Henry Raymond
Fairfax News => Political Issues/Comments => Topic started by: mirjo on December 07, 2010, 10:19:26 AM
-
I know he's not favored by the majority of my right wing pals here, but I happen to think Bernie Sanders has his heart in the right place in most situations as far as politicians go. In the following Youtube video he's giving an impassioned speech to the president about what he believes is an injustice to the American people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5OtB298fHY&feature=player_embedded# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5OtB298fHY&feature=player_embedded#)
I think this was before the senate vote on the tax cuts. Personally, I am really disgusted that the republicans in congress so willingly stand up and talk out of both sides of their mouth about money. I am equally disgusted that we have such a weak president unwilling to stand up to their ridiculous demands. He should have listened to Shumer--I think that's who it was, and agreed to compromise on the millionaires and up, but he's a wuss! You can't trust a bully and you can't trust a wuss. That leaves us pretty much screwed.
I'm sorry guys--Ed (dba Rod) Thor, Chris, Josh, Ron et-al, but if you're in agreement with the GOP on this one that the Bush tax cuts need to be extended for the good of the economy--(because trickle down economics has worked so well)--I will tell you you're nuts, but not before asking you to explain your rationale and cite sources! :D
-
Mirjo,
Weak President..... how can that be?.... he had so much experience behind him... he was so ready to CHANGE things...! Wasn't it Obama who said..."We live in the greatest country in the world; please help me change it"? This guy is a total TOOL, and he has probably signed his own "Not to be re-elected" ticket.
One other point; "should've listened to Schumer" and agreed to compromise on the millionaires and up. Maybe that didn't happen because the Dems don't understand what defines a millionaire. You, yourself told me that someone making $400 - $500K a year was "close enough to a millionaire" or something to that effect.
I ain't no rocket scientist, but the first part of problem solving is to DEFINE what the problem is. If the Dems can't even come together on a definition, how the hell are they gonna agree on a bill? Does a millionaire make $250K a year, $400K a year, $500K a year, or does he actually make a million or more a year? From where I am sitting, that question looks pretty easy to answer without even cheating!! Maybe a good test would be to ask Ed!
-
The deal is a fabulous one.
Everyone gets what they want. The rich get richer, and the unemployed continue to be supported by the system. Oh, and don't forget the payroll tax holiday.
With the recent printing problems at the US treasury ($110 BILLION dollars that cost $120 million to print going for destruction), it's a good thing we have the Fed. Reserve to write a few more checks.
-
Right on Cedarman. I have mentioned it a couple of times in other threads, but you nailed it. THE biggest threat to our society is the Fed. We have got to do away with that criminal element.
-
I think I'm going to start spending my way to prosperity.
Not only am I going to spend even more money, but I'm going to tell my rich boss that I don't want a raise next year so he can help me along my path to prosperity because rich people are so good about willingly parting with their money (do a search of generosity vs income).
I wonder how much I can use my plastic before it starts to melt?
-
Cedarman, I have never missed a mortgage payment or any other payment for that matter. And yet, the people who overextended themselves got all the mortgage breaks. Funny how that works. I wish someone would offer me 2% or better for an interest rate. Guess you had to get in way over your head in order to qualify!
And in regards to spending your way to being rich, isn't that what our gov't is doing? Just keep spending, if we need more, we can print it! If I ran my business like these idiots we have running the state and federal checkbooks, I am pretty sure someone would be knocking at my door.
But on you go... melt those cards. When one max's out, just get another card, and so on.... then declare bankruptcy. Maybe the Fed's will bail you out!!
-
If the gov't can spend it's way to prosperity, I should be able to do it too. If It doesn't work, I can demand a gov't bailout.
OH WAIT, I forgot. I'm not a banker, or giant insurance company.
I've never missed a mortgage payment either. My credit rating is excellent (which is pretty much just good for lower car insurance cost, but I bet I'm saving more by paying in full instead of payments). I've managed to pay off all my consumer debts in the past 3 yrs (after over a decade of paying thousands a year in interest), and have realized how great it feels to build sufficient savings to be able to buy the things I NEED outright, and deal with emergencies without running up a load of debt.
I can only hope we can get enough sensible politicians into gov't in time for our country to turn that same fiscal corner before we end up like Ireland and Greece.
