What happened?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KPM

I agree junk spending should be stopped-but not all on that list is junk...IE 2 Billion to farmers not to grow crops in certain years...on surface sounds stupid....but ask the farmers, agricultural experts and economists why and they will tell you that some years the soil must be allowed to rest, regenerate and become fertile again, that in years of "bumper crops" certain grains "corn" for instance is so abundant that the silos on farms and the storage silos they rent for those bumper years become absolutely stuffed-to the point of grain just sitting open-thus the price for corn goes way way down and those farmers must plant less for the coming year and they take a huge beating in the year of the bumper crop, food manufacturers stock up on the bargain corn and need less the next year IE a farmer who works to get the best crop possible and succeeds ends up being penalized for succees........the payments to farmers are not a winfall-they are to protect the American Farmer so this country has adequate food at some measure of fair pricing....American Farmers are a necessity of our country and they are dwendling in number-someone has to grow the food, someone has to harvest those crops and they are essential to our way of life. The plan has worked for 80 years. Under Reagan in the mid 80s dairy farmers had so much milk that they were dumping it onto the ground because they could not store it and prices fell through the floor. Reagan with Democratic Speaker O'Neals help got legislation to buy that milk, had in turned into 5 pound blocks of cheese, cottage cheese, etc and it was then given to the poor thru places like the Salvation Army also rice, flour and cornmeal were distributed...it helped save many smaller dairy farms and it kept prices more stable.
So yes it sounds stupid-but when you look beyond the initial thought-it makes sense-not all programs that seem to be stupid are but I agree they should be reviewed and those that are truly stupid should go.
As far as PBS-the money they make from selling things goes into their budget, the pledge drive also raises money that goes into their budget.....the premise that we have more available things for kids to watch is true-but the bulk are not educational, in fact they are not fit for children PBS has long and hard been a very upscale network that wants to educate not just kids but everyone. I would say that I might go for taxpayer dollars only going toward the childrens educational programming and none for adult content...that is a compromise...PBS does not have to payback the money allocated to them, that has never been a part of the process that sends them the money...it is a cultural expense... if a society has no respect for it culture it becomes a static bland society. Thats why we have supported museums for art and history, thats why we have parks and great libraries.
This country is a great place- and one of the reasons is our support of culture.


Well when 98% of the country makes "below 250 thousand" and only 2% make above that threshold-the "so called rich" are in fact the rich.
The richest upper 1% are in a stratosphere all their own.When you go by percentage of income and add all taxes into the mix (not just Federal income tax) the lower 98% pay a higher total tax rate by far as has been pointed out time and time again.....most recently by Warren Buffet one of the many billionaires who are willing to pay the higher rate.
Reagan did cut Federal Income Taxes as promised....but virtually every other tax during his years went up, state income, SS, Medicare, gas tax, sales taxes local property taxes, user fees, etc........WHY? Because the cuts to states and local government hurt and put a bind on their budgets so they could not roll back the years of inflation to 1946 and they had to raise their respective rates, fees, etc........

---

Oh where do I begin….The Buffett story drives me crazy in several ways. In a speech that Obama gave during the campaign. He said something to the effect, Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary, how is that fair. Well that was a complete lie. Buffett pays the exact same tax rate that his secretary pays on the same earned income and exact same tax rate on her capital gains as Buffett. Obama didn’t say a lower income tax rate, he just said tax rate. He mainly pays capital gains tax, where she is paying income taxes. Capital gains (investments) tax is 15% for everyone. The income tax rate ranges from 15% to 38%. They would both pay the same rate on taxable earned income.

Obama is really saying he would like to see millionaires pay more than 30% capital gains tax rate. This would drive our wealth overseas. The fact is that millionaires DO NOT pay a lower effective tax rate than the middle class. According to the Tax Foundation the average effective tax rate of American taxpayers is 11%. Millionaires pay about 25%.

Here is something that is never talked about….For these guys like Buffett, movie stars and other millionaires that want to say the “rich” need to pay more. THEY ALREADY CAN. It’s called Gifts to the United States. They don’t need the permission of the government to do so. But do they do it, NO. They don’t really want to they just want to be on tv and talk about “fair”.

How do I make a contribution to the U.S. government?

Citizens who wish to make a general donation to the U.S. government may send contributions to a specific account called “Gifts to the United States.” This account was established in 1843 to accept gifts, such as bequests, from individuals wishing to express their patriotism to the United States. Money deposited into this account is for general use by the federal government and can be available for budget needs. These contributions are considered an unconditional gift to the government. Financial gifts can be made by check or money order payable to the United States Treasury and mailed to the address below.

Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Credit Accounting Branch
3700 East-West Highway, Room 622D
Hyattsville, MD 20782

The CBO (Congressional Budget Office) shows that the Buffett Rule is already in effect. The highest earners pay more than double the amount of taxes as a share of their income than middle income earners. The top 1 percent of earners currently pays 29.5 percent of their income in all federal taxes while middle income families pay 14.3 percent.

