Comments (view in Forum)

  • !
    Trickle down economics hasn't worked for the past 30 years, why would it now? Do they think additional tax cuts will suddenly give the wealthy a sense of patriotism and a conscience?
    And I have desert bridges for sale! Whoops I sounded capitalist there.
  • !
    "Stimulus" spending hasn't worked either. Trickle down will work, but you can't cut taxes and continue to spend money like a drunken sailor, THAT'S the problem.....
  • !
    Trickle Down vs Drunken Sailor.

    Don't you suppose that the establishment of a responsible, lean budget and cutting away all the earmarks would take care of our economy better than either of those two ideas?
  • View all 33 replies >

  • !
    Where was the CPC with a budget in 2010, 2011, and 2012?

    The only budget from Democrats that ever saw the light of day since 2009 was was rejected by the Democrat-controlled Senate 97-0.

    What I notice from this budget is that Democrats might not like "trickle down economics"... But they LOVE "trickle down government."
  • !
    I was wondering how the CPC was able to provide all these additional tax credits and expansion of government and I found it...

    The story we've been hearing is that Warren Buffet's secretary pays a higher tax rate than her boss. Warren Buffet's secretary is paying a 35% marginal income tax rate while her boss pays the capital gains tax rate of 15%.

    The CPC Budget would let Bush's marginal income tax cut expire which would raise taxes on Warren Buffet's secretary and install 5 more brackets on top that inches right up to but not quite HALF.

    "Enact the Fairness in Taxation Act - millionaire and billionaire tax rates proposal (adding 45%, 46%, 47%, 48%, and 49% top rates)"

    Then what the CPC Budget wants to tax capital gains at the same rates as the marginal rates.

    "Tax all capital gains and qualified dividends as ordinary income"
    http://grijalva.house.gov/uploads/Executive%2...

    Now, I understand that the Class Warriors would love this but that doesn't change the fact that nothing would chase wealth and investment out of this country faster than enacting this CPC Budget For All.
  • !
    So keep raising the burden on the people who are actually working until they strike. Sounds like a good book idea! We'll have the recurring quote "Who is Bobolinsky." We'll call it "The Heavens Shirked"
  • !
    Until either side mentions flat tax, I have very little interest in either. One for rich, one side for the poor! Little consolation for me and especially not my children. Middle class, they could not have given a better name! Stuck in the middle of BS!!!!
  • !
    You can forget about a flat tax.
    It's been mentioned various times before the elections & after the elections are over flat tax was just hot air
  • !
    Give it time artjeb. Just like Ron Paul has been slowly gaining respect, so has the idea of a flat tax. Once people understand how much power the evil rich and those faceless corporations lose when they can't hide their loopholes in the middle of thousands and thousands of pages of tax code, the brilliance of the simplicity of a simple Flat Tax that any of us could realistically read an comprehend.
  • !
    @Bobolinsky - You don't need a flat tax to simplify the tax code. All you need is a lower set of progressive tax rates and no deductions or only deductions for families with children.
  • !
    @Lorth-- I'd be more than happy to compromise on a much "flatter" tax than what we have now. One that makes the bump in tax rate an unimportant result of increasing one's earnings. I could be perfectly happy with a progression that ranges from say... 0-15%... maybe even 20%.

    I'd imagine a floor under which no tax would be collected. At some point... the poverty line, the tax rate would slowly increase at a pace that is outpaced by the rate of increase in earnings.

    That preserves the incentive for people to improve their own station in life through their own industry. But welfare programs like food stamps need to be reformed as well. They need to be structured in a similar way so that the decreases in benefits are outpaced by increases in earnings. The idea is to wean people off of assistance so that they are standing on their own two feet and not dependent on government.
  • !
    @Bobolinsky - There now, we've solved that problem together easily enough. I believe if we add a little "work required" to earn your welfare benefits we are coming close to creating the Utopia we've all been looking for. You down for dropping corporate taxes and property taxes also?
  • View all 27 replies >

  • !
    Well, let's look at this argument for w second. Leaving the spin aside, Rep. Honda has pointed out what he believes are deficits in Ryan's plan. With a couple exaggerations, ok.
    But then he offers only general platitudes as to how his party's plan is better. His plan would create jobs: how? There are no concrete examples of how his plan will close the deficit or reform entitlements. Just more fear. Medicare scare and pellet grants will go away? Pretty much the same old tune. Republicans hate the elderly and the poor.

