How do you think America is going to pay off $75 Trillion in debt...

[thumbelina]

...if we don''t raise taxes?

Just wondering what PSers think the other solutions are.

 

[joflier]

Maybe the same way they came up with the $$ to bail out Fannie, Freddie, and AIG.
Get those printing presses rolling!!!

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 9/18/2008 7:38:18 PM
Author: joflier
Maybe the same way they came up with the $$ to bail out Fannie, Freddie, and AIG.

Get those printing presses rolling!!!

That''s a veeerrrry bad idea.

 

[stone_seeker]

ironically, higher taxes decrease government revenue so tax hikes will not pay off debt. that isnt pro-conservative that is just fact and stats. the question has to do with what government spends the money on. decrease superfluous spending and the debt gets paid down over time as the country grows.

 

[joflier]

Date: 9/18/2008 8:00:01 PM
Author: MoonWater

Date: 9/18/2008 7:38:18 PM
Author: joflier
Maybe the same way they came up with the $$ to bail out Fannie, Freddie, and AIG.

Get those printing presses rolling!!!

That''s a veeerrrry bad idea.

I did mean that sarcastically.

 

[iheartscience]

Date: 9/18/2008 8:07:30 PM
Author: stone_seeker
ironically, higher taxes decrease government revenue so tax hikes will not pay off debt. that isnt pro-conservative that is just fact and stats. the question has to do with what government spends the money on. decrease superfluous spending and the debt gets paid down over time as the country grows.

Interesting! Can you please explain exactly how higher taxes decrease government revenue? Thanks!

 

[E B]

*Crickets*

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 9/18/2008 8:13:56 PM
Author: joflier

Date: 9/18/2008 8:00:01 PM

Author: MoonWater

Date: 9/18/2008 7:38:18 PM

Author: joflier

Maybe the same way they came up with the $$ to bail out Fannie, Freddie, and AIG.


Get those printing presses rolling!!!

That''s a veeerrrry bad idea.

I did mean that sarcastically.

Yes, I know.

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/18/2008 8:29:50 PM
Author: thing2of2

Date: 9/18/2008 8:07:30 PM
Author: stone_seeker
ironically, higher taxes decrease government revenue so tax hikes will not pay off debt. that isnt pro-conservative that is just fact and stats. the question has to do with what government spends the money on. decrease superfluous spending and the debt gets paid down over time as the country grows.

Interesting! Can you please explain exactly how higher taxes decrease government revenue? Thanks!

I posted this in the Obama thread but no replies, go figure. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/5935461.html talks about how some believe Obama''s plan will do nothing but increase the deficit. The money from taxes will not be going towards the deficit in Obama''s plan as far as I know - I think he wants to put it towards his universal health care plan & tax refunds for people who don''t pay taxes.

 

[movie zombie]

guess what kind of questions our grand and great grandkids are going to ask us as regards paying off that debt.........

movie zombie

 

[stone_seeker]

basically higher taxes decreases investment since incentives to invest and returns on that investment are lowered. So tax rate is higher but there are fewer things being taxed meaning less revenue. The Treasury took in 20% more revenue under Bush than under Clinton. There are arguments as to why but most all agree because the economy was able to grow with pro-growth fiscal policies.

 

[joflier]

Date: 9/18/2008 9:08:20 PM
Author: MoonWater

Date: 9/18/2008 8:13:56 PM
Author: joflier

Date: 9/18/2008 8:00:01 PM

Author: MoonWater

Date: 9/18/2008 7:38:18 PM

Author: joflier

Maybe the same way they came up with the $$ to bail out Fannie, Freddie, and AIG.


Get those printing presses rolling!!!

That''s a veeerrrry bad idea.

I did mean that sarcastically.

Yes, I know.

K - just makin sure!

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 9/18/2008 8:29:50 PM
Author: thing2of2

Date: 9/18/2008 8:07:30 PM
Author: stone_seeker
ironically, higher taxes decrease government revenue so tax hikes will not pay off debt. that isnt pro-conservative that is just fact and stats. the question has to do with what government spends the money on. decrease superfluous spending and the debt gets paid down over time as the country grows.

