1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

It's simple, taxes must either increase substantially or we must spend a lot less...

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by Rockets Pride, Apr 6, 2011.

  1. Rockets Pride

    Rockets Pride Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Messages:
    3,674
    Likes Received:
    443
    Nutshell version of why the current level of federal expenditures across the board are not sustainable. The federal governmnet simply cannot afford to do all the things it does and wants to do. Period.

    In March, the U.S. government grossed $194 billion in tax revenue and paid out $65.9 billion in tax refunds, netting $128.179 billion.

    Over the same time, the government spent $1.1 trillion (net of the tax refunds). In other words, the government spent 8.2 times what it made in March. And where did most of that money go? To buy Treasury bills. The U.S. government spent $705.3 billion redeeming matured paper.

    In a Senate Budget Committee testimony, Erskine Bowles – former chief of staff to President Clinton and current co-chair of Obama's National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility said of the current situation, "I'm really concerned. I think we face the most predictable economic crisis in history. A lot of us sitting in this room didn't see this last crisis as it came upon us. But this one is really easy to see. The fiscal path we are on today is simply not sustainable."
     
    3 people like this.
  2. pgabriel

    pgabriel Educated Negro

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    42,280
    Likes Received:
    2,741
    no, we must cut planned parenthood and npr.
     
  3. rhadamanthus

    rhadamanthus Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    14,304
    Likes Received:
    595
  4. thumbs

    thumbs Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,225
    Likes Received:
    237
    ...and ACORN.

    Why not raise revenue by eliminating tax shelters / subsidies while cutting spending at the same time?
     
  5. mc mark

    mc mark Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    468
    Because you would be lynched by your own party for such a suggestion.
     
  6. cdastros

    cdastros Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,558
    Likes Received:
    787
    How about we raise taxes on the rich and corporations and cut government spending?
     
  7. thumbs

    thumbs Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,225
    Likes Received:
    237
    My neck is still the same size despite consistently supporting that position on this and other (tea) boards. Actually, my position sits well with quite a few respondents.
     
  8. robbie380

    robbie380 ლ(▀̿Ĺ̯▀̿ ̿ლ)
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2002
    Messages:
    22,204
    Likes Received:
    7,363
    ..........or do both and let some of our debt obligations roll off!
     
  9. bnb

    bnb Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,992
    Likes Received:
    315
    everyone wants to eliminate subsidies and close loop holes.

    They just disagree on which ones :cool:
     
  10. rhadamanthus

    rhadamanthus Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    14,304
    Likes Received:
    595
    And none of them have a "real" voice in congress, so it's moot.
     
  11. thumbs

    thumbs Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,225
    Likes Received:
    237
    This is the prime reason to eliminate them all and go to a graduated flat tax plan.
     
  12. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    493
    A graduated flat tax plan would still be attacked by the GOP as a "progressive" income tax, which it would be. I prefer a transparent consumption tax, it would solve many problems and would balance the budget overnight.
     
  13. thumbs

    thumbs Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,225
    Likes Received:
    237
    The value added tax does have some good points, but it is a bookkeeping nightmare with a tendency toward excessive exceptions.
     
  14. DCkid

    DCkid Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2001
    Messages:
    9,342
    Likes Received:
    2,169
    Get rid of useless tax breaks. The mortgage interest deduction should be one of the first things to go.

    "The Office of Management and Budget estimates that the mortgage-interest deduction cost the government $79 billion in forgone taxes in 2010. That could rise to as much as $144 billion in 2016, the OMB estimates."

    All for something that leads to higher home prices AND rewards people for GOING INTO DEBT. The greater the debt, the better the tax break. It's one of the stupidest ideas ever conceived. Several other countries around the world get by just fine without it.

    Not to mention the average person barely even gets much benefit from it when you subtract the standard deduction. Like usual, it's the wealthy (who don't even really need it) that reap most of the benefits.
     
    1 person likes this.
  15. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    493
    I disagree with the characterization of a "bookkepping nightmare," particularly when compared to income tax, corporate tax, dividends tax, capital gains tax, and all the other taxes that would go away once replaced by the consumption tax. Just about every state already has the sales tax infrastructure in place and businesses already collect sales taxes every day.
     
  16. geeimsobored

    geeimsobored Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2005
    Messages:
    8,680
    Likes Received:
    2,789
    Yup NPR is the problem for sure.

    GOP Completely Fixes Economy By Canceling Funding For NPR
    APRIL 5, 2011 | ISSUE 47•14

    WASHINGTON—Unemployment plummeted and stocks soared Tuesday after Republican leaders fulfilled their promise to cut funding for National Public Radio, a budgetary move that has completely rejuvenated the flagging U.S. economy. "Since eliminating federal spending for NPR, America's economic outlook is brighter than it's been in decades, with manufacturing on the rise and† millions of jobs once sent overseas now returning to our shores," said Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL), adding that by eliminating funds for NPR, the deficit has been slashed by 0.000004 percent and a newly thriving middle class once again has cause to believe in the American dream. "Pulling funding for Car Talk and Planet Money alone has created 4.2 million jobs and generated a $2 trillion budget surplus." Republicans announced Thursday they will now turn their attention to cutting the National Park Service, a move that should ensure Social Security's solvency for the next 350 years.
     
    1 person likes this.
  17. Depressio

    Depressio Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2009
    Messages:
    6,416
    Likes Received:
    366
    Eliminating tax shelters is a great idea. The fact that large corporations are getting multi-billion dollar refunds despite having multi-billion dollar profits is amazing to me.

    However, if we're going to eliminate spending, let's eliminate it from the largest bucket: defense. Eliminating something like NPR which is 0.000004% of the budget doesn't help much -- it's just politics. I don't care about politics, I care about spending. Defense spending is out of control.
     
    1 person likes this.
  18. thumbs

    thumbs Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,225
    Likes Received:
    237
    NPR, ACORN, etc. are merely symbolic of all the wasteful, redundant and unnecessary programs supported by the same federal government that overspends on the military. As I said in another thread, reducing our debt mess means that both left and right must slaughter their respective sacred cows. Compromise, by definition, cannot be one-sided.
     
    1 person likes this.
  19. rtsy

    rtsy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2010
    Messages:
    979
    Likes Received:
    50
    NPR sucks
     
  20. rhester

    rhester Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2001
    Messages:
    6,600
    Likes Received:
    104
    Mr. OP, Rockets Pride I am going to give you a rep.

    For the first time I've seen the obvious truth posted.
    The problem is it is too late to correct the debt problem and the debt problem is created by huge corporations (including banking corporations) who are global could care less about the majority of Americans, republicans or democrats.

    There is no way to fix this. None. Apart from destroying the middle class of America and bringing down the country to its knees. Which is what is going to happen anyway if we continue on our present course. It is not a matter of if but when.

    People who get worked up over taxes, the budget, fiscal policy, Congress, spending, etc really don't understand the fundemental problem.

    No amount of spending cuts or taxes or combinations are going to make any difference at all.

    We are too far in debt and too indebted to debt. This is the fall of many an empire and it is just our turn.

    We might last another 5 yrs but eventually the standard of living in America is going to take a great hit.

    If you total all debt by Americans including govt. debt at every level and private debt and plus in the present entitlement liability you will find that we are dead and don't know it- we are on the breathing machine of more debt floated by the strength of the dollar in the global economy.

    But just wait until the coming inflation picks up steam.

    Keep your eye on the price of bread, milk and meat.

    And remember what it was like when one wage earner in a steel factory supported a middle class family in America and we were the exporting kings of the world for manufacturing- and 'multi national' corporation wasn't in the dictionary.:)
     
    1 person likes this.

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now