Are you advocating 100% balanced budget through tax increases only?
My point being if you want specific amounts cut from specific programs, entitlements, etc that will take some work...I don;t have all the information, but their are people that do. Namely your congressmen and women and the president.
Honestly, I'd like to see what cuts would result in a balanced budget with no new revenue. Then add back entitlements, paid for by tax increases for those that are a necessity.
Are you advocating 100% balanced budget through tax increases only? - NOPE...
I'd be fine with some cuts...perhaps farm subsidies and giveaways to corporations...
I think money could be saved on Medicaid and Medicare if more folks were hired to track down fraud and waste...
I have not arguments with any of your points, Hedonist, but only questions:
If not by mandate, how do we make compensation more fair, especially for underpaid creative people, those who are less advantaged by circumstance, and those who work the hardest for the least? Do we just shrug our shoulders and say, "Oh, well, life is unfair, too bad so sad?" I know you don't think that way and I know you are intelligent and caring so I put the burden to solve these dilemmas on you!
Just kidding but, seriously, what to do?
Auggh- this is a great debate going on but I have grunt work to do!!
Back later.
I dunno, sir...I'm not hard-hearted, but as I said above, life ISN'T fair. We're all born into different environments, cultures, and yes, circumstances. I don't begrudge anyone with an easier life, and I would hope one with a tougher life wouldn't begrudge mine.
Most people - not only those of means - are amazingly charitable of their own accord. I'd rather trust in those folks to spread their wealth or extras with others as THEY see fit, rather than someone I don't even know (or trust) making that decision for me.
Your other questions merit more thought on my part - and even then... :P
sounds super easy...where's that damn red button when you need it...
too bad this notion was in place during the bush years and when the drums were beating for the Irak war...or when the bush tax cuts were in place...oh well, time to pay up...let's cut medicaid...
So does raising taxes to keep paying for more and more and more....
You have a point with GW and the wars. A very good one.
how about this...
put in a 5 year spending freeze....
do away with the bush tax cuts...
pay down the debt...
balance the budget...
sounds super easy...where's that damn red button when you need it...
too bad this notion was in place during the bush years and when the drums were beating for the Irak war...or when the bush tax cuts were in place...oh well, time to pay up...let's cut medicaid...
So does raising taxes to keep paying for more and more and more....
You have a point with GW and the wars. A very good one.
how about this...
put in a 5 year spending freeze....
do away with the bush tax cuts...
pay down the debt...
balance the budget...
maybe the home sales tax will ballance the budget :?
So does raising taxes to keep paying for more and more and more....
You have a point with GW and the wars. A very good one.
how about this...
put in a 5 year spending freeze....
do away with the bush tax cuts...
pay down the debt...
balance the budget...
maybe the home sales tax will ballance the budget :?
Godfather.[/quote]
there's always something...I love it...
person a: "it's hot outside"
person b: "yeah, since they upheld obamacare, it has been hot"
person a: "what does that have to do with the weather?"
person b: "huh?"
person a: "it's hot outside"
person b: "yeah, since they upheld obamacare, it has been hot"
person a: "what does that have to do with the weather?"
person b: "huh?"
\there's always something...I love it...
person a: "it's hot outside"
person b: "yeah, since the Rich haven't paid their fair share, it has been hot"
person a: "what does that have to do with the weather?"
person b: "huh?"
I dunno, sir...I'm not hard-hearted, but as I said above, life ISN'T fair. We're all born into different environments, cultures, and yes, circumstances. I don't begrudge anyone with an easier life, and I would hope one with a tougher life wouldn't begrudge mine.
Most people - not only those of means - are amazingly charitable of their own accord. I'd rather trust in those folks to spread their wealth or extras with others as THEY see fit, rather than someone I don't even know (or trust) making that decision for me.
Your other questions merit more thought on my part - and even then... :P
Very thoughtful post.
I know that most people on here don't really want life to be fair....because in truth we're all UNBELIEVABLY RICH compared to so many people on this earth that if it were to be fair we'd all have to actually give up a LOT.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
So does raising taxes to keep paying for more and more and more....
You have a point with GW and the wars. A very good one.
how about this...
put in a 5 year spending freeze....
do away with the bush tax cuts...
pay down the debt...
balance the budget...
maybe the home sales tax will ballance the budget :?
