Worthy of Consideration

GearHead_1 said:
I agree with much that is said here but see differently the changing course in the middle and ending up back at square one. I would ask middle of what? Being in the middle of something doesn't mean it is a better something. When in the middle of a sink hole going straight ahead isn't necessarily the best way out. You will no doubt be just as tired reaching either side of the sink hole. Make darn sure you don't find yourself further from where you want to be. If we are in the middle of an uncontrolled spending pattern and the course isn't altered, where will we be at the end of this path? If square one is less debt than we now have, is square one a bad place? Certainly many of the metrics we use to monitor progress show little improvement in major areas of concern. Partisan politics just leaves us treading muck in the middle of the sink hole and we get tired.
Click to expand...

not sure your analogy really fits :hmmm: good or bad these were well thought out plans that were written and reviewed by individuals and committees with some extremely educated people. If Columbus went with that theory I'm not sure he would have found the new world. :notme:
The plans have been set in motion and now it's time figure out how to control the run-away train. :idea this could be a great run-away train movie :rofl :ideaoh that's right there is one coming out real soon :lol2:
 
Poorboy said:
...good or bad these were well thought out plans that were written and reviewed by individuals and committees with some extremely educated people.
Click to expand...

Sorry you didn't dig the analogy. If you prefer Columbus, was discovering the new world his plan? He ended up some place not knowing where he was going. Give him credit, he did move on.

Where we are headed today may or may not be the best plans. As far as them being well thought out, I don't know that. I will say that I'm sure there was much consideration given. There are extremely educated people on either side of any these issues with very different opinions.

In the end the best plans are those that work. Time will tell if these plans were actually well thought out or just one of the possible choices made by extremely educated people. The horse is out of the gate.
 
GearHead_1 said:
In the end the best plans are those that work. Time will tell if these plans were actually well thought out or just one of the possible choices made by extremely educated people. The horse is out of the gate.
Click to expand...

aint that the truth :rockon
 
GearHead_1 said:
Sorry you didn't dig the analogy. If you prefer Columbus, was discovering the new world his plan? He ended up some place not knowing where he was going. Give him credit, he did move on.

Where we are headed today may or may not be the best plans. As far as them being well thought out, I don't know that. I will say that I'm sure there was much consideration given. There are extremely educated people on either side of any these issues with very different opinions.

In the end the best plans are those that work. Time will tell if these plans were actually well thought out or just one of the possible choices made by extremely educated people. The horse is out of the gate.
Click to expand...
Pelosi said about the health care bill we will find out what is in it after it is passed.

THAT SOUNDS WELL THOUGHT OUT

One thing in our government changed real fast on 11-2-2010 the cap and trade was alive but on 11-3-2010 it is dead
 
black bart said:
Pelosi said about the health care bill we will find out what is in it after it is passed.

THAT SOUNDS WELL THOUGHT OUT

One thing in our government changed real fast on 11-2-2010 the cap and trade was alive but on 11-3-2010 it is dead
Click to expand...

Pelosi is just a snowflake.... that's all there is to it. She's really got no business being the voice of the Democratic party.
 
Pelosi's strength is supposedly getting the votes needed to pass the bills. I suspect the health care bill took a lot of arm twisting.

The Republicans have a long history of vilifying a specific Democrat (it used to be Teddy Kennedy) in order to motivate (scare tactic) voters to the polls. In this past election, the Dem's used Karl Rove as the Dem target.

The leaders and whips in each party as of late have been pretty extreme in order to force the partisanship we have seen.
 
After watching many Sunday political talk shows, my conclusion is that we will get very little accomplished in the coming years ... this was a headline this morning ..

Rand Paul: Cut spending on Social Security, Medicare & defense

Tea Partier's ideas on budget have his his GOP colleagues livid.



​

the extremes that each party has seems to dominate the news and compromise and bi-partisan legislation doesn't look too promising :surrender
 
I am just waiting to see what the Republicans in the House propose next year budget wise. The entrenched Republicans are more interested in bashing Obama (health care, investigations, etc) rather than true budget reform. I wonder how the Tea Party candidates handle this.

The compromise on the tax cuts expiring is just to reduce the spending to match of loss of revenue. Why isn't that being proposed?
 
One of the most reasonable discussions on politics I have seen lately. Too bad our elected officials can't do the same.
 
Obama's bipartisan committee to address the fiscal issues has been issuing recommendations. Already both sides are making noise about some proposed changes.

