S&P downgrades US rating from AAA

[Spidey]

Foil, if you don’t mind me answering for CUDA…I think working for your check, would be a great start…I mean anything.

Clean the streets…watch someone’s child when they are at work…visit an elderly person, with some soup…

You know what I’m saying?

No wait…I forgot…they are entitled. (so, sayeth the ACLU)

[Foil]

I think working for your check, would be a great start…I mean anything.

Clean the streets…watch someone’s child when they are at work…visit an elderly person, with some soup…

Okay, you're suggesting a change to social programs to require community work for benefits. Interesting.

Do you think that's significantly different from government-created community jobs a la WPA?

[CUDA]

I am against those needy paying nothing into they system which provides for them.

CUDA, I'm curious, what exactly are you suggesting here? Adjusting tax rates/exemptions to require the lowest income levels to still pay some tax? Or are you talking about a restriction which only supports those who pay taxes? Or both?

I'm saying and have said to Both TC and Slick many times. that EVERYONE needs to pay something. I don't care if it's a can of spam PAY SOMETHING. $10 a month, SOMETHING.
or to use a colorful metaphor "Ass, Gas, or Grass nobody rides for free"
why do we let 1 class of people that pay nothing into a system reap benefits from that system. and even have the power to vote such system into place by electing politicians that pander to them from said system ?
everyone can afford something. and if they cannot afford the Cash, then as Spidey says they clean the highways or the restroom at the rest areas. but you know the left will cry slavery, those people ARE being compensated with entitlements it's not slavery.

[Spidey]

Do you think that's significantly different from government-created community jobs a la WPA?

Yea, I’d be fine with that, to replace the current public assistance program. At least they are doing something productive for the money.

Of course the unions and the ACLU would have something to say.

[Top Gun]

...what the hell does the ACLU have to do with any of this?

[Spidey]

Is your comment regarding the fact that this thread is off topic?

The ACLU’s position regarding things such as Workfare is well known.

[callmeslick]

. Evidently the new budget deal includes a balance budget proposal that has to be brought up for a vote. If it passes then we can look at a revised tax structure.

cart before horse, in my opinion. I agree totally on the recklessness and waste issues. Hell, the Defense budget alone is a free-for-all of excess and porkbarrel spending. That is where the vigilance of the electorate comes in, and it isn't simply liberal/conservative, or GOP/Dems. It is ALL of us. Far too many voters are asleep at the wheel FAR too much of the time.

[callmeslick]

CUDA, I wrote that sentence re:Charity completely backwards. What I meant to convey is that I am sure that you give a greater percentage of what you have to charity that I do. Now, re-read the words after that and they might make more sense to you.

[woodchip]

Well how about reducing federal money going to help pay for terrorism. Someone want to explain to me just why we are funding the Palestinians whose govt Hamas is a terrorist organization?

"The PA treasury receives cash from two main sources: the US pays about 50 percent of the money, and the rest is mostly from European Union member nations.

Prisoners who were jailed for periods of up to five years receive 1,400 to 2,000 NIS per month. However, terrorists serving 10 to 15 years receive 6,000 shekels, the ones serving 15 to 20 years receive 10,000 shekels, and those serving 20 to 30 years get 12,000 shekels. These are people who planned, directed and took part in the intentional sadistic slaughter of civilian men, women and children, at point blank range.

Since some of the victims of PA terror are American citizens, the information means that US taxpayers pay monthly salaries to the people who murdered their fellow citizens. The latest US citizen who was a victim of PA terror is Ben Yosef Livnat, who was gunned down in Shechem.

The terrorists' wives and children receive additional cash, and prisoners with Israel citizenship get a bonus."

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/ ... kjbZCxOIgE

Nice sliding pay scale. You get paid more for the more heinous the crime.

[null0010]

Well how about reducing federal money going to help pay for terrorism. Someone want to explain to me just why we are funding the Palestinians whose govt Hamas is a terrorist organization?

Probably the same reason we implicitly support opium growers in Afghanistan, dropping money directly in the Taliban's lap, and the same reason we fund Israel, who in my opinion are no better than Hamas.

