General discussion
-
CreatorTopic
-
January 25, 2005 at 1:41 pm #2291390
2005 Deficit
Lockedby aldanatech · about 19 years, 2 months ago
According to a top budget analyst in Congress, it is projected that there will be $855 billion in deficits for the next decade — even without the costs of war and Bush’s Social Security plan. The Bush administration wants $80 billion more to bankroll wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. $75 billion of it would be for U.S. military costs. The rest would be to train and equip Iraqi and Afghan forces, aid the new Palestinian leadership, build an embassy in Baghdad and help victims of warfare in Sudan’s Darfur province.
It is also estimated that Bush’s goal of revamping Social Security could cost somewhere between $1 trillion and $2 trillion; and the cost of extending Bush’s tax cuts and easing the impact that the alternative minimum tax would have on middle-income Americans, could exceed $2.3 trillion. If we add all this to our current deficit, do you think it will have major consequences on the economy sometime in the future? If so, to what extent? How would the president reach his goal of cutting the deficits in half by 2009?
Source:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=703&e=1&u=/ap/20050125/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_spendingTopic is locked -
CreatorTopic
All Comments
-
AuthorReplies
-
-
January 25, 2005 at 3:22 pm #3324190
Some ideas:
by maxwell edison · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to 2005 Deficit
.
A Tupperware Party.A Bake Sale.
A Garage Sale.
Or maybe the government can just sell all our assets on ebay. Heck, I’ll bet the Liberty Bell could fetch a pretty-penny. And can you imagine what an original copy of the Declaration of Independence would be worth? After all, there are five original copies. You would think they could do without a couple of them.
-
January 26, 2005 at 10:56 am #3322948
Gosh Max?
by aldanatech · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to Some ideas:
This time you hit a new low.
-
January 26, 2005 at 1:34 pm #3322892
-
-
January 27, 2005 at 10:39 am #3323474
Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights etc.
by admin · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to Some ideas:
We better sell them quick while they are still worth something. 🙂
-
-
January 25, 2005 at 4:22 pm #3324163
possibilities, not probabilities
by john.a.wills · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to 2005 Deficit
1. the economy does so well that the tax take goes up a lot;
2. Congress takes most of the pork out of the budget and also tidies the tax code up a bit (why should local taxes be federally deductible?);
3. Congress introduces a value-added tax.
#1 and #2 are things to hope for; #3 is something to work against: income tax is much fairer than VAT. -
January 26, 2005 at 1:04 pm #3322909
-
January 26, 2005 at 5:13 pm #3322792
I shouldn’t be surprised. . . .
by maxwell edison · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to 2005 Deficit
….that you can’t recognize a joke. You won’t recognize “real” solutions either, but I’ll give it a try.
Okay, a serious answer. How to reduce the deficit? Easy – stop spending so much money.
To start, don’t pay for the following:
$200,000 for recreation improvements in North Pole, Alaska.
$100,000 to renovate a Coca-Cola building in Macon, Georgia.
$3.5 million for bus acquisition in Atlanta, Ga.
$2 million for kitchen relocation in Fairbanks North Star Borough in Fairbanks, Alaska.
$1.5 million for a demonstration project to transport naturally chilled water from Lake Ontario to Lake Onondaga.
$500,000 for the Kincaid Park Soccer and Nordic Ski Center in Anchorage, Alaska.
$250,000 for the Country Music Hall of Fame in Nashville, Tenn.
$200,000 for Fenton Street Village pedestrian linkages in Montgomery Co., Md.
$100,000 for a municipal swimming pool in Ottawa, Kan.
$80,000 for the San Diego Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Community Center.
$75,000 for the Paper Industry International Hall of Fame in Appleton, Wis.
$35,000 for the Alabama Sports Hall of Fame.
$25,000 for fitness equipment for the YMCA in Bradford County, Pa.
$200,000 for the Aviation Hall of Fame.
$100,000 for the Punxsutawney Weather Museum.
$725,000 for the Please Touch Museum in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
$200,000 for the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland, Ohio.
