[D6Ri5u13]

Truth is, both parties know something has to be done, yet neither seem to be willing to compromise. And that is the biggest problem, IMO.

The Pubs insist on cutting spendiing while giving more tax breaks, while the dems seem to want the opposite.

The compromise lies in cutting spending, while increasing tax revenues. The revenue issue requires overhauling the tax codes, eliiminating loopholes put in there by special interests, and in the process lowering tax rates on income taxes, while increasing capital gains taxes. The corporate taxes need this overhaul as well, taking out exemptions given to some of those guys, the special loopholes, while lowering corporate rates, while increasing tax revenues.

That is what must be done, yet the political climate is not condusive to real reform. The Pubs are dead set on shrinking the size of gov't, perhaps in a draconian fashioin, and if the nation goes down the tubes and folks starve, that is a small price to pay. I actually think the solution lies with the dems, but they have to compromise as well.

[hujdrftgkas]

Truth is, both parties know something has to be done, yet neither seem to be willing to compromise. And that is the biggest problem, IMO.

The Pubs insist on cutting spendiing while giving more tax breaks, while the dems seem to want the opposite.

The compromise lies in cutting spending, while increasing tax revenues. The revenue issue requires overhauling the tax codes, eliiminating loopholes put in there by special interests, and in the process lowering tax rates on income taxes, while increasing capital gains taxes. The corporate taxes need this overhaul as well, taking out exemptions given to some of those guys, the special loopholes, while lowering corporate rates, while increasing tax revenues.

That is what must be done, yet the political climate is not condusive to real reform. The Pubs are dead set on shrinking the size of gov't, perhaps in a draconian fashioin, and if the nation goes down the tubes and folks starve, that is a small price to pay. I actually think the solution lies with the dems, but they have to compromise as well.

The problem is there are no "trillionaire's" out there to tax. Now under Obama's plan he wants to tax those making over 250K per year. In the 250K bracket you're going to have lots of small business people who are the driving engine of this economy.

If the pubs would agree to tax the over 500-600K crowd this would be out of the realm of small business aka sub-chapter S corporations.

Right now the federal government could take everyone's wealth--including your paycheck and estimates show that would amount to only 2.7 trillion dollars--which doesn't even put a dent into this 14.3 trillion dollar deficit much less 53 trillion in unfunded liabilities.

Therefore, the only way to get this budget under control is to cut everything--with no sacred cows--that both parties cherish on the chopping block. And that-is-for certain--going to be the biggest problem.

No matter how much money the federal government confiscates from others--they will always find a way to spend that and borrow much more.

"When government is big enough to give you everything you want--it will also be big enough to take everything you have."--Thomas Jefferson

[urbalatte]

Truth is, both parties know something has to be done, yet neither seem to be willing to compromise. And that is the biggest problem, IMO.

That's because there is no compromise on cutting spending, and given the state of our industry now, do you really think making that more expensive to do is a good idea?

The Pubs insist on cutting spendiing while giving more tax breaks, while the dems seem to want the opposite.

Basically.

The compromise lies in cutting spending, while increasing tax revenues. The revenue issue requires overhauling the tax codes, eliiminating loopholes put in there by special interests, and in the process lowering tax rates on income taxes, while increasing capital gains taxes. The corporate taxes need this overhaul as well, taking out exemptions given to some of those guys, the special loopholes, while lowering corporate rates, while increasing tax revenues.

Yup. And you don't need to raise the rates, and Obama and company are wanting to do in order to do that do you? And as you said, you get more out of it, and don't make our industry less competitive in the worldwide market at the same time.

That is what must be done, yet the political climate is not condusive to real reform. The Pubs are dead set on shrinking the size of gov't, perhaps in a draconian fashioin, and if the nation goes down the tubes and folks starve, that is a small price to pay. I actually think the solution lies with the dems, but they have to compromise as well.

Some will suffer BD, there's no way at all around that. Not now. The nanny state has to go, because as we've all seen, it's designed to make people feel good, but unsustainable. And it's taught our society far too many of the wrong things.

