Here Comes The Taxes!!!

[Meister]

Let's see. In the last eight years we have seen massive spending increases, and no taxes increased to cover the additional spending. Now we have a major depression on the horizon if we do not get our economy going.

So, maybe a tax increase, in order to cover both the flagrant fiscal idiocies of the prior administration and the attempts of the present administration to head off a complete economic debacle, the Second Great Republican Depression, will be neccessary.

How are you going to pay for the flagrant fiscal idocies of the current administration? Those of the prior administration will cause a depression, but those of the current one will not?

Ms. Hilda, Old Rock's doesn't let the facts get in the way of his story. He'll just say that your poisoning the well, and he can see Mt. St. Helen's from his kitchen. Don't ask me....this is just his method of operation.

 

[auditor0007]

tax increases and huge spending cuts, and a good economy will be necessary, or we as a country will go belly up...

that's all I know on the subject...from all that i have read.

the bailouts were wrong, and the health care proposals will strap us in the future even moreso, if revision or reform of the medical care industry isn't looked at and changed....even if the proposals were not instituted that the administration has...medicare will bankrupt us.

we are in dire straights here, and it is not pretty...imho.

To be objective about all of this, the bailouts, at least of the banks, was necessary. Nobody likes it, and I certainly would liked to have seen some heads roll, but the fact is, we could not allow the entire banking industry to collapse. The stimulus was most likely a waste of money. But let's get past all of that.

Healthcare is already a huge tax on everyone working. There is not going to be free healthcare for anyone, but the fact is that if healthcare costs are not brought under control, we will all go bankrupt, and in the end, be left with no healthcare at all. The current system has done nothing to control costs and has no plans to viably control them in the future. So we are left with goverenment intervention. The fact is, when it comes to healthcare, most people who need it are on Medicare, because only a small percentage of people actually become sick with a major illness until after they retire. Yes, a lot of people have diabetes and other less threatening problems, but those don't cost the system anywhere as much as supporting our retirees with healthcare. And guess what, almost everyone is counting on Medicare when it comes their time to retire.

There are certainly things that can and should be done to reduce spending, and that includes the area of entitlements. The age for eligibility for SS and Medicare should both be raised. As much as everyone complains about government spending, the fact is that goverenment spending on social programs has not really increased in a very long time. But then again, we no longer have a surplus from SS to raid to cover those programs.

As for a national sales tax, I don't see it happening. It's a regressive tax to begin with which if anything, should thrill conservatives. But the outcry against it will be so overwhelming that it will never come to fruition. Maybe the threat of it is what we need to make people understand that in order to cut government spending, it's going to involve cutting some programs that most of us feel we have a right to. At least that would make people understand what they are sacrificing and why.

 

[auditor0007]

Let's see. In the last eight years we have seen massive spending increases, and no taxes increased to cover the additional spending. Now we have a major depression on the horizon if we do not get our economy going.

So, maybe a tax increase, in order to cover both the flagrant fiscal idiocies of the prior administration and the attempts of the present administration to head off a complete economic debacle, the Second Great Republican Depression, will be neccessary.

How are you going to pay for the flagrant fiscal idocies of the current administration? Those of the prior administration will cause a depression, but those of the current one will not?

Perhaps spending money to upgrade our infrastructure will have a better effect than spending money to degrade other peoples infrastructure.

Within six months of Bush's first term, I was stating that he was going to cause a major disaster in foriegn and domestic fields. Now you state the same of Obama. Many stated the same about Clinton at the beginning of his two terms. I think President Obama will have a good deal more success than Bush, but less than Clinton.

Had we spend $700 some billion on infrastructure, I would have been very enthusiastic about it. The fact is, we're spending $45 billion or so, which is a spit in the bucket. The rest of it was wasted money that will have little effect on the economy other than to increase our interest payments on the growing debt.

 

[auditor0007]

Let's see. In the last eight years we have seen massive spending increases, and no taxes increased to cover the additional spending. Now we have a major depression on the horizon if we do not get our economy going.

So, maybe a tax increase, in order to cover both the flagrant fiscal idiocies of the prior administration and the attempts of the present administration to head off a complete economic debacle, the Second Great Republican Depression, will be neccessary.

Hmm..its funny very little money from the stimulus has yet to be distributed but this....


Economic growth will rebound in the second half of 2009 - May. 27, 2009
The panel of 45 economists said it expects economic growth will rebound in the second half of 2009. However, the group still expects to see a decline in second-quarter economic activity.

"The good news is that the NABE panel expects economic growth to turn positive in the second half of this year, with the pace of job losses narrowing sharply over the remainder of this year and employment turning up in early 2010," said NABE president Chris Varvares in a written statement.

Almost three out of four survey respondents expect the recession will end by the third quarter of 2009, the report said.

Of course you said there is a great depression on the horizon so you must be right....

I think this is pretty much on track. The problem is that once we do turn the corner, it is going to be very slow going. We're not going to recover the 7 million lost jobs for a very long time. Unemployment will likely remain above eight or nine percent for the next four to five years with growth in GDP being below 2%.

