stop being selfish (re: the US deficit)

[captain_stan 0]

Quote

Without regard to what you think others should give up,

I'm not convinced that you are able to disregard what "others should give up."

Quote

I'd give up the mortgage interest deduction on my second home and the deduction of my state sales tax from my taxable income.

If you are really willing to give those up even if others do not, you are welcome to make voluntary donations to your government anytime, but I'm guessing that you'll only agree to that if your political will is forced upon other taxpayers.

Would I be correct then in believing that your generosity is conditional on "what others should give up?" I don't have a problem with that. But if so, then how are you any different than those "selfish" folks who want their government to reduce spending before they agree that it can confiscate more of their assets?

Quote

either side of this debate includes something along the lines of "my side can't/shouldn't give up X" but "the other side can/should give up y".

How then is your "side of this debate" any different?

BTW, Your proposals to increase tax revenue seem reasonable enough to me, but I dont' think they'll make much of a dent in our defecit unless we reduce spending.

[captain_stan 0]

Quote

Funny how the older generation is so big on personal responsibility, until it comes time to own up to their own actions.

Lighten-up Doug. You make a good point in broad terms, but your rhetoric sounds bigoted. Just because candidates preach the evils of cutting senior benefits doesn't mean that they truly represent us. Polilticans who want the senior vote will promise the continuation of entitlements whether we approve or not.

With two years remaining before I can draw SS benefits, a lifetime of making payroll contributions, and a long voting record as a fiscal conservative, I'd still vote for a candidate who promised to slash this and other programs. Hey--now I'm back on-topic with the OP!

I'll let other seniors speak for themselves. Any of you wanna throw-down here?

[Channman 2]

Quote

So you have no actual rebuttal to the article. OK.

plenty of rebuttal in the comments listed below the artical.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

I do see people questioning their willingness to give up additional taxes when spending is out of control

What the Donkeys and Elephants should be doing is bring in a balanced budget with spending cuts (this includes military spending). Once this is done, then they can begin addressing America's debt with some additional tax reform. But until the spending issues are addressed, nothing will change.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

But until the spending issues are addressed, nothing will change.

Nor will anything change while the adults in the GOP are scared of the Tea Party throwing a tantrum.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

So you have no actual rebuttal to the article. OK.

plenty of rebuttal in the comments listed below the artical.

Rhetoric and hot air, maybe, but no factual rebuttal.

The argument that a return to pre-GWB tax rates will be a disaster is simply bogus and unsupported by fact.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

What the Donkeys and Elephants should be doing is bring in a balanced budget with spending cuts (this includes military spending). Once this is done, then they can begin addressing America's debt with some additional tax reform. But until the spending issues are addressed, nothing will change.

Funny how a Canadian has to point out the obvious to you guys.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Too bad the children here have not lived thru history of the last 60 years...IT'S MY MONEY AND I WANT IT ALL.

“Taxes are what we pay for a civilized society.” Oliver Wendel Holmes

I don't see any one in here claiming that they shouldn't pay taxes and that they should keep all of their money. That is a false argument, nice try though.

I do see people questioning their willingness to give up additional taxes when spending is out of control, they didn't elect the last 40 years of retards, and a large percentage of the population vocal about tax increases don't even pay federal income tax!!!

Funny how the older generation is so big on personal responsibility, until it comes time to own up to their own actions.

You are paying taxes at the lowest rate of damn near any place in the world.. and are paying at the lowest rates since 1950... and still te conservatards.... want to cut more taxes but I bet they still want all the services they so dearly love, yet the same conservatards... bitch and bitch and BITCH and smolder if anyone dains to tell them that an increase in revenue is needed if the debt will be paid off anytime before the end of this century. It has been shown over and over that the tax structure as it was before the CONSERVATARD in CHIEF took officein Jan 2001 and devastated our economy was on the road to paying down that debt until he and his conservatard needledicks felt they needed to try to swing them around and start 2 wars off the books.. and then to make sure the country tanked.. they cut taxes in some brain damaged orgy of making themselves feel better that those of you on the far right are still trumpeting as great policy.

[DougH 270]

Quote

Rhetoric and hot air, maybe, but no factual rebuttal.

