|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Oct 6, 2013 11:02:36 GMT
Tea Party Republicans are finally starting to admit that their linkage to defunding or delaying the Affordable Care Act as a condition of funding government has been disastrous for the nation and are beginning to back down on that issue.
After only 42 attempts to repeal Obamacare have failed the Tea Party Republicans are finally realizing that they're not going to repeal Obamacare? GEE, YA THINK!!! It would be hard to believe that any American thinks that Obamacare can be repealed so long as President Obama is in office. To believe that is pure insanity.
So they want to shift it to a budget fight but once again their ignorance and myopic agenda betrays them. From the same story:
Sounds great but they miss the point in there agenda.
First of all the largest "entitlement" program is Social Security that has never contributed one dime to the deficits or the national debt. In fact during the Reagan administration American workers were required to pay more in taxes than the program needed to build a surplus so that future benefits for them would be funded. Now the Republican want to slash those benefits for the same people that paid more to prevent them from being slashed. First screw the American worker by over taxing them and then slash the benefits that they were supposed to receive based upon that over-taxation.
Here's a fact about Social Security. It only averages about $15,000/yr in benefits and that is poverty level by all reasonable standards. Social Security needs to provide more benefits, not less, and that is a funding problem not a spending problem. It is, of course, easily solved by lifting the cap on the 12.4% FICA/Payroll/Self-Employment tax and applying it to all incomes regardless of source.
Personally I've advocated for privatization of Social Security but that would take about 40 years and cost an additional $40 trillion in additional taxation as well.
The proposition of "dollar for dollar" stipulations is also absurd as it doesn't reduce the deficits. It merely perpetuated them. We need a dollar in new spending authorization to be offset with a dollar in existing spending reduction PLUS two dollars in new tax revenue if we're going to not just balance the budget but also create a surplus to pay down the national debt. We know that those two dollars can't come from low or middle income workers so who's left in American to carry that additional tax burden? Gee, how about the multi-millionaires who's life styles are not adversely affected by paying more in taxes? What a novel idea. Tax the rich? Never fly with a Republican House.
We should also be looking at where we can cut expenditures so that it doesn't adversely affect the American People. Cutting entitlements like the SNAP program literally takes food of the plates of needy families. Is there somewhere else we could cut expenditures that won't harm the poorest of Americans?
How about looking at this: Basically $1.5 trillion in expenditures because the US is playing World Cop and this only relates to two wars and is only a fraction of the overall cost. The actual cost of our role as World Cop is closer to $6 trillion over the last decade. And what have we bought with that money? Are we any safer? Not really as the international terrorist threat against the United States has increased during that time period. Have we improved the plight of the people in any nation? Not really because Iraq and Afghanistan are just as corrupt today as they were before we invaded them. The people are no better off and all we've really done is leave a path of dead bodies in the Middle East creating more enemies of the United States.
As for "Obamacare" they're right. The need to back off on it until at least 2017. If Republicans win the presidential election, secure 60 seats in the Senate, and maintain a majority in the House then then can address "Obamacare" once again but unless that happens their efforts are going to be nothing but failure after failure just like the last 42 attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act. |
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Oct 6, 2013 15:01:12 GMT
What is it about the Tea Party agenda....which is "fiscal responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government, and free market economics that YOU don't believe in?
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Oct 6, 2013 17:22:08 GMT
What is it about the Tea Party agenda....which is "fiscal responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government, and free market economics that YOU don't believe in?
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Oct 6, 2013 17:36:55 GMT
Of note I'm a Laisse-Faire capitalist where government regulations are required to protect the Rights of the People as opposed to a "Free-Market" capitalist where regulation is opposed. I also understand that for Laisse-Faire capitalism to function that the playing field has to be level for everyone. As long as we have denial of equality of economic opportunity based upon race, gender, and ethnic heritage we don't have the level playing field. So long as that level playing field doesn't exist then our government has a responsibility to mitigate the effects of the denial of equality of opportunity.
The Tea Party movement typically ignores, or worse still, denies the fact that not every person in the United States is afforded equality of opportunity in employment and refuses to accept the fact that our government has a responsibility to mitigate the effects of this discrimination.
|
|
|
|
Post by maniacalhamster on Oct 6, 2013 18:44:32 GMT
What is it about the Tea Party agenda....which is "fiscal responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government, and free market economics that YOU don't believe in?
