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.
We raise taxes on the rich, heck, we can raise taxes all across the board then we're still looking at a $500 billion deficit. Liberals are about to have their way with tax increases, but they fail to suggest subsequent measures to get our fiscal house in order. So liberals I ask, once taxes are increased, then what? Problem solved? America back on track? Economy booming again? Don't worry about the multi-hundred billion dollar deficit?
YES, this is what republicans should be talking about. Quit bitching about taxes on 2% of folks, and focus on the other 99% of the deficit problem.
I think, raise the social security and Medicare eligibility ages, and I think we should cut the defense budget in half.
Close all over seas bases, cut the number of admirals and generals.
This is what it says about the costs of the program: As of the end of year 2008, the average annual per beneficiary cost spending for Part D, reported by the Department of Health and Human Services, was $1,517,[17] making the total expenditures of the program for 2008 $49.3 (billions). Projected net expenditures from 2009 through 2018 are estimated to be $727.3 billion.[18]
So, in order to give the Seniors a average of just $1500 dollars, we are passing on a bill to our children and grandchildren a debt of almost $50 BILLION because the government does not have the money to pay for it.
I think we could use some Presidential leadership on this.
can you please provide the data that supports your conclusion? It seems, from looking at the actual numbers, that spending as a p% of GDP is rather consistent over time, which sort of undercuts the premise.
One would expect spending to increase over time simply because of population growth -- more population, more Medicare recipients, more Medicaid recipients, more education grants, etc., etc.
What we don't find is that when revenues are raised spending increases.
It is the way of DemocRATS and liberals. Expose yourself to the real world with an open mind for a few years, and your understand.
We raise taxes on the rich, heck, we can raise taxes all across the board then we're still looking at a $500 billion deficit. Liberals are about to have their way with tax increases, but they fail to suggest subsequent measures to get our fiscal house in order. So liberals I ask, once taxes are increased, then what? Problem solved? America back on track? Economy booming again? Don't worry about the multi-hundred billion dollar deficit?
I see what the problem is now. You conservatives can't win an argument unless you distort, mischaracterize, and misrepresent the positions that liberals hold.
The basic answer is this: As Paul Krugman in particular has been pointing out recently, the kind of austerity plan that the European countries have tried over the last couple of years, and that you conservatives are asking for here, will have the effect of weakening the economy by depressing aggregate demand. We just had an experiment and it demonstrated by the contrast between the results in the United States and in Europe that Keynes works.
It makes sense to let the current law stand with regard to rich people: they've had their tax party for the last ten years, now it's time for the law to remain in effect and for them not to get a new tax break.
If we can generate some savings out of other program cuts, like cuts to the military budget, that's a good thing.
Meanwhile, the tax scolds should recognize that we are not facing any kind of deficit crisis. We should work to reduce the long-term deficit, but adopting austerity measures to do that is about as smart as crashing your car into a tree to slow it down.
When the economy is doing better and aggregate demand (leading to more jobs) has recovered more, then will be time to attack the deficit. While conservatives want to start out by hurting poor and middle-class people, if we really want to reduce the Medicare budget why don't we start by letting the federal government bargain on prices with the drug companies?
This is what it says about the costs of the program: As of the end of year 2008, the average annual per beneficiary cost spending for Part D, reported by the Department of Health and Human Services, was $1,517,[17] making the total expenditures of the program for 2008 $49.3 (billions). Projected net expenditures from 2009 through 2018 are estimated to be $727.3 billion.[18]
So, in order to give the Seniors a average of just $1500 dollars, we are passing on a bill to our children and grandchildren a debt of almost $50 BILLION because the government does not have the money to pay for it.
I think we could use some Presidential leadership on this.
Medicare Part D was an abomination in 2003 as an unfunded near trillion dollar giveaway to political sponsors. My take on it hasn't changed since. Go for it.
YES, this is what republicans should be talking about. Quit bitching about taxes on 2% of folks, and focus on the other 99% of the deficit problem.
I think, raise the social security and Medicare eligibility ages, and I think we should cut the defense budget in half.
Close all over seas bases, cut the number of admirals and generals.
Read very carefully, for this important.
The tax on 2% of the people is, in reality, another tax increase on the economy.
It doesn't matter where you insert the siphon tube, the effect is the same, less fuel for the economy, and more fuel for coercive, destructive, counter-productive government.
My bad. When dealing with an ideologue, I shouldn't assume they would have any clue (much less appreciation) of pragmatism. Unfortunately, there is little I can do to help, unless you're a willing and able learner, than to say... may be for a few years.
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.
