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.
How about you grow a set and explain how you'd do that. The vast majority of the budget is Social Security, Medicare, interest on the debt, the military are about 70% of the budget. Good luck cutting any of those. Bush couldn't even get a minor change in social security done when he had a Republican House and Senate.
You're saying things can be fixed by cutting, show the data. If you don't have any data to back up your opinion then it is utterly worthless and you shouldn't be sharing it with people.
No reason to be an a$$hole. In regards to growing a set, that would be on Congress. Neither side has the stones to cut anything substantial. Beyond that, I am not going to bother with an essay on something that will never happen. It is obvious to anyone with a triple digit IQ that the federal and (most) state governments spend at an unsustainable level, and cannot resist sticking our tax dollars in whatever tickles their fancy.
The tax cuts that began in the 1980's started the problem and continued for 30 years under both democrats and republicans. If not for the huge economic upswing in the 1990's we would have been running deficits sooner. The additional cuts after 2000 pushed us over the top, even if we didn't have the downturn in 2008 we would be running deficits.
There is no way congress can balance the budget on cuts alone, remove the entire defense budget and your still not even close. So what programs are you going to cut, still waiting for an answer from our elected officials. Simpson-Bolles was a reasonable approach, with shared pain that would have put us on the right track yet congress kicked the can down the road. Like David Stockman indicated, you could lock both parties up in a room for a year and they could not agree on a single cut.
no one is going to touch the AMT because it's such a big source of revenue.
Correct.
Quote:
Same with capital gains and carried interest... these are just freebies to the richest of the rich.
Incorrect. The bulk of capital gains and carried interest advantages go to the middle class's 401k's, retirement plans, annuities, pension funds, etc.
Quote:
If you're a working person who contributes to a pension fund, mutual fund, or life insurance policy with a savings component, you're one of the new owners of big business (and many small businesses), too.
That may come as a surprise, since most working people contribute only modest amounts to their retirement plans. But they more than make up for that in the number of active contributors. If you're still not sure, try this on your calculator: Multiply a contribution of $1,000 per person per year by one million working people. Answer: $1 billion dollars per year. Now note the existence of literally hundreds of millions of working people here and in other countries. And they're contributing new money every year.
This shift of business ownership from rich people to working people may be the greatest economic transformation since the Industrial Revolution. Management guru Peter Drucker has called it "The Pension Fund Revolution;" however, now that mutual funds and insurance companies have also become major investors on behalf of working people, I prefer to call it the "Ownership Revolution."
So what does all this mean? Well, for starters, it should lead to an end of complaints about the profits of corporations and allegations about 'greedy corporations.' After all, much of that profit now goes toward the current and future retirement incomes of working people.
...working people have bought enough stocks and shares to become bosses of the bosses. And some pension funds have begun making that clear. CalPERS, the California Public Employees' Retirement System, has led the way in telling Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) and boards of directors that they'd better manage effectively or else. And, CEOs and directors listen; after all CalPERS runs the country's biggest pension fund
Correct. Incorrect. The bulk of capital gains and carried interest advantages go to the middle class's 401k's, retirement plans, annuities, pension funds, etc.Business Ownership & Labor Day
Gains on 401K's within an IRA are treated as ordinary income when they are closed out, although the gains are sheltered before withdrawal.
The top income earners don't really have to be concerned about 401k's, huge amounts of their stock, valuables, real estate holdings are only taxed at the capital gains rate, individuals in the top brackets benefit the most from the preferential tax treatment.
What argument would you like to make to prove that economy was better in 2008-2009 than it has been since? Let me see it.
The point was...
Quote:
Originally Posted by jt800
Here's the real question for you Liberal Democrats......
In 2009 Obama himself said that you don't raise taxes in a recession. Bill Clinton agreed with that.
So do you really think that our economy is that much better today than it was in 2009 that we can do what Obama himself said we should never do?
Were he and Bill Clinton wrong?
We are still in, or are in another, recession. It will be officially called s such in November or December. So according to the Democrats including Obama and Clinton, we should not be raising taxes.
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.
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.