$150,000 for a single traffic light in Briarcliff Manor, New York.
$100,000 for the International Storytelling Center in Jonesborough, Tennessee.
$500,000 for the Montana Sheep Institute.
$50 million to construct an indoor rainforest in Coralville, Iowa.Oh heck, it would take too much time to list them all. How about we just eliminate the 10,656 such projects in the 13 appropriations bills passed in FY 2004 that accounted for well over $23 billion dollars.
Let the world deal with their own AIDS problem, they don’t appreciate it anyway, and keep the $15 billion we’re spending for that.
Return federal highway and mass transit spending to the states and save $37 billion.
Devolve federal housing programs to state and local governments and cut federal strings on how the programs are operated to save $31 billion.
Send job training programs back to the states and save $6 billion.
The federal government cannot even account for $25 billion spent in 2003, and The U.S. General Accounting Office refuses to certify the federal government’s own accounting books because the bookkeeping is so poor.
Reduce food stamp overpayments and save $1 billion.
Verify parent incomes for school lunches and save $120 million.
Improve eligibility verification and tracking of student loan recipients and save at least $1 billion.
Prevent states from using accounting tricks to secure extra Medicaid funds and save $3 billion.
Eliminate fuel tax fraud and save $1 billion.
Stop veterans program overpayments and save $1 billion.
Collect $3 billion in outstanding debt owed to the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Stop Medicare overpayments and save $12 billion.
Reform Medicare so that it no longer overpays for prescription drugs and medical supplies and save $3 billion.
Recover the $7 billion owed by Medicare contractors.
Reform the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) to stop overpayments to save $9 billion.
The federal government makes about $20 billion in overpayments every year.
How about making it easy – we just implement an automatic across-the-board 10 percent reduction in ALL government spending, and continue for 5 years. And then we implement an across-the-board tax rate cut, and continue that for 5 consecutive years.
And all these things would ONLY be a nice start. Then we can get really serious about getting the government out of our lives.
NOTE: Is should go without saying, but these were all cut and pasted from a variety of sources.
-
January 27, 2005 at 6:53 am #3323615
Wow – I just added up my “partial” list
by maxwell edison · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to I shouldn’t be surprised. . . .
.
I added up all those proposed savings measures, and the subtotal was almost 200 billion dollars. That’s almost half the deficit right there. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg – the iceberg that’s collided with our economic common sense, and if allowed to continue will send us to our economic demise. -
January 27, 2005 at 10:47 am #3323465
Was that…?
by aldanatech · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to I shouldn’t be surprised. . . .
I can’t recognize a joke? Was that another one of your assumptions? I suppose you didn’t assume that my initial reply was also a joke. As for your suggestions, I think some of them can be implemented, but unfortunately there will be those who would not be pleased.
-
January 27, 2005 at 11:05 am #3323453
There will be those who would not be pleased?????
by maxwell edison · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to Was that…?
.
Yea, the one’s on the “receiving end” of getting someone else’s property.And you know what? We shouldn’t care that they’re “not pleased”.
-
-
-
January 27, 2005 at 8:28 am #3323554
Tax “cuts” don’t “cost”
by jdclyde · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to 2005 Deficit
Not taking my money from me does not cost the government ANYTHING.
If they were FORCED to pay the bills like individuals do, they would have to take a hard look and decide if they REALLY NEED to get that ivory back scratcher, or if they should pass on it.
Cut back on the “social issues” that the government has dipped its hands into and get back to the busness of running the government as intended. Not as a nanny who is there to take care of our every need, but to make sure we have a save and stable country to seek gainful employment. It isn’t the governments job to hand you a job. The only way governments “make” jobs is by increasing the amount of government workers it has. Then it pays for those goverment workers by taxing even more from the people who go out and do something with their lives.
-
January 27, 2005 at 8:38 am #3323548
easy…
by fonken monken uk · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to Tax “cuts” don’t “cost”
Tax that fat cats that are running the corporations over there, but what cannot be made from that, you get in tourism from the UK – exchange rates stay the way they are, hell, we’ll be heading to states hand over fist!
