Rat Fink
Member
One issue is your failure to read or comprehend other peoples posts, but instead just like to stir up shit and beat the liberal drum.
Paul Ryan, bowhunter
- Thread starter Tom
- Start date
One issue is your failure to read or comprehend other peoples posts, but instead just like to stir up shit and beat the liberal drum.
JoseCuervo
New member
Rat Fink
Member
As usual you can't take the hint and you're wrong once again. Read my previous posts. I outline it all specifically.
Last edited:
Outdoor Junkie
Active member
I am a fiscal conservative. By fiscal conservative, I mean that you don't spend more than you make. I don't do it at home and the goverment shouldn't do it either. It was horrible when Bush was in charge and the Republicans were in charge of Congress for most of that time, then the democrats doubled down on that and made it worse. We are adding over $1 trillion to the national debt every year and it's not getting any better. Meanwhile, the congress makes examples of little tings (see GSA conference in Los Vegas) to make us believe that they are actually doing something about it. Do these people think we are retarded? Saving a few million dollars is like pissing into the ocean. It might feel good, but you haven't really done anything. We need dramatic reform, which means meeting in the middle. We have to change the entitlements, so that they are sustainable long term. They simply are not the way it stands today! We also need to increase the taxes of the wealthiest Americans, but I believe that everyone should have skin in the game. I've heard that 50% of Americans don't pay federal income tax. That's absolute BS! It doesn't need to be a lot, but everyone has to share in the responsibility to some extent (even if it's 2% of their income). The tax rates on the wealthiest Americans needs to increase and we need to eliminate all the tax loopholes that cause some of the richest Americans to pay very little in taxes.
I think the vast majority of Americans agree with me, but its amazing that the idiots from both sides don't ever come out and say it! The only thing that I've seen that resembles this was from the gang of 6 last year, but that of course died. I'm not saying their plan was perfect, but it was meaningful compromise.
http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-mon...-gang-of-six-backs-37t-deficit-reduction-plan
I think the U.S.economy and the global economy are stuck in a recession like state, because global investors, large corporations, etc are concerned about the current European debt crisis and the building debt crisis here in the U.S. I believe that if Congress and the government actually made meaningful progress on the debt that confidence would increase and the economy would improve.
In the end, I do tend to lean Republican and I will likely vote for Romney and Paul, but only because the spending for the last 4 years has been horrendous. I like Obama's charisma and think he has the skills to be an excellent leader. He just hasn't shown it. He blew his political wad on the ACA and forced it through Congress. Now he wonders why the Rebulicans are so difficult to work with.
In the end, I will vote for who ever I believe will truly try to affect meaningful change and compromise. With that said, neither option seem very good.
I think the vast majority of Americans agree with me, but its amazing that the idiots from both sides don't ever come out and say it! The only thing that I've seen that resembles this was from the gang of 6 last year, but that of course died. I'm not saying their plan was perfect, but it was meaningful compromise.
http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-mon...-gang-of-six-backs-37t-deficit-reduction-plan
I think the U.S.economy and the global economy are stuck in a recession like state, because global investors, large corporations, etc are concerned about the current European debt crisis and the building debt crisis here in the U.S. I believe that if Congress and the government actually made meaningful progress on the debt that confidence would increase and the economy would improve.
In the end, I do tend to lean Republican and I will likely vote for Romney and Paul, but only because the spending for the last 4 years has been horrendous. I like Obama's charisma and think he has the skills to be an excellent leader. He just hasn't shown it. He blew his political wad on the ACA and forced it through Congress. Now he wonders why the Rebulicans are so difficult to work with.
In the end, I will vote for who ever I believe will truly try to affect meaningful change and compromise. With that said, neither option seem very good.
Nemont
Well-known member
Just to be clear, you are saying you can get 100% deductions for your union dues? If that is the case then every middle class American is subsidizing unions. I highly doubt that you get at 100% deduction.
