The Cliff

[Setec Astronomy]

What kind of industry is the government? What do they produce in return for the revenue they do receive?

I think you missed the whole point of my post...and I think I noted the necessity for both increased revenue and decreased spending. Plus the government doesn't represent itself to be an "industry", perhaps a necessary evil would be a better description.

Let's try a little math, since you are from Indiana, all those people who used to work in the auto industry in your state, whose jobs evaporated in the 90's and 00's...let's say they made $15/hr. adjusted to today's dollars, and now they are working at Wal-Mart or Target for $7.25/hr (or not at all). At a given tax rate, how much more taxes did they pay when they had a manufacturing job? If they had a choice would they take the lower-paying job because they are paying less total dollars in taxes? Or would they take the higher paying job because they are earning more total dollars per week? How much additional revenue would the government collect even at a lower tax rate from workers having better-paying jobs?

This isn't even about spending arguments, it's beyond that. Even if we could cut spending by over a $ trillion a year instantly, it would still take us hundreds of years to pay off the money we owe. What I was trying to say is that no matter which approach you take, revenue increase, spending reductions, or both, the scale of what is being done is so small compared to the size of the problem as to be almost irrelevant.

The problems we have, have roots going back 30-40-50 years, and they have been compounded by the global economy and a world that wants a standard of living like we have, and a lot of years of us ignoring the problem.

 

[2old2change]

How long could you run a household if you had to borrow 44 cents or more for every dollar you spent ?

 

[Setec Astronomy]

How long could you run a household if you had to borrow 44 cents or more for every dollar you spent ?

Yes, my point exactly (even though I don't think 1 is 44% of 3.2). As I said, we have be running unbalanced budgets for most of the last 50 years...how can you expect to be solvent when you almost never spend less than you take in? This is nothing new, Ross Perot was ranting about this in 1992 when the problem wasn't half as big as it is now.

 

[Y2KSVT]

I think you missed the whole point of my post...and I think I noted the necessity for both increased revenue and decreased spending. Plus the government doesn't represent itself to be an "industry", perhaps a necessary evil would be a better description.

Let's try a little math, since you are from Indiana, all those people who used to work in the auto industry in your state, whose jobs evaporated in the 90's and 00's...let's say they made $15/hr. adjusted to today's dollars, and now they are working at Wal-Mart or Target for $7.25/hr (or not at all). At a given tax rate, how much more taxes did they pay when they had a manufacturing job? If they had a choice would they take the lower-paying job because they are paying less total dollars in taxes? Or would they take the higher paying job because they are earning more total dollars per week? How much additional revenue would the government collect even at a lower tax rate from workers having better-paying jobs?

This isn't even about spending arguments, it's beyond that. Even if we could cut spending by over a $ trillion a year instantly, it would still take us hundreds of years to pay off the money we owe. What I was trying to say is that no matter which approach you take, revenue increase, spending reductions, or both, the scale of what is being done is so small compared to the size of the problem as to be almost irrelevant.

The problems we have, have roots going back 30-40-50 years, and they have been compounded by the global economy and a world that wants a standard of living like we have, and a lot of years of us ignoring the problem.

You're assuming the laid off auto workers took lesser paying jobs or are unemployed so I fail to see your point, again. I see no justification in making one group pay a higher percentage, only because "they can." I personally believe we should receive 100% of the fruits of our labor, especially when I see the way MY money is being spent on warfare and welfare that I don't at all agree with. I suppose I'm "unpatriotic" for my views, but I'll save that for another day. So, what are you getting at?

 

[BillE]

Taxes have continued to decrease since shortly after the end of WW2. BUT, during the same period WE (yes US) have asked (demanded?) more and more from our various government agencies (local, state, Feds, et al).

Now it has come time to FINALLY pay for some of these services we all love so much. The only way to actually do this is to increase taxes and try like hell to decrease spending.

The only problem with this fix is NO ONE seems to want to pay for 'services rendered'.

To quote Pogo, "We have met the enemy and the enemy is us."

Bill

 

[bulldog shine]

Talk about messed up priorities. Did you see the Sandy relief bill includes money for fisheries in Alsaka? That is about as far away as you can get from New York/New Jersey.

 

[davidc]

Now that the Gov't has passed this bill and left the 2% paycheck tax go thru guess I will be ordering less from AG I am sorry to say. I know it does not sound like much but 2% of a gross weekly check of $1,000.00 is $20.00. That times 4 for a month is 80.00. So unlike the Gov't I can't tax some one else to get that back and unlike the Gov't I will have to cut spending somewhere and if that means a dirty vehicle then that is what will happen. With the cost of fuel, electricity, food etc. something has to give. I do not know about the rest of you on this site but things are a little tight at my place and detailing supplies are not a must have with me although I do like to take care of my property until it is an expense that is not a must have.

Dave

 

[Dr_Pain]

Wow, a few great posts and a few posts that puzzle me. From what I have been reading on this site (which does apply to this fiscal cliff stuff)

"It is not because you can that you SHOULD". You may be a great detailer but it is not because you CAN cut and polish that you SHOULD (indiscriminately). There are consequences to all our actions... and in-actions!