I will say there are many parts of this country you can go to and ask if you make more than $250K a year as an individual or as a family, are you rich? I bet they would say no. They would probably say we do ok. I’m not near that bracket and I don’t consider that rich, I consider it a nice living. My personal guess is anything above $500K is probably getting to the rich side. I don’t live in California or New York but I bet those people who make just above $200K don’t consider themselves rich, its expensive in those areas.

The PBS stuff (briefly, I have to work)….They make over a billion dollars a year of selling their junk. They would be able to sell kids commercials for spots to pay more money into their budget. That is right it is their budget that they are added to their account. That’s why there is no need to pay these guys $400 million a year. They can do it all on their own. That’s like giving a car manufacture over a billion dollars that can survive on their own….oh yeah we did do that.

I will end this by asking you, what is the amount of tax the “rich” should pay? What is “fair”? Is it 50% or more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by King Of The Whole World

Oh where do I begin….The Buffett story drives me crazy in several ways. In a speech that Obama gave during the campaign. He said something to the effect, Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary, how is that fair. Well that was a complete lie. Buffett pays the exact same tax rate that his secretary pays on the same earned income and exact same tax rate on her capital gains as Buffett. Obama didn’t say a lower income tax rate, he just said tax rate. He mainly pays capital gains tax, where she is paying income taxes. Capital gains (investments) tax is 15% for everyone. The income tax rate ranges from 15% to 38%. They would both pay the same rate on taxable earned income.Obama is really saying he would like to see millionaires pay more than 30% capital gains tax rate. This would drive our wealth overseas. The fact is that millionaires DO NOT pay a lower effective tax rate than the middle class. According to the Tax Foundation the average effective tax rate of American taxpayers is 11%. Millionaires pay about 25%.

Here is something that is never talked about….For these guys like Buffett, movie stars and other millionaires that want to say the “rich” need to pay more. THEY ALREADY CAN. It’s called Gifts to the United States. They don’t need the permission of the government to do so. But do they do it, NO. They don’t really want to they just want to be on tv and talk about “fair”.

How do I make a contribution to the U.S. government?

Citizens who wish to make a general donation to the U.S. government may send contributions to a specific account called “Gifts to the United States.” This account was established in 1843 to accept gifts, such as bequests, from individuals wishing to express their patriotism to the United States. Money deposited into this account is for general use by the federal government and can be available for budget needs. These contributions are considered an unconditional gift to the government. Financial gifts can be made by check or money order payable to the United States Treasury and mailed to the address below.

Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Credit Accounting Branch
3700 East-West Highway, Room 622D
Hyattsville, MD 20782

The CBO (Congressional Budget Office) shows that the Buffett Rule is already in effect. The highest earners pay more than double the amount of taxes as a share of their income than middle income earners. The top 1 percent of earners currently pays 29.5 percent of their income in all federal taxes while middle income families pay 14.3 percent.

I will say there are many parts of this country you can go to and ask if you make more than $250K a year as an individual or as a family, are you rich? I bet they would say no. They would probably say we do ok. I’m not near that bracket and I don’t consider that rich, I consider it a nice living. My personal guess is anything above $500K is probably getting to the rich side. I don’t live in California or New York but I bet those people who make just above $200K don’t consider themselves rich, its expensive in those areas.

The PBS stuff (briefly, I have to work)….They make over a billion dollars a year of selling their junk. They would be able to sell kids commercials for spots to pay more money into their budget. That is right it is their budget that they are added to their account. That’s why there is no need to pay these guys $400 million a year. They can do it all on their own. That’s like giving a car manufacture over a billion dollars that can survive on their own….oh yeah we did do that.

I will end this by asking you, what is the amount of tax the “rich” should pay? What is “fair”? Is it 50% or more.

---

My friend where have you been during those last 8 years of Repub rule-the wealth has steadily gone overseas or into Swiss accounts or tax shelters in other areas....during the lowered tax rates, during the deregulation that Repubs always demand as essential to competition.
With a Repub President and Congress for 6 full years-it still headed out of the country.
In my argument I am pointing out the percentage of "total taxation" that hits an American family.
The 15% to 38% that you speak of -is for Federal Income Tax only-not for state, SS, Medicare, sales tax for food, drugs, cars, household items everyday living expenses.......how can you not see how much more of a percentage of income goes for taxes compared to someone in the wealthier bracket....and morally.... when a family of four pays all the payroll taxes, property taxes and everyday living taxes for services and products they need to survive there is no comparison in who is better off, who still has little worry about eating, drug and medical care, home prices, rent prices etc....the upper class may have worries but not about common everyday living expenses.
Speaking of brackets and since this is an Elvis forum-Elvis himself had no qualms about paying his taxes-it is common knowledge he had the IRS help figure his taxes and said many times he had been blessed with so much that he wanted to pay whatever he owed.
The COl said when Elvis went into the service that he felt it was his patriotic duty to keep Elvis in the 90% tax bracket while he was serving his country.
For years there was a 90% bracket and people were not running out of the country to invest, nor putting their income in hidden tax shelters in droves......patriotism seems to have more of a meaning back then.
Now 90% is way to high for any taxation-50% is also too much. The rate under Clinton seemed to be fair for top wage earners it did not kill jobs as was "predicted by Repubs in 92" nor did raising the minimum wage during his terms ......jobs increased, income for all went up, deficit went down to nothing we started to pay down the National Debt.