Actually the democrats have always had the same agenda, how is it you don't get that? The proof is in Obamacare. It's fiscal responsible for everyone , takes in consideration the family income of everyone. The free market economics are not reagan economic absurdities that got the world into trouble with derivatives and other wall street disasters such as banking laws that allowed for the mortgage bubble. It eventually ruined the world economy. Conservatives wanted in on that band wagon in Canada and the Liberal government with all it's wisdom denied the shift to american style banking. And now the Conservative brag about Canadian banking laws worldwide at every opportunity they get. Now everyone is holding it together with World Banks printing trillions, which all admit is an unknown. All due to reagon ecomics of the 80's.. Clinton created a surplus and Bush destroyed it as well as not avoiding the pending disaster of 2008. Which they knew very well was inevatble. to say they didn't is admitting they were totally inept and unknowing in economic matters and any remnant of those republicans should be banned from politics of any kind and any sort of lobbying the government any agenda. the democrats are not creating more government , only the tea party seem to think so and run platforms on it. It's sort of like listening to Smartmouthwoman trying to post political agendas here that are filled with untruths, whimsical dreams to try and defame the Democrats, and misadventure aimed at the Democrats.
The tea party are defacto political refugees from a variety of mean spirited over zealous advocate groups with no agenda other than disrupting the office of the present elected government administration. |
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Oct 7, 2013 14:23:43 GMT
There is one fact about the Tea Party movement that is correct. The average working American is paying too much in taxes.
 When we look at the above chart the 15% earned income tax rate applies up to $72,500 that represents about 75% of all workers in America. When we add to that the FICA/Payroll/Self-employment tax they're really responsible for a tax burden of 32.3% on their income. They're responsible for paying over 18% of all income taxes but this same group is also responsible for paying virtually all of the Social Security/Medicare taxes that comprise about 1/3 of all federal tax revenues. The wage earner they only see 1/2 of the FICA/Payroll tax amount on their W-2 form but in fact they're paying it all with 1/2 of it really being unreported income as it is a cost of labor for the enterprise. The worker pays for it with their labor.
And now for the shocking fact...
 An investor with $72,500 pay zero taxes. They don't pay any Capital Gains tax and they don't pay FICA/Payroll/Self-employment taxes on their income. Not one dime of taxes are being imposed on investors on their first $72,500 in net income.
When we compare taxes across the board the investors pay less than 1/2 of the taxes that working Americans pay.
The high tax burden for working Americans isn't because of the poor not paying enough in taxes but instead it's because wealthy investors have the lowest tax burden relative to income in the United States. The bottom 75%of wage earners has a tax burden on their income while the wealthy investor doesn't have any tax burden on the same income.
|
|
|
|
Post by maniacalhamster on Oct 7, 2013 14:32:46 GMT
Canada on average pays 52% of the wages in taxes...federal taxes by paycheque and then provincial taxes at the cashier..our gas is taxed like crazy thats why it's almost twice as expensive as you guys pay..
we complain about it ...but not like you guys...for life in Canada is pretty good.
I think you will never be happy as long as you spend trillions on military, and finally realize there is a 1% enjoying it to the fullest whilst the rest are either working poor, or bourgeoisie with a facade for a life, or just poor.
there is no squalor in Canada like you see in america...We are horrified when we travel and drive through america and come across mini squalor cities...and huge swaths of run down hell holes.
we don't have ghettos... we never had plantations with working for the company and living for the company forever.
we do have abuse of native peoples, well up to a few years ago...now millions are being paid out to them ...when we find disgusting in our society we rally to fix it and mend it...
you people are being played ...listen to the republican protectors of the right here and on other forums...it's maniacal...lol
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Oct 7, 2013 14:59:16 GMT
Canada cannot be compared to the United States. It only has slightly more than 10% of the US population and doesn't have a racial discrimination problem like the United States as less than 1% of Canadians are of African descent.
|
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Oct 7, 2013 15:38:26 GMT
What is it about the Tea Party agenda....which is "fiscal responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government, and free market economics that YOU don't believe in?
And your comments don't even describe the problem. The real problem is that the burden of paying for Obamacare is on the middle class. Obama and the Democrats did that; not the Republicans. Plus I don't get how you're blaming the Tea Party for playing World Cop....as you call it....when your very own man, Barack Obama, has escalated that BIG TIME. Not a word of criticism for him, though, from you.