Interesting! Can you please explain exactly how higher taxes decrease government revenue? Thanks!

b/c it would put many business out of business.

 

[Harriet]

Date: 9/18/2008 10:34:30 PM
Author: stone_seeker
basically higher taxes decreases investment since incentives to invest and returns on that investment are lowered. So tax rate is higher but there are fewer things being taxed meaning less revenue. The Treasury took in 20% more revenue under Bush than under Clinton. There are arguments as to why but most all agree because the economy was able to grow with pro-growth fiscal policies.

I agree that higher taxes deter investment. However, there are other components in the tax base. There's also a complement to higher income tax -- consumption tax.

 

[fleur-de-lis]

Date: 9/18/2008 10:34:30 PM
Author: stone_seeker
basically higher taxes decreases investment since incentives to invest and returns on that investment are lowered. So tax rate is higher but there are fewer things being taxed meaning less revenue. The Treasury took in 20% more revenue under Bush than under Clinton.

That's great... unless you inflation-adjust those statistics.

 

[fleur-de-lis]

Date: 9/18/2008 6:32:16 PM
Author:thumbelina
...if we don''t raise taxes?

Inflation.

On the positive, I''ll possibly pull in a salary of 300K a year soon. On the negative, I''ll still have to clip coupons at the grocery store in order to pay my future kids'' tuition bills.

Maybe I''m just grumpy: my preferred bag of potato chips is now selling for $5.79 for a 9-ounce bag at the grocery store. GRR!!

f-d-l

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 9/19/2008 2:14:59 AM
Author: fleur-de-lis

Date: 9/18/2008 6:32:16 PM
Author:thumbelina
...if we don''t raise taxes?

Inflation.

On the positive, I''ll possibly pull in a salary of 300K a year soon. On the negative, I''ll still have to clip coupons at the grocery store in order to pay my future kids'' tuition bills.

Maybe I''m just grumpy: my preferred bag of potato chips is now selling for $5.79 for a 9-ounce bag at the grocery store. GRR!!

f-d-l

will you marry me?

 

[Anna0499]

Another article about how Obama's plan will only increase the national deficit. Big promises of little substance if you ask the experts.

ETA: Why does Obama & Biden keep referring to his plan as offering tax "BREAKS" or "CUTS" to middle/low income people? Isn't it just a tax refund for those people; many who don't even pay taxes? I guess I don't get how the terms could ever be used interchangeably. How will we ever pay off the deficit *that* way?

 

[stone_seeker]

Did you all see Joe Biden''s interview with (i think) Katie Couric? He said we need to "take" from you because its patriotic to "pitch in". As if those making over $250K dont pitch in already? Why doesnt he just ask us to cut a check to our neighbor?

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/19/2008 10:10:41 AM
Author: stone_seeker
Did you all see Joe Biden's interview with (i think) Katie Couric? He said we need to 'take' from you because its patriotic to 'pitch in'. As if those making over $250K dont pitch in already? Why doesnt he just ask us to cut a check to our neighbor?

Haha yeah, we were talking about this over in the RNC/Rep. thread SS. I guess those in the middle/lower classes have no hope of being "patriotic" then...why can't *everyone* be "patriotic" & "pitch in" and since when is charity considered so? Admirable, yes, but not forced charity...loses all meaning.

 

[stone_seeker]

Date: 9/19/2008 10:32:54 AM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/19/2008 10:10:41 AM
Author: stone_seeker
Did you all see Joe Biden''s interview with (i think) Katie Couric? He said we need to ''take'' from you because its patriotic to ''pitch in''. As if those making over $250K dont pitch in already? Why doesnt he just ask us to cut a check to our neighbor?

Haha yeah, we were talking about this over in the RNC/Rep. thread SS. I guess those in the middle/lower classes have no hope of being ''patriotic'' then...why can''t *everyone* be ''patriotic'' & ''pitch in'' and since when is charity considered so? Admirable, yes, but not forced charity...loses all meaning.

I also read today that Joe Biden, over the past 9 years, has contributed a total of $3,650 to charities. $3K in 9 years. I have him beat there so I guess I''m already patriotic?

