221 replies to this topic

[Arjan Dirkse]

http://www.washingto...m=Cheat%20Sheet

Why would any gay person even want to be associated with the Republican Party?

Kind of delusional. I hope this opens his eyes.

Edited by Arjan Dirkse, 03 May 2012 - 02:00 PM.

[Johnny Henning]

Sexual orientation doesn't necessarily have a lot to do with political ideology. Gay people are just people so they will have a broad spectrum of ideals.

But I agree, while one might be a gay conservative, it would be hard to join the Republican Party since it actively opposes homosexuality in all aspects of our society.

[Johnny Henning]

I agree, but putting being cynical aside, no one's found a solution to limiting private company payouts, there's no model for it. The regulation of the banking sector has to come from the govt. which should be part of any rescue package, but besides some odd countries there's not a great deal of history of govt. run banks. I find it hard to argue though that you need ridiculous sums of money to attract the best people, but then, should we pay people who run the country more than a football player? would we be happy if politicians were earning 10-100 million bucks a year from the public purse??
Dunno. I also don't know about taxing billionaires to solve the economy, I mean, how many are there and how much money would you actually raise by increasing the income tax rate to them. Most tax money is only ever going to be raised from the 99% of the economy. Most money attributed to the wealthy is actually tied up in various company structures and investments so it's not like in their bank or anything.

Are you sure about that, though? I thought the most tax revenue actually comes from the higher income brackets rather than the majority of Americans below that level.

Also, as far as CEO's, their compensation and the manner of it is well defined by the company. If the compensation is defined then you can tax that compensation no matter what form it takes. It's not like the IRS is filled with simpletons. They can and often have to figure out complex manuevers to hide income everyday. Also, it becomes a cost-benefit problem, too. When you spend about as much to hide income than you would pay in taxes, and risk committing a crime as well, it becomes easier to just pay the taxes.

[Jim Ohara]

Things would be alot simpler if capital gains were taxed at the same rates as regular income. That's where the rich have really been scamming regular Americans. The argument about an extra 3% on the highest bracket on Federal taxes is a distraction from the cuts in capital gains. No-one wants the media talking about those, so they're distracting the people with the shiny conversation about millionaires.

[garjones]

I'm not sure it's anything as radical as Jamon is suggesting.

We have been on an ever marching downward trend in taxation, mainly benefiting the wealthiest. King isn't mentioning controlling private sector salaries, he's loaded. He's just talking about paying a bit more, essentially how society functioned say 20 years ago. It's often used in the UK but there isn't much point diverting slaries through limited companies in the US as the company tax is as high or higher than the top income tax rate. There they use capital gains to avoid but that rate can be increased. The arguments are there, similar to the job creator ones, that it would cause investment to end but you know people invested when it was a lot higher.

There are limits, supertaxes in the 70s created exiles and often caused money to flee, but there's little evidence an extra 5-10% does that. The likes of Buffet and King are saying it won't for them.

[Johnny Henning]

And like we're seeing in Europe, the point of taxation is to keep the money flowing into various levels of the private sector. Government spending is necessary to a healthy national economy ergo tax revenue is also important to general economic prosperity.

[Jim Ohara]

Members of Congress as Muppets

Beaker and Congressman James Lankford


Newsman and Congressman Eric Cantor


Senator Mary Landrieu and Miss Piggy


Dr. Bunsen Honeydew and Congressman Gary Ackerman


Senator Chuck Schumer and Gonzo


Speaker John Boehner and Scooter


Bobo the Bear and Congressman John Lewis


More here.

[garjones]

And like we're seeing in Europe, the point of taxation is to keep the money flowing into various levels of the private sector. Government spending is necessary to a healthy national economy ergo tax revenue is also important to general economic prosperity.

Which is exactly what was seen in the UK. The promise was public sector cuts would be filled by private sector jobs and growth. However you close a school and you lay off dozens of private sector workers or reduce their income, the caterers, the cleaners, the food suppliers, the plumbers, the electricians. Your cutting off an arm and asking them to grow two back.

