TWC Today Forums
Other => General Discussion => Topic started by: Mr. Rainman on July 30, 2011, 10:42:09 PM
-
As most of you probably know, the United States government is in danger of defaulting on its national debt of $14.3 trillion dollars and climbing. The Treasury Secretary has stated that he can keep paying the bills that we owe up to August 2nd (that's Tuesday, or 3 days away) before we are in danger of defaulting.
No one really knows what's gonna happen if we DO default, but there is a consensus that our sterling credit rating of AAA will be cut down to AA...something we have never seen happen to us before. This would make us look like a more risky investment to other countries...and they would likely make necessary adjustments, harming our economy. Did I mention that this could send shockwaves throughout our markets and affect other markets? Stocks gave us a preview this week: they made their worst 5-day finish in over a year.
All eyes are on Congress now as they try to raise the debt ceilings, but unfortunately Washington is going nowhere fast. The House - run by Republicans - has passed two resolutions and bills that could address the debt ceiling - but Democrats in the Senate have slammed both down.
What are your thoughts on this? For me, Jon Stewart put it best, regarding this squabble between parties:
"My question to Congress, and a question from many Americans as of tonight is this: do you want out of this relationship so bad, but don't have the balls to leave, so you all decided to act like such giant ***holes that you force us...to break up with you? Because if so, just get the **** out."
"
-
Is this really the best place to start discussing national politics, especially when the issue is so charged? I can see a war starting here pretty easily... :fear:
-
Is this really the best place to start discussing national politics, especially when the issue is so charged? I can see a war starting here pretty easily... :fear:
Yeah, I'm not for political discussions in this forum. :no:
-
Okay, fine. If this isn't the place, then someone take this down. Keep in mind this isn't entirely a political issue, unless someone chooses to make it so. The only political statements I made was a fact regarding bills in Congress - and why they weren't getting past, and the quote. I wasn't planning on taking it any farther.
-
Pretty sad and pathetic of both parties to drag this on for as long as they have. You would think for once in their lives they could put the political egotistical pride of theirs aside to get something as serious and possibly crippling as this resolved through a compromise. It's like having 5 year olds running and controlling the country or better yet, cats and dogs. :itsok:
-
It's just a really big mess that we never should have in the first place, and I really don't want to say anything more about it. I don't even know what will happen with my job and pay if we default, so I'm hoping something will be done at the very last minute just like in April.
If there is even the slightest hint of a war here, I will lock this topic permanently. I don't want to see a political fight on a forum where we're all friends.
-
I'm quite confused about this default stuff, does it mean our unemployment rate will go up even more? A scary fact is Apple has more cash than the US govt now..perhaps the govt should start selling ipads now :P But in all seriousness, something has to be done. I'm concerned this default may cause further cuts in education such as Federal student aid and pell grants. These are the lifelines in affording a college education, IMO, as I am dependent on federal financial aid for college
-
I'm quite confused about this default stuff, does it mean our unemployment rate will go up even more? A scary fact is Apple has more cash than the US govt now..perhaps the govt should start selling ipads now :P But in all seriousness, something has to be done. I'm concerned this default may cause further cuts in education such as Federal student aid and pell grants. These are the lifelines in affording a college education, IMO, as I am dependent on federal financial aid for college
It could most certainly send the unemployment rate up, and that's the last thing the country needs right now. As for Pell grants and federal financial aid, it's a very strong likelihood that they would be suspended until the government is able to pay its bills again.
-
I'm on a $5000 Pell Grant, I can't afford my college tuition without that. I'm concerned if they do indeed suspend the Pell grants, then students will start dropping out of college
-
Hmm...how to respond this without making it political. Let's see...
First of all, we are not going to default. We can't. Despite the fear mongering that the president and Timmy are doing, social security checks will go out and our military will be paid. They have to.
This problem could have been avoided if a certain group would have passed a budget last year. At the time, I couldn't understand why they'd do something so stupid. Now I do. To put us in this position and make another certain group as the enemy of progress. They're doing it by saying things like "hey, we'd love to fix this problem, but they're not willing to 'compromise'." Of course, when group A says compromise, they mean they want group B to do what THEY want. In particuar, to allow them to continue spending money on things we don't need, and pay for it with higher taxes. Which, of course, is exactly what you need to do when the economy is in the crapper. :rolleyes:
To group A (and the few left in group B that are like them), this is just a game. It's all about power. Although I expect this childish behavior from them (they've been doing it for decades...it's what they do best), I'm mighty pissed. :angry:
-
The sad thing is that we are in the dark for the most part. No one has come out and said, "If we default, this is what is going to get suspended/cut/have a spending cap." Which explains why everyone is worried at the moment.
