Will we default on our debt.

[Armistead]

Seems both sides are sticking to their guns, but we're close to running out of time. Bond raters are threatening, the world is looking. Many economist predict it would throw us into another recession.

Seems the issue is taxes. Obama gave a lot regarding spending, the GOP is holding the no tax line. Obvious, it's all about politics and coming elections, who will blink first and who will be able to point the bigger finger of blame, seems that's all they care about.

[GoldenRivet]

I tried to think of an insightful response...


but it wont matter.


i dont care, i dont *** care. Burn the whole damn country down - i just dont care its all screwed anyhow.

burn it all down, you can even start right here with my house... just light a match and watch that puppy burn.

Im sick of this crap

[Ducimus]

Frankly i think today's GOP would sooner see the country burned into ash's before they'd give an inch. Last i've looked at politics (and its been a few months), the had this attitude of "We are at war", with a mindset of "all or nothing". If that's still true.. well... i guess we'll see.

[Armistead]

Frankly i think today's GOP would sooner see the country burned into ash's before they'd give an inch. Last i've looked at politics (and its been a few months), the had this attitude of "We are at war", with a mindset of "all or nothing". If that's still true.. well... i guess we'll see.

Not the whole country, they'll do their best to protect corporations and the elite.

I find it sickening they want more tax breaks for corporations when all facts show they take the extra profit and invest it in creating jobs in other lands. The last tax holiday for them was a joke. They promised with a tax holiday they would create more jobs here, when in fact they invested in dividends and created more jobs overseas, even laid off thousands or more workers.

It blows my mind how those in the GOP really trust corporations...

[Ducimus]

I just don't understand how they expect to have the country move forward without raising taxes. Fact of the matter is we have a huge war debt, and deficet. I don't want to pay more taxes myself, but i just don't see how we could NOT. Even Saint Ronnie raised taxes - several times. So these jackwagons nowadays? I don't get them. Lost on ideological principles, without a shred of practicality perhaps.

[Armistead]

It's a big circle jerk off. Corporations say with tax breaks and less regulation they would bring jobs back, but each time we do give corporations taxbreaks and less regualtion they use it to build more plants and hire more workers overseas. That leaves more job shortages here, resulting in people seeking more social services. The GOP complain about all the social services, but they cause the effect, except they would rather people do without. They then cry the answer is to lower taxes and regulations, but when we do corporations again will move more jobs overseas and invest profits there, thus the circle continues.

Before the Bush tax cuts we had a surplus, under Bush we went from 5 trillion in debt to 10 trillion, under Obama even more, but people forget when and who created the mess, although both parties are guilty. The only difference I see in dems is they want the now small rich elite to pay for social services, the GOP would rather people die out.

[Growler]

I'm just waiting for my bailout.

[Webster]

the only solution to the mess we are in is to default on our dept

thats what you and i do if we cant pay our bills, you certainly dont go to your boss and say he HAS TO pay you more because your in dept.


defaulting isnt the end of the world people and its a good alternative, not the most desired but at some point you must take your medicine


if you cant pay your bills will taking out another loan help you or add to your dept?

over the last few years under obama and with the democratic control of both houses they had cash for clunkers and two stimulus packages that didnt create any jobs so they raised the dept ceiling and the democrates spent it all then they raised the dept ceiling again and the democrates spent it all then they raised the dept ceiling again and the democrates spent it all again so what in gods name makes you think this time is any different?

the only way to stop the spending is to stop the free money train by defaulting, then and only then will the politicians be limited to only spending the money they have instead of spending $1.60 for every $1 they take in

[Growler]

Only going to say this: The democrats spent it all?

Uh, not so much, mate. Where do you think Mr. Reagan got his 600 ship navy? You know as well as I do that dems don't spend on the military.

[Webster]

Only going to say this: The democrats spent it all?

Uh, not so much, mate. Where do you think Mr. Reagan got his 600 ship navy? You know as well as I do that dems don't spend on the military.


was reagan in the next room spending obamas raised dept limit? if he was i missed that part

its always blame the republicans but the only repulican with serious spending issues was g w bush who spent money like a democrate and is partly to blame for the mess we are in now but that said he spent small change compared to what they spend now

why do democrates always say "look over there look at him" when they cant defend what they are doing? what is it with this "he's more guilty then me" syndrome when they are all a bunch of idiots republican and democrate alike who cant stop spending

[Onkel Neal]

Frankly i think today's GOP would sooner see the country burned into ash's before they'd give an inch. Last i've looked at politics (and its been a few months), the had this attitude of "We are at war", with a mindset of "all or nothing". If that's still true.. well... i guess we'll see.

I think the same about the Democrats, what a coincidence.

I differ with the GOP on taxes, I think they should raise all income tax brackets--low, middle, and top-- 15% across the board until the deficit is wiped clean.

