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 09-26-2010, 05:35 PM
 
3,378 posts, read 3,495,094 times
Reputation: 709

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
Well................. let's see.................

$3.4 trillion budget. $1.5 trillion deficit. $650 billion on the military.

So if we cut the military by 50%, as you ask, we cut the annual deficit to just under $1.2 trillion.

Why cannot liberals say that "which cannot be said" by liberals? We have to massively CUT ENTITLEMENTS! They just cannot say it, yet the math for cuts everywhere else, as well as VAT taxes and increase in income taxes all point to the same conclusions- ENTITLEMENTS MUST BE CUT!
so true if we did gut the military then people would be screaming that the gov't did not protect us. i belive in a strong military, but a smarter more efficient military. DOD has outsourced many projects that just aren't a priority. We need to stop the insane spending, and get back to basics.

I agree that entitlements need to be cut... 99 weeks for unemployment?
bank bailouts? I'd love to see what happens if even 25% of Americans closed their bank accounts all at once. That would be awesome
As long as I made sure to close mine too
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-26-2010, 05:57 PM
 
13,180 posts, read 14,087,736 times
Reputation: 4547
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
Well................. let's see.................

$3.4 trillion budget. $1.5 trillion deficit. $650 billion on the military.

So if we cut the military by 50%, as you ask, we cut the annual deficit to just under $1.2 trillion.

Why cannot liberals say that "which cannot be said" by liberals? We have to massively CUT ENTITLEMENTS! They just cannot say it, yet the math for cuts everywhere else, as well as VAT taxes and increase in income taxes all point to the same conclusions- ENTITLEMENTS MUST BE CUT!
You are so misinformed. The 1.5 trillion surplus was this year due to the stimulus. It's projected to go as low as 600 Billion in two or three years. The defense budget alone is 700 Billion.

Doing away with defense spending would more than erase the budget deficit.

Here wing nuts, this is called an "objective source"......The CBO projected budget deficits going forward http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/105xx/doc...te_Summary.pdf


........SO IN FACT, CUTTNG THE DEFENSE BUDGET ALONE WOULD ERASE THE DEFICIT STARTING IN 2012

Last edited by padcrasher; 09-26-2010 at 06:10 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2010, 06:18 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
36,118 posts, read 23,415,519 times
Reputation: 11042
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLCPUNK View Post
Guess you snoozed through the entire Bush era huh?

The problem with you guys is you never complete the sentence: Obama is spending because...


Yep, those $400bn deficits were murder.

Good thing the Democrats fixed all that.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2010, 06:23 PM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
17,604 posts, read 22,986,778 times
Reputation: 9933
Let the the tax breaks expire, do nothing. In a decade we will have a surplus
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2010, 06:26 PM
 
5,994 posts, read 6,458,888 times
Reputation: 3293
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLCPUNK View Post
Guess you snoozed through the entire Bush era huh?

The problem with you guys is you never complete the sentence: Obama is spending because...he's addicted to it and he can't control himself
There, I completed it.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2010, 06:50 PM
 
Location: Texas State Fair
8,563 posts, read 10,505,341 times
Reputation: 4244
Quote:
I would like to know- from liberals- what are your solutions to cutting the debt and the deficits?
1. Raise taxes
2. Extend unemployment
3. Seize 401k's
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2010, 07:25 PM
 
3,378 posts, read 3,495,094 times
Reputation: 709
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasher View Post
You are so misinformed. The 1.5 trillion surplus was this year due to the stimulus. It's projected to go as low as 600 Billion in two or three years. The defense budget alone is 700 Billion.

Doing away with defense spending would more than erase the budget deficit.

Here wing nuts, this is called an "objective source"......The CBO projected budget deficits going forward http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/105xx/doc...te_Summary.pdf


........SO IN FACT, CUTTNG THE DEFENSE BUDGET ALONE WOULD ERASE THE DEFICIT STARTING IN 2012
who needs a military when the entire world loves you?
time to go back to school
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2010, 10:12 PM
 
1,009 posts, read 2,112,365 times
Reputation: 605
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
ALiberals are unable to actually say it..............that which cannot be said.......... CUT SPENDING ON ENTITLEMENTS!