I think they're going to try and cut the unnecessary stuff first - at least, that's what I hope - and hold on to the stuff we really need. This includes spending with defense, and systems used to keep the public safe - this includes the National Weather Service and the Food and Drug Administration.
-
I'm on a $5000 Pell Grant, I can't afford my college tuition without that. I'm concerned if they do indeed suspend the Pell grants, then students will start dropping out of college
Unfortunately, that's a very realistic possibility. With the country in default, paying for students to go to college will be the least of the government's worries. Sadly, that will mean that some students simply won't be able to continue with their studies until this is over.
-
I think they're going to try and cut the unnecessary stuff first - at least, that's what I hope - and hold on to the stuff we really need. This includes spending with defense, and systems used to keep the public safe - this includes the National Weather Service and the Food and Drug Administration.
Unfortunately, I don't think, in today's political climate, the government considers NOAA to be of prime importance. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if they put the FDA on the back burner, too. Just look at how long the FAA has been partially shutdown!
-
Regarding the FAA, it has been partially shutdown for 8 days. Yet air traffic still continues, for the most part, without a hitch. Out of the 4000 workers suspended, none were air traffic controllers, and very few were federal engineers. Most were at the agency headquarters.
The point I'm making is that this partial shutdown of the FAA is NOT affecting public safety. And even if the government DOES decide to cut some of the funding of the National Weather Service and FDA, I think seeing this action with the FAA tells me they won't do anything that would jeopardize public safety. Also, seeing how a large number of those workers suspended were from headquarters, and not workers at individual airports, I don't think smaller departments of the FDA and NWS will see worker cuts.
-
I honestly have no idea what defaulting is, nor can I ever understand any of the science behind that... yeah, you can tell how little I pay attention to politics :P
-
Well, aren't airline ticket prices suppose to be cheaper now since the FAA has been shut down? It's the FAA that mandates all those pesky fees and taxes onto our tickets.
-
Well, aren't airline ticket prices suppose to be cheaper now since the FAA has been shut down? It's the FAA that mandates all those pesky fees and taxes onto our tickets.
No because the airlines would jack the prices up to compensate
-
Well, aren't airline ticket prices suppose to be cheaper now since the FAA has been shut down? It's the FAA that mandates all those pesky fees and taxes onto our tickets.
No because the airlines would jack the prices up to compensate
And most have, but the price increase is even larger than what the taxes would have been. Of course.
-
The sad thing is that we are in the dark for the most part. No one has come out and said, "If we default, this is what is going to get suspended/cut/have a spending cap." Which explains why everyone is worried at the moment.
I think they're going to try and cut the unnecessary stuff first - at least, that's what I hope - and hold on to the stuff we really need. This includes spending with defense, and systems used to keep the public safe - this includes the National Weather Service and the Food and Drug Administration.
Everyone is worried because the media is telling them the end of the world is coming. I imagine.... as usual... a last minute deal will be made
I honestly have no idea what defaulting is, nor can I ever understand any of the science behind that... yeah, you can tell how little I pay attention to politics :P
Pretty simple really. Not raising the debt ceiling means the US cant borrow any more money and thus we wont have enough funds to pay SOME of our bills. We still get quite a lot of money in so its not like everything is going to shut down.
-
The US Mint should just print more money out to compensate this but then the dollars value will continue to decrease.
-
Even though the airlines are still pulling in record profits, the removal of these taxes is gonna force them to lose almost $200 million dollars in profits. If they don't wanna report a decrease in profits from the last quarter, they're gonna jack up the prices.
And printing out more money, as it was pointed out, would weaken our dollar further and contribute to inflation. Big time. Which means prices would go through the roof on everything.
-
The US Mint should just print more money out to compensate this but then the dollars value will continue to decrease.
There have been many, many examples throughout history to show that this is a terrible idea. Besides, it doesn't matter how much cash there is in the money supply in this situation. The government will shortly be reaching the maximum amount it is allowed to spend in debt, and unless something is done about it, the government simply won't be allowed to spend any more money. It's just like maxing out your credit card. You either have to renegotiate to get a higher limit, or you have to start paying off the debt before you can spend again.