-
Mirjo, There is no reason to apologize about your point of view. You have a right that is forwarded to you to express it in our great country.
As far as me not agreeing with you? Well don't be so quick to Judge. I do agree with you that Obama is a weak president and really just lacks leadership skills and over all experience.
Now as far as me agreeing with either side the Dems. or the Reps. that I do not! I don't get caught up in the whole Party war to be honest I believe that there are smart people on both sides of the Isle. I do side with the Republican side more as of late this is true but that is because I think the Dems have gone to far left as a whole. They have lost touch with America as a whole in my opinion. "Don't ask don’t tell" is one example that I will use. Our country is still fighting on 2 fronts; we are going belly up with spending, and our budget??... well lets face there is no budget because we just keep printing and spending. These are big problems that need attention ASAP!! I think we can all agree on this? Well let’s work on these problems and not worry about weather or not you can be openly gay in the Military. If the Democrats put half the time they have put into that into trying to balancing the budget we might get somewhere.
On the don't ask don't tell policy also. I have served 6 years on the active duty side, 2 combat tours in Iraq and another tour to a hot zone the HOA (Horn of Africa). I can tell you that really when I'm getting shot at I don't care if the guy/girl next to me is Gay and 98% of the troops feel the same way. The thing is though when our guys/girls are getting shot at and are our there putting their life on the line for our country do you really think that it is the best time to be messing with things and trying to change things around? It is not. It is actually flat out Asinine that it is even being discussed at this time in my opinion. Ok off my soap box LOL
Over all really I am just for less government as a whole! In my opinion all this bailing out that took place was not a place the government should have even considered going!! If you are an idiot and run your Business into the ground well sucks to be you! Someone will step up probably with a better product and a better business plan and take your spot. Cedarman and Thor I agree how stupid it is that our government has well pretty much rewarded people who are fiscal morons!! I can go out and buy new cars a fourwheeler and some other cool toys to bury myself in debt. Then when I can’t afford it the government helps me out with other people’s tax dollars or rewards me with changing my interest rate to 2%? If anyone thinks that this is the way things should be I have a word to label you as and it is an Idiot.
-
Mirjo, this is nothing new. History and facts make me side with the R's on this. In the 60's I agreed with the D's on this.
I completely understand why the concept is hard to swallow, but history shows it works.
Here's some reading to start you off.......
http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/reagtxct/reagtxct.htm (http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/reagtxct/reagtxct.htm)
for those short on time, or not so economically educated, here's the summary:
The Reagan tax cuts, like similar measures enacted in the 1920s and 1960s, showed that reducing excessive tax rates stimulates growth, reduces tax avoidance, and can increase the amount and share of tax payments generated by the rich. High top tax rates can induce counterproductive behavior and suppress revenues, factors that are usually missed or understated in government static revenue analysis. Furthermore, the key assumption of static revenue analysis that economic growth is not affected by tax changes is disproved by the experience of previous tax reduction programs. There is little reason to expect static revenue analysis to evaluate the economic or distributional effects of current tax reform proposals much better than it evaluated the Reagan tax program 15 years ago.
Merry Christmas to All !!!
-
Here's an example of how I used this locally in business.
In 2001, Lee Minor came to me and asked me to run the Fairfax News.
It owed Buyer's Digest well over a thousand bucks and was floundering.
The first thing I did to make MORE money was reduce the advertising prices.
$85 ads were reduced to $50, $45 ads to $25, etc., etc., etc.
Some thought I was nuts and this would be the end of the paper,
but new advertisers started calling, and old advertisers loved the idea (some got bigger ads).
We paid BD within months, got ahead, and we're still here in a time when newspapers are getting hit hard.
And it's still FREE !
-
Our Congressman disagrees with me:
Welch and 53 House Democrats oppose Obama tax deal
In letter to Speaker, they say “Don’t back down” from commitment to middle class
WASHINGTON, DC – In a significant demonstration of opposition to President Obama’s tax deal, Congressman Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and 53 members of the U.S. House came out against the President’s proposal Thursday morning.
In a letter sent to Speaker Pelosi Thursday, Welch and his colleagues called the proposal “fiscally irresponsible” and “grossly unfair.”