    He is right about one thing, this election us about two very different philosophies. Whether we are serious about deficit reduction and allowing the private sector to grow our economy for the benefit of everyone or whether more govt is the answer. Whether bigger govt programs and hand outs will be our future. Will we truly become the nanny state of govt dependents? Or will we renew the independent American spirit of capitalism that built our economy and our prosperity. Not only did we build it, but we can again, and without big govt. That is the thought that keeps these greedy power mongering progressives awake at night. The Dems fear a country that doesn't need them. Let the entrepreneurs and the hard workers again shine, equal oppportunity is our benchmark, not the smothering fallacy of a security blanket that promotes only the mediocrity of equal results.
  • !
    @armed_liberal - In 2008, the top 1% wage earners ($380k+) paid 38% of the tax burden. The bottom 50% paid 2.7%. Major government expenditures include social security, medicare, medicaid and military. Social Security is a loss for everyone fairly equally until the ceiling rate of $110k+/-, then, because the rich don't have to contribute anymore above that, there is an ability to escape this foolish burden we impose on ourselves (small nonleach). Medicare is paid by an across the board 2.9% tax on payroll. However, if you consider that the payment to doctors that accept Medicare is subpar to private insurance payouts, the rich, who pay with private insurance, actually supplement the elderly who pay with Medicare. This factor will become more pronounced as we shift to the one-payer system (partial leach). Medicaid is a full leach program providing 0 benefits to the rich. Military spending, if taken to be for protection of property, is a 1 to 1 deal. You have x amount in property you've accumulated off of a wage of y which you've paid a percentage of in taxes and that x amount of property is protected by our military (non leach).

    All of this is good for discussion, but the clearest example of leach hood would be a poor person who walks our roads, eats our food, gets paid our welfare money and doesn't contribute one cent towards the funding of our government.

    http://www.exuberantaccountant.com/2011/05/is...
  • !
    @Bobolinsky - When someone wants to blindly believe something it is hard to change their mind. I am not here to change their minds, just sharpen my own.
  • !
    @DerivePI Fair enough. Sort of like how the profit motive is the best engine of economic growth. A "created job" is an effect of having too much work and too little time to do all that needs done to make that profit. That ain't a bad thing. And neither is educating liberals;-)
  • View all 9 replies >

  • !
    Good. Obama is destroying the American Dream, not only for us, but for our children and generations to come. I really think the American people will see this and VOTE HIM OUT!!!
  • !
    The American Dream was being destroyed before Obama took office. Obama is trying to restore the American Dream and the Ryan budget will only turn it into more of a nightmare.
  • !
    @Gilbert You may be right, George was not a fiscal conservative by any stretch, although he did have 9/11,
    Katrina and the war...You can't restore the American Dream by spending Trillions more dollars, you have to stop the bleeding,
    he hasn't done that, rather has tripled spending, you can't spend
    your way out of debt! Ask any financial expert, you can't.
  • !
    @Gilbert I don't agree, Bush was not a fiscal conservative. Obama is out spending Bush by three to one. How is that helping the economy?
  • !
    @mimi57 We agree to disagree. Because Obama has no other choice after Bush in the current atmosphere of government gridlock.. Plus, your calculation of Bush's spending compared to Obama's is fuzzy math at best. And you can't dismiss the poor demand in current economic conditions after the crash that inevitably happened at the end of Bush's reign. The Greedy Old Party will only champion failed, trickle-down economic ideas of the past.
    http://politix.topix.com/homepage/1969-republ...
  • !
    Its absolutely the worst plan ever, for America...This guy insists on using the same old theories that have already been proven not to work...Then he wants to leave all of our lives and economic future in the hands of the top 1%...Completely closing his eyes to the fact that their ONLY obligation is to fill up their own pockets....and, yes, if necessary at the expense of any/everyone else...Who in their right mind to trust all that we are and all that we have to this small group of greedy and socially bankrupt corporate vultures?---Who?!? This guy knows very little about anything, except holding down his cushy "government job"...He's been living on the public dole for quite some time, now...and thinks that HE knows whats best for all of America...No thanks, pal...
  • !
    @mimi57 ---Good morning Mimi...I see you are "in the mix of things, this morning"..LOL...Good...Bu t I'm telling you....God help us if Rom & Ry ----get elected...its going to be bad, when they create the same climate that we had during the Great Depression....No safety net, No medicine, No jobs----