PBS and its $400 million really bothers you guys doesnt it;) ITs funny yo call their toys, educational tools, videos "junk" not to children nor to the parents that buy them. Lets get down to the real truth about the the right hating PBS-it has become a poster child for the movement...it is a rallying point-a symbol:
"Boy if we could stop funding of PBS all else will fall into place"
Reagan bailed out Chrysler-if you let industries like our auto industry fail without some effort hundreds of thousand of jobs are gone(directly from the plants and indirectly from the ripple effect down the line) Reagan and his fellow Repubs knew this in the 80s and acted....as did Obama in 2009

Not only did jobs head overseas during the Bush years...he and the Republicans encouraged it and said it was good for our country this article and quotes from Bush are from 2004 before the election:
http://seattletimes.com/html/nationw...ushecon10.html
WASHINGTON — The movement of American factory jobs and white-collar work to other countries is part of a positive transformation that will enrich the U.S. economy over time, even if it causes short-term pain and dislocation, the Bush administration said yesterday. [B]The embrace of foreign "outsourcing," an accelerating trend that has contributed to U.S. job losses in recent years and has become an issue in the 2004 elections, is contained in the president's annual report to Congress on the U.S. economy. [/B]"Outsourcing is just a new way of doing international trade," said N. Gregory Mankiw, chairman of Bush's Council of Economic Advisors, which prepared the report. "More things are tradable than were tradable in the past. And that's a good thing."

The report, which predicts the nation will reverse a three-year employment slide by creating 2.6 million jobs in 2004, is part of an effort by the administration to highlight signs that the recovery is picking up speed. Bush's economic stewardship has become a central issue in the presidential campaign.

I now have a question for you-lets pretend you and I need to solve this problem of the Fiscal Cliff....I have already given an indication of what I would do-The Republican/Democratic bi-partisan committee Chaired by former Sen. Simpson and Democratic Advisor to President Clinton, Erskin Bowles came up with a long list of recommendations that would have helped with the SS/Medicare question and many more in all areas of our fiscal house...I think they are a good place to start.
I also have said to you a couple times...yes I agree funding of "true junk" needs to be cut, and overall trimming of government needs to be done (not with an ax but a scalpel) investments that help our economy in education and training are necessary...you pointed out that Romney in the debates said investment in education was needed-(although that came after the primary fights in which he talked of cutting education??)
So I have shown that I would gladly listen and compromise on SS/Medicare along the lines of the Simpson?Bowles proposals-which does raise the age to retire, does reform Medicare and does give them solvency after decades of raiding the fund by both parties. I also think a flat tax system might be fairer to everyone.
So what are your areas of compromise?
What do you think is a fair rate for the upper 2% that have prospered with the lowered Bush rate of 35%in the last 12 years ... as compared to the 39 plus rate under Clinton?
Something has to give in this real life scenario that effects over 300 million people in the US.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KPM

My friend where have you been during those last 8 years of Repub rule-the wealth has steadily gone overseas or into Swiss accounts or tax shelters in other areas....during the lowered tax rates, during the deregulation that Repubs always demand as essential to competition.
With a Repub President and Congress for 6 full years-it still headed out of the country.
In my argument I am pointing out the percentage of "total taxation" that hits an American family.
The 15% to 38% that you speak of -is for Federal Income Tax only-not for state, SS, Medicare, sales tax for food, drugs, cars, household items everyday living expenses.......how can you not see how much more of a percentage of income goes for taxes compared to someone in the wealthier bracket....and morally.... when a family of four pays all the payroll taxes, property taxes and everyday living taxes for services and products they need to survive there is no comparison in who is better off, who still has little worry about eating, drug and medical care, home prices, rent prices etc....the upper class may have worries but not about common everyday living expenses.
Speaking of brackets and since this is an Elvis forum-Elvis himself had no qualms about paying his taxes-it is common knowledge he had the IRS help figure his taxes and said many times he had been blessed with so much that he wanted to pay whatever he owed.
The COl said when Elvis went into the service that he felt it was his patriotic duty to keep Elvis in the 90% tax bracket while he was serving his country.
For years there was a 90% bracket and people were not running out of the country to invest, nor putting their income in hidden tax shelters in droves......patriotism seems to have more of a meaning back then.
Now 90% is way to high for any taxation-50% is also too much. The rate under Clinton seemed to be fair for top wage earners it did not kill jobs as was "predicted by Repubs in 92" nor did raising the minimum wage during his terms ......jobs increased, income for all went up, deficit went down to nothing we started to pay down the National Debt.


