Preliminary Proposal by Debt Commission
 

Debt commission puts out preliminary proposals - Nov. 10, 2010

I'm sure the actual amounts saved is a load of crap, but a couple items stuck me as interesting...

"Set targets for revenue and spending: The report caps taxes at 21% of gross domestic product. It would limit federal spending initially to 22% of the economy and eventually to 21%."

and...

"Reform tax code: The report would lower income tax rates and simplify the tax code. It would also abolish the Alternative Minimum Tax and and reduce tax breaks."

The latter is one that I've mentioned a few times on here "simplify the tax code". A hope (and I'm sure a far fetched one) is that they simplify the way people pay taxes, get rid of some of the more easily abused tax deductions and eliminate that ridiculous Alternative Minimum. An ideal world would be a nice flat tax, but that'll never occur.

Making it easier for people to pay their taxes should, in theory, make it easier for tax collection. My hope is that more clarity will reduce the need for as many audits and reduce the cost per case that comes with them, thus resulting in fewer IRS agents to be on the government dime.

These appear on the surface like obtainable goals. The only thing missing is a referencing money wasted on unnecessary and overly-exploited social services.
-----------------------

I know a constructive discussion about the above is impossible and it will quickly tailspin into a thread about the ridiculous spending, Obama's a socialist and whatnot as every other thread spirals into, but it's worth a try.

Great news. Will common sense prevail.

another Blue Ribbon Farce...we will be belly up as a nation long before anything from this gets implemented...hopefully Bro Versus The Volcano will return soon to save the day with his brilliance :rotf2:


Bowles and Simpson also are proposing a fundamental rewrite of the tax code, though they didn't offer a specific plan.

But the goal is to lower overall tax rates, simplify the code and broaden the taxpayer base. One option proposed is to completely eliminate so-called tax expenditures — including popular deductions like the mortgage interest tax break and a deduction taken by companies that provide health insurance to their employees.

I dont know Scott, I think there is some momentum right now. People are listening. We cant keep going on this path.

I like the proposal to raise the retirement age to 68 by 2050 and 69 by 2075...that should help right away :uhuh:

The thing that is really killing us is the retirement age for Public Employees, we need to move that from 38 to 68 like the rest of the world.....

Here we go
 

Deficit panel leaders propose curbs on Social Security, major cuts in spending, tax breaks

The mortgage deduction will hurt alot.

in parts of Europe, New Jersey, Texas the people have recognized the urgency of the problem and elected executives that will immediately address the problem which is the size of and spending by government at every level despite the backlash and mobs in the streets , elsewhere you have electorates that are esssentially crack addicts who will elect only those that will continue to give them a little crack once in a while and who, as elected public servants will also continue to grow the crack addict base in every way possible to keep them in elected office (RI, Mass, California, NY). Taking the house may help in choking some of the spending, as Jimmy said, there seems to be momentum....but momentum shifts quickly when all of a sudden it's your crack dealer that they are putting out of business. The Crack Dealer in Chief is the biggest pusher of them all, this is a panel "bi-partisan:rotf2:" panel put together by our Nation's worst offender when it comes to government growth spending and defense of every bloated social program...we might make some strides with this new Congress but I think the collapse is coming long before any implemented solution occurs...if great strides are made in the New Jersey's and Texas' they will only be off-set by the rampant crack abuse in California and RI....those that are trying to acutually make changes that will matter will be under relentless assault from the addicts, the pimps in the media and the dealers at the state and federal level and most of all, from Obama who has no intention of reducing government...he's "making government cool again"...remember?

Federal government workers have notoriously earned more than — in many cases more than double — their private sector counterparts for a while. But a new analysis from USA Today sheds light on the shocking size and scope of pay increases for federal workers, most notably in recent years. According to USA Today, the number of federal workers earning salaries of $150,000 or more has increased tenfold over the past five years and doubled since President Obama took office in January 2009.


Graph: USA Today
While the rest of the U.S. economy remains stagnant, the fast-growing pay of federal employees has raised eyebrows

...............................

