by Jack
The democrats say the rich should “pay their fair share”, and the republicans counter this calling it an attempt at “class warfare.” I say, all the tax talk about taxes is a deliberate distraction from the core issue. The real problem is not how much the rich should pay, its the insatiable appetite by big government that is consuming more resources than we have.
Downsizing our bloated government should be our number one priority. News flash: Government does not become more productive and more efficient with greater size! The more tax money you feed Washington the larger it grows and the more it spends. Is there anyone out here who doesn’t believe that? The sheer scope and size of government is the problem in America and it’s been a drag on the economy and every business in that economy. The monster must be scaled back and there is really no choice. We either do it rationally or it’s going to implode our economy just like it did in Greece, Spain, Italy and Ireland.
Even if the rich paid “their fair share” it would be so small as to be meaningless compared to the spending by big government. Ah, but the always trustworthy government promises to make major cuts to reduce spending, but they also need the rich to pay “their fair share”. Do you really believe that?
Lately, big government has been reaching in to your retirement system to pay for their spending addiction. If you were born in the 1950’s or 60’s, that should have your full attention because your generation has fully invested in a retirement system that is almost broke and is about to run out of cash just when you will need it.
Here’s the bottom line, we would have no need for a tax debate if government was reeled in… period.
Their’s your mandate, your voter priority for the next election and for every election to follow until we reduce the size of government by at least 40%. And keep in mind, when you downsize government you’re doing many good things beyond just saving social security and reducing the deficit. Government will become slightly more efficient – after all, you’re forcing them to do more with less. You’re also increasing your personal wealth and spreading said wealth around, because more dollars are in your pocket to spend. This is exactly how we once thrived as a nation and we can do it again, but we’ve got to get government out of the way. The only way we can do it is to quit being a wimpy codependent.
Quentin I have every reason to believe you’re right about government over spending and at the same time protecting their empire, but we must try to fight em. To not try is to surrender.
Then again, if plan A doesn’t work, then maybe surrender is exactly what we should do? Let them run the train off the cliff, with everybody on board. We’ll all suffer dearly for it, but it’s one way to motivate people to extreme action. Hmmmm…you might say, no pain – no gain. lol Yeah, why not, I like that. If we are too weak to rally the stupid troops and force revolutionary change upon Washington, then let it all go bust so we can make believers out of those who thought the money would never run out.
Honest Discussion? Honest???
Any honest discussion of defense cuts should include at least a few facts.
1) The total cost of the Afghanistan and Iraq military engagements are $1.3 trillion. Thats less than 1/11th of the national debt and less than one year of Obama deficit spending.
2) During the 5% per annum economic growth (on average) of the Eisenhower years defense spending was 11 percent of GDP and 60 percent of the federal budget. Today, defense spending is 5 percent of GDP and 20 percent of the budget.
3) Defense IS the primary business of the Federal Government. Without it, nothing else matters. Why is it that the extreme left is always so dishonest about defense spending and so keen to gut it? Hmmmm?
Re: “If we are too weak to rally the stupid troops and force revolutionary change upon Washington, then let it all go bust so we can make believers out of those who thought the money would never run out.”
Huh? Stupid troops? Violent revolution rallied by the military? You must be being facetious.
Jack, in all these rants you never answer my question. What are all these CDC scientists gonna do if they don’t work for the government? There ain’t no money to be made in tracking flu outbreaks, but I want it done.
You may in turn bring up the manufacturers of $500 toilet seats, but I got news for you: those manufacturers sit squarely on the Republican side of the eisle, and I’ve never seen a Republican lift a finger to deal with them.
Libby, I’m pretty sure there is enough pork, waste, fraud and many other ill-considered expenditures that could be saved by responsible oversight. So I’m confident our CDC scientists could remain employed.
I also believe we could go a long way to balancing the budget if we could just nip pork and fraud. Medicare fraud is horrendous, but Blue Cross fraud is manageable…now why do you suppose that is? But, the bonus payoff would be when we did away with the many redundant agencies…we’ve listed them here before. Those folks need to find real jobs in the private sector.
As for the $500 toilet seats, that’s been a problem since the first lobbyist met a congressman, pulleeeeese don’t try to lay that on just republicans. These sort of contracts were frauds and both sides have been guilty. A lot of this is just plain waste too. Imagine building an aircraft and you are told you must only use grade 8 bolts that have been magnafluxed, and they cost 3000% more than off the shelf Grade 8 bolts. The engineers knew this was unnecessary, but because of the CYA factor that resulted in some lawsuit way back when, by some ridiculous lawyers that today all aircraft grade 8 bolts must also be magnafluxed and we’ve been paying out the kazoo for them all that time. It’s BS stuff like that Libs that is killing us. Imagine the tens of thousands of absurd examples that exist in the government contract world! A $500 toilets seat? Ha! That ain’t nothin kiddo.
Fair share as defined by who? Or is it whom?
A question for ANY political candidate: Just exactly what is the maximum percentage of taxpayers’ money that should go to government?
Would be interesting to total up the percentages of Fed, State & local taxes we are required to pay. Property taxes, sales taxes and any “fees” that are required by government should be added in as well. The results might surprise some of those who are chanting “fair share.”
“Would be interesting to total up the percentages of Fed, State & local taxes we are required to pay. Property taxes, sales taxes and any “fees” that are required by government should be added in as well.”
Humpf. If you insist upon 8,000 square feet to live in you can just pay the taxes on it. And I certainly hope you’re not trying to tell us that anybody other than the renters pay the taxes on “investment” property?
There is still some remediating to be done.
Good point J. Soden, what’s fair in their minds anyway? Personally, I think there is no limit, its just whatever they can get away with.