[Armistead]

the only solution to the mess we are in is to default on our dept

thats what you and i do if we cant pay our bills, you certainly dont go to your boss and say he HAS TO pay you more because your in dept.


defaulting isnt the end of the world people and its a good alternative, not the most desired but at some point you must take your medicine


if you cant pay your bills will taking out another loan help you or add to your dept?

over the last few years under obama and with the democratic control of both houses they had cash for clunkers and two stimulus packages that didnt create any jobs so they raised the dept ceiling and the democrates spent it all then they raised the dept ceiling again and the democrates spent it all then they raised the dept ceiling again and the democrates spent it all again so what in gods name makes you think this time is any different?

the only way to stop the spending is to stop the free money train by defaulting, then and only then will the politicians be limited to only spending the money they have instead of spending $1.60 for every $1 they take in

Had the GOP power they would've done the same bailouts, in fact most voted for them, those did not did so because they needed a pass. Bush was first to bailout banks in 2008, not to mention he passed TARP. Face it, Obama stepped into the biggest economic crisis in modern history.

I agree the bailouts were bad, but more because they just gave the money and let banks due with them as they pleased, but most have paid it back. It seems the economy is going to crumble, just congress electing to prolong it.

Course when they can't pay the bills, let's see who doesn't get paid, people on SS and Medicare or due defense contracts, etc...

The fact seems that neither side has an answer, because both love to pander to the special interest that keep them in power, rather than compromise which the GOP ain't gonna do, they would rather cut medicare than even tax corporate luxary jets.

[Webster]

Had the GOP power they would've done the same bailouts, in fact most voted for them, those did not did so because they needed a pass. Bush was first to bailout banks in 2008, not to mention he passed TARP. Face it, Obama stepped into the biggest economic crisis in modern history.

I agree the bailouts were bad, but more because they just gave the money and let banks due with them as they pleased, but most have paid it back. It seems the economy is going to crumble, just congress electing to prolong it.

Course when they can't pay the bills, let's see who doesn't get paid, people on SS and Medicare or due defense contracts, etc...

The fact seems that neither side has an answer, because both love to pander to the special interest that keep them in power, rather than compromise which the GOP ain't gonna do, they would rather cut medicare than even tax corporate luxary jets.

well the tea party god rid of many of those republicans who voted for bailouts and spending more but sadly too many are still there. those tea party people are still watching and paying attention to whats going on and you will see many more republicans get defeated or not in the next election based on what they say and how they vote between now and then.

for the life of me i cant see why people like barney frank and harry reid can still get elected after 100% flat out proof they do nothing to help or represent the people who elected them. now im not saying replace them with a republican but at least replace them with a democrat that "might" look out for the intrests of the people of that state.

im a life long democrat but voted republican the last 5 years mainly because of the out of control spending on both sides and i know less goverment is what i want and lower taxes will create more jobs.

the republican and democrat progressives believe in socialism and want to create a socialist contry while regular democrats believe spending money and bigger goverment solves all the problems and the regular republicans believe cutting taxes and smaller goverment solves all the problems and they are all wrong but cutting taxes will help get more jobs because when companies have more money they hire new workers and lay off less workers and thats the most important thing for now.

there is not a politician in washington that gives a rats azz about us or the country but they only care about what lobbyist give them and how to stay in office

[mookiemookie]

No. This is all political kabuki theater. No one wants to be part of the Congress that let America default.

cutting taxes will help get more jobs because when companies have more money they hire new workers and lay off less workers and thats the most important thing for now.

No. Companies do not hire new employees because they paid less in taxes. They hire employees to meet the demand coming in the front door. Businesses are in business to meet a demand. Businesses will only create enough jobs to fulfill that demand.

[Ducimus]

the only solution to the mess we are in is to default on our dept

thats what you and i do if we cant pay our bills,

I don't get myself in that position to begin with. I owe to creditors, a big fat ZERO dollars. I also earn more money then i spend.


I think the same about the Democrats, what a coincidence.

I differ with the GOP on taxes, I think they should raise all income tax brackets--low, middle, and top-- 15% across the board until the deficit is wiped clean.

I'm not a card carrying member of either party. I am however, more disgusted with GOP emotionally charged rhetoric. Im sure democrates are doing the same BS, it's just the GOP that i seem to hear more of.

Ultimately, i think its this two party system we have right now that will bring about our downfall. I say this because im under the impression statesmanship is (or should be) an art of compromise. If neither side wants to compromise, they fight while the cabin crumbles down around them. In the end, we ALL lose.