"In the end, the president is going to have to decide whether to incorporate some of this into the 2012 budget," said David Walker, a former U.S. comptroller general and an advocate for deficit reduction. "He's going to have to lead, because if the president doesn't lead on this, it goes nowhere fast."Mr. Obama avoided any comment on the specifics, as did Congressional leaders. Both said they'd wait for a final product.

Lawmaker reaction was mixed, suggesting any final plan will be weaker than the one released Wednesday. Sen. Judd Gregg (R., N.H.), the top Republican on the Budget Committee and a panel member, called it "a genuine product that deserves very serious attention."

But liberal panel members were less enthusiastic. Sen. Richard Durbin (D., Ill.) said he wouldn't vote for it, saying that "there are things in there that I hate like the devil hates holy water." he'd know:devil2:
View Full Image

Associated Press

Erskine Bowles, co-chairman of the deficit commission, outlined proposals Wednesday.
.Some important interest groups were sharply critical, particularly over curbs on entitlement spending. The plans authors "just told working Americans to 'Drop Dead,"' said AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka. "Especially in these tough economic times, it is unconscionable to be proposing cuts to the critical economic lifelines for working people, Social Security and Medicare."

The conservative Americans for Tax Reform also blasted the plan. "It confirms what everyone has known—this commission is merely an excuse to raise net taxes on the American people," the group said in a written statement. Supporting the plan would violate the group's no-new-taxes pledge, which many Republicans and some Democrats in Congress have signed, it warned.

I cannot believe they are seriously considering eliminating the deduction for mortgage interest. That would cause housing values to plummet...

I also agree on unions. Don't get me started on municipal employee unions. They are absolutely disgusting, they are literally a bunch of parasites who have no bounds on the burden they are willing to place on our shoulders.

If you ever wonder how many government workers there are,drive to work on a Federal holiday. Beautiful commute this morning!

Jim - allow me to play devils advocate. Why is it the govt. business if you buy a house? Why should homeowners get a benfit others do not? Isnt the mortage deductions just a payoff from the govt to the banks? You dont really "benefit", tax money in the form of a deduction gets funneled to the banks to pay for outrageous interest. If housing prices plummet, wont they reflect the real market value and not an inflated price due to government intervention. I know it would be painful, but I'm for across the board cuts. Maybe if there is no deduction, people will save up for for down payment, borrow less and in the long run, provide a more stable housing market?
I think there has to be some pain spread across the board.

RIJIMMY, you definitely raise some good and interesting points...

"Why is it the govt. business if you buy a house?"

A few things come to mind. First, at least here in CT, town governments (and schools, police, etc) are funded by property taxes, so the more people who own homes, the larger the tax base, which is a good thing.

Second, the government has a keen interest in keeping the economy from genuinely collapsing. Eliminating this deduction will (1) immediately reduce the net income of millions of folks, and (2) it will have a catastrophic effect on housing values, which impacts many other things like ability to retire, ability to pay for kids' education, etc... Just the shock value of eliminating a long-standing deduction bothers me.

"Why should homeowners get a benfit others do not?"

Because I pay property taxes, and renters do not. Government, particularly municipal government, benefits from increased homeownership. Renters use the same services i do (send their kids to public school, etc) but pay no taxes to fund those things. Maybe that entitles me to some relief?

"You dont really "benefit", tax money in the form of a deduction gets funneled to the banks "

I believe I do benefit, as I realize some real, tangible tax savings. The tax savings from that deduction goes right in my pocket. If that deduction is eliminated, I pay more taxes, that's a "real" impact. My current mortgage is 3.75%, hardly outrageous.

"If housing prices plummet, wont they reflect the real market value and not an inflated price due to government intervention."

If housing prices drop, they will reflect the value of the house, EXCLUDING the benefit of the tax break. Problem is, when I bought my house, like most people, the value at that time reflected the tax benefit.

It would sort of be like buying a house in a nice area, and 5 years later the town decides to put a landfill adjacent to my property. I get hurt because of something I could not have foreseen.

"I'm for across the board cuts"

I know my taxes are going up (unless I move to New Hampshire). But as someone else pointed out, the number of federal employees making over $150k has DOUBLED IN THE LAST 2 YEARS. There are a lot of places where there is an awful lot of fat. Let's cut the fat before we cut a vital organ.

