Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 22 Jul '10 18:42
    http://www.examiner.com/x-41012-Inland-Empire-Religion--Politics-Examiner~y2010m7d13-Obama-Commissioners-Warns-Death-of-US-by-Fiscal-Cancer-A-Must-Read

    "Are these the end times? Is the US headed for collapse? That appears to be the serious warnings from the two heads of the Obama appointed commission on our debt and deficit. On Sunday, Erskine Bowles (former President Clinton Chief of Staff) and Alan Simpson (former Republican senator from Wyoming), co-chairman of the Bipartisan Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, warned that unless something is done about the nation's debt and deficit, the US is headed for a predictable economic crisis unlike any we have ever seen.

    To understand the seriousness of our current situation, Simpson explains that current federal revenue only pays for three programs. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Everything else, "including fighting two wars, homeland security, education, art, culture, veterns, you name it -- the whole rest of discretionary budget is being financed by China and other countries." Jill Lawrence of Politics today adds that the amount we borrow currently from China is $920 billion. She says, "That if we continued on autopilot, by 2020 we would be paying $1 trillion a year in interest on our debt?"

    Erskine Bowles compare the problem to a cancer that will eat this country from the inside out. He says, "We could do nothing and survive for maybe five years." He and Simpson hope this will not be the course that Congress will take when they deliver their report in December (after the elections which both Democrats and Republicans demanded). Both parties understand that drastic measures have to be taken. Bowles warns, "We could have decades of double-digit growth and not grow our way out of this enormous debt problem. We can't tax our way out....The reality is we have got to cut spending or increase revenues or do some combination of that."

    All you hae to do is to take a look at California's current debt and deficit problem for where the US is heading. California has always been a trail blazer and now its trail blazing path to collapse that the US is also heading towards. While California's budget crisis could be blamed on its liberal leaning legislature, the same can not be said for the US. When you consider that George W. Bush spent more than any Republican president in history. His Medicare prescription entitlement program along side his own economic recovery plan bailouts added to the problem. Not two mention our involvement in two wars orchestrated by Bush.

    While the "War on Terror" dominated the last decade, the biggest threat to the US this decade is government spending. We are more likely to face complete collapse due to our own financial troubles than a preempted strike from any terrorist organization. The bible in Revelation, as well as, those 2012 predictions mostly forecast natural cataclysmic disasters as the end of times. Could our end by due toward our call to "Render unto Ceaser" even when it went beyond the tithing percentage mentioned in the Bible?


    With this latest report, it is scary to think what could become of us. It makes the upcoming elections in November all the more important. Critical decisions will need to be made to course correct this country. We all need to be sure we are thinking through our choices for elected office."

    ------------------------------------------------------

    So how about it? Are the statists who have allowed out of control spending public enemy #1 to the Republic? If so, what should we do about it? Of course, it does not help the Obama administration when its own appointees condemn it.
  2. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    22 Jul '10 18:59
    Originally posted by whodey
    http://www.examiner.com/x-41012-Inland-Empire-Religion--Politics-Examiner~y2010m7d13-Obama-Commissioners-Warns-Death-of-US-by-Fiscal-Cancer-A-Must-Read

    "Are these the end times? Is the US headed for collapse? That appears to be the serious warnings from the two heads of the Obama appointed commission on our debt and deficit. On Sunday, Erskine Bowles (f ...[text shortened]... it does not help the Obama administration when its own appointees condemn it.
    You mean the "statists" like Ronald Reagan who slashed taxes on the wealthy while vastly increasing discretionary spending thus causing the deficit?
  3. 22 Jul '10 19:08 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    You mean the "statists" like Ronald Reagan who slashed taxes on the wealthy while vastly increasing discretionary spending thus causing the deficit?
    arguing about which administrations or Congresses were to blame for the deficit and debt will not do anything to solve the current problem.

    the current debt is too high and the deficits are too high -- and revenues may remain weak because the economy may remain stagnant for years until everyone gets their out-of-control personal debts under control.

    the question remains -- what do you think should be done?
  4. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    22 Jul '10 19:13
    Tax the wealthiest people heavily, spend what is needed to keep the economy from collapsing, end the wars, decriminalize the "laws against sin" which do not violate natural rights...that's a start. Oh, increase legal immigration from Mexico dramatically.
  5. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    22 Jul '10 19:16
    Originally posted by Melanerpes
    arguing about which administrations or Congresses were to blame for the deficit and debt will not do anything to solve the current problem.

    the current debt is too high and the deficits are too high -- and revenues may remain weak because the economy may remain stagnant for years until everyone gets their out-of-control personal debts under control.

    the question remains -- what do you think should be done?
    I already made my proposal: return the tax rates on the upper income to pre-Reagan levels, end preferential tax treatment of capital gains and dividends and tax inheritances as income. On the spending side, slash defense spending by at least half and end the foreign wars.

    That should leave a nice surplus.
  6. 22 Jul '10 19:16
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    . Oh, increase legal immigration from Mexico dramatically.
    Yeah just look at how great California has become because of Mexican immigration there.

    Like a little slice of heaven compared to 40 years ago.

    And you want to make the whole country like that?
  7. 22 Jul '10 19:22
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    I already made my proposal: return the tax rates on the upper income to pre-Reagan levels, end preferential tax treatment of capital gains and dividends and tax inheritances as income. On the spending side, slash defense spending by at least half and end the foreign wars.

    That should leave a nice surplus.
    how would you go about getting voters to elect people this November that would pass this proposal?
  8. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    22 Jul '10 19:24 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by whodey
    Are these the end times? The bible in Revelation, as well as, those 2012 predictions mostly forecast natural cataclysmic disasters as the end of times. Could our end by due toward our call to "Render unto Ceaser" even when it went beyond the tithing percentage mentioned in the Bible?

    You cultists freak me out.

    a predictable economic crisis unlike any we have ever seen.



    We can't tax our way out

    That is all the fantastically wealthy heirs making themselves known, but in disguise.

    California has always been a trail blazer and now its trail blazing path to collapse that the US is also heading towards

    Yeah, well, I suppose when you provide 13% of GDP, some of the other states will stumble when you do. They need their liberal financial crutch.

    Are the statists who have allowed out of control spending public enemy #1 to the Republic?

    Nope. The wealthy and the military industrial complex are in many ways.

    Of course, it does not help the Obama administration when its own appointees condemn it.

    Suggesting Obama take further, dramatic measures to continue to stabilize the economy is hardly condemning him.
  9. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    22 Jul '10 19:25 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by Sam The Sham
    Yeah just look at how great California has become because of Mexican immigration there.

    Like a little slice of heaven compared to 40 years ago.

    And you want to make the whole country like that?
    13% US GDP homeboy. 8th strongest economy on the planet.

    See the little blue California there on the left?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USA-World_Nominal_GDP.PNG
  10. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    22 Jul '10 19:36
    Originally posted by Melanerpes
    how would you go about getting voters to elect people this November that would pass this proposal?
    I guarantee you that most of the people in the country would be only to glad to see taxes raised on the wealthy. I guarantee you that if people actually knew that someone making money from dividends, capital gains or inheritances pays less than someone working for a paycheck, they'd support ending this absurd inequity. And the majority have been saying they are sick of the wars for years. And ask them if they want to cut Social Security or Medicaid or military spending.

    The problem is with the limited visions of the big money parties.

    BTW, since you've decided to make the smart alecky comment rather than deal with the substance of the proposal, perhaps you'd explain YOUR ideas for ending the deficit.
  11. 22 Jul '10 19:50
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    I already made my proposal: return the tax rates on the upper income to pre-Reagan levels, end preferential tax treatment of capital gains and dividends and tax inheritances as income. On the spending side, slash defense spending by at least half and end the foreign wars.

    That should leave a nice surplus.
    yay! let's try Carternomics!
  12. 22 Jul '10 20:00 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    I guarantee you that most of the people in the country would be only to glad to see taxes raised on the wealthy. I guarantee you that if people actually knew that someone making money from dividends, capital gains or inheritances pays less than someone working for a paycheck, they'd support ending this absurd inequity. And the majority have been saying t with the substance of the proposal, perhaps you'd explain YOUR ideas for ending the deficit.
    it wasn't a smart-alecky comment.

    We can argue until we're blue in the face about the best way to balance the budget, but at the end of the day, the major problem is convincing voters to accept a proposal that includes significant tax increases and significant spending cuts. It's so easy to scare people about how any of these measures will "destroy jobs" or "take away their freedom".

    I agree that the "big money parties" are a big part of the problem. They both have a lot riding on maintaining the status quo.

    As for specific ideas on balancing the budget, I have made various proposals in the past. Some combination of spending cuts and tax increases -- it really isn't rocket science. One of my favorite ideas is phasing out tax preferences given to people with mortgages that aren't available to people who pay rent. But regardless of the proposal, the thing that IS rocket science is getting the voters to agree on anything that doesn't involve paying half the price for twice the food. I personally have no idea how to get that done given the current political climate.

    The only scenario I see is for a truly major fiscal crisis to set in where everyone in both parties realizes that major steps need to be made on both sides on the ledger. Either that or hope that the economy suddenly experiences an unexpected renaissance like it did back in the 1990's.
  13. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    22 Jul '10 20:05 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Melanerpes
    it wasn't a smart-alecky comment.

    We can argue until we're blue in the face about the best way to balance the budget, but at the end of the day, the major problem is convincing voters to accept a proposal that includes significant tax increases and significant spending cuts. It's so easy to scare people about how any of these measures will "destroy job conomy sudden experiences an unexpected renaissance like it did back in the 1990's.
    The voters are already convinced;more than 2/3 (including half of Republicans!) support higher taxes on the rich. They also regard spending on the wars as "wasteful". http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=awkrRPMONDW8

    A Bloomberg National Poll conducted Dec. 3-7 shows two- thirds of Americans favor taxing the rich to reduce the deficit.


    That's what I'm saying!
  14. 22 Jul '10 20:08
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    The voters are already convinced;more than 2/3 (including half of Republicans!) support higher taxes on the rich. They also regard spending on the wars as "wasteful". http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=awkrRPMONDW8

    A Bloomberg National Poll conducted Dec. 3-7 shows two- thirds of Americans favor taxing the rich to reduce the deficit.


    That's what I'm saying!
    How many people are in favour of electoral reforms that would allow for the advent of a new party to implement such measures, however?
  15. 22 Jul '10 20:24
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    The voters are already convinced;more than 2/3 (including half of Republicans!) support higher taxes on the rich. They also regard spending on the wars as "wasteful". http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=awkrRPMONDW8

    A Bloomberg National Poll conducted Dec. 3-7 shows two- thirds of Americans favor taxing the rich to reduce the deficit.


    That's what I'm saying!
    And yet the representatives that the voters have chosen have repeatedly failed to seriously propose any major tax increases or defense cuts. Why do the voters continually re-elect people who refuse to do what they want them to do?