[Rockstar]

No. This is all political kabuki theater


KABUKI theater, I love it! :DL:har:

http://politicalkabuki.com/images/kabuki_header8.gif

[MothBalls]

I do agree with this;

(CNN) -- Watching Republicans and Democrats squabble from their ideological battle lines over the debt ceiling is the same as watching a bratty child fall out in the middle of the floor with a temper tantrum when he doesn't get his way.http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/07/15/martin.debt.talks/index.html?hpt=po_t2

Lets just default on all the foreign debt, file bankruptcy, reset the books and start over. In the new set of rules, simply state you can't spend what you don't have.

Fire Congress, the Senate, and the entire Executive Branch. Face it, if you were in a private company and things got this screwed up, the shareholders would have the entire upper echelon fired. Time we do the same.

Starting to think someone like Larry the Cable Guy would make a better President anyway.

[Armistead]

well the tea party god rid of many of those republicans who voted for bailouts and spending more but sadly too many are still there. those tea party people are still watching and paying attention to whats going on and you will see many more republicans get defeated or not in the next election based on what they say and how they vote between now and then.

for the life of me i cant see why people like barney frank and harry reid can still get elected after 100% flat out proof they do nothing to help or represent the people who elected them. now im not saying replace them with a republican but at least replace them with a democrat that "might" look out for the intrests of the people of that state.

im a life long democrat but voted republican the last 5 years mainly because of the out of control spending on both sides and i know less goverment is what i want and lower taxes will create more jobs.

the republican and democrat progressives believe in socialism and want to create a socialist contry while regular democrats believe spending money and bigger goverment solves all the problems and the regular republicans believe cutting taxes and smaller goverment solves all the problems and they are all wrong but cutting taxes will help get more jobs because when companies have more money they hire new workers and lay off less workers and thats the most important thing for now.

there is not a politician in washington that gives a rats azz about us or the country but they only care about what lobbyist give them and how to stay in office

Webster, look at the last tax holiday, corporations promised more jobs, they actually laid off more workers after it and invested the money in stocks for themselves and used more profit to create jobs overseas.

Tax breaks creating jobs in a global economy works only where they can create jobs for less. Do you really think corporations will create more jobs here or in China of India. The issue isn't taxes, it's regulation, but here in the US we can't or won't give enough, they can still build and pay less elsewhere, maybe why Bachman said we need to get rid of the min wage here, so corps can pay $2 an hour.

Stange, most in the teaparty are fundy christians that want to impose their beliefs on others through government. They want God in government, but forget it was God that said take care of the sick, the poor, the elderly, they must follow a different God than the one in the bible, another reason to keep church and state totally seperate.

Fine, let the poor, the sick and elderly die, just don't claim christian values when you do it, course if they could kill all the fags, then it would be worth it to them.

[Skybird]

http://img842.imageshack.us/img842/3526/40249842.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/842/40249842.jpg/)
Short before the Big Bang...

http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/5268/23087191.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/717/23087191.jpg/)
"Is that your budget deficit?" - "No, I think it's yours."


Both from "Der Tagesspiegel"

[yubba]

I've always wondered what they were thinking when they cut down the last tree on Easter Island. Sadly I was listening to a program telling how Europes fishing stocks were so depleted that the only way their children might be able too see a fish would be in a text book. I say let us default, cut all the damn trees down, fish all the fish out of the sea and be done with it. Too the Victors go the spoils.

[gimpy117]

The tax cuts war made us go broke. we are spending so much on the war now, and they just approved an increase in the budget for the DoD....but republicans want no new taxes. Sure, we need to cut programs, but the cuts nessicary to balance the budget would be Draconian, especially if nobody looks at the 500 pound gorilla in the room that is the defense budget.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

...cutting taxes will help get more jobs because when companies have more money they hire new workers and lay off less workers and thats the most important thing for now.

I disagree. Wages are much more important factor than taxes. If there is option of hiring American or Chinese for same job which one you think company will take? Wages are so much lower in China that even if U.S. gov stops collecting taxes altogether it would still be cheaper to do work overseas.

In top to this, as mookiemookie said, companies hire only as many employees as are needed to get job done. Hiring unnecessary employees is bad business. It unnecessarily cuts shareholders' profits and I as shareholder would not tolerate that!

[Snestorm]

Default.
It'd be the best thing that ever happenned to USA.

Throw out the "Federal" (privately owned) Reserve.
Tell the IMF where to go.
Let USA print US Dollars again.
Nobody for Uncle Sam to borrow from, and pay interest to.
They can't spend what they haven't got.
Do away with the Income Tax & Socialism.
Let Uncle Sam finance himself with Tarrifs & Excise Taxes, just like he used to.

