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.
Whether it was or wasn't you, it's irrelevant. No one really cares or can prove what you do. The argument was that people do not support the wars but it is the people that continue to elect and re-elect the politicians that keep us in them, hence they do support the wars.
That's only because we don't have a choice. There have only been two anti-war candidates recently (Ron Paul and Rand Paul) and they had no chance.
Bernie may have been anti-war but he had way too much socialist baggage.
For FY2016, the budget deficit was about $600 billion. The question is - from where does one cut that $600 billion? Assume that Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans Benefits, and Military Spending aren't cut.
As I see it, there's only about $400-$450 billion total in federal spending after one takes into account the hold-outs that I mentioned above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003
Why assume that? Cutting 600 billion is quite easy.
Can't help but notice that you didn't actually bother to answer the question posed.
Or are you proposing cuts to the sectors that I pointed out were either mandated by law to be fully funded (Social Security and Medicare) or Medicaid (the majority of which goes to the retired poor) or military spending (which we are told by the Republicans needs more funding)?
Where do you propose to cut 600 billion, Road King?
That's only because we don't have a choice. There have only been two anti-war candidates recently (Ron Paul and Rand Paul) and they had no chance.
Bernie may have been anti-war but he had way too much socialist baggage.
Sanders argued to end the wars. Stein argued to end the wars. Rand had no chance because those who claim to not support the wars refused to vote for the candidate that very well might have done that.
I would agree that we need to reduce the corporate taxes to make us more competitive with other countries but it would need to be offset with some of these tax benefits for some companies. But the concept that we can cut taxes without any impact to our deficit is a failed policy. Taxes on balance cannot decrease and actually need to increased to reduce the deficit either through loss of loopholes or a flat out tax increase.
Trumps proposal will be out shortly and needs to be completed in the fall to go into effect.
Reduce spending. Gee that was hard to figure out. But then again, being a man, I'm not dependent on the nanny state.
Can't help but notice that you didn't actually bother to answer the question posed.
Or are you proposing cuts to the sectors that I pointed out were either mandated by law to be fully funded (Social Security and Medicare) or Medicaid (the majority of which goes to the retired poor) or military spending (which we are told by the Republicans needs more funding)?
Where do you propose to cut 600 billion, Road King?
Easy one. Al least for about half of that. Cut military spending.
Easy one. Al least for about half of that. Cut military spending.
All righty then!
The 2017 Trump administration budget proposal wants to spend $623 billion on the military, so we cut that back by about $300 billion. We pull all the troops back from their forward bases, and then release half of them into the civilian population. Solves the European, Middle Eastern, and Korean issues right away. Violates pretty much all of our international treaties. Puts about 600,000 former military personnel back onto the job market.
So the remaining $300 billion comes from the other part of the discretionary budget of $523 billion. Every single federal department absorbs cuts of over 50%. Or we start chopping entire departments off.
So, when do you think that Congress is going to enact your budget cuts?
When I total up all the taxes I pay, it is over 50% of my income. That is indentured servitude.
Fed Income Tax
State Income Tax
Local Income Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Occupational Privilege Tax
SS Tax
Unemployment Tax
Sales Taxes
Energy Taxes, and Fees
Other Utility Taxes, and Fees
Gasoline Tax
I am sure there are many that I am forgetting. Enough is enough!
When I total up all the taxes I pay, it is over 50% of my income. That is indentured servitude.
Fed Income Tax
State Income Tax
Local Income Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Occupational Privilege Tax
SS Tax
Unemployment Tax
Sales Taxes
Energy Taxes, and Fees
Other Utility Taxes, and Fees
Gasoline Tax
I am sure there are many that I am forgetting. Enough is enough!
When I total up all the taxes I pay, it is over 50% of my income. That is indentured servitude.
Fed Income Tax
State Income Tax
Local Income Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Occupational Privilege Tax
SS Tax
Unemployment Tax
Sales Taxes
Energy Taxes, and Fees
Other Utility Taxes, and Fees
Gasoline Tax
I am sure there are many that I am forgetting. Enough is enough!
Gotta say, if you're paying over 50% of your income in taxes, then you need a new tax accountant.
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.