The argument that a return to pre-GWB tax rates will be a disaster is simply bogus and unsupported by fact.

I won't make that argument.

I will make the argument that a return to pre-GWB tax rates will do fuck all to fix the deficit without serious reform to medicare and social security.

The biggest component to our problem is medicare and social security. The democrats are strongly opposed to any meaningful changes to either of these programs, so are some republicans too,

Why? Votes. Getting votes is more important that stopping the runaway train.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[DougH 270]

I really can't reply to your message sweetie pie, I can't even really read it. The fact that you can't get your point across without constantly swearing, using far from clever rewording, and heaping on the dick lingo is far to distracting.

CONSERVETARDS.... TRICCCCCCKKKLLEEEEEE.... RePUBIClicans..... ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

You have some spittle in the corner of your mouth again.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[dks13827 3]

I know.. I will send more tax money ( and I have taken a 50 percent pay cut after losing my computer job ) so the gov. workers can get a pay raise, which IS what happened in Phoenix !!
Makes sense to me.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

I really can't reply to your message sweetie pie, I can't even really read it. The fact that you can't get your point across without constantly swearing, using far from clever rewording, and heaping on the dick lingo is far to distracting.

CONSERVETARDS.... TRICCCCCCKKKLLEEEEEE.... RePUBIClicans..... ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

You have some spittle in the corner of your mouth again.

It seems to me that you guys have your heads buried in spittle since you wish to use that terminology..

You fuckers are in some serious denial in what you consider to be fiscal responsibility and are completely and utterly blind to the fact YOU have been the reason we are where we are with your version of what George HW Bush called VOO DOO economics. But go ahead and keep the denials going.. while handing over all that interest for the rest of your lives like good little sheep and keep hoping for your TRICKLE from those who keep fooling you ALL of the time.. for 30 fucking years now.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Rhetoric and hot air, maybe, but no factual rebuttal.

The argument that a return to pre-GWB tax rates will be a disaster is simply bogus and unsupported by fact.

I won't make that argument.

I will make the argument that a return to pre-GWB tax rates will do fuck all to fix the deficit without serious reform to medicare and social security.

The biggest component to our problem is medicare and social security. The democrats are strongly opposed to any meaningful changes to either of these programs, so are some republicans too,

Why? Votes. Getting votes is more important that stopping the runaway train.

One could argue that SS is a separate program supported by a completely separate payroll tax.

It does need to be overhauled and any surpluses used to rebuild the trust fund- not spent out of the general fund like the last 30 years.

I'd start someplace other than SS for overall government spending cutbacks.

WHAT.. are you carzy??????

We cant have any clear headed thinking in here.

SOCIAL Programs BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD

WAR or rumours of WAR GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD

[TrophyHusband 0]

Quote

It seems to me that every argument on either side of this debate includes something along the lines of "my side can't/shouldn't give up X" but "the other side can/should give up y". Democrats insist the rich be taxed more, Republicans insist the poor get less welfare.

Let's try something different for a change. Without regard to what you think others should give up, would benefit do you currently enjoy that you'd be willing to sacrifice to help balance the budget.

For starters, I'd give up the mortgage interest deduction on my second home and the deduction of my state sales tax from my taxable income. I'd gladly forego Saturday mail delivery and I be willing to drive on roads maintained half as well as they currently are.

Blues,
Dave

I would be willing to give up mortgage interest deduction on a first home. (Full disclosure: we currently rent, but have spent 8 years making mortgage payments and plan to buy a home next time we move.) I would also give up Saturday mail delivery. I would also even give up all my social security I've paid in the past and end that program, OR I would be willing to keep paying into it, but them be means tested when I become eligible and just not receive it (or only get a portion depending on income) if I don't need it. There is also a current proposal to change military retirement so my wife and I may actually will have to decide if we're willing to give up some of what was promised to us or if we'll move on to the civilian world.