Godfather.
there's always something...I love it...
person a: "it's hot outside"
person b: "yeah, since they upheld obamacare, it has been hot"
person a: "what does that have to do with the weather?"
person b: "huh?"
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,464
"How hot is it Jefferson?"
"Fool- can't you hear? I said it's hot- damn hot!"
More local economy.
Less consumption.
Walkable communities and trains.
Helpful, kind, generous, thrifty, brave and clean and reverent...
or irreverent.
And margaritas for everybody.
goodnight...
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Republican House Speaker John Boehner hammered President Barack Obama on Tuesday after accounting firm Ernst and Young released a study funded by pro-business groups hostile to the Democrat's agenda. The firm's results showed that Obama's proposed tax hikes on the wealthy could cost the already sputtering economy more than 700,000 jobs.
"Our economy is still struggling under President Obama's policies, and his massive tax hike will only make things tougher," Boehner said in a statement. "It's one of the worst possible ideas at one of the worst possible times for families and small businesses."
Obama has been campaigning on calls to extend the Bush-era tax cuts on income up to $250,000 but let them expire above that level. He and fellow Democrats have accused Republicans of holding middle-class tax relief hostage to help the very rich (in fact, the wealthy would see the benefits on their first $250,000 of income). Recent polls have suggested that the public broadly supports the president in principle, though Republicans have noted that his proposal does not yet exist as legislation, and Democrats are expected to water down some of the president's recommended changes.
The Ernst and Young study looked at the impact of seeing the top marginal tax rates rise—but also studied the effects of a range of other proposals included in the president's budget and broader tax plans.
This report examines four sets of provisions that would increase the top tax rates:
· The increase in the top two tax rates from 33 to 36 percent and from 35 to 39.6 percent.
· The reinstatement of the limitation on itemized deductions for high-income taxpayers (the "Pease" provision).
· The taxation of dividends as ordinary income and at a top income tax rate of 39.6 percent and increase in the top tax rate applied to capital gains to 20 percent.
· The increase in the 2.9 percent Medicare tax to 3.8 percent for high-income taxpayers and the application of the new 3.8 percent tax on investment income including flow-through business income, interest, dividends and capital gains.
Here is what the accounting firm concluded would happen:
· Output in the long-run would fall by 1.3 percent, or $200 billion, in today's economy.
· Employment in the long-run would fall by 0.5 percent, or roughly 710,000 fewer jobs, in today's economy.
· Capital stock and investment in the long-run would fall by 1.4 percent and 2.4 percent, respectively.
· Real after-tax wages would fall by 1.8 percent, reflecting a decline in workers' living standards relative to what would have occurred otherwise.
Ernst and Young prepared the report on behalf of several pro-business groups, including the Independent Community Bankers of America, the National Federation of Independent Business, the S Corporation Association and the United States Chamber of Commerce. (One of the co-authors, Robert Carroll, served as deputy assistant secretary for tax analysis in George W. Bush's Treasury Department.) Asked for a formal response to the study, two White House officials declined to do so on the record.
"This report shows the president's small business tax hike threatens hundreds of thousands of jobs, and will lead to even less economic growth, less investment and lower wages for American workers," Boehner said.
The speaker underlined that the Republican-led House will vote this month to extend all of the Bush-era tax cuts and set the stage for a broader debate on overhauling the tax code.
i know where i am from you pay 20 percent on the first €40000 and then earned after that you pay 41 percent on(these are just basic figures, you actually pay more because their is employment insurance and other things going on as well),
so for example if i was earning €80000 i would pay pay 40000*20% (8000) + 40000*41% (16400) so my total tax would 24400.
in the states is it the same or is it what ever band you are in you pay that on the whole of your income
I didn't check your math, but conceptually yeah it's the same in the US. Each segment of your income is taxed at the associated bracket. So if i'm "in the top bracket", really only the portion of my income that is above that bracket's minimum is taxed at that rate.
Part of what makes this conversation so challenging is that we all seem to have different definitions of "fair", but then speak as if there is only one true definition.
In a nutshell...
One side believes "fair" is coerced income equality/redistribution to trim what they deem the excesses of the "rich" and provide basic necessities to the poor. They tend to forget that the folks paying the most into the system aren't all Bill Gates's and Oprah's.
