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.
1. 15% VAT
2. More domestic energy on federal lands
3. Flat 20% income / 10% corporate tax
Lower expenses 1. Raise Medicare/SS eligibility to 72
2. Dump Obamacare
3. Close foreign military bases
4. Limit welfare duration
5. Term limits , eliminate PACs,and make lobbying illegal (politicians cannot blow money they do not have and don't have time to spend)
Ban the federal reserve and reissue debt free notes
THEN YOU CAN BALANCE THE BUDGET and not create a depression
Raise it to 72??? Are you nuts? Being old is still the same as it has always been. Just because we live longer does not mean that our bodies have not deteriorated. A person who lived to the age of 72 in 1814 is still just as feeble, their bones, muscles and brains are the same as a 72 year old man in 2014.
The deficit has been set to fall to $514 billion in 2014 from $1.2 trillion in 2008. Less than half of what was handed to Obama by a small government, less government spending, republican.
Keep drinking the Kool-Aid conservatives...the GOP needs you to remain ignorant.
Correlation does not necessarily equal causation.
That said, this is good news! IMHO, our deficits and our debt situation has been troublesome for most of the time since Ronald Reagan took office back in 1981.
Well, the corporate tax cuts have been proposed four time, and every time the GOP rejected them. It's not that they ignore them, they reject them. Last year the reason for rejection was that "this is the same proposal as last year". Is that a good reason to reject something they you actually pushed for in the past?
Do you support corporate tax cuts? Yes, or no? If GOP wanted them, then we would have them. It is as simple as that. Whose fault is it that those proposals ended up in Boehners trash bin?
please provide the COMPLETE bill with the tax cuts in it.
To say yes or no to a question like, D
"Do you support corporate tax cuts?" is meaningless UNLESS you know what the bill entails.
Just look at the Farm bill.
Last edited by Quick Enough; 02-11-2014 at 03:53 PM..
1. 15% VAT
2. More domestic energy on federal lands
3. Flat 20% income / 10% corporate tax
Lower expenses
1. Raise Medicare/SS eligibility to 72
2. Dump Obamacare
3. Close foreign military bases
4. Limit welfare duration
5. Term limits , eliminate PACs,and make lobbying illegal (politicians cannot blow money they do not have and don't have time to spend)
Ban the federal reserve and reissue debt free notes
THEN YOU CAN BALANCE THE BUDGET and not create a depression
I can't go along with a VAT. I understand black market earners will have to pay it. But why start a new tax the the mutts in congress will just keep raising over time? I would make two or three percentages for the flat tax for a little progression.
I like your other ideas though.
I'm not interested in winning an argument with you, that's way easy. The point is that this whole thread ignores the fact that the President is only 1/3rd of the blame or credit for the resulting budget.
So:
1)Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and GW Bush get an F for the last 2 years of Bush Presidency.
2) Pelosi, Reid, & Obama get an F- for creating the worst deficits in history.
3) Reid, Obama and whoever is the Repub Speaker get a D- for slightly decreasing the deficit.
We need a balanced Budget Amendment!!!!
You said "Pelosi, Reid, & Obama get an F- for creating the worst deficits in history."
But to be accurate you should have said "Pelosi, Reid, & Obama get an A+ for fixing the worst deficits in history."
When GW Bush took office our national debt had a debt growth rate of approximately 2%. Bush brought that debt growth rate up to 15.9%.
GW Bush handed Obama a national debt with a 15.9% growth rate. And Obama has brought down that debt growth rate to 8%.
Many republicans try to blame 2009 deficits on Obama, but even conservative sources say 2009's deficits belong to GW Bush.
"The 2009 fiscal year began October 1, 2008, nearly four months before Obama took office. The budget for the entire fiscal year was largely set in place while Bush was in the White House."
You said "Pelosi, Reid, & Obama get an F- for creating the worst deficits in history."
But to be accurate you should have said "Pelosi, Reid, & Obama get an A+ for fixing the worst deficits in history."
When GW Bush took office our national debt had a debt growth rate of approximately 2%. Bush brought that debt growth rate up to 15.9%.
GW Bush handed Obama a national debt with a 15.9% growth rate. And Obama has brought down that debt growth rate to 8%.
Many republicans try to blame 2009 deficits on Obama, but even conservative sources say 2009's deficits belong to GW Bush.
"The 2009 fiscal year began October 1, 2008, nearly four months before Obama took office. The budget for the entire fiscal year was largely set in place while Bush was in the White House."
whatever...Pelosi, Reid, Obama and bush (last 2 years) all get F-. When you rack up deficits like these, you are mortgaging the future of our children and grandchildren and should be in jail!
It's important to see what's in these bills, not just the name of the bill, or to repeat the the political spin created to make a bill sound like something it's not. Often times a bill that claims it will make health care more "affordable," actually ends up making it cost more.
The corporate tax bill proposal you cited earlier was a shell game, lowering the corporate tax rate, but doing away with other tax deductions and adding new fines and penalties which would end up keeping taxes just as high. It says so right in your link:
The main proposal for reform would slash the corporate tax rate to 28% from 35% and pay for the reduction by eliminating "dozens" of business tax breaks. There are currently more than 130 on the books
Absolutely. Reduce the rate, and eliminate loop holes and subsidies. That was the proposal. This is exactly what Reagan did, and exactly what GOP has been pushing for themselves. Romney wanted to do it, and the GOP loved the idea. Why don't they love it now?
Absolutely. Reduce the rate, and eliminate loop holes and subsidies. That was the proposal. This is exactly what Reagan did, and exactly what GOP has been pushing for themselves. Romney wanted to do it, and the GOP loved the idea. Why don't they love it now?
What bill in Congress was voted down by the GOP to do that?
Where the hell did you get tax cuts or defining marriage out of anything I said?????
You seem to be under the impression that presidents can create law, and I explained it is not so. Yes, a president can promise, propose and promote a lot of things, but if Congress rejects them, then they just have to admit that they tried, but it didn't happen. Presidents also do not write bills, only members in Congress can write them. Of course if you make a proposal and the representative throws it in the trash bin under his desk, then you just have to try again later.
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.
I'm right and you know it. Lies do not become you.
