Tea Party 4-18-11 Topic

mykids_31206
Posts: 219 (0)
Hall of Famer
95 60
Prospect
Posted by nickbracco on 8/7/2010 9:31:00 AM (view original):
Cut the defense budget in half and you will blow the deficit in no time. Problem solved.
Quit trying to police the world and protect our citizens from honor killings, gang violence, and the drug trade. Much less expensive.
8/7/2010 10:47 AM
antonsirius
Posts: 2567 (0)
Hall of Famer
167 135 9 20
Prospect
Posted by mykids_31206 on 8/7/2010 10:44:00 AM (view original):

Tax revenue has risen on cutting taxes in the past. However, spending increased as revenue increased. If they cut taxes and it doesnt sitmulate the economy at least the bigger problem will have been addressed. Focus on cutting spending, then focus on reducing the deficit.

Tax cuts can be an effective stimulus under the right conditions. We're about as far from the right conditions as is possible.

You also just acknowledged that you want to cut spending for reasons other than reducing the deficit. Are you a Norquist "drown government in a bathtub" person?
8/7/2010 11:10 AM
antonsirius
Posts: 2567 (0)
Hall of Famer
167 135 9 20
Prospect
Posted by mykids_31206 on 8/7/2010 10:47:00 AM:
Quit trying to police the world and protect our citizens from honor killings, gang violence, and the drug trade. Much less expensive.

Cripple the drug trade through legalization, and then tax the newly legal drugs.
8/7/2010 11:13 AM
creilmann
Posts: 582 (0)
Hall of Famer
134 4
Prospect
Posted by swamphawk22 on 8/6/2010 1:50:00 PM (view original):
Posted by creilmann on 8/6/2010 10:06:00 AM (view original):
The tax cuts decresed the deficit so that was never an issue. 

According to whose numbers?
It has been proven that the federal revenue increased after the Bush tax cuts. It wasnt lower taxes that increased the debt, but increased spending.
The Bush Economic Team disagrees with you... 
The Council of Economic Advisers' Report to the President, 2003: "Although the economy grows in response to tax reductions (because of higher consumption in the short run and improved incentives in the long run), it is unlikely to grow so much that lost tax revenue is completely recovered by the higher level of economic activity."

The chair of CEA from 2003-2005, Greg Mankiw: "Some supply-siders like to claim that the distortionary effect of taxes is so large that increasing tax rates reduces tax revenue. Like most economists, I don't find that conclusion credible for most tax hikes, and I doubt Mr. Paulson does either."

Hank Paulson, Bush's last Treasury Secretary: "As a general rule, I don't believe that tax cuts pay for themselves."

Andrew Samwick, Chief Economist on Council of Economic Advisers, 2003-2004: "No thoughtful person believes that this possible offset [the Bush tax cuts] more than compensated for the first effect for these tax cuts. Not a single one."...

Edward Lazear, chair of the Council of Economic Advisers in 2007: "I certainly would not claim that tax cuts pay for themselves."
8/7/2010 11:17 AM
wrmiller13
Posts: 260 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 86
Prospect
Posted by nickbracco on 8/7/2010 9:31:00 AM (view original):
Cut the defense budget in half and you will blow the deficit in no time. Problem solved.
You could also stop paying / incentivizing people to not work, and therefore not pay taxes.

Cutting the defense budget (or any part of the federal budget) by that much will make it worse.  Think of how many people would be added to the roles of the unemployed.  Has to be a gradual realease of funds, or the impact would be drastic.
8/7/2010 12:06 PM
creilmann
Posts: 582 (0)
Hall of Famer
134 4
Prospect
Posted by wrmiller13 on 8/7/2010 12:06:00 PM (view original):
Posted by nickbracco on 8/7/2010 9:31:00 AM (view original):
Cut the defense budget in half and you will blow the deficit in no time. Problem solved.
You could also stop paying / incentivizing people to not work, and therefore not pay taxes.

Cutting the defense budget (or any part of the federal budget) by that much will make it worse.  Think of how many people would be added to the roles of the unemployed.  Has to be a gradual realease of funds, or the impact would be drastic.
What incentives to not work?  Unemployment benefits?  
8/7/2010 12:07 PM
wrmiller13
Posts: 260 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 86
Prospect
Yes - when unemployment benefits are taken to an extreme - there are jobs availabale, but too many people (my brother included) do not see the value in getting just any job to pay the bills, while he can collect nearly as much money from unemployment, and search for the "right job".

Edit - not too mention all of the "assistance" that pours into poor inner city neighborhoods.  From my anecdotal experience (talking to students, and observing people in the 'hood), this assistance does very little to help people do more than barely survive at a very low level.
8/7/2010 12:18 PM
antonsirius
Posts: 2567 (0)
Hall of Famer
167 135 9 20
Prospect
What's your brother's profession? What's that "right job" he's looking for?
8/7/2010 12:26 PM
wrmiller13
Posts: 260 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 86
Prospect
Oddly enough - my brother is a non-college educated person in "general labor".  There are lots of ads in the paper every weekend for him to go after, but his rationale is that the pay for those jobs is not that much more than what he is getting for unemployment, so why bother.

I have had several friends in other industries (technology or other specialties) who were the same way.

I understand that it may not be the most desirable or highest paying or what you are specifically trained for, but at some point, you just need to "get a job".

8/7/2010 12:36 PM
antonsirius
Posts: 2567 (0)
Hall of Famer
167 135 9 20
Prospect
Well, yeah, if that's his mind set then he's the worst case example for unemployment benefits.

I'm pretty sure he's the exception and not the rule though.
8/7/2010 1:05 PM
rcrusso
Posts: 3497 (0)
All Star
38 2
Veteran
I keep hearing about all the jobs that people on unemployment do not apply for because the government pays more! If this were true then there would be a number of unfilled jobs that would be included in the numbers released by the govt. Yet such numbers do not exist. This is a myth spread by the cons that they can not prove nor are they willing to try.
8/7/2010 2:10 PM
rcrusso
Posts: 3497 (0)
All Star
38 2
Veteran
Oh, those must be the jobs that the illegal aliens are "steeling"!
8/7/2010 2:12 PM
wrmiller13
Posts: 260 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 86
Prospect
Posted by rcrusso on 8/7/2010 2:10:00 PM (view original):
I keep hearing about all the jobs that people on unemployment do not apply for because the government pays more! If this were true then there would be a number of unfilled jobs that would be included in the numbers released by the govt. Yet such numbers do not exist. This is a myth spread by the cons that they can not prove nor are they willing to try.
Never said the government pays "more" - you are selectively reading like you accuse swamp of.

What I said was that the government unemployment was not that far below what he could be making at an actual job.

And why would you bring in the immigration angle - never brought that up.
8/7/2010 2:52 PM
rcrusso
Posts: 3497 (0)
All Star
38 2
Veteran
Where are those jobs? Why would there not be a quoted number that represented jobs available but not filled? It would certainly be a counter balance to the number unemployed quoted every month. You would think the administration would be more then willing to quote something that would take part of the sting out. Again, the right quotes this crap and you people just swallow it hook line and sinker.
8/7/2010 3:00 PM
wrmiller13
Posts: 260 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 86
Prospect
Who said that "the right" had reported this?  I said that it was from anecdotal evidence - speaking with my brother and other friends who have told these things.

You have a serious issue with anything that seems to be counter to your specific world view. 
8/7/2010 3:02 PM
◂ Prev 1...50|51|52|53|54...133 Next ▸
Tea Party 4-18-11 Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2025 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.