[woodchip]

What ever the reasons Null, we can no longer afford the expenditures

[Top Gun]

So hey, while we're talking about massive deficits and financial meltdowns and stuff, let's take a look at what one of the world's richest men has to say on the subject. I think we could do far worse than electing Warren Buffett as president.

[callmeslick]

far worse, Top Gun, but I dare say he isn't planning to put his assets in a blind trust. Doing so might collapse the capital markets in and of itself.

[Top Gun]

Heh, you might be right.

Along the same lines, here's a group of millionaires who support letting the Bush-era tax cuts expire for anyone in their income bracket. Those facts on the marginal tax rate over the past century are an eye-opener.

[callmeslick]

Heh, you might be right.

Along the same lines, here's a group of millionaires who support letting the Bush-era tax cuts expire for anyone in their income bracket. Those facts on the marginal tax rate over the past century are an eye-opener.

Our family is signed on with that group, someplace. They started that movement up over two years back.

edit: actually this is yet another group. The initial effort was a petition to Congress by folks with a net worth of at least 10 million. Can't recall the name, right at the moment, but the points made were identical. The point I am trying to get to is that no matter how many folks come forward, for how long, pointing out the obvious, there is a group simply unwilling to allow rational taxation to be restored whatsoever. What has amazed me is that over these past two years, folks who will NEVER, EVER amass close to $10 million or more in assets will have a fit when the call to rescind the Bush tax cuts is brought up, and for the life of me, I can't understand why......

[Spidey]

What is stopping all of these rich people who want to pay more taxes, from writing a check to the treasury?

[callmeslick]

What is stopping all of these rich people who want to pay more taxes, from writing a check to the treasury?

Why should some pay and others not?? All that is being called for is fairness, what is the point of substituting one unfair scheme with another?




......I've heard Spidey's comment so many times I've lost count. Sort of amazing that so many would miss the point of the exercise so completely. Like Buffett said, there is absolutely ZERO correllation between tax rates on cap gains or high-end income and investment. None. Zilch. Never has been, never will be, because, even if the government decides(as they have at times) to take 90% of the income over, say, $1.5 million, for every million made, $100,000 more goes into the black side of the ledger.

[Spidey]

Fairness my ass, what gives one person the right to speak for another in this case? In fact…one does NOT have the right to speak for others in this case.

You want to pay more…pay more…put up or shut up, don’t speak for others.

Fairness my ass, raising taxes on the rich has nothing to do with fairness, and everything to do with revenue…period.

[Top Gun]

What has amazed me is that over these past two years, folks who will NEVER, EVER amass close to $10 million or more in assets will have a fit when the call to rescind the Bush tax cuts is brought up, and for the life of me, I can't understand why......

Yeah, that astounds me too. There are people who will never make substantially more than minimum wage and yet are adamantly against raising taxes on people who make hundreds of times more per year than they do. It's like they aren't willing to acknowledge that the pie-in-the-sky "American dream" is little more than fantasy for the vast majority of people.

Fairness my ass, what gives one person the right to speak for another in this case? In fact…one does NOT have the right to speak for others in this case.

You want to pay more…pay more…put up or shut up, don’t speak for others.

First off, I kind of doubt that there's any sort of mechanism for direct private contributions to the Treasury. Secondly, as callmeslick noted, it's not "fair" in any sense to even things out only for people willing to contribute. I don't think there's a person on the planet who likes paying taxes, but we're all obligated to, because it's necessary to keep any system of government operational. In the same way, if tax rates on the extremely wealthy are too low, as is generally acknowledged, then they should be raised across the board, for everyone in that bracket.

Fairness my ass, raising taxes on the rich has nothing to do with fairness, and everything to do with revenue…period.

If the rich have been disproportionately benefiting from tax policies over the past decade or two, then it seems only fair to put things back in proportion. Just because it would increase revenue doesn't also make it a good thing to do.

[Spidey]

“as callmeslick noted, it's not "fair" in any sense to even things out only for people willing to contribute.”

Now apply that logic to charity…

Of course it’s fair…nobody is forcing you to give that money.