PBS and its $400 million really bothers you guys doesnt it;) ITs funny yo call their toys, educational tools, videos "junk" not to children nor to the parents that buy them. Lets get down to the real truth about the the right hating PBS-it has become a poster child for the movement...it is a rallying point-a symbol:
"Boy if we could stop funding of PBS all else will fall into place"
Reagan bailed out Chrysler-if you let industries like our auto industry fail without some effort hundreds of thousand of jobs are gone(directly from the plants and indirectly from the ripple effect down the line) Reagan and his fellow Repubs knew this in the 80s and acted....as did Obama in 2009

---

I think democrats really have issues with rich people. People seem to despise them in how they make their money and how much money they have. The rich of course are better off but why should they be punished in being successful. They may not have to worry about things as much as a middle income America but they still pay for all of those things you mentioned. So why should they be punished? That is the land of the USA its has milk and honey out there for anybody to work for. Why should rich people be forced to purchase Healthcare. A lot of rich people don’t have healthcare because they know they can afford medical care without insurance. They are being taxed to buy government healthcare.

This is a true story, if you don’t mind me going off the trail. My dad knows a guy that has a 14 year old son. He went to his dad one day and said why dont you like Obama. He said because he wants to “share the wealth”. His son says what’s wrong with that. His dad tells his son for the whole summer I want you to go out and cut the neighbor’s lawns for money. His son says ok. He does for the 3 months he cuts the lawns and makes some money. His dad says great job and tells him you remember you were asking why I don’t like Obama. His dad said here is what Obama wants to do. I’m going to take half of your money you worked for and give it to the other neighborhood kids that didn’t work. His son says that’s not fair. True story. Side note, his dad did not give the other kids his money but he made his point.

I pointed out that any person can make a donation to the United States of America but do they, no. These Warren Buffetts and celebrities that want to get on tv and talk about they are willing to pay more taxes. Well do it!!! As I said they don’t need anyone’s permission. As I also pointed out we have currently what is called the Buffett Rule and it has not worked either.

This is from the Cato Institute…

But the Congressional Budget Office shows that Buffett Rule is already in effect. The highest earners pay more than double the amount of taxes as a share of their income than middle income earners. The top 1 percent of earners currently pays 29.5 percent of their income in all federal taxes while middle income families pay 14.3 percent.

Upper-income taxpayers have paid a growing share of the federal tax burden over the last 25 years.

A 2008 study by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, for example, found that the highest-earning 10% of the U.S. population paid the largest share among 24 countries examined, even after adjusting for their relatively higher incomes. “Taxation is most progressively distributed in the United States,” the OECD study concluded.

Meanwhile, the percentage of U.S. households paying no federal income tax has been climbing, and reached 51% for 2009, according to a new analysis by the Joint Committee on Taxation.


You pointed out Elvis about taxes. Yes I know that he always said he would not write off donations on his taxes he felt like you shouldn’t get something in return. I think that is great. Yes, the Colonel did say about keeping Elvis in the 90% tax bracket. We all know why he said that, Colonel wanted his money. Now, I have loved Elvis all my life ever since I was old enough to walk and talk. But we all know Elvis was not the smartest when it came to his financial situation. He needed help in that area, you know and I know it.

PBS is just a small part in the whole picture of this nation. The reason why it is a big deal is we give them money when they are making money. So how can you say that is a good idea??? Just like GM, everyone knows we won’t see one dime in that money back. It gets old seeing money go out the door and people say oh we need more money, tax the rich and for what to spend more money. At some point there needs to be a huge decrease in spending. Get back to the basics of the role of government.

1. Military, Defense
2. Roads, highways
3. Schools

Those and a few more should be our goal. I heard the other day we spent a million dollars on a robotic squirrel to catch snakes….WHAT!

I just know at some point you can tax people enough, there will be a rebellion. I happen to think there will be one soon. We have to get the power out of the government and back into the people’s hands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KPM

I now have a question for you-lets pretend you and I need to solve this problem of the Fiscal Cliff....I have already given an indication of what I would do-The Republican/Democratic bi-partisan committee Chaired by former Sen. Simpson and Democratic Advisor to President Clinton, Erskin Bowles came up with a long list of recommendations that would have helped with the SS/Medicare question and many more in all areas of our fiscal house...I think they are a good place to start.
I also have said to you a couple times...yes I agree funding of "true junk" needs to be cut, and overall trimming of government needs to be done (not with an ax but a scalpel) investments that help our economy in education and training are necessary...you pointed out that Romney in the debates said investment in education was needed-(although that came after the primary fights in which he talked of cutting education??)
So I have shown that I would gladly listen and compromise on SS/Medicare along the lines of the Simpson?Bowles proposals-which does raise the age to retire, does reform Medicare and does give them solvency after decades of raiding the fund by both parties. I also think a flat tax system might be fairer to everyone.
So what are your areas of compromise?
What do you think is a fair rate for the upper 2% that have prospered with the lowered Bush rate of 35%in the last 12 years ... as compared to the 39 plus rate under Clinton?
Something has to give in this real life scenario that effects over 300 million people in the US.