-
I agree with Martin--the media is just trying to get attention by scaring people. The interest rates may go up and some jobs lost, but it's not going to be another Great Depression. We should've heeded George Washington's advice to not have political parties. :yes:
I'm not a huge fan of discussing politics because someone is going to inevitably get upset. I don't think this is a bad idea of discussion, though, just as long as it's moderated and we respect other people's thoughts.
Somehow, I think civilization will continue.
-
As Martin said would happen and I figured as well. A DEAL HAS BEEN REACHED BY BOTH PARTIES.
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-congress-reach-debt-deal-003853348.html (http://news.yahoo.com/obama-congress-reach-debt-deal-003853348.html)
-
As Martin said would happen and I figured as well. A DEAL HAS BEEN REACHED BY BOTH PARTIES.
[url]http://news.yahoo.com/obama-congress-reach-debt-deal-003853348.html[/url] ([url]http://news.yahoo.com/obama-congress-reach-debt-deal-003853348.html[/url])
Congress still has to vote on it in both the House and the Senate today into tomorrow. It'll probably pass, but I don't think it will so easily.
-
As Martin said would happen and I figured as well. A DEAL HAS BEEN REACHED BY BOTH PARTIES.
[url]http://news.yahoo.com/obama-congress-reach-debt-deal-003853348.html[/url] ([url]http://news.yahoo.com/obama-congress-reach-debt-deal-003853348.html[/url])
Congress still has to vote on it in both the House and the Senate today into tomorrow. It'll probably pass, but I don't think it will so easily.
Sadly, there are those in the Tea Party that would prefer to see the U.S. go into default. I've never been able to figure out their "logic." I guess they just would rather suffer any consequences rather than compromise.
-
The House of Representatives just passed the debt ceiling bill by a vote of 269-161. It actually got more support than was anticipated. It's expected to make it all the way now as the House was viewed as the most vulnerable hurdle for the bill's passage. A source is provided here as proof of this news:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/house-passes-debt-ceiling-bill-giffords-votes/story?id=14208579 (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/house-passes-debt-ceiling-bill-giffords-votes/story?id=14208579)
-
Sadly, there are those in the Tea Party that would prefer to see the U.S. go into default. I've never been able to figure out their "logic." I guess they just would rather suffer any consequences rather than compromise.
The reason you don't understand that logic is because what you state is what I like to call a big, fat lie. No one in the tea party wants us to go into default. Name one person who has said that. And think about it...if we did, why would be asking for deep cuts? Wouldn't spending cuts keep us farther away from defaulting? It just blows my mind that supposedly sane people can call serious spending cuts and a balanced budget "radical" ideas. And this deal that was achieved is an absolute joke. They're only cutting a couple billion dollars. That's chump change for the government. That's less than the interest we spend on our debt in a week!! Give me a break! And the cuts aren't even specified. Some stupid committee is going to figure out what to cut. And if they don't find something (which you know they won't), it'll come out of defense. And how exactly will that work with 4 wars going on? :dunno:
-
The Senate has passed the debt ceiling bill by a vote of 74-26 about an hour ago, so President Obama will sign it into law in the next few hours.
-
It's not the best deal, but at least we avoided an economic catastrophe. :yes:
-
It's not the best deal, but at least we avoided an economic catastrophe. :yes:
I'm not so sure given the recent bad news from the markets today. There's still a lot more that needs to be done to fix this mess.
-
It's not the best deal, but at least we avoided an economic catastrophe. :yes:
I'm not so sure given the recent bad news from the markets today. There's still a lot more that needs to be done to fix this mess.
I agree. There has to be much more of a focus on jobs.
-
They always wait for the last minute. :(
-
Here's what I don't understand. What's the purpose of a "debt ceiling" anyway? You'd think it would mean what it says: the most allowable debt PERIOD. Once the debt ceiling was hit, THAT'S IT.
The "debt ceiling" has been raised something like 50-70 times since 1960. So in other words, once the spending addicts in D.C. realize that the party's just about over, they just change the rules (i.e. raise the "debt ceiling") so they can continue to feed their addiction (i.e. keep spending). Why should they care, it's not their money.
-
For starters, taxes for the wealthy have to be raised, and entitlements have to be cut down.