Here is a chart of the Bidens’ giving for the years covered by the tax returns:
Adjusted
Gross Income Charity

1998 $215,432 $195

1999 $210,797 $120

2000 $219,953 $360

2001 $220,712 $360

2002 $227,811 $260

2003 $231,375 $260

2004 $234,271 $380

2005 $321,379 $380

2006 $248,459 $380

2007 $319,853 $995

Total $2,450,042 $3,690

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/19/2008 10:47:39 AM
Author: stone_seeker

Date: 9/19/2008 10:32:54 AM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/19/2008 10:10:41 AM
Author: stone_seeker
Did you all see Joe Biden''s interview with (i think) Katie Couric? He said we need to ''take'' from you because its patriotic to ''pitch in''. As if those making over $250K dont pitch in already? Why doesnt he just ask us to cut a check to our neighbor?

Haha yeah, we were talking about this over in the RNC/Rep. thread SS. I guess those in the middle/lower classes have no hope of being ''patriotic'' then...why can''t *everyone* be ''patriotic'' & ''pitch in'' and since when is charity considered so? Admirable, yes, but not forced charity...loses all meaning.

I also read today that Joe Biden, over the past 9 years, has contributed a total of $3,650 to charities. $3K in 9 years. I have him beat there so I guess I''m already patriotic?

Here is a chart of the Bidens’ giving for the years covered by the tax returns:
Adjusted
Gross Income Charity

1998 $215,432 $195

1999 $210,797 $120

2000 $219,953 $360

2001 $220,712 $360

2002 $227,811 $260

2003 $231,375 $260

2004 $234,271 $380

2005 $321,379 $380

2006 $248,459 $380

2007 $319,853 $995

Total $2,450,042 $3,690

Guess he''s not very patriotic...

According to that I''m much more patriotic than him, too! Maybe he should practice what he preaches.

 

[fleur-de-lis]

Date: 9/19/2008 10:47:39 AM
Author: stone_seeker

Date: 9/19/2008 10:32:54 AM

Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/19/2008 10:10:41 AM

Author: stone_seeker

Did you all see Joe Biden''s interview with (i think) Katie Couric? He said we need to ''take'' from you because its patriotic to ''pitch in''. As if those making over $250K dont pitch in already? Why doesnt he just ask us to cut a check to our neighbor?

Haha yeah, we were talking about this over in the RNC/Rep. thread SS. I guess those in the middle/lower classes have no hope of being ''patriotic'' then...why can''t *everyone* be ''patriotic'' & ''pitch in'' and since when is charity considered so? Admirable, yes, but not forced charity...loses all meaning.

I also read today that Joe Biden, over the past 9 years, has contributed a total of $3,650 to charities. $3K in 9 years. I have him beat there so I guess I''m already patriotic?


Here is a chart of the Bidens’ giving for the years covered by the tax returns:

Adjusted

Gross Income Charity

1998 $215,432 $195

1999 $210,797 $120

2000 $219,953 $360

2001 $220,712 $360

2002 $227,811 $260

2003 $231,375 $260

2004 $234,271 $380

2005 $321,379 $380

2006 $248,459 $380

2007 $319,853 $995

Total $2,450,042 $3,690

Huh.... I know that the reader is supposed to be impressed by the candidate''s miserly ways when it comes to charitable giving, but is the more surprising fact how *relatively* low his income has been considering his power and fame?

(That''s a smaller household income than many couples that consist of two working 28 year olds who are 4 years out of law school, for goodness'' sake. Stone seeker, can you post the financials of the other three candidates as well?)

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 9/19/2008 11:02:28 AM
Author: fleur-de-lis

Date: 9/19/2008 10:47:39 AM
Author: stone_seeker

Date: 9/19/2008 10:32:54 AM

Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 9/19/2008 10:10:41 AM

Author: stone_seeker

Did you all see Joe Biden''s interview with (i think) Katie Couric? He said we need to ''take'' from you because its patriotic to ''pitch in''. As if those making over $250K dont pitch in already? Why doesnt he just ask us to cut a check to our neighbor?