“America is wading into fiscal quicksand. Borrowing nearly a trillion dollars to finance tax cuts that disproportionately favor millionaires and billionaires threatens our ability to create jobs, grow the middle class and protect seniors,” Welch said. “Digging the country deeper into debt to pay for misguided tax policy is irresponsible and simply doesn’t make sense.”
The letter, which Welch authored and first circulated late Monday, was signed by: Reps. Earl Blumenauer, Judy Chu, Yvette Clark, Steve Cohen, John Conyers, Elijah Cummings, Danny Davis, Peter DeFazio, Donna Edwards, Keith Ellison, Anna Eshoo, Sam Farr, Bob Filner, Barney Frank, John Garamendi, Alan Grayson, Raul Grijalva, Luis Gutierrez, Alcee Hastings, Martin Heinrich, Maurice Hinchey, Rush Holt, Jay Inslee, Jesse Jackson, Sheila Jackson-Lee, Paul Kanjorski, Dennis Kucinich, Barbara Lee, John Lewis, Ben Ray Lujan, Steven Lynch, Doris Matsui, Jim McDermott, Mike Michaud, Jim Oberstar, John Olver, Chellie Pingree, David Price, Tim Ryan, Linda Sanchez, Jan Schakowsky, Carol Shea-Porter, Adam Smith, Jackie Speier, Pete Stark, Betty Sutton, Bennie Thompson, Mike Thompson, Paul Tonko, Anthony Weiner, Lynn Woolsey, David Wu and John Yarmuth.
The full text of the letter is copied below:
Dear Madam Speaker,
We oppose acceding to Republican demands to extend the Bush tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires for two reasons.
First, it is fiscally irresponsible. Adding more than $900 billion to our national debt, as this proposal would do, handcuffs our ability to offer a balanced plan to achieve fiscal stability without a punishing effect on our current commitments, including Social Security and Medicare.
Second, it is grossly unfair. This proposal will hurt, not help, the majority of Americans in the middle class and those working hard to get there. Even as Republicans seek to add billions more to our national debt in tax cuts to the wealthy, they oppose extending unemployment benefits to workers and resist COLA increases to seniors.
Without a doubt, the very same people who support this addition to our debt will oppose raising the debt ceiling to pay for it.
We support extending tax cuts in full to 98 percent of American taxpayers, as the President initially proposed. He should not back down. Nor should we.
Sincerely,
PETER WELCH
Member of Congress
-
Our Congressman's claim that this would add $900B to our National Debt is unfounded, as show in the link above.
I remember the quote "You're going to add to the Fairfax News' debt".
I hope this helps, mirjo, and again.............
Merry Christmas to All !
-
And Merry Christmas to you Chris!!
-
Excellent Example Chris! Merry Chirstmas!
I am not a Dem or Rep, I vote for the person and the issues I believe should be important at the time. I do not blame the President for everything gone wrong in his efforts to change, I blame everyone in DC. They all need a kick in the butt, put in timeout, and then have to sit down, act like adults, and work to compromise for the better of ALL the people, not some of the people.
-
mkr,
That ain't gonna help. Those are professional politicians, who don't have to do anything they don't want. You seem to forget that WE are here for THEM, not the other way around. It was supposed to be THEY serve us to make things better than before, but once they get there, they get exposed to being above the law, and better than the working class person. I heard a saying once that sounded something like this; "All politicians should be limited to two terms, one in office and the other in prison". Personally I would like to sit all those clowns down and give them a class on leadership, decision making, prioritization, incremental problem solving and probably most important, show them the U.S. Constitution, as it seems none of them (except a couple, I will give the benefit of the doubt) seem to know what that document is all about.
-
So true Thor!
-
Governor Douglas Issues Statement on Tax Compromise
Montpelier, Vt. – Governor Jim Douglas this morning spoke with the White House regarding the tax compromise reached by President Obama and Congressional Republicans. He issued the following statement in support of the compromise:
“Vermonters and all Americans are looking for Washington to produce results. If we are to address our country’s challenges, Republicans and Democrats can no longer take an all-or-nothing approach to governing.
“The compromise reached between President Obama and Republicans is a reasonable approach to helping the American people during this difficult time, while ensuring that tax increases do not burden the recovery. I hope leaders in Washington can build on this collaboration to address the most critical issue facing our nation’s long-term economic health, the national debt.”