1. raising social security age, increasing amount paid into so it is more solvent on its own
2. raising gas tax rather than fund transportation from the general treasury
3. lower overall personal and business tax rates by simplifying code and reducing perks like deducting mortgage interest
4. Cut defense in addition to non-defense
5. Continue to restructure medicare so it is less expensive (people likely to pay more)
6. Reduce agricultural subsides
 
1) Increase taxes on the people working now who most likely won't see those benefits in the future.
2) Increase taxes/cost on those of us who most need a vehicle/gas to get to work.
3) Raising taxes by removing one of the bigger tax breaks to (generally) fiscally responsible adults who purchase a home
4) I can agree with cutting government spending. :) And I work for a defense contractor.
5) Ignoring the main issue (healthcare payment system) while trying to put a band-aid on in the short term. Raising the cost on people who most likely are not able to afford the cost-hike.
6) I can agree with this as well. Our government actually pays farmers to NOT produce crops on land. Maybe we could also toss something in about ethanol here as well - get it out of our gasoline, lower the price of corn, and stop paying government assistance to "farmers" to grow only corn. "Farm" subsidies are misleading, as most of these "farms" are not what we imagine when we think of the word farm.

Just my opinions. They're worth what you paid for 'em.
 
This is from the New York Times article about the plan:

"Under one option, individual income tax rates would decline to as low as 8 percent for the lowest income bracket (it is now 10 percent) and to 23 percent for the highest bracket (now 35 percent). The corporate tax rate, now 35 percent, would be reduced to as low as 26 percent.

But how low the rates are set would depend on how many tax breaks are reduced or eliminated. Some of them, including the mortgage interest deduction and the exemption from taxes for employees’ health benefits, are political sacred cows. "

I am sure some are skeptical about the redo since I am sure some will benefit and others will not.

I am surprised there is not much less discussion about a value added tax which taxes are applied as it changes hands. It was more a focus on taxing consumption and less on income so as not to penalize savers..but Americans even when flush with cash have never been good savers as a whole.
 
JaredPointer said:
It would be a lot simpler just to have everyone pay a flat/fair tax rate based on income.
Click to expand...

GearHead_1 said:
:bigups Agreed!
Click to expand...

I agree as well that would be a simple format for the calculation of tax, but what will the rates be to generate sufficient revenues to operate even a lean government? As I understand it, to keep those rates at their lowest percentages will require a lot (most? all?) of the deductions (like mortgage interest) would be eliminated. There are a lot of lobbyists (not to mention the IRS who surely doesn't want to have its role and size to be diminished) who will fight to cling to their respective deductions. It will take a huge segment of legislators with intestinal fortitude and a disregard for their political future to vote to remove some of those "sacred cows" (borrowed that one from Bunky).

Everyone has their idea of what is wasteful spending and what is not.
 
If there is a flat tax, the cost for lower income people would go up dramatically and most voters do not want to accept that.

The challenge is the budget issue cannot be solved with reduced spending let alone with tax cuts. The interest on the debt keeps that from happening without cutting defense dramatically as well.

The best some want to do is outgrow it by getting the economy growing since the debt in related to GDP is what is more important (debt load).
 
I like the bipartisan commission proposals as a whole. I use the term "as a whole" because the only way we are going to pass something is if we do it as a package deal. If my pet project gets scaled back, and nobody else's does, I'll be pissed. But if my pet project gets scaled back, but so does everybody else's, I can live with it. The proposals look like they step on a lot of toes, which I like. Let the lobbying begin.
 
chet31 said:
I like the bipartisan commission proposals as a whole. I use the term "as a whole" because the only way we are going to pass something is if we do it as a package deal. If my pet project gets scaled back, and nobody else's does, I'll be pissed. But if my pet project gets scaled back, but so does everybody else's, I can live with it. The proposals look like they step on a lot of toes, which I like. Let the lobbying begin.
Click to expand...

That is a healthy attiitude - everyone sacrificing something for the common good - but it will take a lot of folks to share that approach to make something happen.
 
The congressman from Ohio, Dennis Kucinich, has some good suggestions, but he's not taken seriously because he is calling for an end to the wars.

It's careless and destructive for us to continue spending over $120 million a day and expect our economy to get back on its feet without the people suffering the cost of rescue.

Strong words.

Congressman Dennis Kucinich
 
Mr. Gloss said:
The congressman from Ohio, Dennis Kucinich, has some good suggestions, but he's not taken seriously because he is calling for an end to the wars.

It's careless and destructive for us to continue spending over $120 million a day and expect our economy to get back on its feet without the people suffering the cost of rescue.

Strong words.

Congressman Dennis Kucinich
Click to expand...

the end of the deployment in Iraq and Afghanistan will be met with good and bad.. It will be great to see the end of US troops being killed, but as seen on a few news shows, many of the servicemen that have ended their service are coming back to an economy not able to sustain them. Many are now unemployed, homeless (many shun them not knowing that they had just served our country), and they are also overwhelming the military hospitals with post war syndromes and injuries. There is no quick fix to any of our problems whether you think tax cuts, government cut backs, government spending, or new people in control will be instant fixes you are only kidding yourself. This will be a slow process and maybe if we are lucky, in 10 or 20 years we as a nation will be able to look back and realize how deep a hole we had been in. :passout:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top