The fiscal cliff

[Ghogiel]

Global corps avoid paying a lot of taxes. Billions. That's where a lot of money leaves the economy too. They don't tend to reinvest that money.

 

That's where the big money is going to be hiding. It's just easy for them. What was it, starbucks in the UK hadn't paid corp tax in like 15 years or something, the way they did that is they submit they make a loss, by renting property or something to another company in that umbrella corp all their profits go poof.

 

It's the big hole as far as I can see it. And that's where the govs could pull in a fap ton of dough.

Edited November 30, 2012 by Ghogiel

[Dan3345]

The debt started rising long before Bush. It topped 1 trillion under Reagan, but it was something that really kicked off under FDR I think. Or maybe it was Wilson.

 

Point is, you can't entirely blame Bush for this. Sure he got us into two of the stupidest wars in American history, but he raised the debt by 5 trillion over two terms. Obama raised it by 8 trillion in his first term. I am using projected spending of course.

 

Oh and Colour, what you said about democrats asking which entitlements to cut, its just not true. They are not open to cut much of anything. Harry Reid vowed to veto along with the Democrats in the Senate anything that even touched medicare. Which is ridiculous. I am certainly not Paul Ryans biggest fan, but his plan for medicare was to raise the acceptance age for people like you and I. Anybody over 50 I believe would stay the same and their policies wouldn't be changed. This would have been an excellent gradual change into more fiscal sanity, but alas... Democrats had to portray him as a racist extremist hell bent on stealing from the poor.

[JimboUK]

The debt and deficit are linked, if you keep running a huge deficit then that debt increases along with the cost of servicing it. It doesn't matter who's fault it is, the issue has to be dealt with, you can't print it away without running the risk of debasing your economy and causing hyperinflation. Getting out of this mess is going to be painful, I find that pain preferable to selling our children into debt slavery because we are incapable of living within our means.

 

It does matter who's fault it is.

 

Why do you think our debt is so high? Maybe because of bush paying for a false war on a credit card, cutting taxes on the wealthy, letting legislation pass for deregulation for businesses that ended up putting our country on our knees to the banks. Before bush we had a surplus and no debt.

 

The debt had to be risen very high after bushes administration to get us out of the huge hole or we would be bartering with chickens today.

 

since we had surplus back when Clinton was president wouldn't it be wise to go back to taxing the rich at the same rate when he was in office? The republican party won't budge on raising taxes on the rich and holding the middle class hostage yet again unless they get to massively reform entitlements millions rely on.

 

No it doesn't matter who got you into it, what matters is who will get you out of it. Soaking the rich isn't the answer, the rich aren't rich enough to solve the problem and if you overdo it they'll clear off and you'll get nothing as proved here. There is no pain free way out of this and yes the poorest will suffer the most, they after all get more from the state and thus stand to lose more when the state has to reign in spending.

[Korodic]

Is this a hard theory?

 

If you are spending/investing, but still making a profit, then you can pay off the debt as you go.

If you are spending/borrowing, and not making a profit, then you'll just go into more debt.

 

I learned this in middle school. :facepalm:

 

The simple fact is that they are rich either way, might as well leech the system. If we go under hard enough, no security force with a will to live will stand between the riot that will occur and the chairs filled with those whom let this happen.

[colourwheel]

@jim_uk

 

It does matter who is to blame because most likely the fiscal cliff will not be solved in time. looking at recent polling done if nothing gets done about the fiscal cliff the republican party will be to blame for getting us into this situation to begin with and also not getting it solved. Remember it was the GOP that forced this on our country.

 

As of now Obama has offered to extend the bush tax cuts for everyone making $250,000 or less this includes people who make more than this amount meaning everything you make below $250,000 will not be increased in taxes Only taxes above $250,000 will be touched ifyou make more than $250,000. This would basically include everyone in america would get the same tax rates for all their income below $250,000. The republicans in congress rejected this offer to try to get cuts for the rich.

 

The republican party asked for a balanced approach and a plan to achieve this as long as it includes entitlement reform. the Obama administration already laid out a plan and the republican party rejected it when it included the things they asked for. It basically was a plan the republican party just laughed at. Yet The republican party will not answer what entitlements they want reformed.

 

it's like you want to ask santa for xmas gift without making a list. the reason why the republican party will not get specific about the entitlments they want reformed because it would be political suicide to mention or even suggest specifically because they want popular programs to be purged.

 

Obama ran for president on taxing the rich and won the election on it.

 

The republican party is basically holding the middle class hostage again to get the rich tax cuts.

 

I understand "Soaking the rich isn't the answer" yet it would be a big help concidering for the last decade the rich got away paying almost no taxes and getting away with avoiding business cost through deregulations from legislation for the bush administration.

 

If business owner wish to leave the country just because they are crying over paying clinton taxes again then I say let them leave. Most likely the country could do without business owners that are greedy and cheap like that. Just opens up room for new business owners to open up new company's that will be fair to their employee's and understand making over 400% more income than their employee's is just sick when employees purge their benifits and cut their wages.

Edited November 30, 2012 by colourwheel

[JimboUK]

@jim_uk

 

It does matter who is to blame because most likely the fiscal cliff will not be solved in time. looking at recent polling done if nothing gets done about the fiscal cliff the republican party will be to blame for getting us into this situation to begin with and also not getting it solved. Remember it was the GOP that forced this on our country.