It is not because you can "afford" to pay more tax that you should. Where is the fairness in that? What is the incentive to maintain a business in this type of communistic agenda?

As a business owner, I can tell you that this argument will never be won through emotional appeals at the government level. It is a business problem with business solutions. Yes it is UNFATHOMABLE that we still have poverty in this beautiful prosperous idealic country that we live in, but this is an emotional reaction which did not, does not and will not fit in any capitalistic business model.... EVER!

My staff were all excited after the holidays to discuss with me the dedication and fairness of our government in foregoing their lame duck holiday session to come back to the table and help all those that make <$400,000/year (and stuck it to the people that make more)..... until they got their Jan 1st paycheck. What a surprise to them when they noticed that the Social Security tax break they benefited from was no longer. So now their take home pay is less (bummer #1), my business tax burden is up, making less monies available for incentives and bonuses (bummer #2), and unfortunately many employees find themselves part-timer to avoid having to be cover everyone with Obamacare (bummer #3).

I know, I am such a bad man... evil man...scrooge... (flame on) but Business 101 dictate that my ultimate objective is to remain profitable.... or perish! INDISCRIMINATELY Providing additional benefits on my current meager profit margin would have been the death of me. So what is worst?, making due and rolling with the punches or firing everyone and closing doors before I lose my house? It would be different if I did not have to guarantee my own survival, and that the government would support me through the "thick and thin", but I am not on the list of "this business cannot fail", so it is up to me to protect my interests and the livelihood of my staff.

For those believing that you should enslave yourself to a communistic government agenda, then be my guess but be prepared to suffer the consequences on your own actions. Health care won't get better (trust me on that), your retirement won't be guaranteed unless you are willing to raise the retirement age well beyond the median age at which male and female die (so there is enough money to go around).... and don't forget nobody will come to pay your mortgage or your food, so be ready to live what the government believe is the standards of living. Been to the projects lately? I have....

 

[cardaddy]

Now that the Gov't has passed this bill and left the 2% paycheck tax go thru guess I will be ordering less from AG I am sorry to say. I know it does not sound like much but 2% of a gross weekly check of $1,000.00 is $20.00. That times 4 for a month is 80.00. So unlike the Gov't I can't tax some one else to get that back and unlike the Gov't I will have to cut spending somewhere and if that means a dirty vehicle then that is what will happen. With the cost of fuel, electricity, food etc. something has to give. I do not know about the rest of you on this site but things are a little tight at my place and detailing supplies are not a must have with me although I do like to take care of my property until it is an expense that is not a must have.

Dave

Preaching to the choir there David.

I draw a SS check, period. My wife makes the big money, and with right at 30 years in the same job her salary is much MUCH higher than the average pay for her position within the company. She started when it was privately owned, the paid her very well, including a company car. Once they sold out she lost the car, but kept the pay (which is considerably more than they pay anyone else). That 2% was the only raise she's seen in the last few years. Add to that a $12+ hike per paycheck for health insurance, higher taxes, lower interest deductions, and eating out, AG and others will be all competing for what's left.

 

[KneeDragr]

Taxes have continued to decrease since shortly after the end of WW2. BUT, during the same period WE (yes US) have asked (demanded?) more and more from our various government agencies (local, state, Feds, et al).

Now it has come time to FINALLY pay for some of these services we all love so much. The only way to actually do this is to increase taxes and try like hell to decrease spending.

The only problem with this fix is NO ONE seems to want to pay for 'services rendered'.

To quote Pogo, "We have met the enemy and the enemy is us."

Bill

The problem is, most of us dont want what the government is spending money on.

For instance, our airpower is so far beyond anyone's, yet we are spending 50-75 billion dollars a year building the next, even more stealthy, farther seeing plane that the Generals dont even want because its too hard to fly.

Ditto for most of the social programs, that help nobody except Federal employees who are paid high 6 figure salaries to feel good about themselves. Sure there are some that work, but internal studies have shown that 70% of them do absolutely nothing to help the people they were intended to help.

Anyone with a solid background in business could clean up the entire mess pretty quickly, laying off Feds that are under performing, cutting programs departments that are redundant or not working, finding out the actual needs of our military and getting rid of the junk.

But all of that is left to politicians, who are bought and paid for by the beneficiaries of our tax dollars.

 

[BobbyG]

I'm going to toss a wild into the hat and for the most part a never before tried approach.....CUT SPENDING and live within your budget Washington!!

Washington's idea of fiscal responsibility.....

You give me $650 Billion dollars and I'll give you $50 Billion dollars back.....Hell, I can play that silly game all day long!! :laughing:

 

[davidc]

Preaching to the choir there David.

I draw a SS check, period. My wife makes the big money, and with right at 30 years in the same job her salary is much MUCH higher than the average pay for her position within the company. She started when it was privately owned, the paid her very well, including a company car. Once they sold out she lost the car, but kept the pay (which is considerably more than they pay anyone else). That 2% was the only raise she's seen in the last few years. Add to that a $12+ hike per paycheck for health insurance, higher taxes, lower interest deductions, and eating out, AG and others will be all competing for what's left.

