|
Quote:
Quote:
Why not tax people more and just cut the borrowing? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
We are spending 10.6 BILLION DOLLARS PER DAY. If you taxed everyone who made over $250,000 ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of everything they own it would only run the govt. for 30 days. The federal govt. spends more in 29 minutes than Mitt Romney's entire net worth. They spend more in 4 days than Warren Buffets net worth. Do the math. There is NO way to tax ourselves out of this. The spending has to STOP. It has never been at the levels it is now...and no, we don't need the govt. to spend 10.6 billion dollars a day or I'll be "out of a job" You are ignorant in every way on this. |
Bill O' Reilly has the solution for Social Security and Medicare. Raise the age on social security, and don't pay out to people that don't need it. Create a national sales tax of 1 - 2% to pay for Medicare.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Stop spending, cut taxes and those with a little bit more spend on more imports. Those who lose their jobs, spend a little bit less. Why only tax those earning more than $250,000 a year? Total US work force is 146,743,000 unless you have better figures. Tax each one $10 more a week and $1.46 billion is raised a week. Cut borrowing by the same amount and your children will have less of a debt to repay. $75 billion a year less to borrow. It will have exactly the same effect as cutting borrowing by $75 billion a year. Except your children will have less to repay. $4 billion a day is flowing into the US economy. The other 6 is recycled around the US economy. This is the same situation most of the EU is in. Look at those not in trouble and think why. Quote:
Quote:
The answer is from sacking someone. Who isn't buying so much. |
|
Quote:
Tax everybody $10 more a week and raise 1.46 billion in a week. Paul...they are SPENDING 10.6 BILLION DOLLARS A DAY. They are BORROWING 4 BILLION DOLLARS A DAY. That's what I'm trying to explain to you. You apparently are refusing to do the math. They will have spent the 1.46 billion you propose taxing more per week in less than 5 HOURS. You can't tax people fast enough to keep up with that. Spending needs to be actually CUT. And I'm not talking about the bullshit Washington D.C. idea of "cutting" They call it a "cut" when it doesn't RISE as much as it did the year before. |
Has anyone yet mentioned that unemployment is a lagging economic indicator that is typically two to three quarters behind? The fact that it is down to 7.8% means things are even better than the rate implies.
|
Quote:
Hurt people to do nothing. Brilliant. |
Quote:
Romney won't raise taxes, but will probably invent new government fees. That's how he did it in Mass. Obamacare will still leave 30 million uninsured and 3 million paying the tax to stay out of it that will payout to the government 8 billion a year according to the CBO. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
'bowing' |
Quote:
Obama has made promises that he has failed to keep. I would take that over Romney, who lied to us during the debate when he told us he made Massachusetts the best schools in the country. While Massachusetts sure are number one, it had nothing to do with Romney and everything to do with a ten year education plan that doubled the amount of money the state poured into education that was in full swing long before he took office. You have a someone telling us he's going to lower our taxes and lower our deficit while increasing our military and increasing jobs. He's making it sound like it's very easy to do - but he's not telling us how he plans on doing it. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
I also know that Obama keeps taking credit for pumping more oil now than with Bush, failing to tell you that it's because of the permissions Bush gave we are pumping more and that under Obama, they have dropped to records lows. If that doesn't do it for you, watch the speech where Obama told everyone that Osama was dead, count how many times he said "I" or gave credit to himself and never once mentioned the Seal team. He never even said "Seal". He said "I" a lot! Oh yes, let's give Obama credit for ending the war. even though 69% of the casualties happened under Obama, that's 1,272 of the 1,844 deaths since Operation Enduring Freedom started in October 2001. Obama soundly lost my vote when he said he wanted to go back to sending more troops to Afghanistan. Everyone was pissed about the war, yet they voted for him when this is what he promised. http://communities.washingtontimes.c...-laden-raid-p/ So Richard, if you are going to place your vote on lies, the present administration is full of them. And they cost lives, cost at the pump and cost in the economy. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Do you think McCain would have done better? Hardly. Do you think Romney can do better? Romney's entire life has been spent using other people's money to buy stuff that wasn't his, charging a ton of money to "manage it" and then walking away as it fails. Fucking brilliant. Yes, we need that in office. Quote:
My brother works for the oil refineries - he works on them when they shut down. Oddly enough, it seems oil refieneries shut down all the time. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
No problem. Romney will just fix everything. He'll lower the deficit while reducing taxes and increasing military spending while creating millions of jobs - as if it's that easy. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You mean like Obama Promised? |
Quote:
I've only ever put on more employees when work demand was there to earn extra money, not just because I had extra money lying around, that would be a less efficient use of resources. *At least not directly and not for a while. |
Quote:
Imagine you bought a house when everything in online porn was going great. Mortgage is $10,000 a month, breeze to pay it because everything is going great. Then 2008 hits you and your income starts to decline. 2012 and you need to borrow $4,000 a month to pay the bills. You move out of your mansion, into 2 bedroom apartment in a less desirable neighbourhood cut expenditure. Then live a more frugal life. To stop the borrowing and live within your income until and if the good times return. Now think of it in terms of a country. Are you prepared to see 40% of your income lost, when the US stops borrowing the 40%? Many countries are living on credit, stop the credit and lose the money to spend. Happens to people with credit cards and countries with debts. $10 a week won't fill the gap, it was an example of how to narrow it a little. |
$1.460 trillion goes into the US economy every year to keep everyone in a life style they clearly can't afford. Just because it's borrowed by the Government doesn't mean it stops there.
Finding out where it's spent reveals 100s of different opinions and statistics. Except it's mostly spent in the US. Cutting it, stops the spending and removes it from the flow. Cut out military spending and soldiers lose a jobs, a factory lose contracts, administrators lose jobs, shops and porn websites lose customers, their shops lose customers, so porn websites and shops 1,000 miles away cut staff. These people spend less money, because they're now unemployed, where they shop lose money and the the money loss keeps going around and around. Romney says he will cut spending. Welcome to the nightmare. Except a lot of big businesses thrive on Government spending and he knows it. So don't expect any big cuts soon. Solution, raise more in taxes to cut spending and lower interest rates. Encourage businesses to come to America to create jobs, invest in tomorrows technologies. Yes if a company can get more oil out of the US soil, go get it. so long as it doesn't ruin the environment. Better still, get off oil dependency. Drive smaller cars. Buy more US made goods, buy less new imported gadgets, like the latest Chinese manufactured iPhone. Tell Apple in no uncertain terms to close their Chinese sweatshops and bring jobs back. When you buy a car, bike, don't buy a Toyota, BMW, Suzuki, etc. Buy one MADE in the US, not just assembled. Buy a more fuel efficient smaller one, so less oil is imported. There are no quick fixes to a long growing problem. The most important thing is to understand the fix will be painful for all. Not just the US in all Western Countries running on huge debts. |
Quote:
Republican policies took a surplus and turned it to a never ending deficit. Republicans lied to the American people and the U.N. to push for two wars that are currently estimated to cost over 6 trillion dollars (even the WSJ puts the cost of the Iraq war at $4 trillion). Not to mention creating over 100,000 civilian casulties and close to 1,000,000 refugees. All at the same time he was passing the biggest tax cut ever. Now Romney wants to cut taxes again, even though there is still 1 war going on. And he wants to add 2 trillion to the military budget and get tough on Iran (get ready for another war) But hey those wars were 8 years ago, so ancient history. The fact Romney has the exact same policies means nothing. "Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it"? Now tell me Im a stupid Liberal (even though I'm not) who loves Obama (even though I don't) who doesn't understand math. |
This guy is going to follow the same path as Bush. He said so.
https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1084506 |
Quote:
I'm with you 100% about Romney being a warmongering fool who wants to continue doing what Obama is doing...Keep fighting and keep troops occupying these countries. We won those 2 "wars" in a matter of days. But then our giant military industrial machine wanted to keep the money flowing so we did "nation building" and we're still there! Just like we are in Germany & Japan 70 years after WW2 Go check out what Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson says he will do (that's who I am voting for by the way): http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/ Just go there for a couple of minutes and hear what he has to say. I think he makes more sense than Obama and Romney combined. |
Quote:
|
I agree Robbie, to me the biggest problem of this whole election is that there was one guy who had legitimate ideas and he was made to seem insane. I didn't agree with everything Ron Paul said but he at least had clear ideas that he could articulate.