-
"none of them (except a couple, I will give the benefit of the doubt) seem to know what that document is all about. "
unfortunately, I think this also applies to the average, under-educated American (some with advanced university degrees) also.
-
Bernie has been filibustering now for over four hours on the Senate floor,
blaming the entire recession on the Bush tax cuts.
I agree with mirjo, that his heart is in the right place,
it's the location of his head I have a problem with.
He just stated we have more poverty here than anywhere else in the world.
I think some folks in Haiti might disagree with him too.
-
he is still going over 6 hours LOL
-
Chris--in the spirit of Devil's Advocacy:
I think Reagan's presidency has been canonized since his death from Alzheimer's Disease, because I don't honestly recall his policy's being lauded quite as much when he was in office, actually I heard quite a lot of grumbling about the trickle-down economics theory (and honestly, I was too young to really know a lot about it, I wasn't paying attention to politics)
I'm a little too ignorant about economics to fully understand it all on a national or even state level, but as far as the simple example you give about your ads, I don't get the comparison to the current tax argument.
Wal-Mart does the same thing--it's about volume. Most people understand the concept, you attract more flies with honey, the honey in this case being lower prices, if you have something at a lower price than your competitor, you're going to sell more and still be able to make a profit or break even whatever the case may be.
I read the Joint Economic Committee report from 1996 you had the link to, maybe it's accurate, maybe it's not. In today's political mosh pit, I think anything that comes out of DC is highly suspect, personally.
If this is really suppose to help, then why hasn't it thus far? These are not new tax cuts coming down the pike, this is an argument to keep taxes the SAME. So it really begs the question, if keeping taxes lower for millionaires+ is so important, why hasn't it helped in the past couple of years that things have been circling the drain???
Is it because these mega wage earners don't put their money back into the domestic economy in a way that is helpful like is being said from the left of center or what is it? Is there another answer? I keep hearing that these are people who won't be investing in job growth or whatever the catch phrase of the day is and that seems to be at least one of the arguments. So, why hasn't their tax break helped yet? Why is it going to be so magical going forward? Shouldn't it have prevent so many job losses in the first place--many of which started in 2008?
This is why I don't get the justification--these tax laws have been in effect for a decade and after 7 years we were in a huge mess (not necessarily b/c of the tax cuts), but it has been 2 years since things went to hell in a hand basket and the first stimulus was sent to Wall Street (Nov. 2008) and these tax rates have been in place...So, again I ask, why is it now suddenly a magic bullet? It smacks of something very partisan for that reason alone.
There is SO much rhetoric it's difficult to keep it all straight. But I think the reality is, is that these people don't really pay as much in taxes as it appears any way so this is all just a big hullaballoo about squat. The uber rich have and find more loopholes/shelters etc. when it comes to taxes that when all is said and done the secretary to a highly paid millionaire CEO pays more taxes than the boss does.
I think there should be tax incentives for those who are going to invest in some kind of job creation or whatever in the U.S. I don't know how this would work and i doubt DC can be trusted to figure it out, but unless there is something truly compelling that points to the greater good if the uber rich maintain their current tax rates, I'm not on board. Maybe the absence of that revenue won't add to the decifit, I don't know for certain and it almost doesn't matter.If someone doesn't take a vested interest soon (our leaders), well... We're this close to being the United States of China anyway.
As it stands, the majority of people can only barely afford the goods that WM sells--all from China, who we owe a fortune to and who seem to be plotting a surreptitious takeover. But we're all so busy with the infighting, no one is noticing. Our dubious leaders are also still stuck in the 'We're the greatest' mode w/o even realizing they're letting it slip away. We're not invincible, we will crash very freakin hard if someone doesn't pull up and fly straight SOON. I don't know if the answer is to continue the 'Bush Era' tax cuts or not. All I have seen and heard is a lot of partisan opinions on the subject and I don't have enough economic education to discern what seems most plausible or to know what really works in this type of problem. At this point I'm not convinced that anyone does.
He just stated we have more poverty here than anywhere else in the world.
I think some folks in Haiti might disagree with him too.