[Jim Ohara]

Everytime I hear someone criticize government spending I wonder if they know what the government spends money on, or where the money goes. Tax revenues are all spend, and they're spent within the country, stimulating local economies. It's mobilized in places where it will be recirculated immediately. Private money is much more likely to either a) be invested outside the borders or b) be removed from the economy by being locked away in long term yield assets.

I think some people believe government money just disappears into a cave somewhere.

[Chris D]

I think some people believe government money just disappears into a cave somewhere.

To be fair, they do have some reason to think this. I mean there was that whole thing where something like $9 billion set for the rebuilding effort in Iraq went missing. Couldn't be accounted for by the Department of Defense. It's not like there isn't major reform needed in a lot of areas, and much better oversight is need too. I do think there is probably plenty of very wasteful spending.

[Ogul]

To be fair, they do have some reason to think this. I mean there was that whole thing where something like $9 billion set for the rebuilding effort in Iraq went missing. Couldn't be accounted for by the Department of Defense. It's not like there isn't major reform needed in a lot of areas, and much better oversight is need too. I do think there is probably plenty of very wasteful spending.

Yes, but that was a very unusual situation in that we were nation building in a way we usually don't, with a very bad government in place at the time. There is a decent amount of waste in government (although all of it together is a drop in the bucket compared to the national budget, like complaining about misplacing the loose change in your pocket), but under usual circumstances if there is waste, it's at least waste entirely within US borders, so the money comes back to us. Republicans crow about shutting down a ton of "government jobs", but the point they miss is that these are JOBS, employing actual US citizens and paying wages that they'll put right back into the economy. For some reason they seem to think a government job is not as good as a private sector job, but that isn't true to the person who actually had that job.

[Will]

To be fair, they do have some reason to think this. I mean there was that whole thing where something like $9 billion set for the rebuilding effort in Iraq went missing. Couldn't be accounted for by the Department of Defense. It's not like there isn't major reform needed in a lot of areas, and much better oversight is need too. I do think there is probably plenty of very wasteful spending.

I get where you're going with this, but the money was actually transferred to the Central Iraq Bank. There are several reasons why it was unaccounted for, one that it was forgotten in a paper error, misplaced due to incompetence, or no one was told because leaving that much money in a volatile environment would've ensured the bank was robbed.

But I agree there is probably plenty of wasteful spending. A problem is that what you might consider wasteful I see as job protection for a large part of my community and vice versa.
Regardless, there are areas that I'm sure most agree can be trimmed, and a little here and a little there can go a long way.

[Johnny Henning]

On the other hand, if it doesn't go there, it has to go somewhere else. Aside from my money is the worst idea ever theme in the other thread, there is an interesting concept in the idea that taxes and government spending actually "creates" value rather than takes it from the private sector.


In regard to the upcoming election, I've found this site - not too hard to find - that sorta projects the electoral map. http://www.270towin.com/

It's no secret that a candidates platform and ideas are actually not what wins elections. Instead, hard campaigning and spending a lot of money to motivate supporters voting in key areas is what needs to be done. Notably, Florida, a swing state, now has 29 electoral votes like New York. Obama could conceivably still win without Florida, but it would be tough. However, I think it's a must win state for Romney unless he can turn a blue state red.

[Chris D]

I get where you're going with this, but the money was actually transferred to the Central Iraq Bank. There are several reasons why it was unaccounted for, one that it was forgotten in a paper error, misplaced due to incompetence, or no one was told because leaving that much money in a volatile environment would've ensured the bank was robbed.

But I agree there is probably plenty of wasteful spending. A problem is that what you might consider wasteful I see as job protection for a large part of my community and vice versa.
Regardless, there are areas that I'm sure most agree can be trimmed, and a little here and a little there can go a long way.

Yeah, no doubt. I was mostly playing Devil's Advocate with my last post. I can see why people think tax money just disappears. Because, just going back to that Iraq money thing for a second, I heard all over the news about the money being unaccounted for. I don't remember at all the media ever actually reporting what really happened to it once they found out. So it would seem like another situation where the 24 hour news media has been very irresponsible.

[Jim Ohara]

I think it's obvious that government spending creates value. It goes right back into the private sector. It's always spent, and the people who receive it always spend it. Medicaid and Medicare fund the health insurance industry - increasing the customer base which improves services for all and reduces costs. Social security funds rents, groceries and other basic needs. Even the military money remains in the US - manufacturing and materials have to come from US based corporations and the troops are all American citizens.

The GOP have spent the last 3 years attacking the redistribution of wealth without identifying where the wealth redistributes to, or how the wealthy accumulate their income in the first place (here's a hint - they get it from lots of poor people buying their services).

No Republican has ever got over 300 electoral votes in the last 20 years, whereas both Obama and Clinton did. Electoral votes increased in mostly red states (GOP continuing to fix the system), but those red states are very purple now (the migration of industry to the southern states is making them more liberal both through worker migration and education opportunities). Obama is taking NV, PA, VA and NH, so he's already at 270. I don't see how Mitt can win. I don't think anyone expects him to win to be honest.

Missing Iraq money may have been stolen, auditors say
U.S. Defense officials still cannot say what happened to $6.6 billion, sent by the planeload in cash and intended for Iraq's reconstruction after the start of the war.

Reporting from Washington — After the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the George W. Bush administration flooded the conquered country with so much cash to pay for reconstruction and other projects in the first year that a new unit of measurement was born.
Pentagon officials determined that one giant C-130 Hercules cargo plane could carry $2.4 billion in shrink-wrapped bricks of $100 bills. They sent an initial full planeload of cash, followed by 20 other flights to Iraq by May 2004 in a $12-billion haul that U.S. officials believe to be the biggest international cash airlift of all time.
This month, the Pentagon and the Iraqi government are finally closing the books on the program that handled all those Benjamins. But despite years of audits and investigations, U.S. Defense officials still cannot say what happened to $6.6 billion in cash — enough to run the Los Angeles Unified School District or the Chicago Public Schools for a year, among many other things.
For the first time, federal auditors are suggesting that some or all of the cash may have been stolen, not just mislaid in an accounting error. Stuart Bowen, special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, an office created by Congress, said the missing $6.6 billion may be "the largest theft of funds in national history."
The mystery is a growing embarrassment to the Pentagon, and an irritant to Washington's relations with Baghdad. Iraqi officials are threatening to go to court to reclaim the money, which came from Iraqi oil sales, seized Iraqi assets and surplus funds from the United Nations' oil-for-food program.
It's fair to say that Congress, which has already shelled out $61 billion of U.S. taxpayer money for similar reconstruction and development projects in Iraq, is none too thrilled either.

[Paul F]

The Obama campaign responds to the latest attack ad against them, awesomely:

[Will]

[/color]Missing Iraq money may have been stolen, auditors say[/font]

http://www.bloomberg...ntral-bank.html

[Paul F]

For those who haven't seen it yet:

ABC News: Obama Gives Support to Same-Sex Marriage

(WASHINGTON) — President Barack Obama says he now supports same-sex marriage, ending months of equivocation on a subject with powerful election-year consequences.

Obama says he has concluded that it is important for him to affirm that he thinks same-sex couples should be able to get married. He says he came to the conclusion over the course of several years of talking to family and friends.

Obama has previously said his personal views of gay marriage were evolving, a stance that frustrated gay rights supporters.

Obama revealed his support for gay marriage in an interview with ABC News.

Hooray!

[Robert B]

Pretty gutsy move by him, although I suspect it won't change too many minds either way on the subject of President Obama.

[Henry Blanco]

Pretty gutsy move by him, although I suspect it won't change too many minds either way on the subject of President Obama.

At least it won't change any Republican minds, which is probably why he announced it.