[Peertantyb]

[QUOTE]

Truth is, both parties know something has to be done, yet neither seem to be willing to compromise. And that is the biggest problem, IMO.

Wrong the Dem's don't want to cut anything, like you they want to continue to borrow and spend.

The Pubs insist on cutting spendiing while giving more tax breaks, while the dems seem to want the opposite. Your right the Pubs insist on cutting spending, wrong on giving more tax breaks, the truth is they want to cut out the loop holes, which is exactly the same suggestion from Obama debt commission.

[QUOTE]The compromise lies in cutting spending, while increasing tax revenues.[QUOTE]

Cutting spending yes, raising taxes wrong.

[Old-old-Ivy]

Nobody gives a damned about the deficit.

[virtuah]

Sure, frivolous spending needs to be cut, absolutely.

But taxes increased across the board?

Well, maybe .. but first lets address the major reason current taxes aren't keeping pace with spending: un- and under- employment of American citizens.

With roughly 25 million Americans out of work and another 27 million under-employed part-time, that's a lot of lost tax dollars.

So if we increase taxes, the 25 million unemployed won't feel it .. and neither will the federal coffers from what the 25 million would have paid had they been working but won't because .. they aren't working.

And if we increase taxes, the 27 million under-employed will feel it considerably with regard to the proportion of their purchasing power to the tax increase, so they'll purchase less, dipping the economy, while the extra tax money they provide .. won't really be all that much.

When we look at the cause of the effect of lower tax revenues, both state and federal, raising the rates on those fortunate enough to be working full-time and who are charitably privately helping those who can't find work, just seems like the wrong thing to do, both morally and rationally.

It seems like the right thing to do is to put our fellow Americans back to work quickly, so that they can earn money and pay taxes like they used to.

So .. how do we do that?

Simple ..

.. Crack down hard on illegals and those who hire them, encouraging illegals to leave the country quickly and fining businesses caught hiring them ..

.. Crack down hard on American companies that off-shore American jobs to wage-slavers in other countries, significantly increasing their corporate tax rate for those companies that do so and reducing their corporate tax rate when they replace a foreign worker with an American ..

.. Crack down hard on American companies "investing" overseas, by significantly increasing the foreign operations tax rate, and reducing the corporate tax rate for start-up companies in America replacing foreign-made goods ..

.. Crack down hard on imports, increasing the import tariff.

The right thing to do here, addressing the problem at the foundation of its cause, is really a no-brainer.

[D6Ri5u13]

The problem is there are no "trillionaire's" out there to tax. Now under Obama's plan he wants to tax those making over 250K per year. In the 250K bracket you're going to have lots of small business people who are the driving engine of this economy.

If the pubs would agree to tax the over 500-600K crowd this would be out of the realm of small business aka sub-chapter S corporations.

Right now the federal government could take everyone's wealth--including your paycheck and estimates show that would amount to only 2.7 trillion dollars--which doesn't even put a dent into this 14.3 trillion dollar deficit much less 53 trillion in unfunded liabilities.

Therefore, the only way to get this budget under control is to cut everything--with no sacred cows--that both parties cherish on the chopping block. And that-is-for certain--going to be the biggest problem.

No matter how much money the federal government confiscates from others--they will always find a way to spend thatTheand borrow much more.

"When go vernment is big enough to give you everything you want--it will also be big enough to take everything you have."--Thomas Jefferson

The Bush tax cuts need to expire, period, and not just on the top tier. THEN reform the tax codes, simplify them, lowering tax rates, but increasing revenue, as loopholes are closed completely. Increase capital gains taxes. Lower corporate taxes, once the special loopholes are destroyed, so that the advertised rates ARE the effective rates. The time for lying about the real tax rates should finally be ditched.

[D6Ri5u13]

[QUOTE=Forplay;1894967][QUOTE]

Wrong the Dem's don't want to cut anything, like you they want to continue to borrow and spend.