I'm going to disagree on this--I don't know if we have more than anywhere else, but we certainly have a lot that is ignored and we are on par with many places, but we hide it wery, wery well. As for Haiti, it's the size of RI and I'm sure we have several RI size pockets of poverty scattered about the country. We really tend to forget just how vast this nation is compared to most (all?) of the others in the world. I think we tend to view poverty as the naked black people in third world countries, with names we can't pronounce, that we see celebrities championing on the news or something, but there is plenty of urban and rural poverty in this country (and other developed countries as well) that simply gets ignored, because it's shameful.
I don't have numbers or statistics, but I would guess that in NYC alone, there is nearly as much poverty as there is/has been in Haiti (earthquake, not withstanding). That's just one large city. There are about 8 million people who live there and they aren't all wealthy. Every large city in the US has a large poverty population and there is plenty more in the rural areas.
I don't think Bernie was totally off the mark with that comment, although it was probably blown out of proportion in the heat of his argument, but more to the point--the majority in this country I think prefer to turn a blind eye to the amount of poverty there is here, because it makes us look really bad. It's supposed to be the "land of plenty" and you're supposed to be able to support yourself and your family with nothing more than hard work and determination (aka, 'the American Dream'), but I think there is a huge subset that have found it doesn't exist or work that way.
I highly recommend reading Nickel and Dimed by Barbara Ehrenreich for anyone who doesn't believe that there is a working poor class out there.
Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and Good Luck to all!
-
Mirjo,
So, if the current tax rates aren't having a profound effect on the current economic situation.... why change them? Why are you so "down" on milliionaires? The truth is, they could increase all of our tax rates to 100% and it still would not be enough to claw our way out of this hole. (it would provide the Progressives / Socialists exactly what they are after though!) Why not leave the uber rich alone; I am pretty sure many of them earned it, or inherited it. Is it a crime to be successful or extremely successful? Not all millionaires are bad people, or don't put back into the system. Your doing your "over-generalization" again. Remember how you "enlightened" me that not all people on the welfare system were a drain on the system? Same probably applies to the rich.
And you nailed it on the Stimulus. It had no effect, other than to protect and prop up the already criminally negligent banking system. This allowed the banks with extremely close ties to the Federal Reserve (Cedarman; there is that name again... the Fed) to make a huge profit by buying up the banks that were not as revered by the Fed Reserve Board. Anyway, they continually babble about how much tax revenue we are going to lose if the taxes dont go up, well what about how much money it is going to cost to provide unending unemployment. At what point does it become easier to sit at home and collect a check instead of going out and finding work? But don't worry, because if QE2 doesn't work, Bernanke has another plan! If QE2 doesn't make the dollar worthless, his QE3 & 4 will. And I don't think you have to worry quite yet about becoming the United States of China. China is not going to want to inherit another 300 million needy. They may be pissed they got screwed on their "investment", but I doubt they will want any part of our broken system.
It ain't the taxing part of our system, that is broken. It is the spending part! But the elected officials, who are always in their "campaign mode" regardless of whether or not it is election season, just keep telling us what "we want" to hear. All in the name of getting re-elected, without really having to do anything.
Couldn't agree more on the poverty situation. I have always said that we should be pulling back from all of our overseas assistance. That doesn't mean we don't provide something, but not the millions of dollars that we currently donate. That is what charitable organizations are for. Our money should be spent here first, on our people. The $300 million we spent in Darfur last year, could probably have helped out here a great deal. Let the Red Cross and the Red Crescent and UNICEF and every other "do good" organization take on that effort.
-
I don't think you know what you're saying about this whole thing anymore than I know what I'm saying, at this point. It has gotten that skewed whether you think so or not.
The bottom line is this--I am no more right than you are. None of us here are right or wrong, it's just a bunch of opinions, that mostly don't matter and aren't heard, as sad as that is.
As for the state of the nation, it is what it is. Maybe someone who knows how to fix things will come along.
As for politics, it's a bunch of opinions--and everybody's got one. We usually hear the loudest ones. I have a loud opinion too and that's why I jump in to these things, but I recognize that's all it is. I don't feel right or entitled or anything. I think political parties are a sham and should be abolished. They do more harm than good.