[Spidey]

Regarding Investment:

The argument that people will invest less money because of a lower return is probably bogus.

The fact that people will invest less money, because they have less money, is not bogus.

[Top Gun]

“as callmeslick noted, it's not "fair" in any sense to even things out only for people willing to contribute.”

Now apply that logic to charity…

...except this is a completely separate issue from charity, since charity is voluntary by its very definition. Taxes are a mandatory payment. The people signing this petition are making the point that, whether they want to or not, anyone in that income bracket has greatly benefited from the lax tax policies of the past decade, and so as citizens they are obligated to pay a more reasonable rate in order to help pay off the deficit.

[Will Robinson]

“as callmeslick noted, it's not "fair" in any sense to even things out only for people willing to contribute.”

Now apply that logic to charity…

...except this is a completely separate issue from charity, since charity is voluntary by its very definition. Taxes are a mandatory payment. The people signing this petition are making the point that, whether they want to or not, anyone in that income bracket has greatly benefited from the lax tax policies of the past decade, and so as citizens they are obligated to pay a more reasonable rate in order to help pay off the deficit.

The way the system works now, taxes for the rich, are largely charity as well, they make a portion of their income vulnerable to taxation and hide the rest. They can change that number anytime they want.

Arrianna Huffington, a famed liberal loudmouth, charges tens of thousands to travel around and speak to other liberals. She flys a private jet and stays in 5 star resorts and writes off more "business losses" from her travels than she takes in. She calls it a business and at least one year (before it was made public), she paid no taxes on her speakers fees and wrote off the balance of her "losses" against her taxable earnings from her investments! She lives day to day in luxury off of her "business" and gets reduced taxable exposure to her investments. All the while leading the charge against the evil rich conservatives!

When you asked for it to be fair across the board you assume that rich people have all their income on a 'paycheck' that their employer is going to make deductions from and send the 'fair share' in to the government....it isn't that way.
the Fair Tax would at least hit the rich ever time they bought some new bling bling because there would be no tax code that allows those kind of write off's.

[callmeslick]

Fairness my ass, what gives one person the right to speak for another in this case? In fact…one does NOT have the right to speak for others in this case.

the 800 signers of the 2009 petition and this group are speaking for themselves, and who gives a rat's ass if a chunk of the wealthy want to be greedy? That is the problem, this whole 'pledge' business is driven by the greedy, unpatriotic segment, and while the tax code DOES allow me to kick in more, I would view it as obscene if some putz making 80 mil per year on a hedge fund scheme wishes to hang on and get taxed at 16%. What amazes me is all the lower earning folks getting hosed at 25% or more that can't see the inherent problem with the status quo.

[callmeslick]

First off, I kind of doubt that there's any sort of mechanism for direct private contributions to the Treasury.

no, actually, there is. On the really long form that one has to fill out for a complicated return, there is a line for 'additional amount' but, if I recall, it goes to the general fund. Were it directly applicable to the national debt, I can see some movement toward that.

Secondly, as callmeslick noted, it's not "fair" in any sense to even things out only for people willing to contribute. I don't think there's a person on the planet who likes paying taxes, but we're all obligated to, because it's necessary to keep any system of government operational. In the same way, if tax rates on the extremely wealthy are too low, as is generally acknowledged, then they should be raised across the board, for everyone in that bracket.

well put.

If the rich have been disproportionately benefiting from tax policies over the past decade or two, then it seems only fair to put things back in proportion. Just because it would increase revenue doesn't also make it a good thing to do.

the past decade? Try forever, in some sense or another. Why? Because of networking. If you grow up well off, especially old-money well off in this country, you go to college having already met face to face with a ton of politicians. The folks you go to school with and serve on boards and foundations with are the folks who determine most of the policy of the nation. It's a really tight little circle, with the illusion handed out that there is some sort of mobility. Sure, for, say Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg or Barack Obama(hmmm, didn't they all attend Harvard??), but for the average Joe Suburbia? Puhlease! And for those unfortunate to grow up in an inner city slum block, or on an Appalachian homestead, there is little or no chance of ever cracking that network. Even if you blundered into a lottery ticket or an NBA contract.