---

Good question...Cut spending with a chainsaw, ax, knife whatever it takes. I like the fair tax with spending cut but will any of this happen, no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by King Of The Whole World

Good question...Cut spending with a chainsaw, ax, knife whatever it takes. I like the fair tax with spending cut but will any of this happen, no.

---

First off my friend, a chainsaw or ax-makes a mess-if you carve a roast with a chainsaw no one eats, it you try to use a chainsaw for anything other than cutting down trees-you are libel to kill someone....same with cutting a budget in the US....
.....if you just decide "WHAM" the elderly who need Meals On Wheels will have to do with out-someone does not eat as healthy, if you decide "Texas Chainsaw Style" that Home Health Care support is too big "WHAM" you may kill a Republican, Democratic, Independant loved one who needs that care (and that parttime care at home is much cheaper than throwing the old persons into cramped, cheap nursing facilities)
If you say children with disabilities do not need some extra schooling to help them become as fruitful citizens as they can be....and let me be clear on this I KNOW WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT....you end up with someone totally dependant on their parents, and after their parents death the government for the rest of their life a tab that will cost the taxpayers plenty over a 80 year life.
Finally If you cut too heavily, Chainsaw style, with no regard for the industries that are affected by those cuts-you kill jobs.
Why is the fiscal cliff so urgent to be addressed-because the 50% cuts in defense will kill hundreds of thousands of job-50% cuts to things like Medicare, Medicaid, will cripple the hospitals and heatlh clinics across the nation and thousands of jobs are lost....that is the Simpson/Bowles committee that both Repubs and Democrats authorized to come up with a plan...advocated a balanced approach that cuts spending in a prudent way, makes changes to Medicare and SS, and said new revenue must be a part of the plan because you can not just CUT your way to a better economy. The Simpson/Bowles committee was made up of an equal number of Repubs and Dems-who were no longer running for an election or planning to run IE they made choices that were not "political" for fear of losing a job.
There is an insurmountable legacy of America-it is called Morality. Cutting programs with a chainsaw is not the moral responsible thing to do.
If we do in fact cut that way....people are hurt severily-you are too young to recall that during the Reagan years the verified reports of elderly who were faced with high inflation, high energy costs, huge drug bill and low SS increases-who were buying pet foods and using them for meals.
I recall one lady who said she used tuna cat food for casseroles, beef flavored dog food for Hamburger Helper....and she said it saved her money.
Is that what we want to say the richest country in the world allows to happen?
Morality and a conscience for those less fortunate is a cornerstone of this nations history-or it used to be anyway.
Are we now going to say-"forget the obligations we have made to people who may not have become Rich.........but worked their whole lives, who contributed to society!"
Bottom 98% who fought the wars, whos mothers lost husbands, sons and yes daughters in those wars......in those bottom 98% are fireman, clerks, police, librarians, factory workers, trash collectors, postmen, plumbers, yardman, etc-none ever became rich-but they worked saved and planned with the rules that were legally legislated by Congress and for their taxes paid .....income, SS, Medicare etc.... they were given promise backed by every president and Congress to this point in time. They can not go back in time and save more or change the plans which included these promises....
Chainsaw cutting is not an option-its going to take-brains, compromise and ingenuity to "fairly solve this problem"

I suggest you visit this website-http://membership.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reports_porkbarrelreport
It is the CAGW-Citizens Against Gov. Waste, they document each years budget pork spending and even if you eliminate every single dollar-you would save on average less than 2% of the Federal Budget.
In 2009 CAGW documented out of the Budget 10,160 Pork Barrel projects that they have deemed wasteful unecessary pork.
The total for those 10, 160 pork projects was $19.6 Billion-out of nearly a 4 Trillion dollar budget.
I agree $19.6 billion in wasteful spending is way to much-but you must see that it will not be a drop in the bucket to our budget.
CAGW is active in exposing wasteful spending and it identifies every single project by the Senator or Representative who wanted it and by party (pork spending is equal opportunity in nature)

The richest indeed pay for food, drugs, healthcare etc...but once again the point is as a percentage of their income it does not even register on a scale-where as for middle class and poor-it can be life and death budgeting. Stories of people dying because they could not afford their AC on in the summer or full heat in the winter are common place, people choosing Medicine or food-also happens...does that not register as worthy of attention by our nation as a whole........PROMOTE the General Welfare- was not put into the Constitution as an afterthought...it has meaning and purpose for our country...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KPM