Your right the Pubs insist on cutting spending, wrong on giving more tax breaks, the truth is they want to cut out the loop holes, which is exactly the same suggestion from Obama debt commission.

[QUOTE]The compromise lies in cutting spending, while increasing tax revenues.
Cutting spending yes, raising taxes wrong. Objective,non partisan experts say both revenues and spending have to be attacked at the same time. Folks that want to solve the problem instead of indulging in fantasy KNOW this.

[D6Ri5u13]

Sure, frivolous spending needs to be cut, absolutely.

But taxes increased across the board?

Well, maybe .. but first lets address the major reason current taxes aren't keeping pace with spending: un- and under- employment of American citizens.

With roughly 25 million Americans out of work and another 27 million under-employed part-time, that's a lot of lost tax dollars.

So if we increase taxes, the 25 million unemployed won't feel it .. and neither will the federal coffers from what the 25 million would have paid had they been working but won't because .. they aren't working.

And if we increase taxes, the 27 million under-employed will feel it considerably with regard to the proportion of their purchasing power to the tax increase, so they'll purchase less, dipping the economy, while the extra tax money they provide .. won't really be all that much.

When we look at the cause of the effect of lower tax revenues, both state and federal, raising the rates on those fortunate enough to be working full-time and who are charitably privately helping those who can't find work, just seems like the wrong thing to do, both morally and rationally.

It seems like the right thing to do is to put our fellow Americans back to work quickly, so that they can earn money and pay taxes like they used to.

So .. how do we do that?

Simple ..

.. Crack down hard on illegals and those who hire them, encouraging illegals to leave the country quickly and fining businesses caught hiring them ..

.. Crack down hard on American companies that off-shore American jobs to wage-slavers in other countries, significantly increasing their corporate tax rate for those companies that do so and reducing their corporate tax rate when they replace a foreign worker with an American ..

.. Crack down hard on American companies "investing" overseas, by significantly increasing the foreign operations tax rate, and reducing the corporate tax rate for start-up companies in America replacing foreign-made goods ..

.. Crack down hard on imports, increasing the import tariff.

The right thing to do here, addressing the problem at the foundation of its cause, is really a no-brainer.

But that would involve admitting that illegal immigration and corporate globalization is not in the best interest of this Nation as a whole with all folks being considered. While this is true, there seems to be NO support for com mon sense solutions. I just hope to hell we actually get forced into it.

[D6Ri5u13]

[QUOTE=Forplay;1894967][QUOTE]

Wrong the Dem's don't want to cut anything, like you they want to continue to borrow and spend.



Your right the Pubs insist on cutting spending, wrong on giving more tax breaks, the truth is they want to cut out the loop holes, which is exactly the same suggestion from Obama debt commission.

[QUOTE]The compromise lies in cutting spending, while increasing tax revenues.
Cutting spending yes, raising taxes wrong. Again, a Con who only wants to cut spending, which will not fix the grand mess. GET REAL.

[XangadsX]

The Bush tax cuts need to expire, period, and not just on the top tier. THEN reform the tax codes, simplify them, lowering tax rates, but increasing revenue, as loopholes are closed completely. Increase capital gains taxes. Lower corporate taxes, once the special loopholes are destroyed, so that the advertised rates ARE the effective rates. The time for lying about the real tax rates should finally be ditched.

ok, what percentage of income should the government confiscate to pay off the 14 trillion dolar debt?

Btw 100% of everyone would bring in less then 3 trillion..

[D6Ri5u13]

ok, what percentage of income should the government confiscate to pay off the 14 trillion dolar debt?

Btw 100% of everyone would bring in less then 3 trillion..

and that is why we need to put millions back to work with wages high enough as to warrant taxing.

[Old-old-Ivy]

Yeah but you can't create jobs when you have no resources to do so. The resources have to be there first.

[XangadsX]

and that is why we need to put millions back to work with wages high enough as to warrant taxing.

ok so we can put them to work and then tax them at 100% and still only collect about 3.2 trillion..

good plan...

[Peertantyb]

and that is why we need to put millions back to work with wages high enough as to warrant taxing.

Lets see, we put people to work we do not need, pay them a high wage we can't afford, and pass the added expense of paying higher wages to the consumer who has to pay more for the items they can't afford.

Blue doesn't that sound like your chasing your tail.

[urbalatte]

Yeah but you can't create jobs when you have no resources to do so. The resources have to be there first.

Which someone has to find, to be able to afford the expense to gather the resource, and have the ability to sell it to someone who is able to buy it.

[amehoubFomo]

ahoy oh Phoenix!

.. Crack down hard on illegals and those who hire them, encouraging illegals to leave the country quickly and fining businesses caught hiring them ..

aye, no problem with this suggestion...seems about right, aye? 'cept yer goin' to run headlong into the might 'o american corporate interests.

.. Crack down hard on American companies that off-shore American jobs to wage-slavers in other countries, significantly increasing their corporate tax rate for those companies that do so and reducing their corporate tax rate when they replace a foreign worker with an American .. i agree again with ye mate, spot on...yet again, yer aimin' yer cannons at the heart 'o american corporate interests.

.. Crack down hard on American companies "investing" overseas, by significantly increasing the foreign operations tax rate, and reducing the corporate tax rate for start-up companies in America replacing foreign-made goods .. same as above, aye.

.. Crack down hard on imports, increasing the import tariff.

The right thing to do here, addressing the problem at the foundation of its cause, is really a no-brainer. no problem here either, mate...but yer goin' to really make the chinese and the japanese angry at ye.

aye.

- MeadHallPirate

[Shootohoist]

Originally Posted by Phoenix
.. Crack down hard on illegals and those who hire them, encouraging illegals to leave the country quickly and fining businesses caught hiring them

ahoy oh Phoenix!

aye, no problem with this suggestion...seems about right, aye? 'cept yer goin' to run headlong into the might 'o american corporate interests.

PHOENIX — The impassioned debate over the nation’s immigration policy takes center stage at the Supreme Court Wednesday in a dispute over an Arizona law that punishes employers who knowingly hire workers illegally in the U.S.

Prosecutors have used Arizona’s employer sanctions law just three times in three years, but business interests and civil rights groups, backed by the Obama administration, have banded together to argue that only the federal government may enforce immigration laws.

Court To Hear Arguments Over Arizona Immigration Law | News One

[hujdrftgkas]

Originally Posted by Phoenix
.. Crack down hard on illegals and those who hire them, encouraging illegals to leave the country quickly and fining businesses caught hiring them



PHOENIX — The impassioned debate over the nation’s immigration policy takes center stage at the Supreme Court Wednesday in a dispute over an Arizona law that punishes employers who knowingly hire workers illegally in the U.S.

Prosecutors have used Arizona’s employer sanctions law just three times in three years, but business interests and civil rights groups, backed by the Obama administration, have banded together to argue that only the federal government may enforce immigration laws.

Court To Hear Arguments Over Arizona Immigration Law | News One

The problem is the word "knowingly" hire illegals. The very first thing any illegal is going to try and get--is forged documents--which they can readily obtain by BUYING them--birth certificates--social security numbers etc.

Therefore--even if forged--an employer cannot be prosecuted nor should they be.

[hujdrftgkas]

ok, what percentage of income should the government confiscate to pay off the 14 trillion dolar debt?

Btw 100% of everyone would bring in less then 3 trillion..

I have been looking in this country and then I went around the world-- and I can't find even ONE TRILLIONAIRE to raise taxes on?

100% of everything = 2.7 TRILLION dollars--that means everyones paycheck including the rich--and it wouldn't put a dent into a 14.3 trillion dollar red ink we're at now--let alone the other 53 trillion in unfunded liabilities that are in front of us.

Disclosing again how incompetent the Federal Government really is.