I have no issue with private unions at all, period. Labor has a right to organize and employers can or cannot pay what private unions demand. Public employee unions are a different animal and while I have no real problem in principle with public employee unions, in practice many of them have become out of control. Taxpayers across the country have every right to put the brakes on pay and benefits for public employees if the taxpayers are being strained to provide that pay and benefits, especially penion benefits.
Anyone who believe unions are the only reason people are paid above minimum wage is smoking crack.
Back on subject: Neither ticket is going to spend less and deficit spending and adding debt will continue regardless of which ticket wins. That is a fact.
Nemont
d-bone20917
Member
Great post Outdoor Junkie. I agree both sides need to come together and have honest discussions on how to resolve these issues. The political climate right now where no compromise is allowed by either side frustrates the hell out of me. And the presidential candidates are hung up on calling each other names instead of discussing the real issues.
Nemont
Well-known member
What loopholes? I am for getting rid of carried interest but the largest tax expenditures in our budget are the deductions for Health Insurance and mortgage interest deductions. The other loopholes are not even close to what those two cost. I can't imagine any politician ending either of those two huge tax expenditures.
I believe ending loopholes and then actually lowering rates, broaden the base but every deduction has a dedicate support system that doesn't want to give up their own government cheese.
Nemont
Outdoor Junkie
Active member
I believe that the wealthiest Americans can afford to pay a higher percentage. When I was a poor college kid (paid my way), I couldn't afford to pay that much towards taxes; because I needed money for food, gas, car maintenance, car insurance,etc. Now that I have been working for 11 years, I have much more expendable income that I did back then. The tax code has always been scaled, with the realization that the more a person makes the higher the percentage they can afford to contribute. I want to clarify that I don't just believe the richest need to pay more, I think we all do. The richest Americans will just have the most $ impact. A 2% increase on someone making $25,000 won't have the same impact as a 2% increase on someone making $1,000,000 per year.
The truth is that we need to balance the budget and raising revenues (taxes) has to play a part in that, as does reform of the entitlement programs. You have to meet in the middle. I lean conservative, but I think most people realize we can't just get there by raising taxes or by cutting spending alone. We will never solve the debt crisis until both sides agree on this fact.
The truth is that we need to balance the budget and raising revenues (taxes) has to play a part in that, as does reform of the entitlement programs. You have to meet in the middle. I lean conservative, but I think most people realize we can't just get there by raising taxes or by cutting spending alone. We will never solve the debt crisis until both sides agree on this fact.
Outdoor Junkie
Active member
There are a lot of very wealthy individuals in this country that pay a very low percentage in taxes (i.e. Warren Buffet, etc.) These folks are finding ways around paying taxes through the use of tax attorneys and accountants. I'm not a tax accountant, so I can't claim to know all the rules. With that said, there are a lot people who find "legal ways" around paying taxes.
As far as the mortgage intereste deduction goes, I think that needs to be on the table. I also think that the tax credit for children should be there (I have 2 and I see that this makes a big impact on my taxes). You shouldn't get a huge decution if you decide to have 8 kids... just saying. I do my own taxes through Turbo Tax and it takes me over an hour to go through all the exemptions that are on there. There is absolutely no need to have that many exemptions.
We can't solve this by cutting spending alone. The deficit is simply too high.
As far as the mortgage intereste deduction goes, I think that needs to be on the table. I also think that the tax credit for children should be there (I have 2 and I see that this makes a big impact on my taxes). You shouldn't get a huge decution if you decide to have 8 kids... just saying. I do my own taxes through Turbo Tax and it takes me over an hour to go through all the exemptions that are on there. There is absolutely no need to have that many exemptions.
We can't solve this by cutting spending alone. The deficit is simply too high.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
smarandr
Well-known member
Absolutely correct. I also think most people (politicians not included) agree that spending needs to be cut and taxes need to be raised. The problem lies in what programs to cut and how does the increased tax burden get distributed.
