Matt Wuerker for December 24, 2012

If the $1 million is in capital gains, the cut is waaay more.

Stop spending, rebuilding the infrastructure with abundant labor and cheap money just makes sense, so don’t do it.

Well, his user name (@narrowminded) DID forewarn you, @CasualBrowser! Thanks for giving him the benefit of the doubt and taking on the good fight to try to open that closed mind just a little. Most of us just ignore such a rigid ignoramus.

Right, Narrow. It’s worked SO well for the past 12 years. Actually, starving the country has never actually been good for the country and its inhabitants. It’s notable that when you look at the economics since about 1930 EVEN THE RICH DO BETTER under Democratic governance, and with higher tax rates, because the economy does so much better under a rational, balanced system then under one that starves the middle class to give even more to the rich.

…until the NEXT time we try to balance the budget…You forget that a balanced budget is only important when a Democrat is President. The second a Republican is sworn in to office, deficits will no longer matter.

Of course, what I really love is seeing all the crocidile tears being shed for our “brave troops fighting overseas” conveniently ignoring the fact that the two wars were put on a credit card and never really paid for with taxes. Ask the citizenry for taxation support for the troops and the tea-baggers go into revolt. They are revolting anyway.

In case anyone is interested, Krugman’s column in the Times today is interesting:http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/24/opinion/krugman-when-prophecy-fails.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121224&_r=0

Harleyquinn said, “… The myth that the million and billionaires are not doing their “fair share” only buys votes and support from the ignorant dumb masses who want to be a class warfare wealth envy stooge.”

I have a serious question for you: After taking all of my legal deductions, I pay about 25% of my income to the IRS every year. This is typical for many in the 5% – 10% income range. Romney, who is in the 0.1% range, earns more than 100 times what I do and pays 14%. Please explain why this is fair, and why I am a “class warfare wealth envy stooge” for feeling that it is not fair.

Interesting newscast today in CBUS. Only heard it referenced once, but one of Romney’s sons was quoted as saying Mitt never wanted to run for president. If so, does that mean he didn’t really mean what he said about the 47%, or the “taker class”? The top 1% CONTROLS, not CREATES more wealth of the country than all the rest combined. Then they take it to overseas accounts (which is not for favorable tax purposes), and whine about how high taxes are here. Yes the tax code needs restructured, but the deficit is the dollars we put on the credit card for two wars, and for the stimulus to try and bring our economy back. That is bills TO BE PAID!

‘Please explain why this is fair,1. Life is not fair so weir a cup!2. the role of government is not to be mommy government make things “fair”3. 14% is on money already taxed and reinvested and IF it turns a profit then it is tax again at 14%4. Why should I care what the other guy make? ’-M Ster— as I predicted, Harley is just not up to the task of understanding tax brackets or earned vs. unearned income. -He has no concept of what is fair or unfair with regard to taxation. -If there were a law that exempted anyone named ’Koch’ from any tax at all, it would be fine with Harley, ‘cause, you know, ’it’s not the mommy government make things fair’.

While the situation might not actually BE hopeless, those who feel that way can certainly be excused/forgiven for those feelings… I know it’s a “complex” problem – Jay Carney told us so (speaking of ‘hacks’)…BUT, the ‘solutions’ (such as they are) that are likely to be imposed won’t solve anything. Even though it’s simplistic (‘sorry, Jay…), the truth is that we DO have a spending problem…we spend and borrow too much as a nation. Have you ever heard of a family with, say, $50,000 in credit card debt deciding that the way out of that hole is to continue (and to increase the level of) their spending, even though their income can’t possibly keep up? First thing you know, they’ve got $100,000 in credit card debt…How is that a solution? Our government has lost the capacity to draft a realistic budget, to operate within a practical budget, or even to legislatively PASS a budget…Growing up, I often heard the phrases, “Tax ’n spend Democrats,” and “Democrats’ only solution to any problem is to throw money at it.” It seems that those are not just labels from the opponent party, but factual in many respects.To get and keep a level of revenue sufficient to sustain the rampant and out-of-control spending (much of which is amazingly wasteful) would break the backs of the American workers and citizenry…and of the American economy itself.I find merit in the suggestion that $4 be cut from federal government spending for every $1of additional revenue.At least that has a chance of steering our economy in a direction of responsible recovery. As it stands now, we have high drama in Washington, but no guts an’ no glory…no accountability and no sense of fiscal responsibility…Out government is broken, folks, an’ our economy is in the same condition…

It still comes down to the debt being the bill for what we’ve already spent. The Republicans were the cut taxes n spend party for most of the 2000s so far. And when asked if they would take $10 in cuts for $1 in new revenue, every Republican presidential candidate said NO! They have backed themselves, and US, into this corner, but don’t want to help get us out!

That’s good that you’re staying away from the tax issues, Harley. Much better to focus on ‘waring’ your sunglasses.

The bad news is that 400$ is added to deficit where over 5 years it will grow to 454 $ (2.8% interest even as bonds are record low) ***********************************************that you get to pay back. Now assuming something gets cut for that money you now get to pay the private company the difference after administrative costs ( normally 4% variant ) and therefor need only to pay 436$ back.

The total cost of welfare as in food stamps and welfare payments is roughly 15% of the budget.

the deficit is 22%. Assuming you gut them all in one fell swoop to 0 you will still be running a budget deficit of 7%. That is neglecting crime surges because believe it or not if somebody is starving to death they will steal food

Perhaps if you wanted to fully balance budget you can get rid of every welfare program including unemployment insurance. Mass suicide and bankrupsy should stimulate the economy by reducing jobless rate and providing plentiful jobs for prison wardens and gravediggers.

I’ve often heard this statistic quoted without backing. That said the rich can not be expected to hull the total burden. ****************************************************To be truthful the USA has had one of the lowest tax rates in the West with lower than average social spending and much higher than average military spending.****************************************************

That said a few things to do is

Completely eliminate tax deductions for political donations (70%) which assuming lobbying stays the same will bring in around 5 billion. May not be huge amount but would be enough to fund the entire EPA

- Cut military budget by 40% over next few years. at 3 % of GDP the USA would still be the largest military spender on earth

- 280 billion

- Eliminate homeland security, some airports have already switched to private providers. This would save 130 billion billion per year.

Just these cuts alone would save

415 billion dollars.

Dr. Canuck: ???