The last comment about agreeing with the U.S. Constitution is laughable.....coming from someone who actually defends this administration at every turn. |
|
|
|
Post by maniacalhamster on Oct 7, 2013 15:55:37 GMT
Canada cannot be compared to the United States. It only has slightly more than 10% of the US population and doesn't have a racial discrimination problem like the United States as less than 1% of Canadians are of African descent. actually white people of european descent are almost a minority right now. toronto looks like India and china now... what does this have to do with what i was saying anyway. are you saying the squalor is due to a larger african descent crowd? thats unfair of me to ask...but it brings in a whole other area of discussion. You cannot expect a slave people with only a hundred years of freedom and 50 years of voting rights to not have problems over all in a society. grumbling about taxes is the issue... we too have a different tax rate for those in the know... i run a small buisness...i right everything off and do not pay taxes...i'm in a zero tax bracket...lol... if your wealthy there is a plethora of ways to not pay one's fair share. we all have to be honest about whats going down... right here in this forum there is a chance to have at least "US" agreeing and coming to common ground... but if one is really thinking that fox news is a valid teacher of anything of value...and they really think that...well , |
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Oct 7, 2013 16:16:07 GMT
You do know, don't you, that it was Pres. Obama who made a deal that kept in place most of Bush's tax cuts? And so......you condemn it, BUT give him no blame. Why did he do it? It's certainly not because he's economically smart. It was one for 2 reasons: 1) it was right before the last election and he knew that the public; including Democrats, do NOT vote for FOR tax hikes. and 2) He also knows there's an inverse correlation between hiking capital gains tax rates and the amount of capital gains revenue we bring in. That's because as they go up, investors will simply move to something else. It' a misnomer to think that it's only the "rich" who have capital gains. It's also crazy to believe that even the Democrats' rich don't look for every legal way to save their money as well. Soros does it; Obama does it; Pelosi does it----they ALL do it.
So foolish.....but Dems and their supporters would just as soon cut off their noses to spite their face.....meaning, as long as some think they are "hurting" the so-called rich, they are all for it; regardless of what it does to the economy.
|
|
|
|
Post by maniacalhamster on Oct 7, 2013 16:27:17 GMT
It's also crazy to believe that even the Democrats' rich don't look for every legal way to save their money as well. Soros does it; Obama does it; Pelosi does it----they ALL do it.
two wrongs does not make a right. you need to tax anyone making a million or more dollars like this. up to the first million , regular tax rates...after that ..half of what you make is taxed. thats the way it is in France except the big tax hike starts at around 250 thousand. it's the only way to be fair and make your cuntry a better place to live with universal day care and health care and free medicines for the poor... also if the poor should be given a paid for vacation in at least a four star resort somewhere in america...like the Soviet union did for it's people at the black sea. every Soviet citizen got a week at a resort there for free. |
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Oct 7, 2013 21:29:45 GMT
The part about blaming the poor in society for federal deficits when, in fact, is the under-taxation of the wealthy that are the root cause of the deficits. It's the part about them supporting Crony Capitalism as opposed to "Free Market" capitalism that requires open immigration policies where immigration is based upon the supply and demand for labor. It is their failure to address the greatest waste of the wealth of America in playing "World Cop" and instead of using the wealth of America for the benefit of the American People. It is the fact that they only agree with the US Constitution when it fits with their political agenda and then reject it whenever it doesn't.
And your comments don't even describe the problem. The real problem is that the burden of paying for Obamacare is on the middle class. Obama and the Democrats did that; not the Republicans. Plus I don't get how you're blaming the Tea Party for playing World Cop....as you call it....when your very own man, Barack Obama, has escalated that BIG TIME. Not a word of criticism for him, though, from you.
The last comment about agreeing with the U.S. Constitution is laughable.....coming from someone who actually defends this administration at every turn.
A much as I condemn the Obama administration for continuing the US role of World Cop he hasn't been nearly as bad a the prior administration that launched two wars and left two major wars that added roughly $1.5 trillion national debt.
I've also agreed that the funding for "Obamacare" is wrong. The costs should have been levied on the wealthy in America as opposed to the workers of America. The wealthy investors that pay Capital Gains taxes pay less than 1/2 the tax rates of working Americans on their income.