 

[jreeves]

Let's see. In the last eight years we have seen massive spending increases, and no taxes increased to cover the additional spending. Now we have a major depression on the horizon if we do not get our economy going.

So, maybe a tax increase, in order to cover both the flagrant fiscal idiocies of the prior administration and the attempts of the present administration to head off a complete economic debacle, the Second Great Republican Depression, will be neccessary.

Hmm..its funny very little money from the stimulus has yet to be distributed but this....


Economic growth will rebound in the second half of 2009 - May. 27, 2009
The panel of 45 economists said it expects economic growth will rebound in the second half of 2009. However, the group still expects to see a decline in second-quarter economic activity.

"The good news is that the NABE panel expects economic growth to turn positive in the second half of this year, with the pace of job losses narrowing sharply over the remainder of this year and employment turning up in early 2010," said NABE president Chris Varvares in a written statement.

Almost three out of four survey respondents expect the recession will end by the third quarter of 2009, the report said.

Of course you said there is a great depression on the horizon so you must be right....

I think this is pretty much on track. The problem is that once we do turn the corner, it is going to be very slow going. We're not going to recover the 7 million lost jobs for a very long time. Unemployment will likely remain above eight or nine percent for the next four to five years with growth in GDP being below 2%.

The sad part of this so called stimulus bill is that it will shrink the GDP. How is it stimulus if it shrinks the GDP? I thought you wanted to expand the GDP.....
Unemployment will remain high for some time.

 

[Care4all]

tax increases and huge spending cuts, and a good economy will be necessary, or we as a country will go belly up...

that's all I know on the subject...from all that i have read.

the bailouts were wrong, and the health care proposals will strap us in the future even moreso, if revision or reform of the medical care industry isn't looked at and changed....even if the proposals were not instituted that the administration has...medicare will bankrupt us.

we are in dire straights here, and it is not pretty...imho.

To be objective about all of this, the bailouts, at least of the banks, was necessary. Nobody likes it, and I certainly would liked to have seen some heads roll, but the fact is, we could not allow the entire banking industry to collapse. The stimulus was most likely a waste of money. But let's get past all of that.

Healthcare is already a huge tax on everyone working. There is not going to be free healthcare for anyone, but the fact is that if healthcare costs are not brought under control, we will all go bankrupt, and in the end, be left with no healthcare at all. The current system has done nothing to control costs and has no plans to viably control them in the future. So we are left with goverenment intervention. The fact is, when it comes to healthcare, most people who need it are on Medicare, because only a small percentage of people actually become sick with a major illness after they retire. Yes, a lot of people have diabetes and other less threatening problems, but those don't cost the system anywhere as much as supporting our retirees with healthcare. And guess what, almost everyone is counting on Medicare when it comes their time to retire.

There are certainly things that can and should be done to reduce spending, and that includes the area of entitlements. The age for eligibility for SS and Medicare should both be raised. As much as everyone complains about government spending, the fact is that goverenment spending on social programs has not really increased in a very long time. But then again, we no longer have a surplus from SS to raid to cover those programs.

As for a national sales tax, I don't see it happening. It's a regressive tax to begin with which if anything, should thrill conservatives. But the outcry against it will be so overwhelming that it will never come to fruition. Maybe the threat of it is what we need to make people understand that in order to cut government spending, it's going to involve cutting some programs that most of us feel we have a right to. At least that would make people understand what they are sacrificing and why.

maybe i still don't understand WHY we had to bail the banks out, when they caused their own mess and they made boocoos and boocoos of profit the years they were scamming us and the rest of the world selling their mbs's as secure investments when they clearly were not? who got the profits they made off of their scams? where are these people now? would these banks have really all gone belly up and there be no one there to start new banks or buy out other banks.....? and if they were too big to fail then aren't they even bigger now with the consolidations?

 

[auditor0007]

tax increases and huge spending cuts, and a good economy will be necessary, or we as a country will go belly up...

that's all I know on the subject...from all that i have read.

the bailouts were wrong, and the health care proposals will strap us in the future even moreso, if revision or reform of the medical care industry isn't looked at and changed....even if the proposals were not instituted that the administration has...medicare will bankrupt us.

we are in dire straights here, and it is not pretty...imho.

To be objective about all of this, the bailouts, at least of the banks, was necessary. Nobody likes it, and I certainly would liked to have seen some heads roll, but the fact is, we could not allow the entire banking industry to collapse. The stimulus was most likely a waste of money. But let's get past all of that.

Healthcare is already a huge tax on everyone working. There is not going to be free healthcare for anyone, but the fact is that if healthcare costs are not brought under control, we will all go bankrupt, and in the end, be left with no healthcare at all. The current system has done nothing to control costs and has no plans to viably control them in the future. So we are left with goverenment intervention. The fact is, when it comes to healthcare, most people who need it are on Medicare, because only a small percentage of people actually become sick with a major illness after they retire. Yes, a lot of people have diabetes and other less threatening problems, but those don't cost the system anywhere as much as supporting our retirees with healthcare. And guess what, almost everyone is counting on Medicare when it comes their time to retire.

