I totally agree. That is why I was not for extending the tax cuts. I would like to see cuts everywhere and stop the wasteful spending and start lowering the deficit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bayou Magic
Printable View
I totally agree. That is why I was not for extending the tax cuts. I would like to see cuts everywhere and stop the wasteful spending and start lowering the deficit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bayou Magic
RP..... Isnt this kind of double speak?????? If the government would cut wasteful spending, our taxes could go down....... i.e. a tax cut. We can lower the deficit without taxing the people...... there are OTHER ways..... you've said it yourself, but apparently havent put it all together.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Perry
Like I said earlier, the only cuts that will significantly affect the deficit are the type of cuts nobody who wants a political future are willing to propose.Quote:
Originally Posted by troy schwab
Look at the budget pie. DEFENSE AND ENTILTLEMENTS
Niether party is willing to touch those.
Eliminating WIC, NEA, and a handful of other programs altogether, will not even cover the annual interest on our debt! That's not to say that every program shouldn't be scrutinized and economized, but unless you hit the big items, you're whizzing in the wind.
Tax cut is a four letter word to a lib:rolleyes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by troy schwab
"If you want to talk firsts for Bush, this was the first time in American history that a president took us into a war and cut taxes."
As the talk about the price tag for the war in Afghanistan heats up, we thought it would be worthwhile to take a look at Krugman's claim about Bush being the first to cut taxes after leading the country into war, and to add some context.
Generally, we found, taxes and wars have followed a fairly predictable pattern: Taxes rise during wartime and then come back down in the years afterward.
We'll start with the Civil War. Congress enacted various income and excise taxes to meet the rising cost of the war, most of which were repealed in the years after the war.
During World War I, the 1916 Revenue Act and the War Revenue Act of 1917 increased tax revenue from $761 million in 1916 to $3.6 billion in 1918. After the war, in the 1920s, Congress cut taxes five times.
The same was true during World War II. Tax increases over several years raised revenues from $8.7 billion in 1941 to $45.2 billion in 1945. Again, tax cuts followed the war.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-lead-country/
But not with the Bush administration/:rolleyes:
I dont care who did what or didnt do something..... I want to see somebody in the now take action. Didnt we pay like billions of dollars to send a rover to mars and watch it hump a rock????? Lets start there.......
DNF- you mentioned entitlements...... I think the good old USA did OK before these were enacted...... how about pulling them back a bit....... Oh wait.... you'll lose the lazy man's vote.... (1/3 of america) Im just tired of footing the bill for people who are lazy and feel entitled..... If I want to help a neighbor out, that's my perogative..... and I have in the past...... But when the government wants my money to dole out to whom they see fit, with little to no vetting..... I have a problem with that, and so should you.
Common sense regards.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by starjack
Politicians love simple minds.
http://static.businessinsider.com/im...-408/chart.jpg
Troy, I DO have a problem with that. But that wide brush is used to paint over many who do NOT abuse the system. Elderly, who would have NO health care if not for medicare.Quote:
Originally Posted by troy schwab
Before entitlements (I assume we both were not around then) we were NOT just fine. I'm not for coddling the lazy, but there are people who WORKED all their lives, only to have their pensions and benefits yanked out from under them after their company moved overseas or pulled legal tricks to get out of their obligations.
I would agree to careful vetting of recipients of public assistance. But would not throw out the entire bushel for a few bad apples.
NASA's twin robot geologists, the Mars Exploration Rovers, launched toward Mars on June 10 and July 7, 2003, in search of answers about the history of water on Mars. They landed on Mars January 3 and January 24 PST, 2004 (January 4 and January 25 UTC, 2004).Quote:
Originally Posted by troy schwab
It seems like all the money wasted-- tax cuts/wars/ NASA (which you are talking about) came during the last administration and NOW you want them fixed. Wouldn't the time to fix them have during the last administration????
NOW you want to cut the programs or disbanded the programs that help out the people that the last administration put out of work.
The Republicans wanted the tax cuts extended NOW when we can least afford them. Of course anything that takes $ out of your pocket you are against -- lets take it out on everyone but me:rolleyes: Just when do you think you Republicans should bite the bullet and take responsibility for what YOUR guy did to put us in the hole we are in now?
You know, what the Bush administration did is just like you being married and your wife runs up all the credit cards and then decides to divorce you and you get stuck with all the bills, house payments, child support and alimony and she walks away owing nothing.
Roger, you are free to send all of your extra money you have lying around to the IRS. They will gladly take it off your hands. You don't have to wait for them to come get it. Just bag it up and drive on over and give it to them. Obama will send you an autographed photo of himself in gratitude.