I think there are too many opinions out there about what's right or wrong, to really be able to discern what's right from what's wrong. It seems that if there is a system that is working well (somewhere), then perhaps we should be emulating it instead of believing that we know everything, when in fact we are hanging by a thread.
You asked me about millionaires et-al. I don't have anything against anyone who is smart/lucky enough to earn a fortune. I have a huge issue with greed. I'm all for capitalism and people making profits, I just don't believe that anyone needs to create a situation that puts a huge gap between him/her self and everyone else or makes the cost of goods so high it's difficult for people to live.
I don't agree with it or believe in it and doubt I ever will. And as for the tax situation or any economic situation this country is facing, without a degree in Economics (or even with one), I'm not qualified to make suggestions or even begin to think I know what the right answer is. I'm merely b*%*ching like everyone else and that is nothing more than a colossal waste of time.
I think it's wonderfully philanthropic of us as a nation to lend a hand to places in need; however, it seems like we're able to give millions to these places, but can't do anything for our own poverty stricken rat-infested inner cities. I really don't get it. It's completely fupped.
Thanks for the arguments, it's always appreciated. Have a Merry, Merry Christmas.
-
"Political parties are a sham"... yea, but we need them or else we would get the unilateral "bills rammed down our throats" for "the good of the people". Those knuckleheads in charge are trying to do it again as we speak. And political discussion may be just "opinions" between us, but politics (or totally "fupped" politicians) are driving this train at full speed and the bridge is out!
"As for the state of the nation, maybe someone who knows how to fix things will come along". About the best guy I've seen in the recent past is Ron Paul. But the liberals could never possibly vote for a guy who says, enough of these ridiculous entitlement programs. Maybe you want to listen to him a bit about the future of the U.S. I don't agree with him on everything, but if you want to have a country to give to your kids, everyone better at least listen to him concerning fiscal responsibility.
Rich people don't drive up the price of goods. Our assinine politicians and their totally "fupped" fiscal responsibility do that with great help from The Fed and Bernanke. These idiots don't realize that by devaluing the dollar, we average Americans lose money (what you have in your pocket and in the bank) and the inflation associated with it drives up costs. We cannot monetize our way out of debt. We have to quit spending so much. Which means everyone needs to tighten their belt. Everyone, not just the rich.
I don't have a degree in economics, in fact I don't have a degree at all. I barely got out of high school. But I am smart enough to read the "writing on the wall". If we really want to live in a free market society, then we have to get the gov't out of business. They are destroying us. If a business is run so poorly (bank or automaker or anything else) and it is failing, we should let it fail. Someone else will come along that offers a better product at a better price and will win that corner of the market over.
But you cannot spend your way out of debt. I know that, you know that, but the idiots in charge don't seem to get it. They may know it, but they don't care. They have all made their money and are now writing laws to protect themselves, and piss on the average American.
I don't think any of this going back and forth is a collosal waste of time. Sharing opinions. The more information I listen to and read, only makes me more informed. But I don't get frustrated here on this thread. My frustrations lie with the complete incompetence we have in power at all levels (state and federal). And the criminally negligent Federal Reserve. They should all be tarred and feathered, pitchforked, drawn and quartered, hung and then put the pieces in prison so they cannot continue to ruin this country.
-
wow..........
-
Some very good news for the future, unless you're Ben Bernanke. Ron Paul is going to chair the House Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy. As I have previously stated, I don't agree with him on all of his policies, but one I do agree with him on is Ending the Fed, and getting full disclosure from them. Personally I hope he is successful in two things; 1) absolutely crushing Bernanke and his insane fiscal dealings and 2) Ending the Fed or at least getting a full audit and making it mandatory for full disclosure in their dealings.
-
I think it is simple. Everyone should pay the same percentage of taxes. Why tax the wealthy more than the other guy. He has a right to make as much as he wants to. Why penalize him and make him pay more. I do not understand this. He pays more taxes as it is. 5% on a million is a lot more than 5% on 50 K. Since when is it anyone's business how much someone makes. Let me see, I work 15 hours a day and make 100K a year. You work 8 hours a day and make 50K. Just because I work harder does not mean it is my responsibility to bridge the gap. Will someone please enlighten me. Don't forget that the person making 100K also pays more taxes for a bigger house and more taxes on a nicer car. I don't get it.