I now have a question for you-lets pretend you and I need to solve this problem of the Fiscal Cliff....I have already given an indication of what I would do-The Republican/Democratic bi-partisan committee Chaired by former Sen. Simpson and Democratic Advisor to President Clinton, Erskin Bowles came up with a long list of recommendations that would have helped with the SS/Medicare question and many more in all areas of our fiscal house...I think they are a good place to start.
I also have said to you a couple times...yes I agree funding of "true junk" needs to be cut, and overall trimming of government needs to be done (not with an ax but a scalpel) investments that help our economy in education and training are necessary...you pointed out that Romney in the debates said investment in education was needed-(although that came after the primary fights in which he talked of cutting education??)
So I have shown that I would gladly listen and compromise on SS/Medicare along the lines of the Simpson?Bowles proposals-which does raise the age to retire, does reform Medicare and does give them solvency after decades of raiding the fund by both parties. I also think a flat tax system might be fairer to everyone.
So what are your areas of compromise?
What do you think is a fair rate for the upper 2% that have prospered with the lowered Bush rate of 35%in the last 12 years ... as compared to the 39 plus rate under Clinton?
Something has to give in this real life scenario that effects over 300 million people in the US.

---

I should have answered your question completely but all of this stuff takes time defending my ideas and thoughts. I had to go earlier.

I do like some of the Simpson-Bowles plan. It does some things that I like to see happen. Cut some of the spending that has been adding up over the years, tax reform, healthcare cost control, mandatory savings and some social security type reforms. This plan is at least a way to dial-back the enormous growth in spending, entitlements and reduce tax rates would be better than what we are currently facing.

I do like some of these ideas these two have and anything right now would be better for me on the table instead of let’s just tax the rich. I don’t think Obama will do this, I do think he could make both sides a little more excited about the future if he did this plan or something very similar. I want to add again that I do agree with you on the fact that both sides have to come to a meeting of the minds.

I really do like the fair tax too. The idea of you take care of your family first and then pay the government around 23% over your month of basic expenses is a great plan to me. This is for everyone in every income bracket.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KPM

The richest indeed pay for food, drugs, healthcare etc...but once again the point is as a percentage of their income it does not even register on a scale-where as for middle class and poor-it can be life and death budgeting. Stories of people dying because they could not afford their AC on in the summer or full heat in the winter are common place, people choosing Medicine or food-also happens...does that not register as worthy of attention by our nation as a whole........PROMOTE the General Welfare- was not put into the Constitution as an afterthought...it has meaning and purpose for our country...

---

I don’t understand your point…We cannot afford to take care of everyone in this country nor is it our responsibility. I understand their might be a moral decision to try and help people but it’s just not in the budget to do such a thing. Our poor in this country is no where near the poor in the rest of the world. Those people would think our poor live like kings. I don’t have a problem trying to help people but sometimes people have to try and advance themselves any way they can.

If this is why you want to tax the rich to death, I have said several times studies show that you can tax the rich at 100% and it wouldn’t even last us a year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by King Of The Whole World

I don’t understand your point…We cannot afford to take care of everyone in this country nor is it our responsibility. I understand their might be a moral decision to try and help people but it’s just not in the budget to do such a thing. Our poor in this country is no where near the poor in the rest of the world. Those people would think our poor live like kings. I don’t have a problem trying to help people but sometimes people have to try and advance themselves any way they can.

If this is why you want to tax the rich to death, I have said several times studies show that you can tax the rich at 100% and it wouldn’t even last us a year.

---

My point is simple - in order to get everyone on board-regardless of how you or I feel about it-EVERYONE......is going to have to compromise on something.
2 major sticking points -How big the cuts!
-and about a 4% increase in the tax for the upper 2%!
In order to get everyone to give something..... these 2 points are going to have be compromised on.
THe public elderly, middle class, poor disabled are perfectly willing to take cuts to programs-but they are also standing by wide margins with Obama on the higher rate on the upper 2% in most every poll I have heard since the start of this year. Exit polling showed nothing newon this.
ANything short seems destined to failure and that is a catastrophe.
No one is saying we are going to take care of everyone-but their are people who can not afford huge severe cuts to programs that help them live day to day.
My mom just died, she lived on less than 900 hundred dollars a month-my brother and I helped her with another 100 a piece each month.
Her drug bill alone was over 200 a month after the Medicare drug payment and her rent was 450 a month. Her biggest fear-all summer long was what would happen to her if she lost the visiting nurse who came 3 times a week for a couple hours, also her electric bill was behind on budget billing and what if the winter got real cold and she got further behind......without the extra 200 bucks we gave her she would have had no money for normal everyday living items shampoo, Fixadent,.....millions of elderly are in this boat-many thru no fault of their own....
SHe got to where she would listen to the news because she would have breathing attacks. Well she doesnt worry anymore.
Balanced approach is what the Simpson Bowles plan is about-and it calls for those increases in upper tax revenue. Bipartisan, equal number of very qualified people who did reach a consensus on the plan it calls for cuts, it calls for increases in revenue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by King Of The Whole World

I should have answered your question completely but all of this stuff takes time defending my ideas and thoughts. I had to go earlier.

