 |
|  |
 |
|
DanS
|
 |
Kickball Capital of the World
Jan 1970 time: 00:30
|
|
quote: Really? Explain, please. |
Social Security taxes more than it spends. The surplus goes directly to reducing the federal deficit. If you get rid of the system now, you would also get rid of the surplus in that account.
quote: We can't have the fiscal disipline your talking about if the rate of increase for social programs is always increasing. |
Consider that revenue increases with the economy and with inflation. So right now, a 4%-6% increase every year would have no impact on how much of the economic pie the federal government constitutes. Anything lower than that figure, shrinks the government's piece of the economic pie.
If you were to manage a 2%-3% increase every year, and considering income tax bracket creep, you would end up back at balance in 5 or 10 years or so (depending on the economic cycles, of course). What Clinton did was to find that happy medium at 22%-23% of the economy while Bush is trying for 20% of the economy (or whatever). The difference in policies between the two is rather minute.
Last edited by DanS on 02-09-2003 at 19:53
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:30
|
|
quote: edit: A question for conservatives... how do you propose we take care of our seniors and disabled if you get rid of Social Security? |
I'm not a conservative, but I'll answer anyway.
It isn't my responsibility to take care of people who didn't save for retirement or for unexpected life events (ie, becoming disabled). They can take care of themselves, rely on their families, and take charity. If this means they end up dying in poverty, so be it.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Odin
|
 |
Biology Nerd at Minnesota State University Moorhead
Sep 2000 time: 23:30
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Sava
One issue that has been overlooked here is the privatization of the military and how it has increased costs. The government outsources a lot of jobs to private firms that once used military personel. This has lead to a for-profit element that has crept into our defense spending in a big way. There was some discussion about it on MSNBC last week, but I regret I don't have any sources or figures.
Overall, there is government waste in every sector of government spending, that needs to be dealt with in a big way. I would create a commission of accountants to look at the entire budget and find government waste. Cutting spending without cutting the waste is a big mistake. Massive spending cuts are only going to hurt America. Instead, I would get more for our money, and make cuts in pork-related and corporate welfare programs.
I would also repeal the Bush-gift-to-the-rich-cuts, as well as instituting a progressive shift in the tax code, closer to pre-Reagan era (maybe 1950's-1960's) levels when America had a true progressive tax system. The burden should be put back on America's elite and taken off of the shoulders of the poor and middle classes. America was on the right track in the 1960's, but somehow, the junta of corporate scoundrels hijacked our country. The average net income for average workers in America has remained stagnant over 40 years, while income for the rich has increased dramatically. Everyone should be able to prosper in America, not just corrupt business leaders and those with wicked jump shots. |

Kudos to slamming the libertarians and conservatives about the taxes. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:30
|
|
quote: Kudos to slamming the libertarians and conservatives about the taxes. |
Umm, a lack of an income tax means that everyone benefits. Granted, some people don't benefit as much as when they get to steal the money of the rich, but you can't say that people don't benefit from a lack of income taxes.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:30
|
|
Why should wealth = added responsibility?
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:30
|
|
Odin,
quote: Rich people waste a lot of thier extra money on useless goods like $100,000 luxury cars and whatever instead of using it for the good of society. |
Exactly right. their extra money. You hit on the operative phrase, on the first try even 
quote: I Know you Libertarians would say this. I hate libertarians because they act as if the poor can live of charity, GET REAL! |
I don't actually care whether or not the poor can live off of charity. Maybe some can, and maybe some can't. Maybe some have no family, no friends, and can't find a church. I'll feel bad for them, too. But does this make a bit of difference to me when I consider welfare? Absolutely not. My money is MY MONEY, and I should be able to do with it as I please.
Don't like it? You go earn your own money, then.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:30
|
|
quote: That is a completely different ballgame. If you can show me that by doing this I will profit in the long run, then sure. |
If you can show me that I will profit in the long run, I will consider volunteering to let you use my money. However, I will not consent to you taking my money without permission, just because you promise me I'll get more in the future.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30. Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|