Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Morning Safety Dance

Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at the bottom of the form.

42. Re: Differences Jul 22, 2012, 08:51 shinchan0s
 
RollinThundr wrote on Jul 22, 2012, 01:45:
Prez wrote on Jul 22, 2012, 00:40:
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Jul 21, 2012, 23:31:
RollinThundr wrote on Jul 21, 2012, 19:50:
Still focused on taxes. The issue isn't taxes. It's spending. I bring this point up every single time a topic like this comes up and the liberals ignore it every time because they're so focused on getting their "share" of the supposedly finite pie that the 1% is hoarding from them, that they can't take a step back and realize we're spending ourselves into oblivion.

The issue is revenues vs. expenditures, so it's quite obviously about both taxes and spending. Who's not getting that?

Anyone should get it. If you lose your job, the goal in your household needs to be attack the problem from both ends. Drastically lower your expenditures (your "Goesouts" as I like to call it) and your restore your revenue stream (your "Goesins") ASAP. Once you get another job, always make sure your "Goesouts" is a little less than your "Goesins" so that you have room for discretionary spending. The unique thing about Washington is that they seem to think that massive discretionary spending can happen even when their "Goesouts" is exponentially higher than their "Goesins" (At the very least they seem to be either oblivious to or unfazed by the detrimental inflationary effects of printing more money without padding the treasury with actual currency). Maximizing revenue in government isn't only accomplished by tax increases, and in truth that should happen last and only if needed after everything else comes up short. Historically at least the best way to raise "Goesins" sufficiently has been to just get people earning more and spending more. At a given tax rate, more gross income and more spending means more revenue without raising taxes a penny, and it stands to reason I think that this ought to be all that is ever needed barring unforeseen circumstances. Democrats especially seem to have an extremely hard time understanding that and always sing from the same sheet of music: "Raise Taxes, Tax the 'rich', Taxes Taxes TAXES!!" (wherein "rich" is always an inordinately over-sized group for what actually constitutes "rich" in American society) when there are better ways to get the "Goesins" up. But Rollinthunder has a point: Government spending has been so laughably, wildly out of control for so long - and it's getting worse when it needs to be getting drastically better FAST - that I have to agree with him that getting that reigned in needs to be the first priority. Neither party has seemed willing or able to do so however since the friggin' Clinton era. The Republicans occasionally make the right noises now (where were you guys when W. was spending us into oblivion???) but always vote to raise the debt ceiling anyway, making it sound like lip service. The Democrats can't even be bothered to introduce a budget when they controlled both houses and the Presidency for two frickin' years and could have passed anything without breaking a sweat, indicating they are either clueless on how to fix anything or recklessly unconcerned with the problem.

In truth, I don't think the current set of yoekels in Congress nor the bumbling idiot in the Whitehouse are serious enough or competent enough to get it done (And Romney ain't striking me as the Knight in Shining Armor, that's for damn sure). Everyone seems content in maintaining the status quo (which can only end badly) and instead spinning the current crisis for their own political advantage at election time. How can a country NOT fail when its elected leaders are in the business of job preservation rather than governing?

Bingo Prez, and I said the same thing when W was in office. Stop spending so much fucking money. I think what gets me the most is with Obama's inherited war spending from W's administration the man has added more to the nation debt than every previous administration combined, and the media hasn't raised one iota about it.

Sure some of that is totally on Bush for starting said wars but the man hasn't been in office for nearly an entire term now. I'd love to know when we get past blame Bush for every mistake the Obmessiah makes at this point.

I will say one thing, the repubs have at the very least made an effort to come out and propose massive spending cuts, weather they're serious about the issue or not. Here you have a president who's been in office for nearly an entire term without even passing a budget, that's just flat out insane. Bet your bottom dollar if it were a Republican, the media wouldn't let you hear the end of it. But again not a single word.

The spending addiction in DC that both parties subscribe to, needs to just end. We need to stop focusing on these petty class warfare bullshit the dems and the OWS socialists keep trying to cram down everyone's throat and actually address the real issue. Spending.


I keep hearing conservatives bringing up ballooning federal deficits as a problem. Great! I am in full agreement. I guess where we differ is in our priorities on how we tackle the problem. I would argue that you have to raise taxes (on everybody, but more on the wealthy) and have a LONG-TERM PROGRAM of cutting federal spending. Taxes can always be raised and cut on a year-to-year basis. Unfortunately, fiscal spending needs to be planned out because states rely on federal grants and the population, in today's economy, is heavily dependent on federally funded social services. Saying we should "cut everything now" sounds nice, but it clashes with reality. Sorry.

The crazy thing some of you are forgetting is that both federal and (especially) state governments ARE CUTTING THEIR SPENDING. For states, those cuts have been in social services (apart from, understandably, Medicaid and unemployment) and infrastructure. Federal spending (as a % of GDP) on our crumbling infrastructure is at an all time low and has been trending downward since the 70's.

Honestly, the problem isn't really so much the federal budget (BTW, RollinThundr, it's Congress' job to pass a budget, not the President's) but the states' budget. Anyone interested should take a look at Richard Ravitch's report on the states' fiscal crisis. Generally speaking, states are faced with ballooning Medicaid and unfunded pension costs to go along with an eroding tax base. PBS News has a great segment on Ravitch's report.

All the expenditures and liabilities we have now have already been incurred. No use crying about it now whether they were under Bush or Obama. It's time to pay for it. Raise taxes and stop relying on borrowed money. For future spending? The federal and state governments need be realistic, stop relying on accounting gimmicks and adhere to long term plans that are immune to political changes. I seriously doubt that today's politicians are up to the task. You won't see action until the shit finally hits the fan. That's probably something we all can agree on.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
Subject
Comment
     
 
      ;)   ;)   :(   :(   :o   :o   %)   %)   :)   :)   :|   :|   ;P   ;P   X|   X|   :D   :D   More
 
Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you have a signature set up, it will be automatically appended to your comment.
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.
 
          Email me when this topic is updated.
 

Special Codes

  • b[bold text]b
  • i[italic text]i
  • u[underline text]u
  • -[strikethrough text]-
  • c[code text]c
  • +[bullet point]+
  • q[quote text (indented)]q
  • [quote="Author"]quote text (indented)[/quote]
  • [url=Link]text[/url]
  • r{red text}r
  • g{green text}g
  • b{blue text}b
  • m{maroon text}m
  • s{secret text (shows in the background colour)}s

Forum Rules

  1. Disagree all you want but attacks of a personal nature will not be tolerated.
  2. Ethnic slurs and homophobic language will not be tolerated.
  3. Do not post spam, links to warez sites, or instructions on how to obtain pirated software.
  4. Abusing the forums in any manner that could be construed as 'griefing' will not be tolerated.


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo