It is really very simple The Budget!

[zelmo1234]

We have a buch of crybabies in congress, the senage and in the WhiteHouse too, that are maing this Way harder than it seems

We are spending about 3.5 trillion a year, and taking in about 2.4 trillion in revenue. We have 16.4 trillion in debt!

We also have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, and now 53% of the population that pays no federal income tax. The tax code is some 18000 pages and not even a tax attorney can under stand it.

We have new spending programs that will not only add hundreds of billions to the deficite each year, but they will also hurt revenue!

SO MY FIRST QUESTION IS CAN WE AT LEAST AGREE THAT THIS IS A PROBLEM? :yepp:

[zelmo1234]

Assuming that we all can agree that this is not sustainable can we agree that we have already raises taxes back to the Clinton levels on the to 2% and that this accomplishes almost nothing!

Second can we also agree that we ended the payroll tax holiday, and the 2 together accomplish about 125 billion a year in new revenue, most coming from the payroll hike, because we know that the wealthy will shelter to avoid paying those taxes.

Next we have had what some will call cuts in spending, but they are things that for the most part, were not going to be spent anyway. And we are spending about a trillion more that we were 4 years ago. So can we at least admit that there is some room for spending cuts.

As for the revenue side normally we have about 33% of the people that do not pay income taxes. and now we have the rich paying aobut 71% of all federal income tax. the bid drivers of the debt are the entitlement programs which need to be secured, or they will in fact fun out of money! and everyone that works pays into these.

CAN WE AGREE ON THESE FEW THINGS?

[Cigar]

If I OWNED a Large Oil Corporation
If I OWNED a 100 foot Yacht
If I OWNED a Corporate Learjet

Can someone explain to me why I am Entitled to YOUR money for a Tax Break?

[zelmo1234]

So now assuming that we have agreed at least in part on the first 2 posts.

We agree on 2 things, first that the deficites can not contineu, and 2nd what we have done so far has accomplished very little.

So what can be done.

Revenue side first. Raise the FICA deductions from the current 13% split 50 - 50 between the employer and employee, to 13.5% and keep the 50 - 50 split. Cap the top benifits at todays rates. and increse the ceiling for deductions from 112K to 150K

Can we agree that this would bring money in, it could not be sheltered, and it goes directly toward the largest driver of the debt!

Can we also agree that .25% of anyones income is not likely to break the bank. to give you an example the average income of american workers is about 47K and this would be an additional $ 117.50 per year!

Now can we agree that each and every department in the governemtn could find something to cut?

So if we inacted a 3.5% across the board cut, each department had to come up with 3.5% reduction in actual spending. can we agree that this could be done. Without totally breaking the bank? To give you an example it is about 125 billion in spending cuts.

Each department would be give the power to make the cuts where they see fit, but at the end of the year, they did not produce the expected 3.5% cuts, they would be cut 5% the following year. Now remember that all of these departments have people retireing, have building and naintence costs? office supplies. ext. they could cut any way that they wanted to! as long as they end up with the cuts.

CAN WE AGREE THAT THIS IS NOT GOING TO CAUSE ANYONE TO STARVE OR CAUSE MUCH PAIN AT AL REALLY?

[zelmo1234]

If I OWNED a Large Oil Corporation
If I OWNED a 100 foot Yacht
If I OWNED a Corporate Learjet

Can someone explain to me why I am Entitled to YOUR money for a Tax Break?

Great Question I agree 110% this could be a great spot to start cutting spending and a very conservative and a very liberal person just cut 4.4 billion in government spending in less than 10 mins

[Cigar]

Yea I can agree with that ...

Can we agree that money use for Corporate Tax Breaks could be used to feed a starving child?

[Cigar]

Great Question I agree 110% this could be a great spot to start cutting spending and a very conservative and a very liberal person just cut 4.4 billion in government spending in less than 10 mins

... also we could raise the SS ceiling.

[zelmo1234]

Now if you take the first posts and agree that the tax increases are not that terrible and that the spending cuts ware not that terrible, we have just agreed to reduce the deficie by about 400 billion dollars?

No also remember that if the economy grows, we will have more revenue, and we did get an additional revenue bump from the tax increases. so add another 100 billion in revenue do to economic growth.

So we have just cut the deficit by 500 billion and now have a deficite of about 900 billion instead of 1.4 trillion

CAN WE AT LEAST AGREE THAT THIS IS BETTER?

THE CREDIT RATING AGENCIES WOULD LOVE TO SEE THIS?

SO IS IT RALLY THAT HARD?

[Cigar]

Absolutely :f_applause: When are you Running?

[zelmo1234]

IF WE CAN AT LEAST IN PART AGREE ON WHAT WE HAVE ABOVE WE STILL HAVE A MONSTER OF A PROBLEM! BUT IT IS SMALLER.

So what is next. Well if the economy would start to grow at the 3 to 4% needed to reduce unemployment we could start to make a very large dent in those numbers. But we can't count on that.

So the next year you have to have more revenue and more spending cuts. you can't do it at the same rate, but the only fiar way to do it is to do them both across the board.

So for every year that their is still a deficite Congress must do the following

1% across the board spending cuts

.25% across the board income tax / capital gains tax increases

Top rates on SS wold still be capped but the deduction ceiling would be raised an additional 50K

Cut one tax deduction that is primarily used by the rich

All departments would be held to these 1% cuts with the same 5% penalty

This would happen every year. and allowing for 1 to 1.5% economic growth, it would reduce the deficite by about 300 billion So now we would be down to 600 billion

If we had higher growth it would be even lower. So in 5 years we would ahve the deficite gone and our total debt woudl be about 19 trillion dollars.

[zelmo1234]

If we can agree that not of this would toos granma off the cliff. in 5 years we would have reduced the deficit to 0.

And could now use the previous years revenue to set budgets for the following year. So we would run very small surpluses, about 100 billion dollars. with the current rate of economic growth. as high as 500 billion in booming years.

But that would take forever to pay off the 19 trillion.

So what is next.

At the point we reach a balanced budget 5 years. We inact a .5% national sales tax on all non food and clothing items.

This can only be used to pay off the balance of the national debt, not the interest payments that the government has to pay out of the budget.

This would reduce the national debt by about 500 billion per year, add the 100 to 500 billion from increased revenue, and you have a national debt pay off of around 20 years.

And you did not ahve to kill anyone to do it! Also remember that every year that the debt goes down, the interest payments go down too, so you get to increse spending more than just the rate of econimc growth.

[Cigar]

The economy has been trying to grow all by its self ...

If we can just close off Washington from coming to work and screwing it's self.

We have so many no-brain'res sitting right in front of us.

We have a failing infrastructure and skilled labor sitting at home collecting unemployment checks.

Interest rate will never be lower in our lives .... and labor cost will never be lower in our lives.

People are dieing to go back to work and corporations have never been leaner or profitable in our lives.

So guess who can put these people back to work?

Its so obvious ...

[zelmo1234]

... also we could raise the SS ceiling.

Yes but only if you cap benifits at current levels of it is a long term negative!

Holy crap, ultra liberal and ultra conservative 2 down in less than a half hour! And the idiots in Washington can't get ahything done!

[Cigar]

Yes but only if you cap benifits at current levels of it is a long term negative!

Holy crap, ultra liberal and ultra conservative 2 down in less than a half hour! And the idiots in Washington can't get ahything done!

I have a friend who retired and has more money than God ...

Can someone explain to me why he needs to get government money?

Even he says it's stupid.

[zelmo1234]

The economy has been trying to grow all by its self ...

If we can just close off Washington from coming to work and screwing it's self.

We have so many no-brain'res sitting right in front of us.

We have a failing infrastructure and skilled labor sitting at home collecting unemployment checks.

Interest rate will never be lower in our lives .... and labor cost will never be lower in our lives.

People are dieing to go back to work and corporations have never been leaner or profitable in our lives.

So guess who can put these people back to work?

Its so obvious ...

If GWB and Obama had not killed us with spending we could use a program, but if we do you have to cut elsewhere?

And my suggestion is to encourage states do suspend prevailaing wage for the nest 5 years. Most of these people would glady go back to work for the regular 15 to 17 dollars an hour, and they would of course get overtime. There is no need at this time to pay them 30 dollars an hour to do what they would be greatful to do for less.

[Cigar]

If GWB and Obama had not killed us with spending we could use a program, but if we do you have to cut elsewhere?

And my suggestion is to encourage states do suspend prevailaing wage for the nest 5 years. Most of these people would glady go back to work for the regular 15 to 17 dollars an hour, and they would of course get overtime. There is no need at this time to pay them 30 dollars an hour to do what they would be greatful to do for less.

Out of those two ... who grew the Government?

[zelmo1234]

I have a friend who retired and has more money than God ...

Can someone explain to me why he needs to get government money?

Even he says it's stupid.

Cigar you knwo that Means testing for SS and Medicare is a Republcan Idea right?

But I am on board again where do you want to set the bar! A person with a retrement income of over 150K gets ther benifits educe by 50% and over 400K they get no benifits? How does that sound.

Now I have one for you Green energy Subsidies? 92 billion??? The technology is not there as of yet to make it the affordable choice for the nations energy.

How about a 50% cut and instead of paying for battery factories that never produce batteries, we put it all into R & D and use the University system so there are no patent problems when the break through comes, and all companies can use the technology?

46 billion a year in one 50% cut

[zelmo1234]

Here is one for conservatives. If a company brings production back to the USA from a forgien country, and sets up in a dity with an unemployment rate of over 8.5% they get a tax holiday on the repatriotization of the money. and they get a 10 year holiday on federal income tax?

NOW BEFORE YOU ON THE LEFT GO CRAZY! This is a revenue increase. Why?

First if this was not available, the company would not like bring the money or the jobs back to the USA. So we wold not have any tax revenue off this money anyway.

Second lets say that the company employee's 100 people, that is 100 less people on unemployment, and 100 more people paying income tax and FICA taxes from both the compay and the workers.

Plus increae reveneu for the sity and state, so they do not need as much federal help for road and bridge repairs.

[zelmo1234]

Out of those two ... who grew the Government?

Both!

http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/25/news/economy/obama_government/index.htm

Now only 6.2% in 3.5 years, but on a budget of 3.5 trillion that is 217 billion dollars!

Not as much as GWB but with the rising cost of entitlements still way too much!

[nic34]

Yes but only if you cap benifits at current levels of it is a long term negative!

Holy crap, ultra liberal and ultra conservative 2 down in less than a half hour! And the idiots in Washington can't get ahything done!

Just eliminate the SS cap... then everybody gets paid and SS doesn't become a "welfare" program.

[nic34]

Both!

http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/25/news/economy/obama_government/index.htm

Now only 6.2% in 3.5 years, but on a budget of 3.5 trillion that is 217 billion dollars!

Not as much as GWB but with the rising cost of entitlements still way too much!

What do you call an entitlement?

[Peter1469]

If I OWNED a Large Oil Corporation
If I OWNED a 100 foot Yacht
If I OWNED a Corporate Learjet

Can someone explain to me why I am Entitled to YOUR money for a Tax Break?

If government gives a tax break, how does that translate to:

YOUR money for a Tax Break? :wink:

[Peter1469]

Just eliminate the SS cap... then everybody gets paid and SS doesn't become a "welfare" program.

You will also have to have Congress repay the SS trust fund all the money it raided from it; and prevent Congress from doing it again.

[zelmo1234]

Just eliminate the SS cap... then everybody gets paid and SS doesn't become a "welfare" program.

I don't disagree but if you do not cap benifits you still draw out more that you pay in. which if they were investing your mone like they should have been would be OK but because there is not money there, you have to cap benifits too! otherwise peopel like me woudl be drwing 10K per month out of the system.

[zelmo1234]

What do you call an entitlement?

It matters little what I think the government clasifies SS medicare, medicaid, disability, governemnt pensions, welfare support, and unemployment under entitlement programs.

Now if you do not like the word, I undeerstand but these programs are breaking the budget!

[zelmo1234]

You will also have to have Congress repay the SS trust fund all the money it raided from it; and prevent Congress from doing it again.

I agree, but no matter waht at the very best SS is a gaurentee of poverty for most.

After the fund is repaid if you let workers invest there share into monitored funds, you would have a promis of wealth. And if you only ever allowed interest to be taken from the program except for extreme conditions. And passed this down from family to family. with in 3 generations you would ahve a population that no longer needed government support. Imagin as technology improves and we nee less and less workers how great it would be if you wre getting 500 a month from great grampa and 1000 a month from grampa, and 2000 a month from dads retirement. and it just keep building. Think of the economic freedom!

[Chris]

If I OWNED a Large Oil Corporation
If I OWNED a 100 foot Yacht
If I OWNED a Corporate Learjet

Can someone explain to me why I am Entitled to YOUR money for a Tax Break?

Explain the doublespeak of how if you get a tax break you end up getting any of my money.

[Chris]

What do you call an entitlement?

The belief you're owed happiness without pursuing it.

[nic34]

It matters little what I think the government clasifies SS medicare, medicaid, disability, governemnt pensions, welfare support, and unemployment under entitlement programs.
Not all those are entitlements.

An entitlement is a service or benefit that is not specifically paid for but is funded generally by taxes.

SS, Medicare, and even VA benefits are earned benefits or 'Accrued Benefits' and defined for employees of a company as:

Coverage earned on a pension plan, based on years of service. Accrued benefits may include vacation, sick or personal time off, or other related benefits. Employees who are laid off, retire or are fired must receive all unpaid accrued benefits.

[Cigar]

If government gives a tax break, how does that translate to:

YOUR money for a Tax Break? :wink:

Real easy question ... Yes or No

Should Large Oil Corporations, Yacht owner and Corporate Learjet owner get Tax breaks?

Yes or No, not a difficult question, just need an Yes or No answer.

[zelmo1234]

Nic

I so not disagree with your statement above. but it matters little what you or I think, that is the colum that the government accounting office puts these program into.

If you like the term better you can call it manditory spending. The government calls it entitlement spending.

You have discressionaly and "manditory" spending mandator spending is entitlements and the interest on the debt

Another way that helps me with the wording is you earned your SS so now you are entitled to it!

[zelmo1234]

Real easy question ... Yes or No

Should Large Oil Corporations, Yacht owner and Corporate Learjet owner get Tax breaks?

Yes or No, not a difficult question, just need an Yes or No answer.

I say at a time when they ahve hundreds of billions in quartly profits NO. but as a reward for all of the taxes that they do pay we could open a lot of public lands up for oil explorations for them, I an sure that is a trade they woudl gladly make.

So now here is one for you. Do green energy companis that have a product that cost 2 to 3 times as much, and are not able to turn a profit, so they pay no taxes, deserve 92 billion in subsidies?

And if so, Why?

[Chris]

Real easy question ... Yes or No

Should Large Oil Corporations, Yacht owner and Corporate Learjet owner get Tax breaks?

Yes or No, not a difficult question, just need an Yes or No answer.

By changing your initial question you concede it's answer was no.


Should Large Oil Corporations, Yacht owner and Corporate Learjet owner get Tax breaks?

No, no one should, from rich to poor.

[Peter1469]

I agree, but no matter waht at the very best SS is a gaurentee of poverty for most.

After the fund is repaid if you let workers invest there share into monitored funds, you would have a promis of wealth. And if you only ever allowed interest to be taken from the program except for extreme conditions. And passed this down from family to family. with in 3 generations you would ahve a population that no longer needed government support. Imagin as technology improves and we nee less and less workers how great it would be if you wre getting 500 a month from great grampa and 1000 a month from grampa, and 2000 a month from dads retirement. and it just keep building. Think of the economic freedom!

Current levels of SS payments are not bad. If you have properly planed for retirement you should not have a mortgage, and you should have other retirement income.

I agree- I wish that I could divert some of my SS contributions into a private plan- like the TSP plan for feds.

[Peter1469]

Real easy question ... Yes or No

Should Large Oil Corporations, Yacht owner and Corporate Learjet owner get Tax breaks?

Yes or No, not a difficult question, just need an Yes or No answer.

Why don't we answer the first question before we move on to a new question?

How is giving a tax break to a rich man, taking money from the poor?

[zelmo1234]

SS is the worst invetment you will ever make in you life, other than possibly a car!

The pay out levels for me are not bad, but take a person that has never been able to save and make 30K a year ther entire life? They have no home, and no pension or savings. They are screwed.

Take the same person and let them invets that 6.5% and they would retire with 3 times the incoe of their working career. It is not just about getting by, but changing the culture

[Cigar]

Why don't we answer the first question before we move on to a new question?

How is giving a tax break to a rich man, taking money from the poor?

Real simple ... Our country is getting ready to Cut programs for Children why saying no to cutting Tax Loopholes for the Rich.

So ... who do you think is going to pay down the dept .. our Pet Dogs?

[Peter1469]

SS is the worst invetment you will ever make in you life, other than possibly a car!

The pay out levels for me are not bad, but take a person that has never been able to save and make 30K a year ther entire life? They have no home, and no pension or savings. They are screwed.

Take the same person and let them invets that 6.5% and they would retire with 3 times the incoe of their working career. It is not just about getting by, but changing the culture

I agree. But it wasn't set up to be an investment. You don't have a true ownership interest in SS. That is why I would like to privatize part or all of it.

Yes, if a person does not plan for retirement, and expects to live off SS comfortably, they are on the left side of the IQ bell curve.

[Peter1469]

Real simple ... Our country is getting ready to Cut programs for Children why saying no to cutting Tax Loopholes for the Rich.

So ... who do you think is going to pay down the dept .. our Pet Dogs?

You still won't answer the first question. For sake of getting to your second question I will answer the first one for you.

No. Cutting taxes on the rich does not take money from the poor. Unless you are a Marxist and consider all money to be the property of the State. Under that theory people should be thankful for whatever money the State lets them keep for themselves.

Your second question was:


Real easy question ... Yes or No

Should Large Oil Corporations, Yacht owner and Corporate Learjet owner get Tax breaks?

Yes or No, not a difficult question, just need an Yes or No answer.

In general, no.

And now for your current (3rd) question:


Real simple ... Our country is getting ready to Cut programs for Children why saying no to cutting Tax Loopholes for the Rich.

So ... who do you think is going to pay down the dept .. our Pet Dogs?

Cutting tax loop holes will not pay down the debt. It wouldn't even eliminate cuts in projected spending. The US does not have a tax revenue problem. It has a spending problem.

We are spending ~$1.4T per year, more than we get in revenue. It is simply impossible to raise that much more in additional taxes. The harshest budget proposals only raise that much over 10 years.

[nic34]

Current levels of SS payments are not bad. If you have properly planed for retirement you should not have a mortgage, and you should have other retirement income.

Agreed. Planning is key, and most folks don't do this. Sadly it's kinda why SS was set up in the first place as a safety net for poor planners....the middle class and the poor.


I agree- I wish that I could divert some of my SS contributions into a private plan- like the TSP plan for feds.

Don't agree. SS contributons are not that large that we cannot divert funds to private plans on our own.

[Chris]

Real simple ... Our country is getting ready to Cut programs for Children why saying no to cutting Tax Loopholes for the Rich.

So ... who do you think is going to pay down the dept .. our Pet Dogs?

That is false. The sequester does not cut existing funding, it cuts increases in spending.

[Peter1469]

Agreed. Planning is key, and most folks don't do this. Sadly it's kinda why SS was set up in the first place as a safety net for poor planners....the middle class and the poor.



Don't agree. SS contributons are not that large that we cannot divert funds to private plans on our own.

I don't understand your second sentence. If you took 1/3 of your monthly contributions and diverted it to a private plan, you stand a good change of earning a lot more money from it than the other 2/3rs still in the SS system.

[Peter1469]

That is false. The sequester does not cut existing funding, it cuts increases in spending.

It is called baseline budgeting.

If Cigar tried that with his business he would end up in Club Fed. (Jail)

[nic34]

If you took 1/3 of your monthly contributions and diverted it to a private plan, you stand a good change of earning a lot more money from it than the other 2/3rs still in the SS system.

... and it would defund current retirees...

... can I divert part of my health ins. premium to pay for another plan?

I'm all for using (risking) the rest of our pay for private plans, but leave a basic SS insurance alone.

[zelmo1234]

Real simple ... Our country is getting ready to Cut programs for Children why saying no to cutting Tax Loopholes for the Rich.

So ... who do you think is going to pay down the dept .. our Pet Dogs?

The President has the power to decide where these cut will come from. If he choose to cut childrens programs and still fun all of the czars that is up to him. IF he does not offer up early retirement to some then that is up to him.

If he wants to take it out of controlers, and the military that is up to him. but he might lay off all of the new IRS agents that he is hiring to inforce obamacare? Cut the funding to Dingy Harry's Cowboy poetry Festival, and cut some to the 92 billion he is pissing away on green energy!

He could cut some of that instead of cutting childrens programs, if he did not want to play politics wouldn't you say!

[zelmo1234]

... and it would defund current retirees...

... can I divert part of my health ins. premium to pay for another plan?

I'm all for using (risking) the rest of our pay for private plans, but leave a basic SS insurance alone.

That is where raising the deductin by .5% and means testing comes in

look at this chart.

http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/the-best-life/2010/03/29/determine-your-future-social-security-benefits1

A person making 40K is going to receive a little over 17K per year and have to pay his or her medicare premiums out of that amount. leaving about 900 dollars a month to live on???

Take that same 3.25% and invest it saying that the person averages 30K for his life not 40K and he woudl have about 900 thousand in savings using the averge rate of fairly safe mutual funds and moving to securities as the person ages. at a 5.5% anual return, not that hard to get on that sum of money. anual income of $49,500 and you tax this. So take home of 41K that is averaging 30K per year from age 25 to 65.

Which way would you rather live.

And remember that while you may have to off set some other spending to take care of current retiree's for a few years. 25 years in your retirement liability is going to be dropping like a stone. That money can go to reduce heath care cost, saving retired people even more, until there is no premium for retired folks, and then you can start adding to the amount that workers can invest.

[zelmo1234]

I agree. But it wasn't set up to be an investment. You don't have a true ownership interest in SS. That is why I would like to privatize part or all of it.

Yes, if a person does not plan for retirement, and expects to live off SS comfortably, they are on the left side of the IQ bell curve.

The perhaps a better way to do it is call it a welfare tax. leave the deductions the same, and for those who save and do not need financial help, they would get a better grace of medicare. call it medicare +. and they would get it at no charge.

Those that need help would go onto the welfare system! And just do away with the current SS plan.

[zelmo1234]

So Friends and neighbors, I have proposed a plan that even Cigar and I agree on most of the points. It balances the budget in five years or less?

And even from most of our liberal friends on this forum, their has been no real opposition! As it raises revenue, in a fair way, and it decreases spending in a fair way.

So the final questions is how come we are not sending this plan to our congressmen, Senators, and the President and getting every man women and child to do the same.

[Peter1469]

So Friends and neighbors, I have proposed a plan that even Cigar and I agree on most of the points. It balances the budget in five years or less?

And even from most of our liberal friends on this forum, their has been no real opposition! As it raises revenue, in a fair way, and it decreases spending in a fair way.

So the final questions is how come we are not sending this plan to our congressmen, Senators, and the President and getting every man women and child to do the same.


Send it to your Congress Critters.

[GrumpyDog]

These clowns in Congress are bitching about a paltry 85 Billion, which is not even 0.5% cut, and having a heartattack about Tea Party proposing a mere 1%.

The credit card spending addicts need to have an intervention, before the world loses faith in USA currency.

So I guess I agree with Zelmo and ironically, the Tea Party too, on the economics side.

[ptif219]

The answer is get rid of baseline budget and let congress do it's job it has not done the last 4 years pass a budget. Congress needs to work on balancing the budget instead of playing politics. what we have now is not a budget cut but a cut in the increase of automatic spending increases of the baseline system

[nic34]

Take that same 3.25% and invest it saying that the person averages 30K for his life not 40K and he woudl have about 900 thousand in savings using the averge rate of fairly safe mutual funds and moving to securities as the person ages. at a 5.5% anual return, not that hard to get on that sum of money. anual income of $49,500 and you tax this. So take home of 41K that is averaging 30K per year from age 25 to 65.


Remember 2008? You DO see the danger here don't you?

It's not about maximising returns, it's about security.

Gamble with another portion, not your SS insurance!