silly stuff aside

[spence]

Originally Posted by EarnedStripes44

Bush did inherit a nice surplus, even Greenspan worried we might pay the national debt off too soon. Bush then used that as an excuse to cut taxes, Greenspan co-signed. By the end of 2001 his then secretary of the treasury was asking congress to raise the debt ceiling. Its been runaway spending ever since.

Didn't you read, mentioning Bush is against the rules. He has nothing to do with the present situation. It's all due to a fundamental shift in our countries direction toward socialism.

Besides, Bush had 9/11 and that changed everything.

-spence

[EarnedStripes44]

Originally Posted by spence

Didn't you read, mentioning Bush is against the rules. He has nothing to do with the present situation. It's all due to a fundamental shift in our countries direction toward socialism.

Besides, Bush had 9/11 and that changed everything.

-spence

I think some of Bush's former constituency suffer from the political equivalent of battered wife syndrome. It was a very abusive administration, so its understandable.

My woman has the same problem with her first love. He was a really horrible guy, but she went from defending him to memory suppression. He was such a loser and he nearly ruined it for stand-up guys like myself. She's a work in progress, she has come along way but only because we've talked about it.

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by spence

Didn't you read, mentioning Bush is against the rules. He has nothing to do with the present situation. It's all due to a fundamental shift in our countries direction toward socialism.

Besides, Bush had 9/11 and that changed everything.

-spence

This thread is a commentary on what Obama IS doing. Not the current situation and not the past. The current budget has the potential to further burden this nation, not only in debt, but it increases the burden on the FEW who are carrying all the weight. Spence will tell you that all Obama is proposing is the same tax rates that were under the Clinton admin, but that is misleading. Tax rates are not the only factor in "tax burden". Obama is also proposing reductions in itemized deductions (this is BEFORE) the tax rate is applied. So, some people that may have a lower taxable income as a result of the deductions, will no longer qualify, as their taxable income has increased! He is also lowering the amounts of people who barely pay any taxes. Once again, benefits those who "need" vs. those who "supply". This widening gap will soon put the taxpayers of this country in the MINORITY. Those who dont pay, will have more votes that those who DO pay taxes! Call it what you will, but he is creating a foundation for a society that will no benefit hard work.
Now - take into consideration all his social programs - health and education. Tell me - will any of the "wealthy" bearing the tax burden receive any benefits from these programs? No, but the increase in population receiving health care and higher education, will increase the DEMAND for these. As a result, the PRICES WILL GO UP, and who will pay these higher prices? The so called wealthy, who are already bearing the higher tax burden.

excerpt from the commentary:
Along with massive hikes in spending, this budget also implements the largest tax increase in U.S. history -- $1.5 trillion in new taxes over the next 10 years. For small business people, taxes are going to go up dramatically as a result of this budget; high-income people who donate to charity will face higher taxes, a change which will likely reduce charitable contributions; and anyone who turns on their lights in the morning will face higher taxes.

If the president gets what he wants in his cap and trade proposal, everybody who pays an electric bill or other energy bills will pay an average of $3,000 more in taxes a year for their energy needs. Yet none of these taxes will go to reduce the deficit. Instead, they will go to ramp up the size of government.

[spence]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

This thread is a commentary on what Obama IS doing. Not the current situation and not the past.

You sounded the alarm that "Obama's" tax and spend policies are going to bury us. I simply pointed out that this isn't all "Obama" policy we're dealing with.

It's not even political, it's simple math.

The current budget has the potential to further burden this nation, not only in debt, but it increases the burden on the FEW who are carrying all the weight.

And again you speak as if the "Obama" budget is a new poison. And the national debt is a burden on everyone, not just the rich.

Spence will tell you that all Obama is proposing is the same tax rates that were under the Clinton admin, but that is misleading. Tax rates are not the only factor in "tax burden". Obama is also proposing reductions in itemized deductions (this is BEFORE) the tax rate is applied.

From the actual plan...

Reducing Itemized Deduction Rate for Families With Incomes Over $250,000. Lowering health care costs and expanding health insurance coverage will require additional revenue. In the health reform policy discussions that have taken place over the past few years, a wide range of revenue options have been discussed -- and these options are all worthy of serious discussion as the Administration works with the Congress to enact health care reform The Administration's Budget includes a proposal to limit the tax rate at which high-income taxpayers can take itemized deductions to 28 percent -- and the initial reserve fund would be funded in part through this provision. This provision would raise $318 billion over 10 years.

People throw around that the Obama plan is "eliminating" these deductions when it looks more like they're just limiting the rate at which higher income taxpayers can take deductions.

At many companies the amount of benefits like employee matches and tax free expense accounts (i.e. child care, medical expenses) are reduced for highly compensated individuals. The idea being that those with more stand more to gain. These type of rules were put into place long before Obama.

This isn't any different.

This widening gap will soon put the taxpayers of this country in the MINORITY. Those who dont pay, will have more votes that those who DO pay taxes! Call it what you will, but he is creating a foundation for a society that will no benefit hard work.

Nonesense. The higher wage earners by all measures are much more likely to vote.

Now - take into consideration all his social programs - health and education. Tell me - will any of the "wealthy" bearing the tax burden receive any benefits from these programs?

Considering what the future brings I don't think you could be much more out of touch. Regarding healthcare it's perhaps the biggest unfunded liability and threat to our nation's long-term survival.

When all this wealthy taxpaying baby-boomers retire, who do you think is going to be paying for their medical care? Unless we improve the system today we're screwed. Obama has proposed cost savings measures like electronic records that have been labeled socialist by the Right. I don't think Obama's plan is perfect, but we need to invest in this while we still have time.

Regarding education, you only have to look at the numbers of engineers graduating in China to know that we need an educated workforce here at home if we hope to keep America the innovation center of the World. Schools are failing and college is barely afforable.

I agree that throwing good money after bad isn't a wise plan, but this is an investment that can pay off in spades if done right.

excerpt from the commentary:
Along with massive hikes in spending, this budget also implements the largest tax increase in U.S. history -- $1.5 trillion in new taxes over the next 10 years.

What's funny is that Obama's Stimulus package a actually contained the largest TAX CUT in history, 282 Billion in just two years.

If the president gets what he wants in his cap and trade proposal, everybody who pays an electric bill or other energy bills will pay an average of $3,000 more in taxes a year for their energy needs. Yet none of these taxes will go to reduce the deficit. Instead, they will go to ramp up the size of government.

Well, I guess this number did come from a "commentary" and not from any real projections.

Do you really believe you're going to pay 3K more in taxes under this plan? I don't.

-spence