-
the only way you can expect jobs to be created is if fuel costs were at pre-katrina levels
-
For starters, taxes for the wealthy have to be raised, and entitlements have to be cut down.
One little problem with the first part of your plan...
IRS: Not enough rich to cover the deficit (http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/39534)
Entitlement reform is a necessity.
-
For starters, taxes for the wealthy have to be raised, and entitlements have to be cut down.
One little problem with the first part of your plan...
IRS: Not enough rich to cover the deficit ([url]http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/39534[/url])
Entitlement reform is a necessity.
The IRS can say whatever they want to say. There is no reason why the richest 1% shouldn't be required to pay higher taxes. :yes:
-
For starters, taxes for the wealthy have to be raised, and entitlements have to be cut down.
One little problem with the first part of your plan...
IRS: Not enough rich to cover the deficit ([url]http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/39534[/url])
Entitlement reform is a necessity.
The IRS can say whatever they want to say. There is no reason why the richest 1% shouldn't be required to pay higher taxes. :yes:
I like how you discounted the IRS's evidence without any evidence or reason. :lol: You don't get it. You can tax the rich at 100%, it still won't be enough to pay all our debt. Many economists have documented this. Not to mention that the rich pay nearly 40% of all taxes and almost half don't pay any taxes. Funny that no one asks them to pay their "fair share." Which begs the question - how much is a "fair share?" We've heard this from the Dems for decades, but no one (that I know of) has ever qualified was "fair share" means. And why, why, WHY do we punish people for success (though higher taxes)? Think about it. You start a business. You work you ass off for years to build it up. It becomes successful and you earn a lot of money. And as a reward, the government asks you to pay a higher percentage of taxes. WTF!? :censored:
-
Simply bring the tax level on the wealthy back to levels under Clinton while doing entitlement reform (which is sorely needed, especially SS disability and SSI) and cutting down spending in all areas of government...including defense and -dare I say it? - eliminating Homeland Security.
-
Simply bring the tax level on the wealthy back to levels under Clinton while doing entitlement reform (which is sorely needed, especially SS disability and SSI) and cutting down spending in all areas of government...including defense and -dare I say it? - eliminating Homeland Security.
I disgree. Homeland security is a must to protect against terrorist threats. However, defense needs to be cut. The defense budget was $663.8 billion in our last fiscal year. Who knows what the figure will be the end of this year when you add the Libya mission.
-
It's not the best deal, but at least we avoided an economic catastrophe. :yes:
Wow the debt deal sure saved us! The markets really took off.... oh wait. Well at least the deal saved out nations credit rating.... oh wait.
Tomorrow is going to be an interesting day people. If the markets really fall after this downgrade I think we are in serious trouble
-
For starters, taxes for the wealthy have to be raised, and entitlements have to be cut down.
One little problem with the first part of your plan...
IRS: Not enough rich to cover the deficit ([url]http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/39534[/url])
Entitlement reform is a necessity.
Funny you should mention that URL. I read it myself a few days ago. Interesting stuff
-
Simply bring the tax level on the wealthy back to levels under Clinton while doing entitlement reform (which is sorely needed, especially SS disability and SSI) and cutting down spending in all areas of government...including defense and -dare I say it? - eliminating Homeland Security.
I disgree. Homeland security is a must to protect against terrorist threats. However, defense needs to be cut. The defense budget was $663.8 billion in our last fiscal year. Who knows what the figure will be the end of this year when you add the Libya mission.
We have no business being in Libya in the first place.
-
President Obama is "making a statement" at around 1PM Easter/Noon central today. I normally do not follow this kind of stuff, but I should REALLY start.
-
President Obama is "making a statement" at around 1PM Easter/Noon central today. I normally do not follow this kind of stuff, but I should REALLY start.
Didn't see it but looking at the market I can say it didn't help
-
President Obama is "making a statement" at around 1PM Easter/Noon central today. I normally do not follow this kind of stuff, but I should REALLY start.
Didn't see it but looking at the market I can say it didn't help
I didn't see it either, but let me take a wild guess at what he said...
"Let me be clear. What I have said in the past is that the rich need to pay their fair share. We could have easily avoided this mess had the Republicans been willing to negotiate. As you know, I inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression. Which is why we need revenue enhancements (tax hikes) to attack our deficit."
-
Well, the markets certainly took a nosedive in response to the credit rating downgrade.