[Skybird]

You depend on deliveries of all kinds of ressources from other countries. Without these, your people cannot work, since there will be no wokring economy. Your society will fall apart. And why will there be no such deliveries in sufficient degrees anymore? Becasue you betrayed the world and have stollen too much money from other people whose money you leased, but did not pay back - that tells everybody that you cannot be trusted. Much of your heavy industry you have sold away carelessly or allowed to degrade so that now it is rotten and not compatible anymore, especially compared to Asian and European companies. Your powergrid is a mess. Your road grid falls into pieces. And whjat you are proud of, yxour computer and hightech industry, vitally depends on rare precious ores and earths from Africa and China whose names most people never have heared of but without which you cannot do.

But you want to cut right those international economic ties that are vital and indispensable for your very own self-interest? Not to mention that you would cause a tsunami by going bancrupt throughout the developed world, too. Is this what we are left with to expect from America: first messing things up by making debts, debts, and more debts, and when it all collapses saying "Not our problem"?

Probably. Already Nixon's finance minister once told the Europeans: "The dollar is our currency, but it is your problem." Thank you. Maybe it serves us right. Maybe we should have kicked you already back then. But we didn't. Like nobody reacted to the alarm bell of the oil crisis of 71 as well.

Isolationism does not work in this world anymore, Snestorm, not last of the reasons is self-interest and survival. Your scenario is not rescue. It is suicide.

On the deadlock between both parties, Obama already had agreed to huge compromises, and if the relation between both parties would be normal, the Reps already would have worked out a compromise. It'S just that the Tea Partry movement in them sees any compromise as weakness and that their hate on Obama for the lost election is so irrational and that bitches like Psalin have been so successful in poisening that now it is just about doing as much damage to the president as humanly possible - even at the cost of the nation that gets blinded and deafened by their vitriol.

[Snestorm]

Isolationism does not work in this world anymore, Snestorm, not last of the reasons is self-interest and survival. Your scenario is not rescue. It is suicide.

Isolationism worked very well for them before, and it can work very well for them again.

USA was self-sufficiant before, and there is no reason why it can't be again.

Beyond that, I hardly think every nation in the world would turn their backs to her.

[Castout]

The question that every American should ask is that when will their country default on its debt?

How do you pay that amount of debt?


Raising the ceiling is obviously not a solution to reduce this debt in the long run.

What kind of austerity measures that will be needed to control this debt. Large debt usually is related directly with decreased quality of life and rising prices(inflation) and the reduced value in currency in general.

[Skybird]

Isolationism worked very well for them before, and it can work very well for them again.

USA was self-sufficiant before, and there is no reason why it can't be again.
That is a dangerous fallacy (that Jarred Diamond has reflected in depth about in his book "Collapse"): that something that worked in past conditions therefore will work in future conditions. Usually, the militarey is most pronbe for this thinkling error, it always starts the next war in the way it has won the last one. However, in this case discussed here, it is not true. The world, the economy has changed. Your dependencies are others than back then, and they are more intense - as long as you do not wish to give up your hightech industry and computer. Even the planned electric revolution to end the carbon era would not be possible without massive deliveries of needed ores and substances withiut which you cannot do it and that you do not have in North America.

As long as you do not all become farmers and trapperds again, you need a working economy to offer people sufficient jobs so that they can earn their living. And your economy is a highly depending, vulnerable thing, and much of it is in a pity state, with major parts of its former glorious branches outdated, gone, externalised, sold away.

There is no return to the days pre WWI and Roosewelt . This US today is not the US of the 60s and 70s, or the 40s. It is not the US of one and two hundred years ago.

However, it seesm to be a pattern in US politics. In a nutshell, Dems increase spendings and go on the international offense, Reps cut it and go isolationistic. Like a sine wave it goes like this, up and down, back and forth.

Beyond that, I hardly think every nation in the world would turn their backs to her.
If you betray your creditors by several trillion, they will remember that and it will serve as a warning to others.

Plus: before, the US will have inflicted crippling damage to global economic structrures and finances by defaulting. We in europe pay until today for and feel the aftermaths of the US-made housing and credit crunches that started in 2008, the ammount of wealth the American drama, made in the US, has destroyed for Europeans in Europe, both in live investements as well as future financial securites, are monumental. And therefore, many still are pissed. The dollar feels it, and some countries even saw their banks stopping to deal with American credits and bonds (amongst them: yours! :D http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=182783&highlight=riksbank ) . China is in full action to reshift its reserves away from the dollar, and is reducing its focus on exporting to the US, wanting to boost internal consummation instead.

This time nobody will let America off the hook just because it shows a Californian tooth-paste-advertising smile. All the world is closely monitoring it, tight-lipped. And nobody wants to hear just an easy joke.

P.S. Ignore the "you". I forgot for a while that you are not an American. :)

[Platapus]

No. Companies do not hire new employees because they paid less in taxes. They hire employees to meet the demand coming in the front door. Businesses are in business to meet a demand. Businesses will only create enough jobs to fulfill that demand.