There are certainly things that can and should be done to reduce spending, and that includes the area of entitlements. The age for eligibility for SS and Medicare should both be raised. As much as everyone complains about government spending, the fact is that goverenment spending on social programs has not really increased in a very long time. But then again, we no longer have a surplus from SS to raid to cover those programs.

As for a national sales tax, I don't see it happening. It's a regressive tax to begin with which if anything, should thrill conservatives. But the outcry against it will be so overwhelming that it will never come to fruition. Maybe the threat of it is what we need to make people understand that in order to cut government spending, it's going to involve cutting some programs that most of us feel we have a right to. At least that would make people understand what they are sacrificing and why.

maybe i still don't understand WHY we had to bail the banks out, when they caused their own mess and they made boocoos and boocoos of profit the years they were scamming us and the rest of the world selling their mbs's as secure investments when they clearly were not? who got the profits they made off of their scams? where are these people now? would these banks have really all gone belly up and there be no one there to start new banks or buy out other banks.....? and if they were too big to fail then aren't they even bigger now with the consolidations?

If we had allowed them to fail, there would have been a major run on the banks, which would've collapsed the entire banking industry. In fact, it almost happened. There was an electonic run on the banks in September of last year. Had it not been for intervention from the Fed, it is highly likely that the entire banking industry would have collapsed.

Paul Kedrosky: Congress Spooked in September By Massive Financial System Run Underway?

You have to understand that the money you have in the bank, isn't actually in the bank, at least the bulk of it. The banks only need to hold a small portion in cash, while the rest is invested in other sources. That is how they make their money. However, if everyone gets scared and starts pulling their money out of the banks, the banks can't come up with the cash, and next thing you know, we are in a major depression. No banks, no businesses, no nothing.

 

[Megatrend]

Yes the banks were bad for scamming everybody, but the people who bought into those loans are guilty too. I am still shocked just how similar this all is to the crash of 1929. With all of our 'preventative measures' such as the federal reserve and regulatory bodies, we still fell into the same pitfall.

Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me.

 

[oreo]

tax increases and huge spending cuts, and a good economy will be necessary, or we as a country will go belly up...

that's all I know on the subject...from all that i have read.

the bailouts were wrong, and the health care proposals will strap us in the future even moreso, if revision or reform of the medical care industry isn't looked at and changed....even if the proposals were not instituted that the administration has...medicare will bankrupt us.

we are in dire straights here, and it is not pretty...imho.

To be objective about all of this, the bailouts, at least of the banks, was necessary. Nobody likes it, and I certainly would liked to have seen some heads roll, but the fact is, we could not allow the entire banking industry to collapse. The stimulus was most likely a waste of money. But let's get past all of that.

Healthcare is already a huge tax on everyone working. There is not going to be free healthcare for anyone, but the fact is that if healthcare costs are not brought under control, we will all go bankrupt, and in the end, be left with no healthcare at all. The current system has done nothing to control costs and has no plans to viably control them in the future. So we are left with goverenment intervention. The fact is, when it comes to healthcare, most people who need it are on Medicare, because only a small percentage of people actually become sick with a major illness after they retire. Yes, a lot of people have diabetes and other less threatening problems, but those don't cost the system anywhere as much as supporting our retirees with healthcare. And guess what, almost everyone is counting on Medicare when it comes their time to retire.

There are certainly things that can and should be done to reduce spending, and that includes the area of entitlements. The age for eligibility for SS and Medicare should both be raised. As much as everyone complains about government spending, the fact is that goverenment spending on social programs has not really increased in a very long time. But then again, we no longer have a surplus from SS to raid to cover those programs.

As for a national sales tax, I don't see it happening. It's a regressive tax to begin with which if anything, should thrill conservatives. But the outcry against it will be so overwhelming that it will never come to fruition. Maybe the threat of it is what we need to make people understand that in order to cut government spending, it's going to involve cutting some programs that most of us feel we have a right to. At least that would make people understand what they are sacrificing and why.

maybe i still don't understand WHY we had to bail the banks out, when they caused their own mess and they made boocoos and boocoos of profit the years they were scamming us and the rest of the world selling their mbs's as secure investments when they clearly were not? who got the profits they made off of their scams? where are these people now? would these banks have really all gone belly up and there be no one there to start new banks or buy out other banks.....? and if they were too big to fail then aren't they even bigger now with the consolidations?

Yes banks did that:--BUT who enabled them to do that? Fannie/Freddie & AIG were ALL deregulated by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT in the 1990's.

That is why--I still do not understand people who "trust" our government to manage their lives. Over the last 70 years I can't think of one single thing that the government has worked their fingers into that they haven't major a MAJOR MESS of--costing us--the taxpayers of this country trillions! Social Security & Medicare will be the next federal government run programs that turn into disasters.

"Government is not the solution--it's the PROBLEM" Ronald Reagan