Yeah, I know it all to well. I have seen it erode year after year but it has now arrived to the point that our standard of living has sank to no extra's. The wife works at CVS and supposedly the word came down that prescriptions go up 15% as of the 1st of the year for Obama care. That I am afraid is only the beginning of the end of the middle class which has been eroding more and more over the years.

Dave

 

[arack]

Guys, This bill was a sham. The CBO (Congressional Budget Office, Non Partisan and independent) stated that this bill will add $ 4 trillion to our already massive 16.5 trillion dollar debt.

Government Debt in the United States - Debt Clock

We cannot continue to raise taxes and not cut spending dramatically. It is a simple math equation.

This country is heading for a serious reckoning with inflation and currency devaluation on the world markets. I work in an area in which we invest large amounts of money. I have been seeing the impact for the last couple of years. The currency, debt ceiling, and printing of money will cripple us. The real question is not when, but how soon?

I feel for all of you paying the tax increases, but guess what, that is what you voted for. My taxes are going up and guess what, most of yours are , too. Not quite just the rich people's taxes, is it?

 

[davidc]

Guys, This bill was a sham. The CBO (Congressional Budget Office, Non Partisan and independent) stated that this bill will add $ 4 trillion to our already massive 16.5 trillion dollar debt.

Government Debt in the United States - Debt Clock

We cannot continue to raise taxes and not cut spending dramatically. It is a simple math equation.

This country is heading for a serious reckoning with inflation and currency devaluation on the world markets. I work in an area in which we invest large amounts of money. I have been seeing the impact for the last couple of years. The currency, debt ceiling, and printing of money will cripple us. The real question is not when, but how soon?

I feel for all of you paying the tax increases, but guess what, that is what you voted for. My taxes are going up and guess what, most of yours are , too. Not quite just the rich people's taxes, is it?

You need to change that to "That is what some of you voted for". I for one did not vote for it. Some cannot see the forrest for the tree's.

Dave

 

[Rockeey]

This country is heading for a serious reckoning with inflation and currency devaluation on the world markets.

The currency, debt ceiling, and printing of money will cripple us. The real question is not when, but how soon?

This is the part that most Americans do not understand or willfully dismiss because the enormity of it happening is too great. There is an element of "it can't happen to us" falsely ingrained into our reasoning. We are very near to the "point of no return" and yet, sadly, the way out is quite simple and explained in the greatest selling book of all time.

 

[bulldog shine]

The problem is, most of us dont want what the government is spending money on.

For instance, our airpower is so far beyond anyone's, yet we are spending 50-75 billion dollars a year building the next, even more stealthy, farther seeing plane that the Generals dont even want because its too hard to fly.

First, I love how this debate is ongoing and everyone is behaving.

Second I do have to disagree with the air power. The average age of our air force is over 30 years.

 

[KneeDragr]

This is the part that most Americans do not understand or willfully dismiss because the enormity of it happening is too great. There is an element of "it can't happen to us" falsely ingrained into our reasoning. We are very near to the "point of no return" and yet, sadly, the way out is quite simple and explained in the greatest selling book of all time.

When a car costs 300k, a gallon of gas for 100$, and a loaf of bread for 20$ they will start to get it. It will unfortunately be too late.

 

[arack]

You need to change that to "That is what some of you voted for". I for one did not vote for it. Some cannot see the forrest for the tree's.

Dave

dave you are correct. Some of us did not vote for this madness. I give it 3 to 5 years max. Our credit rating will fall. Again this year. Bookmark this post.

 

[KneeDragr]

dave you are correct. Some of us did not vote for this madness. I give it 3 to 5 years max. Our credit rating will fall. Again this year. Bookmark this post.

But what is that going to do? Unless people stop buying treasuries, its meaningless.

And thats the real dilemma, what do people do with all their dollars? Americans buys so much stuff, especially oil, everyone gets dollars in return. If they trade them for local currency, the dollar drops and their economy tanks. So they buy treasuries, because our budget is still a better bet than Japan or Europe.

 

[Y2KSVT]

The problem is, most of us dont want what the government is spending money on.

For instance, our airpower is so far beyond anyone's, yet we are spending 50-75 billion dollars a year building the next, even more stealthy, farther seeing plane that the Generals dont even want because its too hard to fly.

Ditto for most of the social programs, that help nobody except Federal employees who are paid high 6 figure salaries to feel good about themselves. Sure there are some that work, but internal studies have shown that 70% of them do absolutely nothing to help the people they were intended to help.

Anyone with a solid background in business could clean up the entire mess pretty quickly, laying off Feds that are under performing, cutting programs departments that are redundant or not working, finding out the actual needs of our military and getting rid of the junk.

But all of that is left to politicians, who are bought and paid for by the beneficiaries of our tax dollars.

Very well put, KneeDragr! :xyxthumbs: