times
Reputation: 10111
Quote:
Originally Posted by redguard57 View Post
Whenever I see articles like that I wonder...if we pay so much in taxes, why don't we have cool stuff like universal health care or tuition-free college? Other countries have that stuff & pay high taxes as a result, but the article says we pay high taxes?

Either we're not paying that much tax or the U.S. government is much more inept & inefficient than those of the rest of the developed world.
Because we are highly inefficient in our spending. And some people have managed to pit us against each other as to what tax should be spent on. Notice repubs and dems now arent fighting over how MUCH to tax us, but theyre fighting over what to spend the tax ON. Military vs Social welfare etc. I laugh when repubs say dems want free stuff yet repubs want a MASSIVE military.
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 > Economics

All times are GMT -6.

© 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