And, I'd like to add a point of trivia for everyone that loves to tout Reagan and his tax policy. During 6 of his 8 years as president the top marginal tax rate was at or above 50%. That's quite a bit higher than our 35% of today.
smarandr
Well-known member
Going to disagree with you on this one. People like Buffet (and Romney for that matter) get their income from investments which by statute (not loophole) are taxed at a much more favorable rate than money earned by going to work from 9-5.
Sure, they engage attorneys and accountants to help with strategy (as everybody should), but bottom line is if you have a problem with guys that pay a low tax rate because of investments hate the law, not the man.
Mudranger1
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2010
- Messages
- 2,909
http://www.theonion.com/articles/ryan-begins-attacking-romneys-record-as-massachuse,29179/
Am I missing something here? How would this help get your guy elected?
Am I missing something here? How would this help get your guy elected?
Outdoor Junkie
Active member
I think the gang of 6 proposal was a legitimate place to start. I'm not saying I have all the answers, but everyone needs to agree to take a hair cut if we're going to get anywhere. I'm in and I think most of America would be if the increases and cuts were made across the board and not cherry picked.
If you want to really screw up your day look at this! The part that stands out to me is that total goverment spending is at 44% of GDP, while total Goverment revenue is at 32% of GDP. The compromise is between these two numbers.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
If you want to really screw up your day look at this! The part that stands out to me is that total goverment spending is at 44% of GDP, while total Goverment revenue is at 32% of GDP. The compromise is between these two numbers.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
steamfitter
Member
Yes 100% of union dues are tax deductible and as for as public unions are a littlke different than public i do believe if you are a public employee unions need more control. Let me ask you a question if a employer told you he was gonna pay you minumun wage and the contractor across the street do same kind of work was union and said he was gonna pay you double and insurance and retirement where would you work and then the guy across the street has to raise his pay to get employees. He wouldnt have to cause you wouldnt have a choice but to accept his rate because he would have no reason to pay more. Why do you think there is a davis-bacon wage its based off union wages. If it werent for unions you would have no osha either no workers comp if you got hurt no unemployment insurance for when you get layed off you could be fired for no reason like a personallity conflict, but anyone that doesnt believe unions do some good then work for nothing . Im proub to belong to the Steamfitter local union because i will have something when i retire a pension because social security wont be around in 20 years when i retire and i dont have to work 70 hours a week to pay my bills like some people that has to kill themselves and have their wife work just to make a living.
Tom
New member
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc112/h1126_ih.xml is the bill to sell public land not needed and previously identified as not used. It even exempts state identified land and public recreation land.
Where's the problem land being sold off?
Where's the problem land being sold off?
Nemont
Well-known member
If unions are such great things why have they been in decline for 30 years? Entire industries that used to be here and be unionized have moved offshore? Wonder why.
I have no choice but to work for minimum wage? How do you figure that one. I have never once in my life worked for minium wage, well except in the Army but even that was above minimum wage. I could do a million other things if somebody doesn't want to pay me for what I am worth. I also have never belonged to a union but wife does. Her union would trip of $100 bill just so everybody could get $5 each. So don't tell me that the only reason people are not working for minumum wage is unions. Again anyone that believes that as a fact is smoking crack.
Public sector unions are fine as long as the public sector workers understand that the taxpayers are their employers and there fore have a right to determine what amount of tax burden they are willing to endure. That is a fact and anyone who says otherwise is a hack. Private sector unions have every right to get whatever they can at the bargaining table as the employer can either say yes or no.
Anyone who thinks their union dues are "free" because they deduct them from their taxes should probably stay out of arguements in regards to market forces and wage scales. I learned long ago on this board to never have a battle of wits with an unarmed man.
Nemont
Last edited:
smarandr
Well-known member
The Onion is a humor/satire "news" organization much like John Stewart & Stephen Colbert. It's articles aren't supposed to be believed as real news.
