With an expanding government with employees receiving much greater pay and pension then private sector, we are on our way to the "haves" and "have nots" kind of society. It is similar to what Soviet Union had will have the same disastrous results.
You get a job with the Government you will have it made. Work for the private sector and you will be in poverty. The rich and connected will prosper and the majority of civilians will work for the elite.( gov. + rich)

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

The deficit spending problem cannot be solved with cutting spending alone. Again, I implore you all to do the arithmetic.
[/LIST]Those three would be good for a start as far as I'm concerned. But they should be enacted along with STIFF reductions in federal spending...and I mean along the lines of 15-20% cuts in spending including cuts in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and VA entitlement benefits.

Instead of cuts in Social Security, Medicare, etc., why not start with the ridiculous salaries of Congress right along with all their perks? How about eliminating lobbyists, as promised? How about getting rid of pork as promised? Instead of cuts, how about starting with the fraud and waste in those "entitlement" programs that are already known. Part of the waste is the way, Medicare for instance, is designed. Instead of having to have procedures split out over several visits so that Medicare will pay, how about paying for all of them at once? Case in point: You go to the dermatologist and several lesions are diagnosed as cancerous. Some of the cancers are more costly to remove than the others depending on the type and procedure required. Medicare will pay to remove one only, not the multiples. Therefore, each one requires another visit for removal in order for Medicare to cover the charges. Supplemental insurance only covers the remaining 20% approved by Medicare after they have paid their 80%. Why not pay according to a set schedule for each procedure and do them all at one time?

My husband has coverage thru the VA and Medicare. Our company insurance only covered us for 10 years or to age 65, whichever came first. Private insurance? Out of the question because of cost and medical history. Even if they were forced to insure us, the premiums would be completely out of reach. We paid into Medicare while working and still do. Would you pay into any insurance and then not use it when you needed it? I didn't think so.

Unlike many others here, we are not wealthy, simply comfortable (so far). Did we plan for retirement? Yes. Did we plan for the economy to go south right along with our retirement? No.

Unlike many others here, we are not wealthy, simply comfortable (so far). Did we plan for retirement? Yes. Did we plan for the economy to go south right along with our retirement? No.

We are in the same position. We did everything right to save for our retirement. We sacrificed and lead a humble lifestyle so we might be comfortable in our golden years. We took for granted that our government would be frugal and stable on their part.
Our government has failed us and now our sacrifices seem silly. Thinking back maybe we should have spent our equity and savings to frivolously live a grand lifestyle like our government obviously did.

Originally Posted by Donna2

We took for granted that our government would be frugal and stable on their part.

Huh? The same government that has only had two balanced budgets since at least 1960? When did you think they would START being frugal?

Originally Posted by djplong

Huh? The same government that has only had two balanced budgets since at least 1960? When did you think they would START being frugal?

Well, maybe frugal was too much to hope for. But I never expected someone like Obama coming around and doubling Bush's deficit in one year what it took Bush 8 years to accomplish.

If you raise tax rates on low taxable income earners you may reap a modest increase in revenues.

If you raise tax rates on the wealthy you will reduce revenues.

Not believing this means you do not understand the clever American society.

I think the intangibles don't get enough ink. When the business world perceives that an administration is anti-business, they will go to coasting mode, so to speak. They will ride down the street with their foot tapping the brakes. They will only use the gas pedal when necessary to just make it up the hill so they can coast all the way down the hill.
I have talked to people in small business and they are just holding on till things get better. They will not hire or spend money on capital investments. They will repair their machinery instead of replacing it with something better and more efficient. Alot of this mentality is based on history.
Most companies have their own culture. It is created form the CEO on down. When companies starts cutting back and having wage freezes, it's employees will reduce their spending on their own home budgets. The fear of layoffs start trickling down.

People see the president of USA as a sort of CEO. This president doesn't seem to have the best interest of it's employees at heart. The layoffs are constant. Job creation is basically nonexistent.
Until the intangibles are changed, we will not put much gas in the car. We will "ride" the brakes and not put the medal to the pedal.

Originally Posted by Donna2

I think the intangibles don't get enough ink. When the business world perceives that an administration is anti-business, they will go to coasting mode, so to speak. They will ride down the street with their foot tapping the brakes. They will only use the gas pedal when necessary to just make it up the hill so they can coast all the way down the hill.
I have talked to people in small business and they are just holding on till things get better. They will not hire or spend money on capital investments. They will repair their machinery instead of replacing it with something better and more efficient. Alot of this mentality is based on history.
Most companies have their own culture. It is created form the CEO on down. When companies starts cutting back and having wage freezes, it's employees will reduce their spending on their own home budgets. The fear of layoffs start trickling down.

People see the president of USA as a sort of CEO. This president doesn't seem to have the best interest of it's employees at heart. The layoffs are constant. Job creation is basically nonexistent.
Until the intangibles are changed, we will not put much gas in the car. We will "ride" the brakes and not put the medal to the pedal.

Yes you are correct.

The Democrats want higher taxes to redistribute wealth. They think they will get votes by doing so.