 

As of now Obama has offered to extend the bush tax cuts for everyone making $250,000 or less this includes people who make more than this amount meaning everything you make below $250,000 will not be increased in taxes Only taxes above $250,000 will be touched ifyou make more than $250,000. This would basically include everyone in america would get the same tax rates for all their income below $250,000. The republicans in congress rejected this offer to try to get cuts for the rich.

 

The republican party asked for a balanced approach and a plan to achieve this as long as it includes entitlement reform. the Obama administration already laid out a plan and the republican party rejected it when it included the things they asked for. It basically was a plan the republican party just laughed at. Yet The republican party will not answer what entitlements they want reformed.

 

it's like you want to ask santa for xmas gift without making a list. the reason why the republican party will not get specific about the entitlments they want reformed because it would be political suicide to mention or even suggest specifically because they want popular programs to be purged.

 

Obama ran for president on taxing the rich and won the election on it.

 

The republican party is basically holding the middle class hostage again to get the rich tax cuts.

 

I understand "Soaking the rich isn't the answer" yet it would be a big help concidering for the last decade the rich got away paying almost no taxes and getting away with avoiding business cost through deregulations from legislation for the bush administration.

 

If business owner wish to leave the country just because they are crying over paying clinton taxes again then I say let them leave. Most likely the country could do without business owners that are greedy and cheap like that. Just opens up room for new business owners to open up new company's that will be fair to their employee's and understand making over 400% more income than their employee's is just sick when employees purge their benifits and cut their wages.

 

Soaking the rich doesn't work, instead of a reasonable percentage of something you end up with a large percentage of nothing. It's been tried in this country on more than one occasion and the result is always the same, people leave and the tax take goes down. The U.S is following the same path to disaster as Europe, take a look at what is happening in Greece and other southern European countries, if it wasn't for the money from the north both Portugal and Greece would have defaulted already, the U.S is too big to be bailed out, when it goes that is that. Yes the fiscal cliff does need addressing but in a way that doesn't add to the already chronic levels of debt. The U.S economy is huge and it can sustain huge levels of debt but there is a limit, when the U.S lost it's AAA rating alarm bells should have sounded but oddly they didn't, I'm wondering what has to happen before people wake up to problem.

 

@Korodic They're spending, borrowing and then buying up their own debt with printed money just as they are in the Eurozone, it's the economics of the madhouse.

[colourwheel]

Soaking the rich doesn't work, instead of a reasonable percentage of something you end up with a large percentage of nothing.

 

$1.6 trillion is large percentage of nothing from taxing the rich?

 

I would think this is a good start if anything.

[Korodic]

Taxing the rich seems fair enough. They have thousands more than any one poor/middleclass person makes in a life-time.

 

Though there is a right way and a wrong way to go about it. For one, spending their money towards social programs is not a legitimate reason to tax them, and two social programs such as the one's giving free cell phones should disappear. The politicians should all take pay cuts too for every year they don't balance the budget... >.>

[colourwheel]

Taxing the rich seems fair enough. They have thousands more than any one poor/middleclass person makes in a life-time.

 

Though there is a right way and a wrong way to go about it. For one, spending their money towards social programs is not a legitimate reason to tax them, and two social programs such as the one's giving free cell phones should disappear. The politicians should all take pay cuts too for every year they don't balance the budget... >.>

 

lol I don't know any programs that exist that give away free cell phones from tax payer money. Also responsible entitlements are ussually entitlements americans have earned. Example, If you worked for the military then got hurt in combat you don't think they should be taken care of by the governemnt that put them in combat to begin with?

 

But yes taxing the rich seems fair enough and a good start.

Edited December 1, 2012 by colourwheel

[Korodic]

Taxing the rich seems fair enough. They have thousands more than any one poor/middleclass person makes in a life-time.

 

Though there is a right way and a wrong way to go about it. For one, spending their money towards social programs is not a legitimate reason to tax them, and two social programs such as the one's giving free cell phones should disappear. The politicians should all take pay cuts too for every year they don't balance the budget... >.>

 

lol I don't know any programs that exist that give away free cell phones from tax payer money. Also responsible entitlements are ussually entitlements americans have earned. Example, If you worked for the military then got hurt in combat you don't think they should be taken care of by the governemnt that put them in combat to begin with?

 

But yes taxing the rich seems fair enough and a good start.

 

Well a soldiers line of work warrants some special privileges. As for the free cell phones, it's hella real.

 

what gets me worked up on this is because... story time...

 

My GF's dad got divorced a long time ago, before I even met her. He got with some other woman and had a kid. This woman lives in the wonderful town of Pleasantville NJ. It is not pleasant at all... Anyways. As far as I know, she holds no job. Only "raises" the kid. Lives in special government funded development, recieves food stamps and collected some kind of aid for having a child. They get some kind of free cell phones through some program. Basically, she has no reason to even work a little, and is one of the leechs on the system. The kid told us he eats at popeyes everyday. Explains why he's getting fat. This woman also had twins with some guy recently whom none of us know.

 

I know people need and deserve help when things get tough, but today's mentality and work ethic is not the same as our grandparents, and our standards are certainly not either.