Very well put. Demand influences production, not the other way around.

If the customer/potential customer has more money to purchase stuff, they will buy more stuff, which increases demand for stuff, which makes hiring more people to make stuff profitable for the company that sells stuff.

No company is going to increase production (hire more people) unless there is a reasonable expectation that the extra production will be sold.

I am faced with this situation at the company I work for all the time.

I want to hire someone (increase production). But before I am allowed to hire them, I need to make a business case to my senior management where I demonstrate that the demand (from our clients) for this person will result in contracts exceeding the costs of the new hire.

If I can't make that case, we don't hire them. It sucks because I lose good resumes all the time. But I have to find the demand first, before I can increase the production.

Cutting the taxes for the company will not influence this formula no matter how badly some politicians want it to be true.

[Platapus]

. Sure, we need to cut programs, but the cuts nessicary to balance the budget would be Draconian, especially if nobody looks at the 500 pound gorilla in the room that is the defense budget.


That is the other issue that concerns me. We have to recognize that it took us decades to get into this hole and it will probably take decades to get out of it. There is no way we can solve this "debt problem" in the time of one term of the House.

What we need is some sort of commitment that this will be a multi-generational solution of gradual cuts and redesigning of the government programs.

But multi-generational does not work with the House, where the representatives are only interested in their re-election in two years.

I don't know if a constitutional amendment is the right solution, but it may be the only way we can force, and force is the right word, congress to come up with a mulit-generational plan and then stick with it.

There are no quick fixes. Unfortunately party politics needs quick fixes as we have elections every two years.

We need to make small changes in our spending, then allow the market economy time to adjust. Then make more small changes, allow the market economy time to adjust. Rinse and repeat for 50 years until we can get this problem fixed.

Again, it took us decades to get in to the mess, it is illogical to expect it to be fixed in one House Term.

If only we could elect politicians would be interested in the long term health of our government and not just their political career.


:har::har::har::har::har::har::har:

I kill me sometimes with my fantasies.

[Ducimus]

Isolationism worked very well for them before, and it can work very well for them again.

USA was self-sufficiant before, and there is no reason why it can't be again.


Problem is, we jumped on board the whole globalism thing. Just about everything here is manufactured in china, and most corporations are global, with offices all over the world. Unfortunately, in the world we live in, where financial gain is concerned, patriotism ALWAYS takes a back seat.

[CaptainMattJ.]

we cant be a consumer economy if no one has money to buy anything. The thing is, people dont see things in logical terms anymore. They see it as "dont let the other side get what they want". The republicans and democrats are all greedy fat old men, with little concern for the middle class and ridiculous breaks for the corporations that "persuade" them into bailing them out. Its not like the corporations give a god dam about their workers. Instead of giving them a wage they can live off of without having to worry about when the next paycheck is coming , they keep paying them less and less, and cutting costs wherever possible.

and the republicans, who refuse to raise taxes on the wealthy, are killing the country. The wealthy got tax BREAKS while the middle class got screwed. people living paycheck to paycheck have no room to breathe, while the wealthy sit on their ass in their second home up in Avalon. Only a greedy politician wouldn't raise taxes on the wealthy when its the only thing we can do to save ourselves from burying ourselves in debt

Of course, when the corporations get whacked, then they take it out on the workers. theyre so desperate to keep their rich lifestyle that they sack the workers wages and cut down anywhere they can. Corporations who hire illegal aliens to do the dirty work for nothing while the legal American cant get a job anywhere for a decent wage to live off of.

With the mind-blowing costs of the war, the corporations sticking it to the little guy, and the politicians sitting on their old wrinkly ass and doing nothing about it, is why were going down the drain.

[Sailor Steve]

It's easy to be hypercritical when you're young and still know everything.

[gimpy117]

we cant be a consumer economy if no one has money to buy anything. The thing is, people dont see things in logical terms anymore. They see it as "dont let the other side get what they want". The republicans and democrats are all greedy fat old men, with little concern for the middle class and ridiculous breaks for the corporations that "persuade" them into bailing them out. Its not like the corporations give a god dam about their workers. Instead of giving them a wage they can live off of without having to worry about when the next paycheck is coming , they keep paying them less and less, and cutting costs wherever possible.

and the republicans, who refuse to raise taxes on the wealthy, are killing the country. The wealthy got tax BREAKS while the middle class got screwed. people living paycheck to paycheck have no room to breathe, while the wealthy sit on their ass in their second home up in Avalon. Only a greedy politician wouldn't raise taxes on the wealthy when its the only thing we can do to save ourselves from burying ourselves in debt

Of course, when the corporations get whacked, then they take it out on the workers. theyre so desperate to keep their rich lifestyle that they sack the workers wages and cut down anywhere they can. Corporations who hire illegal aliens to do the dirty work for nothing while the legal American cant get a job anywhere for a decent wage to live off of.