I do like some of the Simpson-Bowles plan. It does some things that I like to see happen. Cut some of the spending that has been adding up over the years, tax reform, healthcare cost control, mandatory savings and some social security type reforms. This plan is at least a way to dial-back the enormous growth in spending, entitlements and reduce tax rates would be better than what we are currently facing.

I do like some of these ideas these two have and anything right now would be better for me on the table instead of let’s just tax the rich. I don’t think Obama will do this, I do think he could make both sides a little more excited about the future if he did this plan or something very similar. I want to add again that I do agree with you on the fact that both sides have to come to a meeting of the minds.

I really do like the fair tax too. The idea of you take care of your family first and then pay the government around 23% over your month of basic expenses is a great plan to me. This is for everyone in every income bracket.

---

Obama has never said "taxing the rich" is the only thing the plan should have in it-he has said everyone is going to have to give something and cuts will happen, last summer before the Republicans slammed the doorl real progress on the debt ceiling Obams had nearly 3 trillion in cuts changes and yes added revenue on the table-and not every Democrat was happy with what he had on the table.....so Obama is not just saying
"We can tax the rich and that is all we can do"
I will give you my own prediction-if we keep pumching down the middle class by sending jobs to countries for 1 dollar a day wages-and the poor can not rise above the poverty....the upper 2% will live like kings but the bottom 98 will slowly become a third world nation right here in the US and that will not stand very long.
Sad

The first President Bush said he was a "compassinate conservative" and it showed at times.
I fear the words compassion, understanding, and compromise are no longer words Republicans understand...and it can only be to the detriment to what our country is suppose to mean.
I am willing to see everything in some way or another involved in the deal and my wife and I only have 7 years till we plan to retire-but it also must include at a return to the 39% rate under Clinton or something close.
You mentioned BUffett and the rich dems could just go ahead and give the extra tax-and so could Republicans on the issue of Term limits that use to be a huge Republican platform goal-they could just not run after so many terms, or the campaign finance reform that they use to harp upon-they could just not accept money from huge pacs which no one knows who gives it-but they do not,
In the 90 one of the Republican 10 items in the COntract with America was voluntary term limits and most of those Repubs who swore to limit their time in Congress -did not -including John Shimkus right here near me.

Just ran across this in an article on the fiscal cliff....Boehner has said he would look for revenue increases thru closing loopholes, creditd and deductions with no details on specifics but if this report has any truth to it....the revenue increases the Repubican speaks of may come from the middle and lower class as much as the rich:
[B]......But Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., warns of possibly huge changes affecting millions of people. [/B]Chambliss told the Atlanta Journal Constitution that federal revenues can be increased significantly without raising tax rates, by limiting deductions. But he noted the popularity of the most important deductions, which are granted for mortgage interest, charity gifts and health care costs. "It can be done, but it's going to require the elimination of almost all— if not all — tax deductions and tax credits," Chambliss said. "That's going to be difficult." Congress has raised and lowered income tax rates many times over the past few decades. Currently, a married couple pays 15 percent on taxable income between $17,400 and $70,700. Four higher tax rates apply to incomes beyond that.

The rate a couple pays is only one factor in their overall tax bill. Deductions or credits for child care, charitable giving, medical costs and other expenses can make big differences.
President George W. Bush achieved major cuts in income tax rates in 2001 and 2003. Since then, GOP lawmakers have taken increasingly tough stands against letting those cuts expire — as they now are scheduled to do at the end of the year.

President Barack Obama campaigned this year on a pledge to end the Bush-era tax breaks for families making more than $250,000 a year. The White House said Friday he will veto any deficit-reduction package that fails to do so.

Republican leaders say they are just as adamant that no one's tax rate rises.

Unless one side yields, Congress and the White House seem unlikely to agree on a new deficit-shrinking plan of tax hikes and spending cuts. Without an agreement, a huge package of spending cuts and tax increases, which both parties dislike, will take effect in the new year.

The debate highlights Republicans' ideological emphasis on income tax rates, a topic they discuss far more than other tax matters, such as the Social Security payroll levy. The question of tax rates has achieved "holy grail" status, said veteran GOP strategist Terry Holt. One reason, he said, is that raising or lowering deductions is "considered more overtly social engineering, the government rewarding certain behaviors."

Chris Van Hollen, the House Democrats' top Budget Committee member, said Republicans' "obsession with small changes in tax rates goes back to this pixie-dust theory that if you cut tax rates for wealthy people, it pays for itself" through job creation. "That theory went bust," he said.

Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney briefly suggested limiting itemized deductions to $17,000 a year. The plan would have raised $1.7 trillion over the next decade, according to the non-partisan Tax Policy Center. But it would have increased taxes on millions of people, including about 27 percent of households making $50,000 to $75,000 a year.
Now, GOP congressional leaders are suggesting that limits to itemized deductions might be acceptable. But they have offered few details.

I think we have gone as far as we can-its is getting us nowhere-we understand each others thoughts I am sure.

