That isnt true at all. Democrats led by Obama were willing to give cuts to basically every single over the last year including medicare, medicaid and a restructuring of social security but they want to balance it with revenue increases.

What you actually have is a party running around making it seem like if only America raised taxes or cut spending on those evil poor people all of the problems would be solved. But yeah, cant put up taxes on the rich, they are "job creators" dontchaknow.

No..the "lol poor" are the job creators. Geez this forum provides lots of laughs. Lets start with the 50% that dont pay any fed tax to get them to pay something first.

There is nothing like obama giving a speech in these various colleges with the clueless dopes (college kids) in the audience who applaud his every word. These are the very people who are ****ing doomed because of this idiot...but hey people in this thread can feel free to applaud him too.

Also the 3B more the fed gets would equal roughly 6 solyndras....Ill take 4 more years of obama alex....

We do spend $100 billion a year subsidizing rich people's mortgages. We could just reduce the deduction by 5%, and we could generate more revenue and reduce distortions, without introducing overly complicated new tax schemes that would jack marginal CG rates as high as 45%.

Or, if your beef is with the CG rate preference, we could just raise the rate on capital gains...

The Democrats are saying that when we consider tax cuts or tax increases, we should be harder on those with higher incomes than those with lower incomes. The Republicans are saying that when we consider tax cuts, everyone should be lumped together to get the same percentage decrease. And they want to decrease the tax bite of taxes other than income tax (capital gains, inheritance), which will be to the benefit of higher income people.

What's detrimental to the future of the economy is that whatever scruples members of either party might or might not have, they take a back seat to being reelected.

The Republican candidates would be adding hundreds of billions to the annual deficit with the amount they would be giving away in tax breaks. Democrats are at least attempting to move in the right direction with meager increases on the super rich, but they still get blocked. No point in asking for more when you can't even get through what should be a slam-dunk.

Ah, so payroll taxes have been eliminated.

Sure. So do that as well and now you have took 8 billion out of the deficit.

My entire point is that America's finances dont have this huge 2 trillion dollar sized entity you can just say "yeah, lets get rid of that and its all sorted". Its a whole lot of small things that need to be changed be it a hundred defence contracts like the second engine at 0.5-3 billion a pop or minor revenue increases for 3 billion a year (assuming that figure is correct btw, not even remotely tried to fact check it).

But anyone, literally anyone, who tries to claim America's finances can be sorted without touching defence spending is living in a dream world. AKA the Rep budget that got released the other day where it just invents mythical and unachievable growth rates to justify minor cuts most of which doesnt come near any Republican sacred cows, including removing the mandatory defence cuts that were decided on to get the debt ceiling raised last summer. But i also think you are living in a dream world if you think its possible to close the deficit without any revenue increases either even if its just raising 700 billion over 10 years getting rid of the Bush cuts on top earners (if i remember the number correctly). Its gotta come with a mix, everything has to be on the table and its pointless just saying X is too small a number to cut out of the deficit otherwise you will never start cutting.

If you want me to defend the F-35, you're barking up the wrong tree.

I think conservative talking points should be applied to every day people:

Linda: Did you pay the minimum on the credit card yet? The due date is tomorrow!
John: Forget it. It's $80... I owe over $10,000! What's that gonna do? Let's go to Applebee's.

FNC head: If you emptied the bank accounts of everyone in the country and used it to pay off their debt it STILL wouldnt be a drop in the bucket at the bottom of the Grand Canyon under the shining sun of the greatest country god ever gave man. Why do these people who want others to pay their debts hate freedom?

Hey look, mikeinyonkers is lying again!

At least he has started adding fed to the front of tax. Its a start/

I do not disagree that it is going to take a whole bunch of cuts and every little thing would help. But, if you recall for about 2 years now Obama has not only been preaching this tax the rich message but also how this would pay for his 450 billion jobs plan that the mean republicans are blocking.

Now the CBO has pretty well confiimed that it would not have even covered the interest on that plan.

Yes... preaching it by signing off on an extension of the Bush-era tax cuts... yes... right...

Thats my point. 3 billion here and there is just a waste of time.

The axe needs to come out and cut the military budget by hundreds of billions. Politicians are just dicking around without the courage to make changes that are necessary.

Now let's fix this to be a little more accurate to the situation.

It would be an $80 payment against a $34,780 PAST DUE amount against a credit card with a TOTAL balance of $401,307.69. Tell me again that the $80 is important.


Oh, and even if you ignore my total number (translates to national debt) and instead just pretend the deficit is the only issue, the minimum payment on a $34,780 credit card balance would be $1391.20. As far as the bank would be concerned, you can go ahead and keep your $80, because it'll be $1311.20 short of what you need to pay to stop anything bad from happening to you.

I'm sorry, but your post was terrible.

Obama also said he would go thru the budget line by line to eliminate waste and redundant programs.... I guess 3+ years isn't enoough time to do that.... just another administration full of jokers and blow hards, hope and change indeed lol.

It's not a whole lot of small things, it's 3 giant things: Defense, Medicare/Medicaid, and Social Security.

I won't defend the Ryan budget for a second, but this is the grand bipartisan fiscal delusion of our times, and it is definitely fed by proposals like this.

Either you owe the money, or you don't. Either you make an effort to pay it if you can, or you don't. If you don't, there needs to be a rational reason for it or you're a deadbeat using excuses.

A good argument against extra taxation is undue hardship. This sort of thing applies such negligible hardship as to probably be unquantifiable. Seems like a good place to start.

Before you even start, I would be fine with a scaled tax on people working minimum wage jobs as well along some sort of progressive curve.

Oh and keep carrying the water for those with enough money to own you with propaganda.

You didnt read the post you quoted, here it is again:

There is no one single expense called "defense" just as there is no one single expense called "medicare/medicaid", its made up of a lot of much smaller expenses. To be fair Social Security is pretty much just one single expense as there isnt much in the way of sub programs afaik.

Assuming this is even close to accurate, it's clear we need to reform Medicare, SS, and Defense spending.

The bigger issue that, for some reason (ie they vote) no one wants to mention, is that SS and Medicare are essentially subsidizing the wealthiest demographic in America. 43% of our budget goes to subsidizing the wealthiest age demographic. Cut 20% of the top of Defense/SS/MC, cap it at 1% growth for a decade, and boom no more problem.

...or if that idea is "to drastic to the poor elderly". Just set the budget back to 2005 levels, cap growth at 1% for a decade, BOOM no more problem. Were people dieing in the streets in 2005 budget levels? It really is this easy...

Does America means test social security?

Edit, and medicare while we are on given your healthcare industry make up it seems relevant.

Tien,

The amount of Federal money going to Planned Parenthood, ACORN! and the free cell phones for poor people program that may or may not exist is, in sum, a much smaller amount than would be raised by the Buffett Rule. Surely you'll STFU about those expenditures!