With the mind-blowing costs of the war, the corporations sticking it to the little guy, and the politicians sitting on their old wrinkly ass and doing nothing about it, is why were going down the drain.

+1.

congress is too busy helping the ones with money instead of helping the people who actually need it the most. but why should they? free speech can be in the form of money now, so why listen to words? those are so last century.

[Webster]

Default.
It'd be the best thing that ever happenned to USA.

Throw out the "Federal" (privately owned) Reserve.
Tell the IMF where to go.
Let USA print US Dollars again.
Nobody for Uncle Sam to borrow from, and pay interest to.
They can't spend what they haven't got.
Do away with the Income Tax & Socialism.
Let Uncle Sam finance himself with Tarrifs & Excise Taxes, just like he used to.

well said and i agree with neal in that we need a flat tax of 15% but i want it to be on EVERYONE even those on wellfare and social security of which i am in the later catagory.

then institute a national sales tax of 5% on every purchase with no loopholes or exceptions and you triple the revenues coming into goverment overnight.

next while im being king for a day i would eliminate the IRS and homeland security along with the federal reserve as well as fanny mae and freddy mac, stop all funds going to support the united nations and sever all ties to the IMF banks as well as stop ALL foreign aid to ALL countries (if we cant fund our own country why are we giving hundreds of billions of dollars to the countries that either hate us and want to destroy us or are loaning us money?)

[Webster]

On the deadlock between both parties, Obama already had agreed to huge compromises, and if the relation between both parties would be normal, the Reps already would have worked out a compromise. It'S just that the Tea Partry movement in them sees any compromise as weakness and that their hate on Obama for the lost election is so irrational and that bitches like Psalin have been so successful in poisening that now it is just about doing as much damage to the president as humanly possible - even at the cost of the nation that gets blinded and deafened by their vitriol.

what a joke, obama agreed to only spend 1.3 trillion more money instead of the 3.4 trillion he wants to spend so you think thats a huge compromise when your broke and in default already? dont make me laugh :har:

[nikimcbee]

I think the same about the Democrats, what a coincidence.

I differ with the GOP on taxes, I think they should raise all income tax brackets--low, middle, and top-- 15% across the board until the deficit is wiped clean.

Agree 100%, except with the income tax part. Pick another tax please, as Ore-gone has the highest(?) income tax in the nation. I'd make it harder to weasle out out of paying. (see pelosi and the exemptions for obamacare)
I say, if you vote for higher taxes, by god you and your buddies are going to pay them too.

[Tribesman]

well said and i agree with neal in that we need a flat tax of 15% but i want it to be on EVERYONE even those on wellfare and social security of which i am in the later catagory.

And welcome to the black economy.

then institute a national sales tax of 5% on every purchase with no loopholes or exceptions and you triple the revenues coming into goverment overnight.
So you are cutting and raising the same tax and expect to increase revenue and avoid the black market?

next while im being king for a day i would eliminate the IRS and homeland security along with the federal reserve as well as fanny mae and freddy mac
How much will they cost to get rid of and how much will new institutions which will replace them cost?

stop all funds going to support the united nations
it is hard to stop the money going when you don't hand it over anyway:03:

stop ALL foreign aid to ALL countries
Shut down your international trade you mean.


But then there is........

We have to recognize that it took us decades to get into this hole and it will probably take decades to get out of it.

:up:

[Ducimus]

I think this picture pretty much sum's up the real problem in American Politics today regardless of party affiliation:
http://www.active-noise-reduction.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/noise-fingers-in-ears-001.jpg


Although, this kind of obstructive mindset isn't helping either:
http://downloads.visiontoamerica.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/no-compromise-300x198.gif

[CaptainMattJ.]

Its a mexican standoff. much like the cold war. Republicans and democrats hold the decision that will make or break the country. And neither seems to want to do the right thing. Draw the line, cut our insane spending spree and start paying off the ginourmous debt we dug ourselves into.

Stop counting on the corporations to create the vast majority of new jobs and start helping small(er) buisness get back on its feet.

Defaulting isnt an option. Short term means nothing. the trend will continue, and we will soon find ourselves in a 100 foot hole with a broken shovel.

[Oberon]

No. This is all political kabuki theater. No one wants to be part of the Congress that let America default.

I'd agree, no-one wants to be remembered for that and all the negative connotations that it involves. Sure both sides would blame the other but it would be a failure across the board.

No, there'll be a last second deal struck. Both sides are just trying to squeeze the most out of it.

[Platapus]

Its a mexican standoff. much like the cold war.

But it is like a Mexican Standoff while standing on a sinking ship. Just waiting the other person out is not the optimum solution.