-
January 27, 2005 at 9:41 am #3323513
Always get someone else to pay the bills?
by jdclyde · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to easy…
Why is there the class warfar mentallity that the evil rich should pay everyone elses way through life, just because they can?
There used to be something called self respect. People were expected to pay their own way through life, not to leach off others. People now feel they are entitled to have everything just given to them, and it is really disgraceful.
Your willing to work, your more than welcome to come on over. I for one do not think legal immigration is a bad thing, and we can use all the good people we can get.
-
January 27, 2005 at 9:45 am #3323511
Here’s a “corporate” challenge
by maxwell edison · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to easy…
.
Compare the corporate tax rates for ALL industrialized nations, and then compare the economic rate of growth and the unemployment rates for those same nations, and you’ll discover something very interesting.Do you care to guess what you’ll discover?
Fill in the blanks:
1. The HIGHER the corporate tax rate is, the _____________________ the national rate of economic growth is.
2. The HIGHER the corporate tax rate is, the _____________________ the national rate of unemployment rate is.
Possible answers: HIGHER or LOWER
-
January 27, 2005 at 10:04 am #3323489
Thanks
by jdclyde · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to Here’s a “corporate” challenge
for being a clear voice of reason and expresser of logical thoughts.
Your posts are not emotional rantings about how you FEEL about this or how you FEEL about that. It is based about what you know and can demonstrate to others.
Rock on.
-
January 27, 2005 at 10:34 am #3323477
See the Index of Economic Freedom
by maxwell edison · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to Thanks
.
The following nations rate high on the Index of Economic Freedom (listed in order):1. Hong Kong: The top corporate tax rate is 17.5 percent.
2. Singapore: The corporate tax rate is 22 percent.
5. Ireland: The corporate tax rate was just dropped to 12.5 percent.
6. New Zealand: The top corporate tax rate is 33 percent.
10. Australia: The top corporate tax rate is 30 percent.
13. USA: The top corporate tax rate is 35 percent.
44. France: France?s top income tax rate is 49.6 percent. The top corporate tax is 34.3 percent (a 33.33 percent corporate tax rate plus a 3 percent surcharge).
Using ONLY the “corporate tax rate test” won’t fit in absolutely ALL instances, but it certainly is revealing. Canada’s top corporate tax rate, for example, is lower (22 percent) than the USA’s, but they’re still rated a bit lower (16th) on the Index of Economic Freedom. However, other factors will affect the rate of economic growth, such as:
Highest Individual tax rates
Average individual tax rates
Trade Policy
Fiscal Burden
Government Intervention
Monetary Policy
Foreign Investment
Banking and Finance
Wages and Prices
Property Rights
Regulation
Informal MarketIt’s an interesting thing to study, to say the least. And anyone with a lick of sense will see that the less government interference and/or punishment of success (i.e. taxes), the higher the national economic rate of growth.
Link:
http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/countries.cfm
The USA used to be on the top of the list year after year. Then came the “social engineering” and “redistribution of income” fiasco. We’ve been going downhill ever since.
-
January 27, 2005 at 10:58 am #3323458
punishment
by jdclyde · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to See the Index of Economic Freedom
A fine is a tax for doing bad.
A tax is a fine for doing good.
-
January 27, 2005 at 11:02 am #3323456
I Love It
by maxwell edison · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to punishment
.
I’ll have to remember that. -
January 28, 2005 at 6:49 am #3324754
cost for usage
by jdclyde · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to punishment
it will cost you a nickel everytime you use it. please send me my nickels care of TR.
Thank you.
-
-
January 27, 2005 at 8:48 am #3323545
Absolutely Correct
by maxwell edison · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to Tax “cuts” don’t “cost”
.
You correctly pointed out a predictable tactic often used by the redistribution of income zealots about the “cost” of tax cuts.First of all, a tax levied is what “costs” something — but the “cost” is to the person from whom the money was seized; and a tax cut only returns the money to the rightful owner — money that shouldn’t have been taken in the first place.