Dow: 10,810.83 (http://media.cnbc.com/i/CNBC/CNBC_Images/componentbacks/watchlist_down.gif) 633.78 (-5.54%)
NASDAQ: 2,358 (http://media.cnbc.com/i/CNBC/CNBC_Images/componentbacks/watchlist_down.gif) 174.72 (-6.90%)
S&P 500: 1,119 (http://media.cnbc.com/i/CNBC/CNBC_Images/componentbacks/watchlist_down.gif) 79.92 (-6.66%)
-
Are the markets going to continue to drop to levels even lower than the great depression?
"S&P: No regrets in lowering U.S. credit rating"
No regrets? Wow, just wow. :rolleyes:
-
Are the markets going to continue to drop to levels even lower than the great depression, to the point where the entire country will collapse for years?
"S&P: No regrets in lowering U.S. credit rating"
No regrets? Wow, just wow. :rolleyes:
Sorry, but I don't understand what you mean by "Wow, just wow." Can you explain that?
-
"S&P: No regrets in lowering U.S. credit rating"
No regrets? Wow, just wow. :rolleyes:
Why would they have regrets? Its not their fault the US economy sucks. Why keep lying to themselves and say we are a AAA rating when we are not? I love how some people and the the White House have begun blaming the credit agencies. It would be hilarious if things weren't so devastating.
-
President Obama is "making a statement" at around 1PM Easter/Noon central today.
Here's another "statement" made by Barack Obama...
“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America ’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies.
Increasing America ’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren.
America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”
-- Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006
When then-Senator Obama made that statement in 2006, he was 100% correct. It's a shame that he obviously didn't believe the words he was saying; all he was doing was playing partisan politics. :angry:
-
A certain radio talk show host predicted this would happen back when Hilary Clinton was the primary contender. He said that if universal healthcare became law, within 2 years or so, our AAA credit rating will be downgraded. Creditors and other countries would see that we're not serious about cutting our debt. One of many things he saw happening years ago, but everyone thought he was crazy.
-
He said that if universal healthcare became law, within 2 years or so, our AAA credit rating will be downgraded.
Practically every other industrialized country has universal healthcare, so how can you explain their high credit ratings if it would destroy that of the U.S., which is one of the very few modern countries without it?
-
I ran across this article this morning, Warren Buffett, one of the richest men in the world urges congress to stop babying the rich and raise taxes on the rich to reduce the deficit.
http://news.yahoo.com/stop-coddling-super-rich-buffett-084140678.html (http://news.yahoo.com/stop-coddling-super-rich-buffett-084140678.html)
-
I ran across this article this morning, Warren Buffett, one of the richest men in the world urges congress to stop babying the rich and raise taxes on the rich to reduce the deficit.
[url]http://news.yahoo.com/stop-coddling-super-rich-buffett-084140678.html[/url] ([url]http://news.yahoo.com/stop-coddling-super-rich-buffett-084140678.html[/url])
Hope he can make a donation then!
https://www.pay.gov/paygov/forms/formInstance.html?agencyFormId=23779454 (https://www.pay.gov/paygov/forms/formInstance.html?agencyFormId=23779454)
-
I ran across this article this morning, Warren Buffett, one of the richest men in the world urges congress to stop babying the rich and raise taxes on the rich to reduce the deficit.
[url]http://news.yahoo.com/stop-coddling-super-rich-buffett-084140678.html[/url] ([url]http://news.yahoo.com/stop-coddling-super-rich-buffett-084140678.html[/url])
He's been saying that for years. I suppose you can say that for types like him, but not so much for small business owners.
-
He said that if universal healthcare became law, within 2 years or so, our AAA credit rating will be downgraded.
Practically every other industrialized country has universal healthcare, so how can you explain their high credit ratings if it would destroy that of the U.S., which is one of the very few modern countries without it?