It is like playing "Hand Grenade Chicken" it does not matter who throws first, but who throws last. :shifty:

[gimpy117]

Seems the issue is taxes. Obama gave a lot regarding spending, the GOP is holding the no tax line.

one side is compromising and the other isn't, that's pretty much the core as i can see. IMO, I think the republicans getting their way would be much more of a disaster than some very very rich people having to pay a little more in taxes.

[Sailor Steve]

one side is compromising and the other isn't, that's pretty much the core as i can see. IMO, I think the republicans getting their way would be much more of a disaster than some very very rich people having to pay a little more in taxes.
But some very very rich people paying a little more in taxes won't even scrape the paint, let alone put a dent in the problem. If you take 100% of everything every millionaire and billionaire has it won't even come close. Then who do you tax?

[gimpy117]

But some very very rich people paying a little more in taxes won't even scrape the paint, let alone put a dent in the problem. If you take 100% of everything every millionaire and billionaire has it won't even come close. Then who do you tax?

well the point is, we need cuts yes, and those have been offered along with some pretty substantial cuts. but as far as i know republicans are bent on no more taxes on the rich and steeper cuts

[Sailor Steve]

well the point is, we need cuts yes, and those have been offered along with some pretty substantial cuts. but as far as i know republicans are bent on no more taxes on the rich and steeper cuts
And my opinion is that the "tax the rich" thing is a diversionary game played by liberals to try to level the playing field, and has nothing to do with the economy or the Federal Deficit. At the height of his wealth Bill Gates had 60 billion dollars. If we stripped Bill Gates of his entire fortune and distributed it equally, every man, woman and child in America would recieve...$200. Yep, two hundred dollars. If we stripped every single billionaire in America - all 385 of them - of everything they have, we would gain a total of $1.3 trillion (yes, I pulled out my calculator and did the addition), so a little less than five thousand dollars for each of us. And then they would all be broke, and then who would you complain about?
http://www.forbes.com/wealth/forbes-400#p_1_s_arank_-1_

$1.34 trillion. $1,340 billion. Last year's Federal Budget Deficit was $1.29 trillion, so breaking all of them might just pay off this year's deficit. Then what?
http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/171275-federal-budget-deficit-nearing-1-trillion

Oh, great! :rotfl2:While I was looking at this I just stumbled on a site which already did the work I just did, so I did it all for nothing!
http://www.federalbudget.com/

Anyway, every time someone brings up "Tax the rich more" or "make them pay their fair share" I have to wonder if that someone has a clue what they are talking about, or is just parroting another party line.

[mookiemookie]

And my opinion is that the "tax the rich" thing is a diversionary game played by liberals to try to level the playing field, and has nothing to do with the economy or the Federal Deficit. At the height of his wealth Bill Gates had 60 billion dollars. If we stripped Bill Gates of his entire fortune and distributed it equally, every man, woman and child in America would recieve...$200. Yep, two hundred dollars. If we stripped every single billionaire in America - all 385 of them - of everything they have, we would gain a total of $1.3 trillion (yes, I pulled out my calculator and did the addition), so a little less than five thousand dollars for each of us. And then they would all be broke, and then who would you complain about?
http://www.forbes.com/wealth/forbes-400#p_1_s_arank_-1_

$1.34 trillion. $1,340 billion. Last year's Federal Budget Deficit was $1.29 trillion, so breaking all of them might just pay off this year's deficit. Then what?
http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/171275-federal-budget-deficit-nearing-1-trillion

Oh, great! :rotfl2:While I was looking at this I just stumbled on a site which already did the work I just did, so I did it all for nothing!
http://www.federalbudget.com/

Anyway, every time someone brings up "Tax the rich more" or "make them pay their fair share" I have to wonder if that someone has a clue what they are talking about, or is just parroting another party line.

My rationale behind it is that the effective tax rate on the top taxpayers in this country has steadily declined over the past 20 years, yet the proportion of the country's total wealth that they own has increased over that same time period.

The rich are not job creators. Demand is a job creator. And demand is not created by 2% of the taxpayers in this country. Demand is created by the other 98%. That's why I'd raise taxes on those most able to pay it before I'd raise it on the middle and lower classes.

[Armistead]

Steve, there is a big difference between individual wealth and corporate wealth that should be taxed yearly.

Not to mention all the shelters, loopholes and unfair deductions the get.

[Growler]

Let me just go on record to say, and I speak only for myself on this one, but suspect that my sentiments are echoed by Americans regardless of party at this point:

F$#@ CONGRESS.

Both sides could care less. They're still going to collect their paychecks and keep their taxpayer supported lifestyle, while the rest of us are left to twist in the wind. Regardless of the outcome, we the people - lose.