[callmeslick]

another issue of taxation/fairness to ponder:

.....the other day, I was having a nice gin and tonic and watching that buffoon Rick Perry announce his candidacy for President. He went into a harangue over the fact that '50 percent of all Americans pay NO income tax'. Now, my first response was to bellow "Plagerist! CUDA came up with that line long ago!", then I got to thinking...and, did a bit of research. First off, those 50% do pay sales taxes, fuel taxes, Social Security taxes, fees and levies almost all of which are very regressive, in terms of percentage of income.
But, what really got me was the fact that for any working American making less than $45,000 per year, not self-employed, payroll taxes are far more of a burden than the income tax. And guess what? If you are living off the income of an inherited trust, you pay ZERO payroll tax. Nada. Zilch. Ain't that a biatch? All of a sudden, those 50% don't seem like such a bunch of useless leeches anymore. At least, not to me. Rick Perry apparently differs........

[CUDA]

Rick Perry apparently differs........

so do I.
If you want Taxation/fairness, you don't need to "raise" taxes on the "Rich". you need to Do away with the loopholes (IE: people who cheat the system) and make the people that pay no taxes, pay taxes including illegals. that should solve your revenue problem and you can have all the social programs and infrastructure improvements you want.that is taxation/fairness. raising taxes on the rich is just class warfare and class warfare is bad for the nation and bad for the economy.

Many hands make light work

Edit. you do realize that we are both arguing the same thing don't you?? Neither of us is happy with the people in our tax bracket. BOTH groups do not pay their "fair share" in taxes. but the difference is I don't think the class warfare should be used for political tactic just to keep one party in power over the other. you think the rich don't pay enough in taxes fair enough. I don't think the lower income don't pay enough in taxes. so the only "FAIR" solution is an overhaul of the tax system and for EVERYONE to pay their "FAIR SHARE" of the taxes.

par·a·site
   [par-uh-sahyt] Show IPA
noun
2.
a person who receives support, advantage, or the like, from another or others without giving any useful or proper return, as one who lives on the hospitality of others.

people that take from the system and do not pay into it are Parasites. or to make it PERFECTLY clear

I think that if you take from the Government and pay no taxes then you are a Parasite on this nation. and I am saying this about the class of people I belong to. quit being users

[woodchip]

Curious interview I saw this morning. Guy goes out and asks college students if rich folk should share more of their wealth with the poor and they all said yes, that would be a fair thing to do. Then the guy ask them if they would think it was fair if these self same students would think it fair if they shared their higher GPA points with the student who weren't doing so well. I suspect most all of you know what there answer was.

[woodchip]

And guess what? If you are living off the income of an inherited trust, you pay ZERO payroll tax. Nada. Zilch. Ain't that a biatch? All of a sudden, those 50% don't seem like such a bunch of useless leeches anymore. At least, not to me. Rick Perry apparently differs........

Well, was not the money in the trust already taxed once when it was earned. Or, to look at it another way, should my daughter have to pay tax on the money I pay for her college and money I give her to live on?

[callmeslick]

Curious interview I saw this morning. Guy goes out and asks college students if rich folk should share more of their wealth with the poor and they all said yes, that would be a fair thing to do. Then the guy ask them if they would think it was fair if these self same students would think it fair if they shared their higher GPA points with the student who weren't doing so well. I suspect most all of you know what there answer was.

yeesh, what a stupid analogy. On so many levels, as well.

[callmeslick]

And guess what? If you are living off the income of an inherited trust, you pay ZERO payroll tax. Nada. Zilch. Ain't that a biatch? All of a sudden, those 50% don't seem like such a bunch of useless leeches anymore. At least, not to me. Rick Perry apparently differs........

Well, was not the money in the trust already taxed once when it was earned.

the principle but not the earned income. Further, you all don't seem to realize that cap gains are only taxed at 15%, even if one makes millions in same.

Or, to look at it another way, should my daughter have to pay tax on the money I pay for her college and money I give her to live on?

not quite as ridiculous as the earlier analogy, but close.