They're like 10 times smaller than us. So the impact isn't as great. But it might be worth mentioning that their economies (and their healthcare systems) are in the crapper. This whole "notion" that people are entitled to "healthcare" (which no one has defined what that even means) is preposterous. What's everyone entitled to next? Free high-speed internet? Oh wait. :P
-
Part of the American mentality is stuck several centuries ago, when there was no choice but to do everything yourself if you wanted to survive. In Europe, especially after WWII, people realized that civilization has progressed enough to allow the government to offer things to people simply because these people are alive, meaning the people no longer have to worry about certain things, like how they'll pay for healthcare or higher education, that Americans have to worry about. Of course, taxes in Europe are generally much higher than in America, with numbers that would give the average American a hemorrhage, but, having lived in Europe, I personally think it's the better system. For example, I once found myself needing pretty extensive medical care that I got for free. My taxes and the taxes of the rest of the population took care of the bill. I paid nothing out of pocket. Had I been in the United States at the time, I know I'd be paying off that bill for a long, long, long time.
But the American mentality is that it's WRONG to get something you didn't "earn." Europeans say you "earn" these things just by being alive, that every human being has entitlements. American entitlements seem to end at life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Good entitlements, but there's so much more that can be done.
-
But the American mentality is that it's WRONG to get something you didn't "earn." Europeans say you "earn" these things just by being alive, that every human being has entitlements. American entitlements seem to end at life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Good entitlements, but there's so much more that can be done.
Of course it's wrong. If you don't work for things, you don't appreciate them. You have no sense of self-worth. It also makes you lazy. For example, it's amazing how many people suddenly find a job when their unemployment benefits run out. But it makes sense. Why should anyone work or go to school, if the government will take care of everything? And what happens when they decide to take something away? Something major like free housing? Man is much better off doing what he can on his own. Doesn't matter what century it is or what's available to you.
-
I ran across this article this morning, Warren Buffett, one of the richest men in the world urges congress to stop babying the rich and raise taxes on the rich to reduce the deficit.
[url]http://news.yahoo.com/stop-coddling-super-rich-buffett-084140678.html[/url] ([url]http://news.yahoo.com/stop-coddling-super-rich-buffett-084140678.html[/url])
He's been saying that for years. I suppose you can say that for types like him, but not so much for small business owners.
Here's the thing... They only tax what you MAKE (earn), not what you have. Buffet has already MADE his fortune, so...
Secondly, nobody's stopping him personally from paying more taxes. PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS, WARREN. :angry:
-
I ran across this article this morning, Warren Buffett, one of the richest men in the world urges congress to stop babying the rich and raise taxes on the rich to reduce the deficit.
For everybody who heard this particular comment from Mr. Buffet, this following article is a MUST READ.
Warren Buffett, hypocrite (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/warren_buffett_hypocrite_E3BsmJmeQVE38q2Woq9yjJ)
This is just TOO funny. :rofl2:
I love it when people like this get exposed. :biggrin:
-
:happy: :lol: :dance: :rofl2:!!! Nice! And super funny :dance:
-
stop babying the rich and raise taxes on the rich to reduce the deficit.
Here are some facts about that misconception.
Top 0.1 Percent Pays More Income Tax than Bottom 80 Percent (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/top-01-percent-pays-more-income-tax-bottom-80-percent_594000.html)
Fact check: The wealthy already pay more taxes (http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/story/2011-09-20/buffett-tax-millionaires/50480226/1)
ANY politician who spouts a "Tax The Rich" mantra is only playing politics and trying to get votes. :angry:
-
Some facts about Warren Buffett's claims...
http://ow.ly/6CfOV (http://ow.ly/6CfOV)
-
In a nutshell, the rich not only should pay more in taxes than the poor, but I don't think they pay enough. Not by a long shot.
-
In a nutshell, the rich not only should pay more in taxes than the poor, but I don't think they pay enough. Not by a long shot.
The rich currently pay about 40% of all taxes, while 51% of the population pays nothing. So how much is enough? Should they pay all of our taxes? If not, what percentage of their income should the government take? 40% 60% All of it?
-
Keeping in mind that I'm a member of the Communist Party, I believe that income should be equalized amongst everybody. :)
There's no need for rich and poor. In fact, the only way the rich can become and stay rich is at the expense of the poor. If every person is supposed to be equal, then why should there be such a huge difference in income?
If a person deliberately chooses to be lazy and not work, then he should suffer the consequences solely as a result of his actions, or lack thereof. But there is no excuse whatsoever for a hard-working family to be left in poverty because of lack of access to better education and better job opportunities. For the richest country in the world to have such a large number of poor and impoverished people is unforgivable.