I'm so sick of the hypocrisy in Washington - across the board - that it makes my head spin and my heart hurt.

[Sailor Steve]

Steve, there is a big difference between individual wealth and corporate wealth that should be taxed yearly.

Not to mention all the shelters, loopholes and unfair deductions the get.
That's very true, especially the corporate part. Of course they'll pass the taxes on to whoever pays their bills, but what the hey?

But I was responding directly and only to the constant cry that taxing the rich would solve our problems, or even help. There is a segment who seem to want to blame everything on the rich, and they mean individuals, not corporations. The problem lies with Congress, and I disagree with anyone who claims that Congress can solve the problem by soaking any individual. Except themselves, of course.

[CaptainMattJ.]

corporations ARE rich. and get the most tax breaks. we cant "just" tax the rich (along with corporations), we have to cut spending.

we do, however, have to try Everything BUT default. Defaulting wont help anything.

There are some rediculous projects that the government is pouring money into. hit them before we hit our crucials like medicare. One of the most rediculous is the war. If after a decade these people cant fight for themselves, then why bother spending billions on keeping troops stationed to "help the afghans fight for themselves".

Maybe, just maybe, this will be the last war we fight on foreign soil against suicidal maniacs fighting a guerilla war. Oil? maybe you should increase our trade instead of pouring trillions into a war. we went in to get saddam and Osama. and now theyre gone and we still arent leaving for Years to come.

[gimpy117]

my take on it?

Balanced approach. oh...and tax the rich...why? because the last 10 years has been really, really good to them and really they are the only ones who can afford a tax increase of any significance. I am not actually talking raising the rates, but closing all the loopholes that let them slide from 35% down to 18%.

[Armistead]

That's very true, especially the corporate part. Of course they'll pass the taxes on to whoever pays their bills, but what the hey?

But I was responding directly and only to the constant cry that taxing the rich would solve our problems, or even help. There is a segment who seem to want to blame everything on the rich, and they mean individuals, not corporations. The problem lies with Congress, and I disagree with anyone who claims that Congress can solve the problem by soaking any individual. Except themselves, of course.

Maybe, maybe not. Sadly, because of law many corporations do pass the buck, face it, the medical industry and insurance are basically monopolies, but with fair laws, trade, loopholes, etc..coporations still have to compete.
But it's crazy to say rich people are soaked, they do pay high taxes, but get a lot of it right back through shelters and loopholes

When I ran my business, I paid myself around 200K a year, not rich, but good. Be surprised how accountants can spin and what loopholes apply. I paid a great deal less taxes percentage wise than I did when I made 70K working for someone else.

[Sailor Steve]

I am not actually talking raising the rates, but closing all the loopholes that let them slide from 35% down to 18%.
Now that I can get behind. I don't like taxes on general principles, but if you're going to have them at least keep people from cheating.

[AVGWarhawk]

There are some rediculous projects that the government is pouring money into. hit them before we hit our crucials like medicare. One of the most rediculous is the war. If after a decade these people cant fight for themselves, then why bother spending billions on keeping troops stationed to "help the afghans fight for themselves".

Maybe, just maybe, this will be the last war we fight on foreign soil against suicidal maniacs fighting a guerilla war. Oil? maybe you should increase our trade instead of pouring trillions into a war. we went in to get saddam and Osama. and now theyre gone and we still arent leaving for Years to come.

War is an industry for the US. Thousands upon thousands work in some capacity towards war and war materials. It is in some part the fabric of our economy.

[Armistead]

The GOP screams about entitlements, but they created an elite class resulting in a large amount of poverty.

FACT...about 10% now control 80% of all real wealth..That didn't happen because americans got lazy. Anyone can see the result of that is poverty. As the government increased the elite, they threw bones of entitlements to the dying middle class, if they didn't chaos would evolve.

The same with blacks, for years they were denied equal rights resulting in poverty. For decades, instead of giving true equal rights the government threw entitlements at them, resulting in even more harm.

I agree, the answer isn't entitlements, it's going back to the system of laws and regulations that built the strongest middle class in history and based on real money, the gold standard, not worthless paper today. With a strong middle class, you need few entitlements. The GOP doesn't understand this, they want to continue in the same mess that has destroyed the middle class. Any fool can see "trickle down" Reagan economics won't work in a global economy. Since US corporations can move to anywhere in the world, using unfair US laws, loopholes and regulations to get rich there, that's where they will stay.

Believe it or not, US corporations use to have to work for the US, now they operate in a global world at will for themselves. Yes, US corporations are creating jobs and a strong middle class, in India and China..but when they fail, they still want taxpayer bailout.

You want to get rid of entitlements, study the tax code, trade laws and regulation between 1940-1980 as we built a strong middle class.

Entitlements are just the rich paying to keep the poor from revolution.