[callmeslick]

]people that take from the system and do not pay into it are Parasites. or to make it PERFECTLY clear

um, you just did, you called children parasites. Because, as I tried to spell out to you clearly above, everyone else DOES pay into the system, to some extent or another. Nice touch.....care to crap on the infirm and disabled, while you're at it? WWJD, anyone?

[callmeslick]

raising taxes on the rich is just class warfare and class warfare is bad for the nation and bad for the economy

completely ridiculous. No one complained in the 50s, when the top rate was 90%. I never heard anyone complaining in the 90s under Clinton about their tax burden on a seven-figure income, either. Who is feeding you this class warfare crap? If there is or was a class war, it is long over and with predictable victors.

Edit. you do realize that we are both arguing the same thing don't you??

no I don't........I don't even get the idea of why you think your tax bracket is riddled with unfair parasites.

Who are these parasites? As I stated above, I can't think of a single group that pays no federal taxes except minor children. Who am I missing? As for the wealthy, I cannot fathom how you think a great nation ought to tax their wealthiest individuals at an average of 18%, while folks making less than $100,000 are getting socked at double that. You often try to make the dubious analogy that government finances are like household finances.......if so, why do you willingly refuse to take a fair income, and in doing so cause either massive debt or horrible belt-tightening that would make your family suffer?

[Spidey]

Anyone with 2 brain cells to spare, knew CUDA was not referring to children in his comment.

(I think that might even include you)

[CUDA]

]people that take from the system and do not pay into it are Parasites. or to make it PERFECTLY clear

um, you just did, you called children parasites.

that has to be the single most asinine statement ever to be posted on this BB

.....care to crap on the infirm and disabled, while you're at it? WWJD, anyone?

get over your holier than thou self. your not better than I am as you've tried to imply multiple times in multiple threads. your just wrong. we are not your pets. we dont need you to put out our food and water for us every day. we are not your children and you don't need to change our diapers. what we need and what we want are OPPORTUNITIES Not your sympathies. and what do you know about WWJD. you keep trying to backhanded slap me with my Faith. I see in typical DNC form you did not debate a single point I made. you just tried to demonize me for my stance. How DROLL and infantile. the HH of the left. I once thought you had common sense and like to debate an issue without getting personal. I was wrong.

[Top Gun]

get over your holier than thou self. your not better than I am as you've tried to imply multiple times in multiple threads. your just wrong. we are not your pets. we dont need you to put out our food and water for us every day. we are not your children and you don't need to change our diapers. what we need and what we want are OPPORTUNITIES Not your sympathies. and what do you know about WWJD. you keep trying to backhanded slap me with my Faith. I see in typical DNC form you did not debate a single point I made. you just tried to demonize me for my stance. How DROLL and infantile. the HH of the left. I once thought you had common sense and like to debate an issue without getting personal. I was wrong.

That's what you want and what you need, Cuda. What about people who legitimately can't make ends meet, who are trapped in unfavorable economic conditions decades in the making? What sort of vague "opportunity" is going to be enough to fix that?

Also, do you know how asinine you sound when you try to make "the left" into some sort of slur?

[Sergeant Thorne]

"The left" is a slur, but only among the right/correct.

That's what you want and what you need, Cuda. What about people who legitimately can't make ends meet, who are trapped in unfavorable economic conditions decades in the making? What sort of vague "opportunity" is going to be enough to fix that?

People always whine about victims and being victims. Opportunity is everywhere. You brush over the all-important details in order to try to win a generalized, false point. What people lack who suffer from poverty is, in order from first to last, moral foundation, wisdom, initiative, and education. None of these are served by hand-outs. You're treating the symptom, aggravating the problem, and claiming they're one and the same. What the people in America need is a sound economic foundation, and the 0.05% that legitimately need a safety net need one that asks something from them, not from everyone else. Anything else is just prone to abuse and failure.