I hope you do not think unkindly of me-2 very different upbringings it seems... I grew up poor, my dad hung himself, my mom put me in a place of huge responsibiliy at 10 because she became unglued and I was left to watch my 2 brothers and 2 sisters for days at a time-got no help in even simple things such as her going to school to talk with my counselors to help map out a career path....she said I knew what I wanted to do....unreal.
I moved 33 times into 3 different states by 17, 3 stepdads who were never a father figure in any form.
I have earned every single thing I have, raised 3 kids all work good jobs (including my brain damaged son who has been off SSI for 9 years, works hard and pays his taxes) I am honest, I never got a degree, but I am not unintelligent, have had more setbacks in life than you can ever imagine but I'm still here. I believe in helping others, I think we as a "Christian Nation" should remember that-because it counts not just in Lip Service on Sunday-but in everyday deed and action.
We still have Elvis in common my friend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KPM

I think we have gone as far as we can-its is getting us nowhere-we understand each others thoughts I am sure.

I hope you do not think unkindly of me-2 very different upbringings it seems... I grew up poor, my dad hung himself, my mom put me in a place of huge responsibiliy at 10 because she became unglued and I was left to watch my 2 brothers and 2 sisters for days at a time-got no help in even simple things such as her going to school to talk with my counselors to help map out a career path....she said I knew what I wanted to do....unreal.
I moved 33 times into 3 different states by 17, 3 stepdads who were never a father figure in any form.
I have earned every single thing I have, raised 3 kids all work good jobs (including my brain damaged son who has been off SSI for 9 years, works hard and pays his taxes) I am honest, I never got a degree, but I am not unintelligent, have had more setbacks in life than you can ever imagine but I'm still here. I believe in helping others, I think we as a "Christian Nation" should remember that-because it counts not just in Lip Service on Sunday-but in everyday deed and action.
We still have Elvis in common my friend.

---

Ken, I really don't like you anymore after this....just kidding. We both have are different point of views, that is what life is about and the greatness of being an American.

I'm sorry you didn't have a great upbringing. I was fortunate that I grew up with both of my parents in a loving home. I know that everyone cannot be so fortunate. I will tell you I didn't grow up rich or anything but I don't ever remember going without love, food and a home.

We are still friends.....so let's discuss ELVIS!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by King Of The Whole World

Ken, I really don't like you anymore after this....just kidding. We both have are different point of views, that is what life is about and the greatness of being an American.

I'm sorry you didn't have a great upbringing. I was fortunate that I grew up with both of my parents in a loving home. I know that everyone cannot be so fortunate. I will tell you I didn't grow up rich or anything but I don't ever remember going without love, food and a home.We are still friends.....so let's discuss ELVIS!

---

On my part its never personal-but discussions with great personal passion can end up getting to that point....I did not want that here.
This is a great place to forget the grind of making a living, the worries, and the depressing everyday news that seems to never end......
Occasionally I will go to TOPIX and debate politics but can always leave.....really do not want to leave TCBs forum-its been a great place to unwind and make friends.

I learned to actually cook with a cookbook at 12 because many times we would only have basics or staples in our kitchen, flour, baking powder, baking soda, eggs, powdered milk,.....usually the last week of the month our house would get very tight on money-never stopped mom from going out to bars and clubs....so I learned to make Skillet Bread and Milk gravy, pancakes, milktoast,....would use noodles with beef gravy packets to make a main dish, would tear a hole in a slice of bread in a skillet pop and egg in it and fry it up -told my siblings its Egg in a Hat.....one time all we had for a weekend was frozen waffles, eggs and milk.....yes my friend we both grew up in very different slices of America. As far as love, guidance and support -I tried to be that for my bros and sisters, but I got none.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KPM

On my part its never personal-but discussions with great personal passion can end up getting to that point....I did not want that here.
This is a great place to forget the grind of making a living, the worries, and the depressing everyday news that seems to never end......
Occasionally I will go to TOPIX and debate politics but can always leave.....really do not want to leave TCBs forum-its been a great place to unwind and make friends.

I learned to actually cook with a cookbook at 12 because many times we would only have basics or staples in our kitchen, flour, baking powder, baking soda, eggs, powdered milk,.....usually the last week of the month our house would get very tight on money-never stopped mom from going out to bars and clubs....so I learned to make Skillet Bread and Milk gravy, pancakes, milktoast,....would use noodles with beef gravy packets to make a main dish, would tear a hole in a slice of bread in a skillet pop and egg in it and fry it up -told my siblings its Egg in a Hat.....one time all we had for a weekend was frozen waffles, eggs and milk.....yes my friend we both grew up in very different slices of America.

---

Yes I love coming to this place to get a way from it all. As Elvis always said he wanted people to listen to his music or go to his shows and be entertained, not think about anything. That's why I love this site and the people so much here.

Like I said I was fortunate and I don’t wish a bad life on anyone. Life is easier if you have a jumpstart at a early age. Not that it makes life perfect but easier. Like I said we were not rich (not even by the government standard :D) but I always had someone there for me and for that I’m grateful.