Now to stray a little from the parameters you gave. I'm willing to pay more taxes to pay off our debt IF spending is drastically cut. I look at it like this, let's say that one of my kids gets runs up a bunch of credit card debt and is on the brink of financial disaster. If he refuses to cancel his cable, get rid of his cell phone data plan, trade in his car for something with a much smaller payment, move into a cheaper apartment, and stop hitting the bars 4 nights a week, he's only going to get free advice (and he can come over for dinner whenever he wants, he is my son after all). If on the other hand he truly sees the error of his ways and makes deep cuts to his spending, I'll certainly help him dig out of his fiscal hole.

Another thing I would be willing to do is pay more state taxes in return for the federal government stepping out of things. Roads and education being two things I've wanted the feds to leave to the states for a long time. I don't like my money going to the feds to then be allocated back to the states.

I would also give up quite a number of our overseas military bases, but that is for another thread.

"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

[DougH 270]

Quote

One could argue that SS is a separate program supported by a completely separate payroll tax.

One could claim that, but one would be wrong.

If there were actually 40 years of contributions sitting out in some account some where, plus accrued interest then I would agree.

The reality is that all the past contributions have been spent on general government expenditures. The account is balance is zero and there isn't enough current contributions to fund the expected future benefits.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[DougH 270]

Quote

It seems to me that you guys have your heads buried in spittle since you wish to use that terminology..

You fuckers are in some serious denial in what you consider to be fiscal responsibility and are completely and utterly blind to the fact YOU have been the reason we are where we are with your version of what George HW Bush called VOO DOO economics. But go ahead and keep the denials going.. while handing over all that interest for the rest of your lives like good little sheep and keep hoping for your TRICKLE from those who keep fooling you ALL of the time.. for 30 fucking years now.

I still can't get past the whole middle school lunch table nonsense to get at what you are saying.

TRICCCCCCKLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLE TRICKLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLE. ARGGGGGGGGGH FUCK SHIT KOCK BROTHER reeeeePUBLICcaaaaans. ARGHHHHHHHHH DRIP DRIP.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

What the Donkeys and Elephants should be doing is bring in a balanced budget with spending cuts (this includes military spending). Once this is done, then they can begin addressing America's debt with some additional tax reform. But until the spending issues are addressed, nothing will change.

Funny how a Canadian has to point out the obvious to you guys.

Except it's not particularly funny or obvious. When a family takes a realistic look at their finances and realize they just don't work, two things happen simultaneously...they look for where they can reduce or eliminate expenses and they consider asking for a raise or taking a second job. If the husband told his wife, "Yes, I could do tandems at the DZ on weekends for some extra cash, but I won't till you prove you can cut the grocery bill in half", he'd probably find himself sleeping in the dog house, and rightfully so.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

It seems to me that you guys have your heads buried in spittle since you wish to use that terminology..

You fuckers are in some serious denial in what you consider to be fiscal responsibility and are completely and utterly blind to the fact YOU have been the reason we are where we are with your version of what George HW Bush called VOO DOO economics. But go ahead and keep the denials going.. while handing over all that interest for the rest of your lives like good little sheep and keep hoping for your TRICKLE from those who keep fooling you ALL of the time.. for 30 fucking years now.

I still can't get past the whole middle school lunch table nonsense to get at what you are saying.

TRICCCCCCKLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLE TRICKLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLE. ARGGGGGGGGGH FUCK SHIT KOCK BROTHER reeeeePUBLICcaaaaans. ARGHHHHHHHHH DRIP DRIP.

Isee I have made an impression.. GOOD.. you fuckers ran this into the ground... please OWN your fucking mistakes

[DougH 270]

Isn't that little analogy nicely tailored to your argument. I won't get a job until you cut out the food that we need.

A better analogy to the current situation is that wife keeps buying shoes and maxing out her credit cards, and the husband keeps buying car parts that they dont NEED. They had set up a savings account to cover known future expenses, hello social security, but instead it was spent on eating out three times a week at crappy chain resturants.

Now the roof has a leak but they already spent all of their home equity line. So now they want their teenage kids to work two jobs each to pay for their great financial planning.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

Without regard to what you think others should give up,

I'm not convinced that you are able to disregard what "others should give up."

Quote

I'd give up the mortgage interest deduction on my second home and the deduction of my state sales tax from my taxable income.

If you are really willing to give those up even if others do not, you are welcome to make voluntary donations to your government anytime, but I'm guessing that you'll only agree to that if your political will is forced upon other taxpayers.

