Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why increasing taxes won't fix the budget mess

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 5
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 template Next
  • #1

    Why increasing taxes won't fix the budget mess

    http://www.taxfoundation.org/ff/taxcutsanddeficits.html

    I found this interesting:

    the government will collect $762 billion in individual income taxes this fiscal year.
    and:

    $404 billion in income taxes that will be collected from every taxpayer making more than $200,000 this year
    53% of revenues seems like a lot of money to me. What percentage of the population makes over $200k?
    Asked what he would do differently in Iraq, Kerry said, "Right now, what I would do differently is, I mean, look, I'm not the president, and I didn't create this mess so I don't want to acknowledge a mistake that I haven't made."
    Tags: None
  • #2
    They should just cut spending. That will guaruntee balancing the budget.
    Go Cards ...12 in 13.


    Comment

    • #3
      Originally posted by TTB@Mar 16 2004, 06:08 PM
      They should just cut spending.  That will guaruntee balancing the budget.
      Let me name a few items to get the axe:

      Department of Education

      Drug Enforcement Agency

      Amtrak

      Section VIII housing vouchers

      Corperate welfare

      And

      Social Security
      Make America Great For Once.

      Comment

      • #4
        Realistically, start by cutting pork-barrel spending!

        Everything you listed just isn't going to happen!

        Hell, the one thing I list will not happen!

        We're doomed! :o
        Norman Chad, syndicated columnist: “Sports radio, reflecting our sinking culture, spends entire days advising managers and coaches, berating managers and coaches, firing managers and coaches and searching the countryside for better middle relievers. If they just redirected their energy toward, say, crosswalk-signal maintenance, America would be 2 percent more livable.”

        "The best argument against democracy," someone (Churchill?) said, "is a five minute conversation with the average voter."

        Comment

        • #5
          Originally posted by nick2@Mar 16 2004, 06:37 PM
          Realistically, start by cutting pork-barrel spending!

          Everything you listed just isn't going to happen!

          Hell, the one thing I list will not happen!

          We're doomed! :o
          Those programs I mentioned make up the main part of the pork.
          Make America Great For Once.

          Comment

          • #6
            This should take care of this budget problem
            http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/bg1733.cfm
            Asked what he would do differently in Iraq, Kerry said, "Right now, what I would do differently is, I mean, look, I'm not the president, and I didn't create this mess so I don't want to acknowledge a mistake that I haven't made."

            Comment

            • #7
              "Spending cannot be restrained without reforming entitlements, which comprise two-thirds of all federal spending and threaten the country's long-term finances."

              Good god.....2/3 of the budget :rolleyes:

              I dare anyone to defend this.
              Go Cards ...12 in 13.


              Comment

              • #8
                Originally posted by TTB@Mar 16 2004, 07:26 PM
                "Spending cannot be restrained without reforming entitlements, which comprise two-thirds of all federal spending and threaten the country's long-term finances."

                Good god.....2/3 of the budget :rolleyes:

                I dare anyone to defend this.
                Lawmakers often reject any spending cut that could offend someone. Yet every dollar government spends--no matter how wasteful--is received by someone who would be angry to lose these benefits. Every spending cut will offend somebody, and any easy cuts surely would have been made by now. Lawmakers who are serious about cutting spending should focus on the millions of taxpayers--both current and future--who are forced to sacrifice their financial well-being in order to fund ineffective federal programs
                edit: most certainly not a defense.
                Un-Official Sponsor of Randy Choate and Kevin Siegrist

                Comment

                • #9
                  Originally posted by lazydaze+Mar 16 2004, 07:27 PM-->
                  QUOTE (lazydaze @ Mar 16 2004, 07:27 PM)
                • #10
                  Originally posted by TTB@Mar 16 2004, 07:26 PM
                  "Spending cannot be restrained without reforming entitlements, which comprise two-thirds of all federal spending and threaten the country's long-term finances."

                  Good god.....2/3 of the budget :rolleyes:

                  I dare anyone to defend this.
                  Some people don't think social security and medicare are entitlements, they think they are constitutional rights.
                  Asked what he would do differently in Iraq, Kerry said, "Right now, what I would do differently is, I mean, look, I'm not the president, and I didn't create this mess so I don't want to acknowledge a mistake that I haven't made."

                  Comment

                  • #11
                    Excellent article, Burn.

                    I was reading that over this past weekend. I'm willing to give it a try, but, I'm doubtful if either of the two main partys are willing to commit public suicide.

                    It's going to be a very tough sales job. But, if the "average joe/jane" can be convinced that the cuts are going to cross the entire spectrum (public housing tenant to Ladue resident to CEO at a major corperation to the military to the very halls of congress) we may can begin to put our ducks back in the correct order, and make headway.
                    Make America Great For Once.

                    Comment

                    • #12
                      Originally posted by TTB+Mar 16 2004, 07:30 PM-->
                      QUOTE (TTB @ Mar 16 2004, 07:30 PM)
                      Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2004, 07:27 PM
                    • #13
                      Originally posted by BurnKU+Mar 16 2004, 07:30 PM-->
                      QUOTE (BurnKU @ Mar 16 2004, 07:30 PM)
                    • #14
                      Originally posted by The Kev@Mar 16 2004, 07:31 PM
                      Excellent article, Burn.

                      I was reading that over this past weekend. I'm willing to give it a try, but, I'm doubtful if either of the two main partys are willing to commit public suicide.

                      It's going to be a very tough sales job. But, if the "average joe/jane" can be convinced that the cuts are going to cross the entire spectrum (public housing tenant to Ladue resident to CEO at a major corperation to the military to the very halls of congress) we may can begin to put our ducks back in the correct order, and make headway.
                      Well, it will not come from our current federal politicians.

                      The answer lies in voting independents into local office that espouse these sentiments. Building bench strength to easily challenge in future federal elections.
                      Un-Official Sponsor of Randy Choate and Kevin Siegrist

                      Comment

                      • #15
                        Originally posted by lazydaze+Mar 16 2004, 07:31 PM-->
                        QUOTE (lazydaze @ Mar 16 2004, 07:31 PM)
                        Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2004, 07:30 PM
                        Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2004, 07:27 PM
                        Previous 1 2 3 4 5 template Next
                        Working...
                        X