-
You didn't answer my question. I understand you want things to be equal (even though what you're proposing doesn't make things equal), but I'm looking for a specific number for the "fair share" argument. But in response to your comments, how exactly does a rich person become or stay rich at the expense of someone who is poor? I have never had any rich person steal money from my checking account or prevent me from obtaining wealth. Yet the government essentially does it every month when I get my paycheck. Going back to my point from a while back, what incentive is there to work hard (which is something you need in order to make everything equal in your mind) when the reward for that work is the same no matter what? I'm for equality too, but not at the expense of someone else. Everyone in this country already (more or less) has equal opportunity to achieve whatever success they desire. If you want to go to college, you can. You can either work until you can pay for it, or you can get a loan and pay it after you get a good job. What socialists and communists seem to want is for everyone to have what they want right this second, without having to work for it. I'm sorry, but life doesn't work that way. At least not in a way that's truly fair and equal.
-
Here we go again. :angry: :censored:
Obama to Ask for $1.2 Trillion Increase in Debt Limit (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/28/us/politics/obama-to-ask-for-1-2-trillion-increase-in-debt-limit.html)
-
And it's gonna keep happening, sadly. We're so addicted to debt at this point that we're just going to keep raising the ceiling higher and higher so we can spend more and more money that we don't have.
-
What's the alternative? End all spending altogether? Close all municipal fire departments and staff them only with volunteers? Close all the public schools and force parents to pay for private schooling? End Social Security and Medicare payments? Stop importing oil? Nuke the rest of the world and take their resources?
One has to think rationally. It is going to cost money to cut the debt. And, besides, this isn't Obama's debt. When George W. Bush took office, the U.S. had the biggest budget surplus in history. Bush put that to an end right quick, and the debt's been growing ever since. Bill Clinton may have had a sleazy personal life, but at least he knew how to balance budgets.
-
What's the alternative? End all spending altogether? Close all municipal fire departments and staff them only with volunteers? Close all the public schools and force parents to pay for private schooling? End Social Security and Medicare payments? Stop importing oil? Nuke the rest of the world and take their resources?
One has to think rationally. It is going to cost money to cut the debt. And, besides, this isn't Obama's debt. When George W. Bush took office, the U.S. had the biggest budget surplus in history. Bush put that to an end right quick, and the debt's been growing ever since. Bill Clinton may have had a sleazy personal life, but at least he knew how to balance budgets.
Whats the alternative?? Spend less! The federal government doesn't deal with fire departments. Not sure where that is coming from. Its up to local counties/cities. Turn the education systems back to the states. Social security and medicare are flawed concepts but since its obvious they aren't going away I suppose reform them.
One has to think rationally. It is going to cost money to cut the debt.
Not trying to argue but really? That doesn't make sense!
-
What's the alternative? End all spending altogether? Close all municipal fire departments and staff them only with volunteers? Close all the public schools and force parents to pay for private schooling? End Social Security and Medicare payments? Stop importing oil? Nuke the rest of the world and take their resources?
One has to think rationally. It is going to cost money to cut the debt. And, besides, this isn't Obama's debt. When George W. Bush took office, the U.S. had the biggest budget surplus in history. Bush put that to an end right quick, and the debt's been growing ever since. Bill Clinton may have had a sleazy personal life, but at least he knew how to balance budgets.
Wow. There's so many errors in that statement, I don't even know where to begin. Believe it or not, you can cut government spending to a more responsible level without ending all services. If we keep spending, we'll eventually have to cut essential services because we won't be able to pay for them.
"It is going to cost money to cut the debt." That doesn't make any sense. How does spending less cost you money?
"This isn't Obama's debt." Really? I had no idea George Bush was still signing spending bills! :wacko: Republicans definitely lost their way under Bush, but to say that Obama isn't responsible for any of our current debt is insane.
"Bill Clinton may have had a sleazy personal life, but at least he knew how to balance budgets." That also makes no sense. The president has no direct control over the budget. He can make recommendations. He can ask for things, but ultimately it's up to congress. It was the Republican congress under Clinton that balanced the budget.
-
Either I'm the only one here who doesn't support the Republicans in anything, or I grossly overestimate my intelligence when it comes to fiscal matters. Either way, I'm not bringing politics into this forum anymore.
-
Either I'm the only one here who doesn't support the Republicans in anything, or I grossly overestimate my intelligence when it comes to fiscal matters. Either way, I'm not bringing politics into this forum anymore.