We need to cut spending EVERYWHERE. That, coupled with a VAT tax, may be able to curb our headlong path into oblivion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
The only actions which can actually reduce the debt are-

Massive across the board cuts in spending (including medicare, social security, medicaid, the military, and eliminating Obamacare)
A very large VAT tax
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
Why cannot liberals say that "which cannot be said" by liberals? We have to massively CUT ENTITLEMENTS! They just cannot say it, yet the math for cuts everywhere else, as well as VAT taxes and increase in income taxes all point to the same conclusions- ENTITLEMENTS MUST BE CUT!
To address your main argument: Do you know why entitlements are called entitlements? Because you are ENTITLED to them. When you receive a social security check, it's PAYBACK for the MONEY you put into the system your whole WORKING LIFE. In effect, social security is a forced retirement account. The standalone social security budget (which is entirely separate from the main budget) has a 2.5 Trillion dollar surplus, to pay out those ENTITLEMENTS that people paid into the standalone system of Social Security.

The problem is that various administrations have borrowed against Social Security, as if it were some kind of asset or well that could be tapped whenever you needed to do something expensive and didn't want to pay for it. The PROBLEM with ENTITLEMENTS is that the bills are coming due for the government, to be paid BACK to the American people, and the Republicans (and corporate Democrats) simply don't want to honor the obligation!

It's more convenient to attack Social Security directly, and complain about a perfectly reasonable mentality that the American people have regarding their national retirement program, and call it something like ENTITLEMENT MENTALITY, than to honor the obligation of paying back money that is owed to the American people, and to which they are entitled! The reason it's an American mentality is because we paid for it, with every single paycheck! Pay up, Uncle Sam!

The reason Social Security has a surplus as a standalone budget is because it's NOT illiquid, it's NOT insolvent, and it won't have any problems paying out 100% of benefits until 2037. Thereafter, it will have to cut payouts by around 20%, and many decades after THAT, it will have to cut payments again. That's Social Security, and it was never supposed to be used as a goddamn piggy-bank for wars or anything! That money is still OWED to the American people, no matter what the corrupt accountants in the government waste bureaucracy will try to sell you, and the only reason they might have any trouble paying it back is because they pretended that the trust fund could be used for their own pet projects in the first place!

It's a separate budget, it has nothing to do with the main budget. It's not a welfare program, because welfare recipients do not ALSO pay into the system their whole lives. Social Security is a retirement fund, money that is being bounced back to the American people after being held in reserve during their entire working lives, and it's completely solvent and will only require slight increases in revenue or modest adjustments to payouts to operate without problems for the long-term foreseeable future.

Criminal, budget-rapist politicians would like to shrug their shoulders and say "Well, boo-hoo citizens! We spent all the money in Social Security, we robbed a trust fund as if it were our personal slush fund, and now we simply don't want to pay the bill." Well, boo-hoo for Washington. Cut spending wherever you have to, but you WILL NOT renege on the contract with every American citizen! There WILL be hell to pay! If you absolutely must kill the program, you WILL pay me back every cent that I paid into it! EVERY CENT.

So we can stop talking about killing Social Security, or "Dealing With It," or "Addressing It," because IT is not part of the budget to be addressed.

Now, aside from the standalone, solvent government entity with a budget surplus of 2.5 trillion, where should we cut spending?

The question is wrong. Appropriate question: Where should we NOT be cutting spending?

Everything has grown bloated with bureaucracy and waste, and I bet if the detailed expenditures of any government administration were transparent down to the dollar, the public would be literally sickened in their stomachs by how much of our tax money is wasted, stolen, or simply better well spent. Cut everything, get our military out of the whole world (http://www.militarybudget.info/overseas.html - broken link), and focus on some homeland prosperity. Let's cut back on never-ending empire expansion, and spend all of our money on the 50 united states for a change. I wonder what would happen!

Last edited by chiaroscuro; 09-26-2010 at 10:17 PM.. Reason: Anger cannot be quenched.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2010, 01:37 AM
 
Location: Alaska
6,449 posts, read 4,843,356 times
Reputation: 3873
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiaroscuro View Post
And the right-wing propaganda machine churns onward

That video WOULD be funny and clever, except Obama has no such "Obamanomics" to speak of. You know what would be radical, and more in line with the lie that Fox is trying to spread about Obama? Moving the tax rate on the top brackets back to where they were after WWII, when we were in our prime as a nation. Go look it up if you don't know what those rates were. Here's a tiny clue: It was less than 92%. Use this new technology called google. Instead of feeding conservatives facts all day, creating dependency, I shall teach them how to search for themselves.

Did those astronomical tax rates on the wealthiest Americans kill jobs? Did anybody call those presidents communists? Did anybody call CLINTON a communist maoist socialist for his tax rates? No.