I've also condemned the entire "Obamacare" program as, at least from my perspective, the problem could have been resolved by simply fulfilling the original Mission Statement of Medicaid. I proposed this in 2009 and haven't backed off from it one iota. The Mission Statement of Medicaid in the 1960's was to provide health care for those that couldn't afford it but that Mission Statement has never been fulfilled due to a lack of funding by the US Congress and the States. If the Mission Statement for Medicaid had been fulfilled since the 1960's there wouldn't have been a problem in 2009.
The Tea Party refuses to address the elephant in the living room when it comes to over-spending by the United States government which is the DOD budget. That budget is at least twice what is necessary for the US military to be the finest military in the world to provide for the defense of the United States and a deterant against any foreign invasion or attack especially considering that not a single nation in the world threatens to attack the United States today.
Instead the Tea Party movement targets Social Security that has never contributed even one dime to the national debt and, in fact, over-taxed working Americans since the 1980's with the promise that the over-taxation would prevent their benefits from being cut in the future. The Social Security Trust Fund has almost $3 trillion in reserves and it's greatest problem is that the benefits are too low, not too high, but it does require additional funding to continue paying benefits in about 20 years. Why haven't wealthy investors ever been required to pay into this fund? If we eliminate the cap (currently about $110,000/yr) and impose the 12.4% Social Security tax on all income regardless of source the funding of Social Security is solved.
Better still we could privatize Social Security but the Tea Party movement has never made any realistic proposal to do this where benefits could be increased for those collecting Social Security welfare checks as well as starting young workers on the path of investments that would result in privatization within the 40 year time span that would be required. Privatizing Social Security will take at least 40 years and it will cost about $40 trillion but the Tea Party movement refused to pay the costs of the transition. Sometimes it costs money to save money but the Tea Party is apparently completely ignorant of this fact.
The Tea Party wants to reduce welfare spending and so do I. The difference is that to reduce welfare spending requires reducing poverty that the welfare mitigates. The Tea Party refuses to address the problem which is poverty and instead chooses to leave the poverty in place while refusing to mitigate it's effects. We have to address the PROBLEM and the Tea Party won't do that.
The Tea Party are also hypocrites when it comes to the Constitution. They complain about Social Security/Medicare/Obamacare calling them unconstitutional because they lack specific enumeration in the US Constitution but endorse immigration limitations when the US Constitution doesn't enumerate any role or responsibility of government to control immigration. The word "immigration" is not mentioned anywhere in the US Constitution and controlling immigration is not an enumerated power of the federal government.
From what I gather most in the Tea Party are opposed to ending the War on Drugs but once again no where in the US Constitution does it provide any authority for the federal government to prohibit the American People from using growing, processing, possessing or using drugs of any kind.
Many, if not most, in the Tea Party movement are opposed to same-sex marriage even though the 14th Amendment prohibits denial of equal protection under the law and Article IV Section I requires all states to give full faith and credit to official records of another state that would require them to recognized same-sex marriages from other states.
The examples of when the Tea Party movement is hypocritical related to the US Constitution are almost endless.
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Oct 7, 2013 21:58:07 GMT
As noted when I created this thread the Republicans have changed from Plan A (defunding or delaying Obamacare) to addressing the deficits and debt ceiling so why haven't they passed a Continuing Resolution to fund government without any "Obamacare" provisions? Basically they just need to pass the Senate legislation that stripped out the "Obamacare" provisions.
Yes, the national debt is a major concern and tax reform has always been the problem. We need to ensure that all Americans are carrying the same tax burden relative to income but today it's the workers of America that have the highest tax burden relative to income.
Yes, we need to address "entitlements" by reducing the need of these "entitlements" but the Republicans aren't addressing that problem at all. Social Security and Medicare needs to have benefits increased, not decreased, and that is a funding problem and not a spending problem. Assistance for the poor to mitigate the effects of poverty needs to be addressed by reducing poverty and not reducing benefits.
We don't just need a balanced budget but instead a surplus budget to pay down the national debt. There aren't enough spending cuts to do this responsibly even if we cut the DOD budget, the elephant in the living room, by 50%. We certainly can't do this by cutting welfare assistance that mitigates the effects of poverty. We need to raise tax revenues and working Americans cannot afford to have their taxes raised. Only the wealthy can afford to pay more in taxes and they can easily afford to pay far more. Today they're not even paying their "fair share" as the tax rates for the top 1% are less than 1/2 that those for working Americans that pay earned income taxes.
