Voter Fraud In Ohio

With all the bailouts going on looks like we're getting more gov't involvement whether we like it or not.

With all the bailouts going on looks like we're getting more gov't involvement whether we like it or not.
If the bailouts are properly managed it should be a break even or win for the U.S. taxpayer. But we are talking about government managing the process so a positive outcome is unlikely.

with the massive deficit we now face, any ideas on how to start paying on it? or is now the republican way to spend, spend, and spend some more, and let our grand-kids worry about it? lets face facts. no matter who gets into office, out taxes are going up. that's just a fact. i guess the real debate is who will raise them more
Keep in mind the Congress is controlled by Dems and they're as much to blame as the Bush admin for the last few years of spending recklessness.

How about we freeze spending at current levels, pass a balanced budget ammendment, review and cut unnecessary/wasteful government programs, pass some sort of privitazation of a portion of SS, raise the age for maximum SS benefits for those under 45 up to 75 or whatever the curent life expectancy is. Any surplus goes to paying down the national debt. Interest on the national debt is 8.5% of our national budget.

SS, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare and Unemployment are over 50% of the budget. These programs have to brought under control now or we're looking at MASSIVE tax increases by 2030. I'm sure this isn't what FDR intended when these programs were put in place.

Image:Fy2009spendingbycategory2.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Fy2009spendingbycategory2.png)

Keep in mind the Congress is controlled by Dems and they're as much to blame as the Bush admin for the last few years of spending recklessness.

How about we freeze spending at current levels, pass a balanced budget ammendment, review and cut unnecessary/wasteful government programs, pass some sort of privitazation of a portion of SS, raise the age for maximum SS benefits for those under 45 up to 75 or whatever the curent life expectancy is. Any surplus goes to paying down the national debt. Interest on the national debt is 8.5% of our national budget.

SS, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare and Unemployment are over 50% of the budget. These programs have to brought under control now or we're looking at MASSIVE tax increases by 2030. I'm sure this isn't what FDR intended when these programs were put in place.

Image:Fy2009spendingbycategory2.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Fy2009spendingbycategory2.png)

That was one of the very few things Bush did that I liked. Unfortunately, it went nowhere. That's because Matty unfortunately is right -- we are going to get more government and apparently the people want it. If we really wanted less gov't then the people would have loudly supported Bush's attempt to privatize a portion of SS.

One more large item in your list of spending cuts -- how about we stop forking over $10 billion a month for Iraq?

That was one of the very few things Bush did that I liked. Unfortunately, it went nowhere. That's because Matty unfortunately is right -- we are going to get more government and apparently the people want it. If we really wanted less gov't then the people would have loudly supported Bush's attempt to privatize a portion of SS.

One more large item in your list of spending cuts -- how about we stop forking over $10 billion a month for Iraq?IMO we should've taken a more Reagan-esque approach, subvert Saddam with special ops and fund rebels/Kurds, but we had to do something. Saddam was intent on rebuilding his nuclear program and US forces found enough Sarin there to kill over 500K people. Not to mention him thumbing his nose at numerous UN Resolutions. Although the Bush Admin was certainly the catalyst here, there was heavy bi-partisan support for going into Iraq. The Bush Admin certainly did not act unilaterally internally or externally in Iraq. Another modification I would've made would be Iraq funding more of its own reconstruction rather than us footing the bill.

Hindsight is 20/20 though, and we are where we are. We MUST finish the job and stabilize Iraq or we'll be looking at a far worse situation 10-15 years from now if we walk away with the job 60-70% done.

They are. I find it interesting you think its OK for them to work 4 months just to pay taxes but admit its not for you. I'm not saying they should not pay taxes but find it strang how people can sit back and say rais their taxes but no not mine.

Actually, I'm one of those weirdos who's ok with them raising my taxes now, if it's part of a good program.

Look, either my argument is a good one or it isn't. I claim that the rich can bear the burden of a higher tax rate better than the middle class or the poor. Further, I claimed that effective progressive taxation is better for the economy than the trickle-down alternative. Finally, I claimed that the rich have benefited more from living in this society--its infrastructure, its institutions, its government, etc.--so it's reasonable to ask them to pay more. If this argument works, it works even if I'm rich.

For the record, I learned to think this way from my grandfather, a tax lawyer and law professor. He was rich and happily paid higher taxes. He liked Justice Brandise's dicutm: with my taxes I buy civilization.

No one but my grandfather, as far as I know, likes paying taxes. But we can see that it might be a necessary thing to do, even if we don't like it. The alternative is worse, or so I claim.

I'm not against paying more either if it's for the better good of society in general.

When Goverment can cut its waistful spending and our tax dollars are put to good use I would only then give a tax increase consideration. The problem is if they did that we would not have a need for a tax increase.

When Goverment can cut its waistful spending and our tax dollars are put to good use I would only then give a tax increase consideration. The problem is if they did that we would not have a need for a tax increase.

Exactly
The most fundamental element in quality leadership is the ability to "lead by example". As stated, when that happens, I could take an increase more seriously. Until that time........Washington is WAY fat....with your $$$$$$

I'm fine with a flat rate of taxation of equal percentage among everyone to perform the legitimate functions of government.

But I don't believe the function of government is to take from those who've worked hard and made better decisions and give it to those who didn't.