You just have no concept of how complex people are--how compelling and defeating excuses can be until things are down to the bare wire and a person is forced to face a reality that does not coddle excuses. Until that bleak point a person may believe anything that helps them or casts what they do or have done in a positive light, instead of facing reality. Reality is the only thing that is truly going to get a person back on their feet when they've fallen, and reality is the key to success.

[CUDA]

What about people who legitimately can't make ends meet, who are trapped in unfavorable economic conditions decades in the making?

well the difference between you and me is. I have a belief in the Character of Man and his ability to be able to pull himself out of tough circumstances if he wants it bad enough. and don't mistake my want for "Man" to better HIMSELF with my lack of charity. there are too many times through history that people have come from total destitute and made something out of themselves because they wanted it bad enough, and obtained it WITHOUT the Governments Charity. but I guess having the Government be Mommy and Daddy is what you want for yourself because it's easier than you actually having a goal and trying to reach it.

Also, do you know how asinine you sound when you try to make "the left" into some sort of slur?

then stop taking it as such. would you rather we call you Liberals?? the left is called the left because that's what they call themselves sorry you don't like it
I guess it's only OK for some one on the "LEFT" to say things like "Christian Conservative" derogatorily or to call someone in the Tea-party "teabaggers" or Terrorists"
Lord forbid we call someone on the "Left" what they call themselves. grow a thicker skin.

[CUDA]

No one complained in the 50s,

and you know this how??? you weren't around in the 50's to remember it. so you must be taking someones word for it

Who is feeding you this class warfare crap?

your President!!
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... ama-style/

Who are these parasites? As I stated above, I can't think of a single group that pays no federal taxes except minor children. Who am I missing?

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Most people think they pay too much to Uncle Sam, but for some people it simply is not true.

In 2009, roughly 47% of households, or 71 million, will not owe any federal income tax, according to estimates by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.

facts are a interesting thing
http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/30/pf/taxe ... /index.htm

As for the wealthy, I cannot fathom how you think a great nation ought to tax their wealthiest individuals at an average of 18%,

Do you even pay any attention while this conversation goes on. I said ELIMINATE THE LOOP HOLES. there are too many ways for the "wealthy" to use loop holes to show little or no income. and if you do not call for Tax reform and elimination of those loop holes then you calling for Tax increases on the "wealthy" is all just a big show on your part and will have no value to our economy. and your either Naive or stupid if you think that if they raise the Tax rate on those people that they wont just find more loop holes to show they don't make anything to pay Taxes on.

if so, why do you willingly refuse to take a fair income,

I believe in an Honest days work for an Honest days wages. That is a Fair Income. it's an income I negotiated and an income I give my best to earn everyday while I'm at work and if I don't like what they pay me or how I am treated then I have a choice. I can go somewhere else and start the process over.
Plus I would be a hypocrite if I was taking welfare. (which I do not need) just to make my life "easier" and would be part of the problem with the unsustainable debt in this country

[Top Gun]

"The left" is a slur, but only among the right/correct.

Give me a break. You're like a little kid on the schoolyard sticking out his tongue at people.

People always whine about victims and being victims. Opportunity is everywhere. You brush over the all-important details in order to try to win a generalized, false point. What people lack who suffer from poverty is, in order from first to last, moral foundation, wisdom, initiative, and education. None of these are served by hand-outs.

...you're ★■◆●ing me. You honestly believe this. And you accuse me of ignoring reality. You're so far dismissed from it that I don't even think you're worth arguing with. I can only hope that we fix our ass-backwards education system at some point, so that we stop producing people who are that blind to reason.

Also, do you know how asinine you sound when you try to make "the left" into some sort of slur?

then stop taking it as such. would you rather we call you Liberals?? the left is called the left because that's what they call themselves sorry you don't like it
I guess it's only OK for some one on the "LEFT" to say things like "Christian Conservative" derogatorily or to call someone in the Tea-party "teabaggers" or Terrorists"
Lord forbid we call someone on the "Left" what they call themselves. grow a thicker skin.

I'm not "liberal," so I don't take it either way. And there's a big difference between using the term and using it in a derogatory fashion. In any case, are you going to pull the lame, "They do it, so I can do it too!" excuse? Please.