The other side believes "fair" is being able to choose how to spend the money they believe they've earned. That, other than exceptional situations, we are a product of the choices we make throughout life, not just a product of our circumstances. They tend to overlook how important our upbringing and background is in terms of our ability to make those right decisions.
Part of what makes this conversation so challenging is that we all seem to have different definitions of "fair", but then speak as if there is only one true definition.
In a nutshell...
One side believes "fair" is coerced income equality/redistribution to trim what they deem the excesses of the "rich" and provide basic necessities to the poor. They tend to forget that the folks paying the most into the system aren't all Bill Gates's and Oprah's.
The other side believes "fair" is being able to choose how to spend the money they believe they've earned. That, other than exceptional situations, we are a product of the choices we make throughout life, not just a product of our circumstances. They tend to overlook how important our upbringing and background is in terms of our ability to make those right decisions.
Part of what makes this conversation so challenging is that we all seem to have different definitions of "fair", but then speak as if there is only one true definition.
In a nutshell...
One side believes "fair" is coerced income equality/redistribution to trim what they deem the excesses of the "rich" and provide basic necessities to the poor. They tend to forget that the folks paying the most into the system aren't all Bill Gates's and Oprah's.
The other side believes "fair" is being able to choose how to spend the money they believe they've earned. That, other than exceptional situations, we are a product of the choices we make throughout life, not just a product of our circumstances. They tend to overlook how important our upbringing and background is in terms of our ability to make those right decisions.
Interesting take on fair! Sounds kind of like a nature vs. nurture debate which is, in some ways, the explanation that the two sides usually give to explain their POV. Perhaps if we married the two concepts of nature AND nurture then we could get somewhere in regards to a solution.
Here's another take on it. What is our definition of middle class? We have a very large middle class but in comparison to some East Asian countries theirs is far larger. They (in general) seem to be satisfied with remaining in the middle class whereas I sometimes believe that Americans are continuing to strive to remove themselves from the middle class and enter the upper (wealthy) class. I can't remember the exact way the other thread's blog post described it (the thread about 10 things...) but that poor Americans are simply temporarily embarrassed millionaires. Perhaps definition of middle class is the wrong phrase. I think what I really am asking is, is it ok to have just enough? Or do we need all the other stuff that will elevate us to that upper class?
Are we getting something out of this all-encompassing trip?
Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...
Comments
Are you advocating 100% balanced budget through tax increases only? - NOPE...
I'd be fine with some cuts...perhaps farm subsidies and giveaways to corporations...
I think money could be saved on Medicaid and Medicare if more folks were hired to track down fraud and waste...
Most people - not only those of means - are amazingly charitable of their own accord. I'd rather trust in those folks to spread their wealth or extras with others as THEY see fit, rather than someone I don't even know (or trust) making that decision for me.
Your other questions merit more thought on my part - and even then... :P
how about this...
put in a 5 year spending freeze....
do away with the bush tax cuts...
pay down the debt...
balance the budget...
maybe the home sales tax will ballance the budget :?
Godfather.
maybe the home sales tax will ballance the budget :?
Godfather.[/quote]
there's always something...I love it...
person a: "it's hot outside"
person b: "yeah, since they upheld obamacare, it has been hot"
person a: "what does that have to do with the weather?"
person b: "huh?"
person a: "it's hot outside"
person b: "yeah, since the Rich haven't paid their fair share, it has been hot"
person a: "what does that have to do with the weather?"
person b: "huh?"
Very thoughtful post.
I know that most people on here don't really want life to be fair....because in truth we're all UNBELIEVABLY RICH compared to so many people on this earth that if it were to be fair we'd all have to actually give up a LOT.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
there's always something...I love it...
person a: "it's hot outside"
person b: "yeah, since they upheld obamacare, it has been hot"
person a: "what does that have to do with the weather?"
person b: "huh?"
[/quote]
Oh, you weren't aware this was in the Obamacare bill? Guess what, you aren't alone. There are more than a few members of Congress that aren't aware of it [url=eitherhttp://www.gop.gov/blog/10/04/08/]eitherhttp://www.gop.gov/blog/10/04/08/[/url] ... taxes-home<http://www.gop.gov/blog/10/04/08/obamacare-flatlines-obamacare-taxes-home http://www.gop/. gov/blog/10/04/08/obamacare-flatlines-obamacare-taxes-home>
Godfather.
it's hot outside....