I really hope Gary Johnson makes an impact in this election. Talking about cutting PBS or taking on subsidies for Corporate Jets when your spending $300 million a day in Afghansistan is like saying I'm going to stop paying to have my rims detailed on this lamborghini I can't afford. |
I have family members in oil business and I hear its booming. Record profits are being made as we speak.
|
Quote:
You absolutely have to be an idiot, live in lala land or completely un-informed to actually believe the Republicans will ever "really" cut spending. (not aimed at you just at anyone in general) The right always get on their high horse and blow the trumpet about spending cuts blahhblahh blahh on "social" services then they increase the spending on military & give tax cuts to the rich that they can't pay for. It's the exact same cycle every Republican president since Reagan. Maybe before then but Reagan was my first personal experience with Republican president and even he knew in the end that he fucked up & had to raise taxes. Give me a real "Physical" Conservative that will actually cut the budget sensibly and I'd vote for him no matter who he was or what party he was with. Everyone knows spending is too high but it's only too high on the shit this party or that doesn't care about. Hell Clinton was a better "Physical" Conservative than any of the Republicans we have seen in the last 30 years. At least he put the budget back in control after the Reagan era spending and we would of been set up pretty well had Bush Jr not been elected. |
Quote:
Just like Obama is not the same as Clinton who was not the same as Carter. They all had different agendas. As for Bush...who really knows what his presidency would have been if not for 9-11 and the subsequent (and dumb) wars that the U.S. went into? But taking your last sentence...IF I wanted to lump all Democrats into some kind of monolithic thinking like you are doing with Republicans I could easily change your sentence to read: "You absolutely have to be an idiot, live in lala land or completely un-informed to actually believe the Democrats will ever "really" cut spending That sentence kinda works for both parties. And it's why I registered as a Libertarian last week. :) |
This argument that tax cuts create jobs is the biggest lie there is. Its the other way around; higher tax rates create jobs by forcing business owners to look for more deductions, hiring people and paying payroll is one of those deductions.
|
The UK is cutting spending, take a look at the IMF's prediction for the growth in the UK.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Really that was so easy to knock back across the net. Sharpen up on your service game. :winkwink: |
Quote:
I specifically said I would never hire someone because taxes were raised. Learn to read before you type ignorant sentences. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Eventually they will have to stop spending because the whole thing will simply implode. 10.6 billion dollars per day in spending. 4 billion of that borrowed every day. Printing new money every year and adding it into the economy (making everything more expensive and the dollar lose worth). Sooner or later that just won't work anymore and there simply will be no funds for any of these things that politicians just can't bring themselves to cut. I've been hearing it since I was a teenager that if we didn't do something now, we would be screwed completely in the future. But every year the politicians in Washington D.C. (congress and Senate) kick the can down the road by applying temporary fixes and borrowing more money. And no President has had the balls to take the bull by the horns and step in with some real leadership. I think the "future" is almost here finally. And we are about to have no choice but to "cut" a whole lot...simply because there won't be any money to fund things. |
Quote:
Cost of worker in wages/taxes = X Cost of worker in terms of equipment, location, etc = Y Profit from his work has to be more than X+Y to make it viable. It's that simple to someone who employs people. Or more simply. What ever it costs to employ someone, he/she should make there employment worth at least 50% more than cost. Even if the cost includes tax, lunches, transport or a hooker every Friday. The cost of the worker has to be less that what the worker produces by a decent amount. So you wouldn't employ someone whose cost was $1,000 a week and produced you $1,000 a week in in pure profit. Because $200 of the workers cost was tax. :upsidedow And when the Government does stop spending, expect your US sales to drop. |
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:26 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123