Second of all, a properly structured and implemented tax-rate cut will result in MORE revenue collected, not less. If anyone doubts this, just look at the total revenues collected in the years following major tax-rate cuts. (Another “conveniently” overlooked factor.)
By the way, Aldanatech. Since you place so much faith in our elected representatives to decide who should be the recipient of what you and I earn, you should know this. I just contacted my elected representative, and she decided that you should give me $100. You see, I have a “need” and you have the “ability to earn”, so what you earn must go to satisfy what I “need”. Trust me, it happens all the time. We’re just eliminating the middle-man — the government.
Just send it to me in care of TechRepublic. They’ll make sure I get it. But if they behave like the government middle-man, I’ll only get fifty cents.
-
January 27, 2005 at 9:47 am #3323507
Your Absolutely Correct to say I am Absolutely Correct
by jdclyde · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to Absolutely Correct
(I love to say that, sorry to sound egotistical. Joke, it was a joke)
The higher the tax rates are, the more people look for loop holes and ways to cheat the system.
It is when the taxes are at what people feel are reasonable contrabutions to the running of our country that they don’t look as hard or cut as many corners. Also the savings aren’t as great making it less and less worth the risk for what is gained.
After the Reagan tax cuts, there was record “revenue” (our tax money paid in) recieved by the government.
-
January 28, 2005 at 7:24 am #3324732
Well…
by aldanatech · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to Absolutely Correct
Well I wonder what your need actually is. It is probably to go golfing or something. If I were to do such a thing I would rather send that money to the families of our men and women who died in Iraq. I’m sure they need it far more than you do.
-
January 28, 2005 at 8:58 am #3324677
Missed or Evaded
by maxwell edison · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to Well…
.
Did you miss my point, or did you evade addressing my point? -
January 28, 2005 at 9:18 am #3324661
Both
by jdclyde · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to Missed or Evaded
He either couldn’t or wouldn’t see what you were saying.
It isn’t something you can reason with some people about because they don’t care about the facts or logic. They FEEL it isn’t fair about this, and FEEL it isn’t fair about that. News flash, life isn’t fair. Get over it.
The deficit is so high and going up because of two groups of people.
One is the group standing their with their hand out. The more you have your hand out looking for someone to give you money, the more likely you are a democrat.
Two is the group that gets it’s power by taking money away from people who work and giving it to people who don’t. This redistibution of wealth is part of a “gift society” where they are buying influence and votes based on who will give out more.
Who will group one vote for. The party that works to remove obsticals from your path so you can go out and be successful, or the party that says it isn’t your fault that you can’t work, so we will take care of you.
Which party has elevated minorities to the highest positions in goverenment?
Which party gave women the right to vote?
Which party gave blacks freedom, and then later the right to vote? (note, blacks could vote before women could)(Hint, it wasn’t the Democrats)
-
January 28, 2005 at 9:31 am #3324646
How about addressing ALL my points – Heck, even ONE
by maxwell edison · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to Well…
.
How is it that you posted a reply to my message, but you failed to address even one point I made? -
January 28, 2005 at 12:51 pm #3323867
What’s to address?
by aldanatech · about 19 years, 2 months ago
In reply to How about addressing ALL my points – Heck, even ONE
Look, you expressed your opinion about taxes. That’s fine and acceptable. Then you address me with a suggestion that can be interpreted either in a literal or figurative way, and I replied with a better suggestion. If you couldn’t figure out the context of my suggestion then that is your problem. What, you expected me to just follow along or agree with your point of view? I understand that you are in favor of tax cuts. Now don’t get me wrong. I do agree with the benefits that tax cuts provide, but I also believe that they should only be implemented when the country can afford them. I know most of us hate paying taxes, but they are essential to run a country, and its okay to pay them only if they are properly and responsibly spent. Balancing the budget should be among the administration’s top priorities to get us back on track. I hope the White House will soon present a solid plan to accomplish this.
-
-
-
-
AuthorReplies