DonLever Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 Almost 2 trillion of that was inherited dept from the Bush legacy, and with the Re-thugs doing everything they can to block ANY job-creation bills, they have kept the US economy stuck in the mire .. add in the fact that the Re-thugs block any effort to increase revenues, and you have an "Empire" teetering on falling into an abyss .. both sides are controlled by the mufti-national interests that dictate American domestic policy .. You want to fix the troubles in the US of A?? .. start with a guillotine .. and start with the top .1 of 1% .. now THAT would have a trickle-down effect!! .. anything else is posturing, a joke and similar to sticking one finger in the dyke and the other up yer nether region .. If only the American's who believe they are "Exceptional" and "God's Chosen" could realize the rest of the world laughs behind their back at how screwed up their country is .. 1st in dollars spent on health care per capita and 17th in results? .. and that is fudged IMO .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaytanic Wehrmacht Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 Doing "little" is better than doing nothing, and is certainly better than eliminating programs that so many want to be cut for the sake of the budget...like NASA, for instance. We're already so far behind the rest of the world as far as science is concerned that it is absolutely disgraceful...and the goddamned right wing looney tunes want to cut out NASA and the space exploration venture altogether? I've abided these nutbars insisting that "creationism" be introduced as an (laughably ridiculous) alternative to evolution...but if they actually eliminate NASA...I'm going to be doing more than just posting sardonic replies on an internet message board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 It wouldn't matter who was in power if you have a congress that refuses to cut entitlements OR raise taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 The problem with your theory is that there are not enough super rich in the US to solve the US debt problems. There are only 236,833 people who made over $1 million. The number is too small for higher rates to make much difference to the budget. Only $73 Billion in new revenue would be raised with a 10% surcharge. The extra revenue would be only 2% of the federal budget. http://www.cnn.com/2....buffett.wrong/ Taxing the rich may make you feel better but will do little to solve the financial mess in the US and other countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tystick Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 Ron Paul 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 Ron Paul 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 Actually it matters very much who's in power. One party wants to extend the Bush Tax Cuts for the top income earners in the U.S., and the other wants to bring the tax level back to the rates before they were implemented. To think that it doesn't matter who was in power is approaching the heights of stupidity, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaytanic Wehrmacht Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 No thanks. We don't need the U.S. to go back to pre-Civil Rights days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 The problem with your theory is that there are not enough super rich in the US to solve the US debt problems. There are only 236,833 people who made over $1 million. The number is too small for higher rates to make much difference to the budget. Only $73 Billion in new revenue would be raised with a 10% surcharge. The extra revenue would be only 2% of the federal budget. http://www.cnn.com/2....buffett.wrong/ Taxing the rich may make you feel better but will do little to solve the financial mess in the US and other countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 There's plently of democrats that support the Bush tax cuts and some are signed onto the Americans for tax reform. They also had more than enough of a majority at the beginning of Obama's term to push through tax increases if they really wanted to. Saying that it's only the Republicans that fight to avoid tax increases is about as naive as saying it's only the democracts fighting to keep entitlements. It's not stupidity it's called being reality. Now, if you say wanted to blame everying on the highly influently lobby group Americans for Tax Reform who will tax anyone who proposes raising taxes to task BIGTIME with attack ads and what not (they will in fact do that as a default for not signing on to their pledge) then you might be onto something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 There's plently of democrats that support the Bush tax cuts and some are signed onto the Americans for tax reform. They also had more than enough of a majority at the beginning of Obama's term to push through tax increases if they really wanted to. Saying that it's only the Republicans that fight to avoid tax increases is about as naive as saying it's only the democracts fighting to keep entitlements. It's not stupidity it's called being reality. Now, if you say wanted to blame everying on the highly influently lobby group Americans for Tax Reform who will tax anyone who proposes raising taxes to task BIGTIME with attack ads and what not (they will in fact do that as a default for not signing on to their pledge) then you might be onto something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaytanic Wehrmacht Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 The couldn't get cloture because they didn't have the 60 votes needed, in a super-majority, to bring the bill forward. They also had to deal with some of the DINO Blue Dogs in the party. The Dems are not as monolithic as the Repubs. That's the reality Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tystick Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 No thanks. We don't need the U.S. to go back to pre-Civil Rights days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddhas Hand Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 The issue is that the US has to cut it's spending on healthcare, not expand them. It needs to cut it's spending on everything. It also needs some serious tax reform. For all those people that think it's heartless to deny someone's dad their cheap meds just wait and see how they feel after the fiscal cliff gets enacted and 1 MILLION jobs are lost due to defence cuts and a MILLION more are lost from other cuts. Just the decrease in government spending alone are GUARANTEED to put the entire economy into recession. If people think Obama inherited a hangover they ain't seen nothing yet! Oh, and even all this isn't even close to stopping the US slide to bankruptcy. There's going to be a LOT bigger problems than dad not having his dementia meds. Much worse. That's the result of the short term "me first damn the rest of them" thinking that has plagued the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 Wtf are you talking about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddhas Hand Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 Learn a little bit more about Paul's policies and what their affects would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 I suppose that depends if it happens to be YOUR father . whether you believe it or not , it is a governments {societies} duty to look after it's most vulnerable members and if you pay tax all your life this is one of the benefits you should recieve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaytanic Wehrmacht Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 Learn a little bit more about Paul's policies and what their affects would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddhas Hand Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 If the US doesn't get it's fiscal house in order people will eventually stop lending it money. When that happens the kind of austerity that doesn't mind people starving to death or general anarchy can be it's replacement. If the total amount of benefits given out doesn't match the amount of taxes coming in eventually those benefits will disapear regardless of how much duty their is to provide them. For a preview of that extreme scene look at what's going on in Greece right now. After a while it doesn't matter how much people protest if you have no money you have no money! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tystick Posted August 14, 2012 Share Posted August 14, 2012 Learn a little bit more about Paul's policies and what their affects would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.