"I think there has to be some pain spread across the board"

OK, when ALL municipal employees have 401 (k)s instead of pensions (like the rest of us), if we still need more tax revenue, I'll pony up.

Jim, dont forget - renters live in houses owned by someone. Those property taxes still get paid.

If the deduction went away, banks may be forced to revise their mortgage policies. The payoff - interest first process to me is pure roberry.

Just discussing both sides. I dont really have a stong opinion on it and it would hurt my $$$ too.

"renters live in houses owned by someone. Those property taxes still get paid"

But not as much tax revenue is collected. If you have an apt building with 100 apartments, the guy that owns the building pays taxes. But if all those people move out and buy 100 homes, much more tax is collected. A home generates more property tax revenue than an apartment.

RIJIMMY, I was in the USMC, and as such, I was on the public dole. SO I see the value in everyone paying their fair share. But before we discuss tax increases, THERE IS SO MUCH WASTE that could be eliminated. I believe that if we were smart with efficiencies, we could LOWER taxes further, but still have enough revenue to pay for public costs. Just a hunch, I have nothing to base that on.

[QUOTE=Jim in CT;810173RIJIMMY, I was in the USMC, and as such, I was on the public dole. SO I see the value in everyone paying their fair share. But before we discuss tax increases, THERE IS SO MUCH WASTE that could be eliminated. I believe that if we were smart with efficiencies, we could LOWER taxes further, but still have enough revenue to pay for public costs. Just a hunch, I have nothing to base that on.[/QUOTE]

im with you. There is also the component of lowering the tax rate so that may offset the home interest deduction, dont forget that.
and happy vets day too!
My Dad was a Marine 1959-64. Stationed in Borneo, Okinawa and Japan.

Jim, I'm shocked. It's your damn money. The less they steal from you the better. Deductions are just a way of them brainwashing you into thinking they are doing you a favor.

Every Fed. employee got a raise this year. But the people on SSI have not had a cost of living increase in the 2 years Obama has been in office. AARP should be marching all over Washington.

im looking at the proposal as a whole. If they're reducing my tax rate by 10%, thats a lot more than my mortgage deduction.
The proposal also contains big cuts in spending.

it's the government's money...we are all socialists now...:gh:

Taxes will go up. They always do. I'm still seathing at the way the DEMS pushed that sham"porkulas" bill through.Now we will hear these same crooks asking for sacrifice to lower the debt. Imagine if the last election never happened... Unless your from Ma., and then it didn't change anything.:fury: Time for a freaking revolution!!!:soon:

man, Im trying to be upbeat and you're bringing me down!

have you spent any time reading about QE2?

The Queen Elizabeth 2? Do we get a free cruise with our 2010 tax filings!

Where Is The Love For QE2? - Intelligent Investing - Ideas from Forbes Investor Team - Forbes

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/...ve-would-mean/

http://money.cnn.com/2010/11/03/news...sion/index.htm

like feeding a fat kid a candy bar.

If housing prices ever dropped more than they have in many areas you'd have bigger problems on your hands. Many more people would be upside down and foreclosed on.

My town seems to have spared alot of the drops most others have. Taxes suck and they're about to get worse with a new high school rammed through this year.

People shouldn't be taxed on paying someone else to borrow money. Eliminating the deduction means $10k or more in taxable income to many homeowners. Self employed 35% bracket? ha. Bend over

Up yours to all the people who thought this jackass wasn't going to raise every tax he could.

I dont think you guys are getting the point on all of this and truthfully, you're intial responses are the same as Nancy Pelosi's!

This is just a study to see what we can do to lower the deficit. Its not ALL taxes, theres a lot of cuts and some good ideas.
As a conservative, you're all sounding like the party of "no". I want to see what my man Rand Paul has to say about this!

He is consulting Aqua-Buddha, he'll get back to you :biglaugh:

As far as this report, the whole point was to go get, out of office, independent people from both sides of the aisle to contribute, and they came up with a reasonable plan. But of course, as RIJ pointed out, it came out of the current administration, so NO,NO, NO

We just know what parts the current administration will drool over.:drool:

Thats fine, but the suggests are being attacked by BOTH sides, which leads me to believe it is getting closer to some small solutions!