Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Federal spending

May 21, 2013

Dear editor: Members of the Senate sub-committee have predicted an 80% increase in various welfare payouts in the next decade....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(56)

Uncle5

May-23-13 3:42 PM

St1: OK, so you agree about the sales tax being regressive. Flat tax: In theory the flat tax seems fair. In addition to Brazil's notes, part of the answer also lies in the golden rule (he who has the gold makes the rules). Make no mistake, when Steve Forbes came out with his big push for the flat tax, he wasn't doing it to have it bite him and all his buddies harder in the butt.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Brazil

May-23-13 10:02 AM

Stonewall - many corporations pay little or no corporate tax, many wealthy individuals pay a much smaller amount then their fair share through the use of influence of politicians in charge of tax code legislation and their ability to afford tax accountants and lawyers. I never seem to see you pontificate on that. In fact you seem to go out of your way to protect and defend them. I guess it's easier for you to attack the custodial worker, the waitress, the low paid retail and factory worker.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Brazil

May-23-13 9:58 AM

So Stonewall the person who works 40 hours a week cleaning the Holiday Inn or 40 hours a week working at Bob Evans or 40 hours a week at Blair making minimum or close to it are just cruising through life? So is the person who works 40 hours at $9.00 an hour at Blair, roughly 18,000 a year and 20 hours at Kwik Fill making roughly $9,000 a year, cruising through life? The flat tax can be debated but the fact that it is a regressive tax that exacts a much higher price on low income workers cannot be debated.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

st0newa11

May-23-13 9:39 AM

Uncle 5, how is a flat tax not fair? Let's use 10% for simplicity's sake. If you earn a million, you pay 100k, if you earn 30k, you pay 3k. Your system punishes ppl for being productive and rewards those who just want to cruise through life. Is our current system fair when some ppl pay NOTHING and actually get $8-10k in tax "refunds" due to EIC. This is fair? Seriously twisted logic! A sgl mom can sit on her but and get up to $45k in public "benefits" per year. Fair?

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Brazil

May-22-13 11:26 PM

Round up - You pleaded fifth. You just haven't realized it yet.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

archaeo1

May-22-13 11:26 PM

Roundup, Your responses remind me of an adolescent with attitude problem. Do you feel you have an attitude problem? Be honest

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Uncle5

May-22-13 5:05 PM

On that same anti-regressive tax note, why don't we ditch the ~$120k cap on Social Security payments, and have everyone pay fairly and "flatly", all the way up to Bill and Melinda, and Sam's kids? That would get rid of the Soc Sec shortfall that is projected to happen twenty years from now, in less time than it took me to write this.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Uncle5

May-22-13 4:55 PM

Stonewall, as Brazil pointed out, sales taxes are regressive, penalizing to a greater extent the people who can least afford it. Poor people must spend a far greater portion of their income to simply get by. The wealthy? The richer you are, the tinier is the percentage spent on "goods and services". Too, these are the same people who, for those yachts and high ticket items, could cross borders fairly easily to avoid the tax. Do you see why that is a bad idea? If not, explain why you think the poor should shoulder that burden more heavily.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MTOMTO

May-22-13 4:19 PM

The difference being that I actually believed Reagan when he said that. All the media was presenting him as a dottering old fool anyway.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Lifelongresident

May-22-13 4:13 PM

This forum is a perfect example of why politicians get nothing done. Can't agree, just stone wall. Don't like what someone has done turn a blind eye to what your party has done and blame the other.

The bickering going on here is very similar to what happens on capital hill.

We should all be proud. NOT!

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Brazil

May-22-13 2:17 PM

So Round UP and MTOMTO you must have been absolutely disgusted in Ronald Reagan when he said "I don't remember" or "I don't recall" 150+ times when he gave his deposition for Iran Contra. Please say yes, I wouldn't want to think you were just playing partisan politics. When outrage only flows one way it really loses credibility.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MTOMTO

May-22-13 1:06 PM

The legacy may just be "The Sgt. Shultz of U.S. Presidents"?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Brazil

May-22-13 10:17 AM

Round up - Better than Bush. That was an easy one to answer.

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Brazil

May-22-13 10:16 AM

The flat tax and even more so the sales tax are regressive taxes that take a much larger share of the poor and middle classes money. Total government (i.e., the sum of state, local, and federal) employment has decreased by over 580,000 jobs since the end of the recession, the largest decrease in any sector since the recovery began in July 2009. AND oh, by the way, relative to the size of the economy, the deficit this year will be less than half as large as the shortfall in 2009, according to the CBO. Hmm... unemployment down from the Bush caused recession high in the Spring of 2009, the Market doubled, hmm...All with a Republican party whose primary goal for four years according to Mitch McConnell was to deny OBama a second term.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

st0newa11

May-22-13 8:28 AM

To Mamaofateenandtot May-21-13 8:01 PM, and RoundUp May-21-13 9:47 PM posts. I agree 1,000 times with you. Only allowed one vote :(

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

st0newa11

May-22-13 8:24 AM

"No good if it can't help you bolster a conserva-lie", "..the trash heap of stupidity". The first rule of debate: when you resort to name calling, you have LOST. You have shown that you have no rational/logical argument. Relying in emotionally charged terms is sad. Just very sad. This is true for BOTH sides of the argument. Facts people, FACTS. Remember, statistics can be manipulated to say whatever you want. Be careful.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

st0newa11

May-22-13 7:57 AM

Even with a flat tax, which is the only FAIR way to go, people can cheat, which they do. They'll not report all income and work "under the table". The only real way to tax everybody the same way/rate is with a national sales tax on all goods and services. No other taxes from anywhere. No crooked IRS. No exemptions, no deductions. Period!

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Brazil

May-21-13 9:28 PM

Round Up - I was commenting as to the revisionist history lessons by folks such as yourself and Writer. It is your group that tries to blame the 2nd worst disaster in the last 100 years on Clinton's banking policy instead of manning or womening up and admiting that 7 years of Bush policy put us in that hole. I don't pretend to think Obama is perfect but let me ask "how have your investments done since the Bush economic disaster. Up 120% or so. yeah...... Unemployment down from 10% but keep calling everything an outrage and a coverup. That's worked really well for you. You got killed the last time in both the Presidetial election and the Senate. You see when you call everything Obama does an outrage or coverup the vast majority of the American public quits listening. You two, Shawn and Rush have a great tomorrow.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Uncle5

May-21-13 8:56 PM

And. Boxes don't work. Please don't try to put me in your little box with the picture of the big bad evil Obama on the outside, just so you can kick it around. You are shadow boxing with yourself and it's not pretty.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Uncle5

May-21-13 8:52 PM

Roundup- personally, though Obama is a far better president than Bush, I couldn't care less who holds that office if they mess up. I am not partisan. Obama's foreign policies are for the most part cut from the same stinking cloth as Bush's. As I said before, he and his gang are neocons despite the "D" that many people apparently can't see past.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Mamaofateenandtot

May-21-13 8:01 PM

I know something is not right when I see welfare paying for cellphones and t-bone steaks. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that our tax dollars are being spent in the wrong places. Help those that are willing to help themselves. Welfare should be a temporary solution, not a way of life. I've seen to many people popping kid after kid out when they can't financially care for the ones that they have. Just my simple opinion.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Uncle5

May-21-13 6:01 PM

And if the past is irrelevant, so is whatever happened a minute ago and more so half a year ago in Benghazi. I don't doubt there was more to the story which will never be confirmed. But word is it was less an embassy than a CIA operations center whose mission "as always, Jim" was to subvert and destabilize the region to favor US puppets. From the point of view of people living in that reality, it probably seemed more like ridding their home of rats than an act of terrorism. Which is the terrorism? Do you see the more egregious act of us assassinating bin Laden as terrorism? Either yes or no. Not both without contradicting yourself.

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Brazil

May-21-13 5:51 PM

Oh Writer yes it's the minimum wages fault. A wage that has not kept up nearly with inflation over the years. Blame the housekeeper at the local hotel, the busboy at the restaurant, the sales clerk. Yes its all their fault. Those greedy people!! Also love your take on the Bush recession being Clinton's fault. Yep we have to go back 7 1/2 years in order to erase any Republican blame. Yes it's the Clinton banking policy. Bush and his administration had 7 1/2 years to clean up his supposed mess. Were they ignorant of it or just too busy fighting wars for phoney excuses that cost us trillions of dollars?

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

archaeo1

May-21-13 5:43 PM

Keystone XL will raise the cost of petroleum products throughout the lower mid west by up to 30 %.Big oil should build their own refineries to process the tar sands . Processing tar sands isn't cheap it will go to overseas markets for higher profits . At the same time at least 2 refineries will not be producing supply for our use. The $ stated for American jobs is probably as over stated as Pa.s shale boom.Or maybe even the 10s of millions of dollars we have been making all these years with the Kinzua dam. They will lie to get what they want {government}.After all they will just line their pockets anyway.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Uncle5

May-21-13 5:43 PM

Yup. History is bunk. Can't learn anything from it, nope. No good if it can't help you bolster a conserva-lie.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 56 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web