    But here's what I wanted to ask you, Mimi..."Do you really think its a good idea to give the top 1% even more power over the rest of us"? I mean...if we always knuckle under to what ever demand they may be making---are we not going to find our selves simply being held "hostage" to a very, very, small plutocracy ...and have to live every aspect of our lives under their "mercy"?
  • !
    @Sonny Good Morning Sonny,
    I was a Dem for most of my adult life. I voted for Clinton and actually liked him. I held the same views you do, I'm not thrilled
    with "rich" people, but mid-income and poor people don't provide jobs.. I work for a very unique agency. I work at a therapeutic farm w/ severely mentally ill people, not M.R. The owner is a lady
    who is 90, she got her money from owning railroads, her husband was a well known Atty. Their son was schizophrenic,
    and she placed him in a Therapeutic Farm Community in Mass.
    She was so impressed by the place, that she bought a huge
    house that had been a B&B. She added 3 cottages and now
    has the room for 60 or more people who suffer from various
    mental illness. She employs a large staff, pays them well, employs other staff at her personal mansion and pays them well.
    My husband works for an environmental company, he travels
    and is gone all week, but he makes great money. His boss started the company out of his garage, and now has a house next to a celebrity. He's a great guy and employs about 180
    people. They are both rich, and both would be considered small business owners... My boss, as well as my husbands , donates
    thousands of dollars to charities. So, I don't envy the rich, I feel
    we need them. Unless one is an entrepeneur, we will work for someone, and it won't be a poor person. I had to get away from the "Class Warfare" mentality. Out of space. Whew!
  • !
    @mimi57 Well the thing is, Mimi..."The rich need us, just as much as you feel that we need them"...And I guess I can never understand why people don't realize that....The rich don't create jobs...Demand does that...Try this...take the richest guy in the world...have him pile all of his cash up on the table in one big warehouse (he can have armed guards all around it, I don't want him to loose even one nickel from my experiemnt_..LOL...Then have it just sit there..day after day, month after month, year after year...And guess what happens...? NOTHING!... Thats right...he can have all the money in the world in his pocket...but until and unless he has US, yes people...to do something ...he has Nothing...So why should it be so one-sided? in his favor...Whats he going to do without us...eat his money?..Because thats about all its good for, with out people....so its really a two sided negotiation in everything.....Thats my positon.
  • View all 20 replies >

  • !
    Bad for America because the Ryan budget will favor a small minority of greedy Americans that don't care enough about anything but themselves, let alone a better future for our children.
  • !
    Your hair should be on fire because the same cast of neo fascists corporatists that have thrown hundreds of millions of Americans out of work is well on the way to bringing the Chinese Oligarchy to Amerika. The key players in the plot; right wingers in finance and corporatists like the Koch brothers.

    For those of you who think this is so farfetched simply look at China today. Who could have imagined that in a span of time less than a generation China went from Mao to oligarchy?

    China basically replaced a centralized crony party system with a series of insider Capitalist cronies. The enabling factor was that as where Mao refused to trade with the west the oligarchs quickly realized that 150 million Chinese laborers working for less than 30 cents an hour was an economic force too powerful to deny for greedy late stage capitalist like the Kochs and the Schaifs.

    You might take some comfort in that we no longer fear the massive Communist world takeover because China today is our friend not to mention our most important trading power. Besides, you don’t have to live in that largely crap hole world so, as long as you can buy cheap Chinese made junk at WalMart, who cares? But that crap hole world is on its way to you now and it is right on schedule.

    The grand strategy of the Republican /Corporatist (neo-fascist) is to generate the economic crisis that will facilitate the arrival of oligarchy. When it does what is left of the recovery will convert to a 1930’s style depression. It will be epic and ugly. There will be massive civil unrest that will enable the fine print in the Patriot Act to deal with the angry masses. When the SWAT Team throws a flash-bang grenade into your bedroom at 3:00am in the morning – let me know how well your right to own as many guns as you like works out.

    Realistically the in the first phase of the takeover, the oligarchs want controlled crisis – enough to force the sale and privatization of everything that is in the public sphere. Your wages will continue downward to a bottom that makes us competitive with Chinese laborers when you include the shipping cost of goods.

    What’s the solution? Well you can buy us a few more years if you elect Obama. If you go with the Romney the oligarch scenario will engage within his second year in office. The choice is yours…

    By the way in 2007 when I predicted the housing collapse of epic proportion all the right wing trolls here at Topix said I was wrong then too.
  • !
    Thank you! You have hit the nail on the head. There will be widespread suffering and protests which is what the republicans want. I know and am related to many republicans who have voiced a desire for a situation much like you describe. Unbelieveably scary!
  • !
    When any business or household finances over 40% of their operating costs, that is a recipe for disaster. To cut or tax our way out of this deficit spending will not be easy or pain free. Even reforms to SS or medicare will be difficult in light of 10,000 boomers retiring every day. The parties will never agree what needs to be cut or who should be taxed more, that is obvious. The only solution I see in the near term is to have automatic cuts across the board with no input from any politician. We have trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see and have created the vast majority of our debt in just the last 10 years. We are running out of time and if something is not done in the near future, there won't be much of an American dream. Our fiscal irresponsibility is the greatest threat to our future.
  • !
    I have one word : arithmetic. It's not like the top 5% are in trouble this moment. Actually they're richer than ever for the past decade. Corporate profits are at an all time high. Do you feel the trickle down effect? Do you? Probably not unless you build yachts for a living.
  • !
    A flat tax. Same for all, and no loopholes to bury money. This is how much you make, this is the tax. But you can get caught up in the under the table dealings. Any political figure of today an yesterday year has a certain amount corruption within, so this will never go.
  • !
    Anybody who thinks Ayn Rand had all the answers, needs to be ejected from his bought and paid for seat.

    He would destroy the American dream.

    Look at what bush did, and with little effort....
  • R Load more comments...