Bush temporarily cut the Clinton taxes, and those tax cuts are due to expire. Leaving taxes at the exact same rates as they were under Clinton, and half as much (or less) as they were in our American Century of glory. If Obama is a socialist marxist communist for tax rates the same as Clinton, then EVERY PRESIDENT BEFORE CLINTON is also a marxist, socialist, communist, maoist, wealth-spreading tax-and-spend liberal!!! Be consistent and don't ignore your history conservatives!!!

PS: please respond with facts from reality, not opinions or ad hominem attacks this time. Seems every day I point out the history of taxation compared with the history of economic success, nobody has a factual response, only spin. Facts only, please.
Still advocating redistribution of wealth eh?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2010, 01:41 AM
 
Location: Alaska
6,449 posts, read 4,843,356 times
Reputation: 3873
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiaroscuro View Post
To address your main argument: Do you know why entitlements are called entitlements? Because you are ENTITLED to them. When you receive a social security check, it's PAYBACK for the MONEY you put into the system your whole WORKING LIFE. In effect, social security is a forced retirement account. The standalone social security budget (which is entirely separate from the main budget) has a 2.5 Trillion dollar surplus, to pay out those ENTITLEMENTS that people paid into the standalone system of Social Security.

The problem is that various administrations have borrowed against Social Security, as if it were some kind of asset or well that could be tapped whenever you needed to do something expensive and didn't want to pay for it. The PROBLEM with ENTITLEMENTS is that the bills are coming due for the government, to be paid BACK to the American people, and the Republicans (and corporate Democrats) simply don't want to honor the obligation!

It's more convenient to attack Social Security directly, and complain about a perfectly reasonable mentality that the American people have regarding their national retirement program, and call it something like ENTITLEMENT MENTALITY, than to honor the obligation of paying back money that is owed to the American people, and to which they are entitled! The reason it's an American mentality is because we paid for it, with every single paycheck! Pay up, Uncle Sam!

The reason Social Security has a surplus as a standalone budget is because it's NOT illiquid, it's NOT insolvent, and it won't have any problems paying out 100% of benefits until 2037. Thereafter, it will have to cut payouts by around 20%, and many decades after THAT, it will have to cut payments again. That's Social Security, and it was never supposed to be used as a goddamn piggy-bank for wars or anything! That money is still OWED to the American people, no matter what the corrupt accountants in the government waste bureaucracy will try to sell you, and the only reason they might have any trouble paying it back is because they pretended that the trust fund could be used for their own pet projects in the first place!

It's a separate budget, it has nothing to do with the main budget. It's not a welfare program, because welfare recipients do not ALSO pay into the system their whole lives. Social Security is a retirement fund, money that is being bounced back to the American people after being held in reserve during their entire working lives, and it's completely solvent and will only require slight increases in revenue or modest adjustments to payouts to operate without problems for the long-term foreseeable future.

Criminal, budget-rapist politicians would like to shrug their shoulders and say "Well, boo-hoo citizens! We spent all the money in Social Security, we robbed a trust fund as if it were our personal slush fund, and now we simply don't want to pay the bill." Well, boo-hoo for Washington. Cut spending wherever you have to, but you WILL NOT renege on the contract with every American citizen! There WILL be hell to pay! If you absolutely must kill the program, you WILL pay me back every cent that I paid into it! EVERY CENT.

So we can stop talking about killing Social Security, or "Dealing With It," or "Addressing It," because IT is not part of the budget to be addressed.

Now, aside from the standalone, solvent government entity with a budget surplus of 2.5 trillion, where should we cut spending?

The question is wrong. Appropriate question: Where should we NOT be cutting spending?

Everything has grown bloated with bureaucracy and waste, and I bet if the detailed expenditures of any government administration were transparent down to the dollar, the public would be literally sickened in their stomachs by how much of our tax money is wasted, stolen, or simply better well spent. Cut everything, get our military out of the whole world (http://www.militarybudget.info/overseas.html - broken link), and focus on some homeland prosperity. Let's cut back on never-ending empire expansion, and spend all of our money on the 50 united states for a change. I wonder what would happen!
Son, you need to stop using Google and start thinking for yourself. I was reading this thread and realized you are very good at regurgitating what you read and totally inept at coming to an independent conclusion based on your own value system.

I worry about the future of this nation.. I really do..

Oh, you are still proposing redistribution of wealth. Heck, it's hidden or obvious in everyone of your posts..
Rate this post positively 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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:12 AM.

© 2005-2021, 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