Democrats must know that by raising tax rates and taking money away from job producers they reduce the number of workers and therefore the tax revenues. Of course they know but all they care about is control of the votes.

Originally Posted by cashman

...The Democrats want higher taxes to redistribute wealth. They think they will get votes by doing so.

Originally Posted by cashman

Not believing this means you do not understand the clever American society.

Federal Budget = $3.8 trillion
Tax Revenues = $2.4 trillion
Deficit = $1.4 trillion
Total spending on Social Security, Medicare and Defense = $2.1 trillion
ALL other federal spending = $1.7 trillion

Go ahead. Balance the budget without any new taxes.

A-R-I-T-H-M-E-T-I-C !

Originally Posted by Donna2

...When the business world perceives that an administration is anti-business, they will go to coasting mode...They will ride down the street with their foot tapping the brakes. They will only use the gas pedal when necessary to just make it up the hill so they can coast all the way down the hill....we will not put much gas in the car. We will "ride" the brakes and not put the medal to the pedal.

Wow! This is the famous American free market system?

Originally Posted by cashman

...The Democrats want higher taxes to redistribute wealth. They think they will get votes by doing so.

Originally Posted by cashman

Not believing this means you do not understand the clever American society.

Federal Budget = $3.8 trillion
Tax Revenues = $2.4 trillion
Deficit = $1.4 trillion
Total spending on Social Security, Medicare and Defense = $2.1 trillion
ALL other federal spending = $1.7 trillion

Go ahead. Balance the budget without any new taxes. Show us all how it's done.

A-R-I-T-H-M-E-T-I-C !

[QUOTE=Villages Kahuna;259001]Wow! This is the famous American free market system?




Mock me all you want, but don't tell me that the market system is running on all the cylinders under this socialist leaning administration.

You want some more arithmetic? How much revenue is lost each week while people aren't paying taxes from non-existent pay checks and how much are we also losing from paying billions to those unemployed. who do you think is paying the unemployment checks?
Funny how problems go away when everybody is working.
What is the democrat leadership doing for jobs lately????

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8bQDqe2NPo&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

the U.S. congress since they do not intend to address one....as an earlier posted article quoted it containing too much controversial and emabarassing content.....especially with an upcoming election season.

The arithmetic is not an issue for any one of them.
Does anyone doubt the so called "budget" could be reduced to what we in business used to call essentials for survival only?

Then go after the sheltered non tax paying domestic and foreign corporations.

Isn't it obvious the representatives who are mostly lawyers live by and hide behind the law? They can say what is done/not done is legal or not illegal via the definition of the law. That does NOT mean it is right.
Remember lawyers are trained to defend murderers, rapists and fellow senators and congressmen/women....using the letter of the law.

btk

Originally Posted by billethkid

...go after the sheltered non tax paying domestic and foreign corporations.

I'm not disagreeing that this is necessary, but if I had suggested it many would have leaped at me because I had suggested raising taxes. After all, that's what you suggest.

As I said, yes corporate taxes is a place that ultimately Congress may be looking to increase revenues. Right now, of the $2.4 trillion in tax revenues, here are the sources...

• Personal income taxes..............43.5%
• Social Security taxes................42.3%
• Corporate income taxes..............6.6%
• All other sources........................7.6%

As I suggest that this may happen, I'm sure there are some who are reading this who will jump down my throat with suggestions that I study the Laffer Curve Theory, etc. It probably should be noted that about half of the Social Security tax revenues are actually collected from corporations, increasing their "real" tax rate to closer to 28% than only single digits.

I think by far the more likely way that Congress will consider to raise revenues will be the use of a consumption tax such as the Value Added Tax (VAT) so common in Europe. That tax will be less noticeable by any specific segment of taxpayers, but would have the capacity of raising revenues pretty dramatically. VAT tax rates in Europe are typically in the range of 18-25%, with much lower VAT rates applicable to basic necessities, such as foodstuffs. In addition to the VAT, the average income tax for a family with a couple of children in Europe averages in the range of 20-35%.

How comparable the total personal tax burden in th U.S. is compared to Europe is hard to calculate. Europeans tend to pay just an income tax plus the VAT. Those are the principal sources of tax revenues for European countries. For the most part, the more fiscally responsible countries live within those means. Greece is an example of one which does not.

Here in the U.S. we have a plethora of different taxes from different taxing bodies...federal income tax, social security tax, state, county and city income taxes, real estate taxes, sales taxes, special product taxes (gas, liquor, cigarettes, etc.) and on and on. It's possible I suppose, that Americans are already paying as much in taxes as their counterparts in Europe.

What is painfully obvious is that whatever the amount of taxes are being collected in the U.S., we are demanding that our government spend a lot more than that amount on various kinds of government services and entitlements. We can blame our political leaders for being spendthrifts, but remember that they wouldn't be so loose with the pursestrings if expenditures weren't being demanded by the electorate in exchange for their election votes.

Let us begin by insuring somehow that EVERYONE pays income taxes and is not using our government as an income source, as almost HALF of americans are doing !