Budget Insanity - John Stossel

Listening

Gold Member
Aug 27, 2011
14,989
1,650
260
Budget Insanity | RealClearPolitics

Last year, Congress agreed to $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts, unless politicians find other things to cut. They didn't, of course. So now, with so-called sequestration looming in January, panic has set in. Even the new "fiscally responsible" Republicans vote against cutting Energy Department handouts to companies like Solyndra and subsidies to sugar producers. Many claim that any cut in military spending will weaken America and increase unemployment.

It's another demonstration of the politicians' addiction to spending -- and how we are complicit. "One more infrastructure bill" or "this jobs plan" will jumpstart the economy, and then we'll kick our spending addiction once and for all.

But we don't stop.

For most of American history, government was tiny. But since Lyndon Johnson's Great Society and the promise that government would cure poverty, spending has gone up nonstop. This is not sustainable.

Progressives say: If you're so worried about the deficit, raise taxes! But it's a fantasy to imagine that taxing the rich will solve our deficit problem. If the IRS grabbed 100 percent of income over $1 million, the take would be just $616 billion. That's only a third of this year's deficit.

It's the spending, stupid.

***********************

I recall Chrissy saying, at the time, that Obama took it out of the hands of congress and called him brilliant. Every rightie on the board predicted this would happen.

They didn't cut the spending like they were supposed to. Another Chris prediction (like Scott Walker) that turned out to be brown stains on someone's underwear.

Our supercommittee was a total failure.

Both sides, a the federal level, SUCK.

When do people finally wake up to the fact that this insn't going to be easy and that the longer we wait, the more painful it will be.

I'll raise taxes on the rich for every 3 that gets taken out of the budget (including S.S. and Medicare).
 
Last edited:
From Stossel:

Even if you could balance the budget by taxing the rich, it wouldn't be right. Progressives say it's wrong for the rich to be "given" more money. But money earned belongs to those who earn it, not to government. Lower taxes are not a handout.

That's the moral side of the matter. There's a practical side, too. Taxes discourage wealth creation.

Even if you think -- despite all evidence -- that government spends money more usefully than people in the private sector, there is a limit to how much government can tax before people work less or flee.

Progressives claim a small increase in tax rates won't stop the wealthy from producing. But some would stop. When the top marginal rate was 90 percent, actor Ronald Reagan worked just half the year. He said that woke him up to the damage that high taxes impose.

Higher taxes give rich people and politicians more reasons to collude. The rich make contributions, and politicians pay the rich back by giving them tax loopholes.

*****************

Is anyone going to argue with that ?
 
Budget Insanity - John Stossel

Stossel should know all about "insanity"...

Are you ever going to contribute anything useful to a discussion or are you just going to act like Chris and post the wishful talking points you jerk-off to ?

If there a point to you post...please clarrify.

Otherwise this is just a lame and completely failed attempt to shoot the messenger.

If you have an issue with his claims.....make your point.

Turdblossom.
 
I have an idea...

Let's just tax Whites more than Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians.

Then, we can tax Hispanics more than Blacks and Asians.

Then we tax Blacks more than Asians.

That seems fair... Right?
 
From the article:

Higher taxes give rich people and politicians more reasons to collude. The rich make contributions, and politicians pay the rich back by giving them tax loopholes.

That's a big loss to America. That money and creative energy spent on figuring out taxes might have gone to build new products, make music, cure cancer or ... who knows what?

Politicians promise to balance the budget by getting rid of what is wasteful, redundant or unnecessary. There's plenty of that, but they have promised to eliminate it for years. They cannot. It's just in the nature of the beast. Centrally planned monopolies do things that are wasteful, redundant and unnecessary.

What will bankrupt us first are the wealth transfers to my generation: Medicare and Social Security

When FDR started Social Security, most people didn't even live to age 65. Today, we average 78 -- and we baby boomers demand all the cool new stuff that modern medicine invents: anti-cholesterol drugs, hip replacements, etc. And we don't want to pay for most of it because we've been trained by government to assume that we're entitled to these things for free, or nearly free. We paid into Social Security and Medicare for our entire working lives, and damn it, we're entitled to get our money back!

*********************

Yes, he nailed it again.

I am there too. I've got enough invested in SS (I've maxed it for several years) that I'm gonna be pissed if they ever means test me off it. But I also realize that might need to happen in order for those who really need it to get it.

The left assumes the right is greedy.

When it comes to this...the left is just as greedy.
 
From the article:

Higher taxes give rich people and politicians more reasons to collude. The rich make contributions, and politicians pay the rich back by giving them tax loopholes.

That's a big loss to America. That money and creative energy spent on figuring out taxes might have gone to build new products, make music, cure cancer or ... who knows what?

Politicians promise to balance the budget by getting rid of what is wasteful, redundant or unnecessary. There's plenty of that, but they have promised to eliminate it for years. They cannot. It's just in the nature of the beast. Centrally planned monopolies do things that are wasteful, redundant and unnecessary.

What will bankrupt us first are the wealth transfers to my generation: Medicare and Social Security

When FDR started Social Security, most people didn't even live to age 65. Today, we average 78 -- and we baby boomers demand all the cool new stuff that modern medicine invents: anti-cholesterol drugs, hip replacements, etc. And we don't want to pay for most of it because we've been trained by government to assume that we're entitled to these things for free, or nearly free. We paid into Social Security and Medicare for our entire working lives, and damn it, we're entitled to get our money back!

*********************

Yes, he nailed it again.

I am there too. I've got enough invested in SS (I've maxed it for several years) that I'm gonna be pissed if they ever means test me off it. But I also realize that might need to happen in order for those who really need it to get it.

The left assumes the right is greedy.

When it comes to this...the left is just as greedy.

Soc Sec (The I in FICA stands for Insurance) and there should be no doubt that Medicare was sold as an Insurance program for the elderly. What is greedy about demanding collecting from an Insurance policy if you paid the premiums?
 
From the article:

Higher taxes give rich people and politicians more reasons to collude. The rich make contributions, and politicians pay the rich back by giving them tax loopholes.

That's a big loss to America. That money and creative energy spent on figuring out taxes might have gone to build new products, make music, cure cancer or ... who knows what?

Politicians promise to balance the budget by getting rid of what is wasteful, redundant or unnecessary. There's plenty of that, but they have promised to eliminate it for years. They cannot. It's just in the nature of the beast. Centrally planned monopolies do things that are wasteful, redundant and unnecessary.

What will bankrupt us first are the wealth transfers to my generation: Medicare and Social Security

When FDR started Social Security, most people didn't even live to age 65. Today, we average 78 -- and we baby boomers demand all the cool new stuff that modern medicine invents: anti-cholesterol drugs, hip replacements, etc. And we don't want to pay for most of it because we've been trained by government to assume that we're entitled to these things for free, or nearly free. We paid into Social Security and Medicare for our entire working lives, and damn it, we're entitled to get our money back!

*********************

Yes, he nailed it again.

I am there too. I've got enough invested in SS (I've maxed it for several years) that I'm gonna be pissed if they ever means test me off it. But I also realize that might need to happen in order for those who really need it to get it.

The left assumes the right is greedy.

When it comes to this...the left is just as greedy.

Soc Sec (The I in FICA stands for Insurance) and there should be no doubt that Medicare was sold as an Insurance program for the elderly. What is greedy about demanding collecting from an Insurance policy if you paid the premiums?

Nothing except that while it was "sold" as an insurance program, it is not run like one. Not a regular (resources are scarce) program.

Social Security is simply a government retirement program. My mother used to have clients who told her they used their S.S. to pay their green fees. If anything, S.S. does not really care the people who need it the most...the way it should.
 

Forum List

Back
Top