:yawn: pay my taxes while your at it...I have a protest to go to.
Godfather.
does not compute...does not compute....
Godfather.
really...
Godfather.
"Fool- can't you hear? I said it's hot- damn hot!"
More local economy.
Less consumption.
Walkable communities and trains.
Helpful, kind, generous, thrifty, brave and clean and reverent...
or irreverent.
And margaritas for everybody.
goodnight...
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
"Our economy is still struggling under President Obama's policies, and his massive tax hike will only make things tougher," Boehner said in a statement. "It's one of the worst possible ideas at one of the worst possible times for families and small businesses."
Obama has been campaigning on calls to extend the Bush-era tax cuts on income up to $250,000 but let them expire above that level. He and fellow Democrats have accused Republicans of holding middle-class tax relief hostage to help the very rich (in fact, the wealthy would see the benefits on their first $250,000 of income). Recent polls have suggested that the public broadly supports the president in principle, though Republicans have noted that his proposal does not yet exist as legislation, and Democrats are expected to water down some of the president's recommended changes.
The Ernst and Young study looked at the impact of seeing the top marginal tax rates rise—but also studied the effects of a range of other proposals included in the president's budget and broader tax plans.
This report examines four sets of provisions that would increase the top tax rates:
· The increase in the top two tax rates from 33 to 36 percent and from 35 to 39.6 percent.
· The reinstatement of the limitation on itemized deductions for high-income taxpayers (the "Pease" provision).
· The taxation of dividends as ordinary income and at a top income tax rate of 39.6 percent and increase in the top tax rate applied to capital gains to 20 percent.
· The increase in the 2.9 percent Medicare tax to 3.8 percent for high-income taxpayers and the application of the new 3.8 percent tax on investment income including flow-through business income, interest, dividends and capital gains.
Here is what the accounting firm concluded would happen:
· Output in the long-run would fall by 1.3 percent, or $200 billion, in today's economy.
· Employment in the long-run would fall by 0.5 percent, or roughly 710,000 fewer jobs, in today's economy.
· Capital stock and investment in the long-run would fall by 1.4 percent and 2.4 percent, respectively.
· Real after-tax wages would fall by 1.8 percent, reflecting a decline in workers' living standards relative to what would have occurred otherwise.
Ernst and Young prepared the report on behalf of several pro-business groups, including the Independent Community Bankers of America, the National Federation of Independent Business, the S Corporation Association and the United States Chamber of Commerce. (One of the co-authors, Robert Carroll, served as deputy assistant secretary for tax analysis in George W. Bush's Treasury Department.) Asked for a formal response to the study, two White House officials declined to do so on the record.
"This report shows the president's small business tax hike threatens hundreds of thousands of jobs, and will lead to even less economic growth, less investment and lower wages for American workers," Boehner said.
The speaker underlined that the Republican-led House will vote this month to extend all of the Bush-era tax cuts and set the stage for a broader debate on overhauling the tax code.
In a nutshell...
One side believes "fair" is coerced income equality/redistribution to trim what they deem the excesses of the "rich" and provide basic necessities to the poor. They tend to forget that the folks paying the most into the system aren't all Bill Gates's and Oprah's.
The other side believes "fair" is being able to choose how to spend the money they believe they've earned. That, other than exceptional situations, we are a product of the choices we make throughout life, not just a product of our circumstances. They tend to overlook how important our upbringing and background is in terms of our ability to make those right decisions.
Yeah, I can see that. Good post.
Interesting take on fair! Sounds kind of like a nature vs. nurture debate which is, in some ways, the explanation that the two sides usually give to explain their POV. Perhaps if we married the two concepts of nature AND nurture then we could get somewhere in regards to a solution.
Here's another take on it. What is our definition of middle class? We have a very large middle class but in comparison to some East Asian countries theirs is far larger. They (in general) seem to be satisfied with remaining in the middle class whereas I sometimes believe that Americans are continuing to strive to remove themselves from the middle class and enter the upper (wealthy) class. I can't remember the exact way the other thread's blog post described it (the thread about 10 things...) but that poor Americans are simply temporarily embarrassed millionaires. Perhaps definition of middle class is the wrong phrase. I think what I really am asking is, is it ok to have just enough? Or do we need all the other stuff that will elevate us to that upper class?
Seems my preconceptions are what should have been burned...
I AM MINE