Would I be correct then in believing that your generosity is conditional on "what others should give up?" I don't have a problem with that. But if so, then how are you any different than those "selfish" folks who want their government to reduce spending before they agree that it can confiscate more of their assets?

Quote

either side of this debate includes something along the lines of "my side can't/shouldn't give up X" but "the other side can/should give up y".

How then is your "side of this debate" any different?

BTW, Your proposals to increase tax revenue seem reasonable enough to me, but I dont' think they'll make much of a dent in our defecit unless we reduce spending.

The point of this thread is to change the tone of the conversation from what we think others should give up to what we'd be willing to give up. Instead of "go get that from so & so", it's "I suppose I could live without X". If we identify a common X, then maybe our perspective evolves from one of what *I* can give up to what *we* can give up. And yes, some sort of equality is assumed, we're only human. So far several people have mentioned giving up social security paid in so far and any promise of future disbursements, albeit on the contingency that no more is taken from us. Several people have also mentioned a willingness to sacrifice the mortgage interest tax deduction...whether it's secondary or primary, phased or immediate are details to be worked out, but it seems several of us are willing to consider it as part of the package of repairs.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[livendive 8]

Quote

Isn't that little analogy nicely tailored to your argument. I won't get a job until you cut out the food that we need.

A better analogy to the current situation is that wife keeps buying shoes and maxing out her credit cards, and the husband keeps buying car parts that they dont NEED. They had set up a savings account to cover known future expenses, hello social security, but instead it was spent on eating out three times a week at crappy chain resturants.

Now the roof has a leak but they already spent all of their home equity line. So now they want their teenage kids to work two jobs each to pay for their great financial planning.

So in your example, should the husband doing tandems at the DZ on the weekends be part of the appropriate solution? Or should he wait for the car parts/shoes/credit car bills/roof repairs to be stricken from the budget before he consider such a drastic move?

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[DougH 270]

In my analogy it was the teenage kids that have to shoulder the burden of their dumb ass parents.

I tried to keep the analogy mixed between female and male stupidity.

If we switched back to your analogy, where the wife was driving the families finances off the cliff, I think the husband should get the second job, but only after asking the wife to get with the program. If the wife doesn't get with the program he should get a lawyer.

You don't really have that option as a taxpayer who intends to stay in the country do you?

Now we can see how silly equating a family to the federal government is.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

you fuckers ran this into the ground... please OWN your fucking mistakes

If this gets me banned, fine ban me.

You are a fucking idiot to think only the Elephants are responsible for the mess the US is in. The Donkeys and the Elephants have both created this mess. To blame only one side just goes to show the world what a partisan moron that you really are. For crying out loud you have admitted that you have a maid and yet you still whine about how much money other people have? I can not afford a maid, but I could give a rats ass how much money someone else has. Whoever told you life would be easy was clearly lying to you.

Now if you will excuse me, I will send myself off to the dizzy.com penalty box and wait to see if I only have a game misconduct for this post or if a suspension is in order. I do have better things to do with my time than argue with some partisan medusa.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[livendive 8]

Quote

In my analogy it was the teenage kids that have to shoulder the burden of their dumb ass parents.

I agree, that is analagous to our current situation. However that doesn't make it a good situation. I'm asking about fixes, especially with regard to making more money and spending less. I believe both are appropriate steps, and neither should be held as ransom while waiting for the other.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[DougH 270]

I dont disagree entirely, but that is only true if a true solution is at hand.

If your extra effort is all for nothing, and the real problems aren't going to be fixed, then you should fight the extra effort at all costs because you won't reap any benefit from it.

The kids should do everything possible to leave instead of busting their ass if mom and dad can't get their shit together.

If you don't fix the real problem with social security and medicare I will resist and resent any tax increase because in the end we will still be in the same mess.

I would take a 15 to 20% increase in my Federal taxes if it part of a meaningful plan that left us solvent in the near future. I would give up any claim to social security or medicare even.

But my tax increase will not be paired with medicare or social security reform. It will be matched up with BS accounting tricks, cutting around the edges, and other nonsense.

You want me to really sacrifice, come back and see me when the sacrifice is shared.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P