We also need to dispel the myth that wealthy investors benefit the US Economy. They are not investing in corporations but instead are investing in secondary financial markets that do not fund enterprise. This was the problem with "Trickle-down" economics under Reagan. These investments don't fund enterprise at all.
If we want to improve the US economy then we need to increase consumption by the 90% of working Americans. Simply trading corporate ownership between individuals in the top 1% does nothing to improve the economy.
|
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Oct 8, 2013 3:05:12 GMT
First off....you didn't answer the question. None of the statements you make have a thing to do with what the Tea Party stands for.
And your comments don't even describe the problem. The real problem is that the burden of paying for Obamacare is on the middle class. Obama and the Democrats did that; not the Republicans. Plus I don't get how you're blaming the Tea Party for playing World Cop....as you call it....when your very own man, Barack Obama, has escalated that BIG TIME. Not a word of criticism for him, though, from you.
The last comment about agreeing with the U.S. Constitution is laughable.....coming from someone who actually defends this administration at every turn.
A much as I condemn the Obama administration for continuing the US role of World Cop he hasn't been nearly as bad a the prior administration that launched two wars and left two major wars that added roughly $1.5 trillion national debt.
I've also agreed that the funding for "Obamacare" is wrong. The costs should have been levied on the wealthy in America as opposed to the workers of America. The wealthy investors that pay Capital Gains taxes pay less than 1/2 the tax rates of working Americans on their income.
I've also condemned the entire "Obamacare" program as, at least from my perspective, the problem could have been resolved by simply fulfilling the original Mission Statement of Medicaid. I proposed this in 2009 and haven't backed off from it one iota. The Mission Statement of Medicaid in the 1960's was to provide health care for those that couldn't afford it but that Mission Statement has never been fulfilled due to a lack of funding by the US Congress and the States. If the Mission Statement for Medicaid had been fulfilled since the 1960's there wouldn't have been a problem in 2009.
The Tea Party refuses to address the elephant in the living room when it comes to over-spending by the United States government which is the DOD budget. That budget is at least twice what is necessary for the US military to be the finest military in the world to provide for the defense of the United States and a deterant against any foreign invasion or attack especially considering that not a single nation in the world threatens to attack the United States today.
Instead the Tea Party movement targets Social Security that has never contributed even one dime to the national debt and, in fact, over-taxed working Americans since the 1980's with the promise that the over-taxation would prevent their benefits from being cut in the future. The Social Security Trust Fund has almost $3 trillion in reserves and it's greatest problem is that the benefits are too low, not too high, but it does require additional funding to continue paying benefits in about 20 years. Why haven't wealthy investors ever been required to pay into this fund? If we eliminate the cap (currently about $110,000/yr) and impose the 12.4% Social Security tax on all income regardless of source the funding of Social Security is solved.
Better still we could privatize Social Security but the Tea Party movement has never made any realistic proposal to do this where benefits could be increased for those collecting Social Security welfare checks as well as starting young workers on the path of investments that would result in privatization within the 40 year time span that would be required. Privatizing Social Security will take at least 40 years and it will cost about $40 trillion but the Tea Party movement refused to pay the costs of the transition. Sometimes it costs money to save money but the Tea Party is apparently completely ignorant of this fact.
The Tea Party wants to reduce welfare spending and so do I. The difference is that to reduce welfare spending requires reducing poverty that the welfare mitigates. The Tea Party refuses to address the problem which is poverty and instead chooses to leave the poverty in place while refusing to mitigate it's effects. We have to address the PROBLEM and the Tea Party won't do that.
The Tea Party are also hypocrites when it comes to the Constitution. They complain about Social Security/Medicare/Obamacare calling them unconstitutional because they lack specific enumeration in the US Constitution but endorse immigration limitations when the US Constitution doesn't enumerate any role or responsibility of government to control immigration. The word "immigration" is not mentioned anywhere in the US Constitution and controlling immigration is not an enumerated power of the federal government.
From what I gather most in the Tea Party are opposed to ending the War on Drugs but once again no where in the US Constitution does it provide any authority for the federal government to prohibit the American People from using growing, processing, possessing or using drugs of any kind.
Many, if not most, in the Tea Party movement are opposed to same-sex marriage even though the 14th Amendment prohibits denial of equal protection under the law and Article IV Section I requires all states to give full faith and credit to official records of another state that would require them to recognized same-sex marriages from other states.
The examples of when the Tea Party movement is hypocritical related to the US Constitution are almost endless.
|
|