Haha yeah, we were talking about this over in the RNC/Rep. thread SS. I guess those in the middle/lower classes have no hope of being ''patriotic'' then...why can''t *everyone* be ''patriotic'' & ''pitch in'' and since when is charity considered so? Admirable, yes, but not forced charity...loses all meaning.

I also read today that Joe Biden, over the past 9 years, has contributed a total of $3,650 to charities. $3K in 9 years. I have him beat there so I guess I''m already patriotic?


Here is a chart of the Bidens’ giving for the years covered by the tax returns:

Adjusted

Gross Income Charity

1998 $215,432 $195

1999 $210,797 $120

2000 $219,953 $360

2001 $220,712 $360

2002 $227,811 $260

2003 $231,375 $260

2004 $234,271 $380

2005 $321,379 $380

2006 $248,459 $380

2007 $319,853 $995

Total $2,450,042 $3,690

Huh.... I know that the reader is supposed to be impressed by the candidate''s miserly ways when it comes to charitable giving, but is the more surprising fact how *relatively* low his income has been considering his power and fame?

(That''s a smaller household income than many couples that consist of two working 28 year olds who are 4 years out of law school, for goodness'' sake. Stone seeker, can you post the financials of the other three candidates as well?)

Heh, I know!

Incidentally, if you looked me up, you''d see I only donated $50 to one charity. But that''s because it was the ONLY time I didn''t do it anonymously. Not everyone needs bragging rights.

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/19/2008 11:02:28 AM
Author: fleur-de-lis

Huh.... I know that the reader is supposed to be impressed by the candidate's miserly ways when it comes to charitable giving, but is the more surprising fact how *relatively* low his income has been considering his power and fame?

(That's a smaller household income than many couples that consist of two working 28 year olds who are 4 years out of law school, for goodness' sake. Stone seeker, can you post the financials of the other three candidates as well?)

Senators don't make that much money from their salaries, relative to what most people probably think they make (less than $200,000/year); but of course they don't have all the expenses of normal people either. Presidents only make a smidge more than that. I'm guessing McCain & Obama have the same government salaries but earn different incomes based on their book deals, appearances, investments, etc. Palin probably makes less as a governor, but who knows.

 

[stone_seeker]

The other candidates arent on the record talking about how giving money to the less fortunate is patriotic. Biden's contributions are the lowest as a % of any candidate ever. 0.1%

Obama and his wife, Michelle, who earned a total of $4.2 million in income in 2007, donated $240,000 to charity that year. Thats 5%.

John McCain does most of his giving through the John and Cindy McCain Family Foundation. From his marriage his net assets of between $20 million and $32 million. In 2007, McCain donated more than 25 percent of his $400,000-plus income to the foundation — money made from his Senate salary, book royalties and Navy pension.

Harper’s Magazine reported that McCain contributed roughly $950,000 to the foundation between 2001 and 2006, almost entirely with proceeds from book sales, and that the foundation made contributions of roughly $1.6 million during that period

The Clintons at least gave over $10 million to charities over the past 10 years. Thats impressive.

Point is, practice what you preach.

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/19/2008 11:05:01 AM
Author: MoonWater

Heh, I know!

Incidentally, if you looked me up, you''d see I only donated $50 to one charity. But that''s because it was the ONLY time I didn''t do it anonymously. Not everyone needs bragging rights.

The point isn''t really bragging rights or how much he donated per se IMHO; it''s that he is calling forced taxes upon his own income bracket (which would skyrocket under Obama''s plan) "patriotic" when it would be used to serve welfare-esque agencies/plans when he himself, by all accounts of the information we *do* have, does not contribute a high percentage to charity. Also, being a Senator and presidential nominee several tiems throughout his career, I can bet he had an accountant to record all of his financial information to make sure it was on the up and up.

 

[MoonWater]

I don''t trust politicians that donate to charities in their own name. Especially not the Clintons.

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/19/2008 11:19:44 AM
Author: MoonWater
I don''t trust politicians that donate to charities in their own name. Especially not the Clintons.

That would include all four in this election, though...

 

[MoonWater]

Oh really? I was unware of the Obama Foundation and Biden Foundation. What are their mission statements?