Unless you can backup your claims, I'd say it's the second one. Although I'd substitute the word "intelligence" with "knowledge."
-
It's posts like this that make me want to leave this forum altogether.
-
This congress (both democrats and republicans) has to be the most pathetic congress in the history of all mankind. What's the point of even having them? We could put flowerpots in their seats and progress would still move at the same pace. Sad, very, very, sad. :doh: :facepalm: It doesn't make sense that they drag their feet because they rather carry on pity childish fights with eachother worse than my 5 years old niece does than to work together to get the economy moving.
-
This congress (both democrats and republicans) has to be the most pathetic congress in the history of all mankind. What's the point of even having them?
Republicans in the house have passed lots of job-creating bills and budgets. Harry Reid refuses to put them up for a vote.
It's posts like this that make me want to leave this forum altogether.
Eric - It's nothing personal. I actually like you. But you can't just throw out statements like that without backing it up.
-
I once made a political thread in this forum and was rebuked for it. Yet others make political threads, and yet I still end up getting rebuked in the end.
I've never supported anything any Republican has done, and I never will.
-
My last statement, and then I'm through here (at least, that's what I'm telling myself). You can take one side, Republican or Democrat, but let's face it, Tavores is right. With this Congress, you can't pin the blame on only one party. The Democrat-controlled senate has been as stubborn as a mule, and even as a Democrat, I'm not thrilled with Harry Reid. The Republican House, however, has also been just as stubborn, if not more, by rejecting several bills Obama has put forth. In addition, the Republicans have friction within their own party, especially between Boehner, one of the more moderate Republicans out there, and the far-right members of the party. Both houses of Congress are a total mess.
My point is that no matter which way you look at it, both parties are at fault. I consider myself a Democrat, but I'd be fooling myself if I thought the Republicans were entirely to blame for the political fiasco this year.
-
The reality is that we need to stop pointing fingers and start learning how to work together. We have a huge mess on our hands, and everyone is trying to blame the other side for power and positioning in the next election. From my perspective, I don't think either party has the right answer as they are so extremely opposite of one another. I believe we need to look in the middle of these extremes for new ideas, compromises, and sacrifices that everyone will have to take to make things work for the greater good of everyone. I'm even seeing some evidence of the deep polarization in this country right here in this forum, and it deeply bothers me. I certainly don't have the answer to solve this debt crisis, but I wish we could all work together for once.
-
If politicians actually did their job by defending the Constitution, we wouldn't be in this situation. In fact, we wouldn't have any of the problems we currently have. Unfortunately, most of them are just in it for the power. So they answer to campaign donors, not the people. The idea of "working together" is a nice thought, but it's not possible. At least not currently. What we need to do is throw out those who are just in it for the power, and elect/re-elect those who are in it for the people. Re-elect the bums and we'll get what we deserve. Oh, and if you think things are bad now, do a little research on the election of 1800. Supporters of John Adams said that "murder, robbery, rape, adultery, and incest will be openly taught and practiced, the air will be rent with the cries of the distressed, the soil will be soaked with blood, and the nation black with crimes" if Thomas Jefferson was elected. :o
-
Well, it was inevitable, but it finally happened. Our national debt is now 100% of our GDP and still rising.
-
Well, it was inevitable, but it finally happened. Our national debt is now 100% of our GDP and still rising.
Hasn't it been that way for a few weeks now? A friend posted this on Facebook last night. I think it's worth posting here.
DEBT LIMIT - A GUIDE TO AMERICAN FEDERAL DEBT MADE EASY. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Li0no7O9zmE#ws)
-
Now we understand why Warren Buffet has been sucking up to Obama. :rolleyes:
Warren Buffett cleans up after Keystone XL (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=49036)
-
I call them the Demadon'ts and the Republican'ts. Both parties suck.
Time to go like Great Britain and allow all parties to run in every election with no strings attached.
-
The Democrats often annoy me because they don't show the support to their President that they should, and they don't have the guts to stand up to the poison and lies spewed by the GOP.
-
The Democrats often annoy me because they don't show the support to their President that they should, and they don't have the guts to stand up to the poison and lies spewed by the GOP.
Are you serious? I guess you don't watch the news because Dems lie for the president ALL THE TIME!! It's quite entertaining. Debbie two names is always good for a laugh. I too, though, get frustrated when my party doesn't stand up to the lies. Some do, but most don't. I don't get it. :hmm: