Paul Ryan will be unvieling the FY2012 budget tomorrow: $4T in cuts

[Siddhartha]

You need to cut the line on old people. I'm sorry but their time has gone. If they get cancer and they can't afford the care, guess what? They can't have it! I'm tired of having to pay for the health insurance of old people.

This is an example of the rally call of the Reagan Era: "As long as I've got mine screw everyone else"

 

[her209]

And his roommate

He was asking to how to leech off the tax payers in this thread.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2137726

 

[werepossum]

I agree government can get out of whack, and we need to apply forces to keep costs down to make up for the lack of profit motive for controlling costs.

"Transfer of wealth". Every transaction that occurs is a "transfer of wealth" of some sort. Anybody who's rich, has had wealth transferred to them, somehow.

I object to the use of that phrase, not by you particularly but by anyone, when what they really mean is, it's poor people's fault they are poor, leave me alone.

Huge difference between a mutually advantageous, two-way transfer of wealth and using the armed might of government to take wealth from one person and transfer it to another person for no better reason than the difference in wealth. (And of course buying the vote of the recipient.)

 

[matt0611]

Why is education a good? That's your question? Really? Why is history important? Why is social mobility important? Why is class mobility important? Everyone should just do the job their father did? This is what you are really asking? Man, if you're the product of public schooling I think I really do need to reevaluate my position on it.



You're so right. In 1959 35% of seniors lived in poverty and today an albeit imperfect SS system has lowered that number to under 10%. It's so old hearing that shit. I know, we should pretend it never happened. Let's imagine a world where we did nothing and in 1961 all the old people won the lottery and lived happily ever after. Yay!!! That was fun!




Yes, it's funny how the wealth inequality in this country (which skyrockets under republicans) has continued to splinter until the top 400 people have wealth equivolent to the bottom 50 million people. Funny how that works. Why you think this is sustainable or even preferable is not comprehensible to me.

1. Ok, I think you have a reading comprehension problem...
People could not afford to go to school because high technology or highly skilled jobs were not there. People did not make enough money and were not able to sacrifice their productivity to take time off to go to school.

Of course education is important, thats not what I'm saying at all. But in a primitive economy are you going to educate yourself for 20 years? For what?
The jobs that are out there don't require that much education, you'd be stupid to do that.

Also the costs of everything the school ran on was more expensive, more expensive to build, to heat, to maintain, keep records, staffing etc

Hence only the rich were able to afford the luxury of long term formal education.

Since capitalism has brought about cheaper everything and more technology for more skilled and more productive jobs it is now worth it and much more affordable to get a formal education.

2. Again, just because something happened after a certain event does not mean that the even caused it, and even if it did it, it doesn't mean it was the sole solution or even the best one.

3. First, as long as the pie keeps getting bigger and the lower wage earners are having their wealth increased as well then there is no problem and it is indeed sustainable.
I blame government / corporatism for the increasing gaps in our wealth though.

 

[jonks]

1. Ok, I think you have a reading comprehension problem...

I'd argue you have a problem writing with clarity but whatever.

2. Again, just because something happened after a certain event does not mean that the even caused it, and even if it did it, it doesn't mean it was the sole solution or even the best one.

Generally true, but if you can find any other plausibly sourced explanation for the drastic decline in senior poverty have at it. Increases in SS benefits is the recognized source of the reduction. Further, one can argue the govt shouldn't have acted, but the market wasn't helping. It had its shot and was failing miserably. You can argue the market would have eventually come up with a private plan to ease the suffering, but how long should the govt have waited to see if that happened, a decade, two, three?

3. First, as long as the pie keeps getting bigger and the lower wage earners are having their wealth increased as well then there is no problem and it is indeed sustainable.
I blame government / corporatism for the increasing gaps in our wealth though.

Yeah, except that from 1979 - 2005 the lower wage earners wealth increased about 2% and the top 1% wealth increased 150%. As more and more wealth accumulates in fewer and fewer hands, that's a societal problem.

 

[Red Dawn]

I don't understand this false notion that 47% don't pay taxes. They pay a shit load of taxes, probably a higher percentage of their income than the wealthy do. Yeah it might not be Fed and State Income tax but they pay taxes on everything else.

 

[Fear No Evil]

I don't understand this false notion that 47% don't pay taxes. They pay a shit load of taxes, probably a higher percentage of their income than the wealthy do. Yeah it might not be Fed and State Income tax but they pay taxes on everything else.

They often get CREDITS back from the Feds. So that offsets much of what they pay in other taxes.

 

[Red Dawn]

They often get CREDITS back from the Feds. So that offsets much of what they pay in other taxes.

I know, that Rich really have it made.

 

[Throckmorton]

They often get CREDITS back from the Feds. So that offsets much of what they pay in other taxes.

Look at my blue state thread. In Hawaii the lower 1/5, the next 1/5, and the 3rd 1/5 all pay about 12% of their income in state/local taxes only. Those people aren't getting credit from the federal government. I sure as hell am not. The top 1/5 only pays 6%.

Texas is even more regressive.

 

[Throckmorton]

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

lets just end medicare

 

[Matt1970]

This continual blaming of government for peoples problems is increasingly loosing validity. Community College is cheap and if you can't afford that there are student loans and financial aid. Starting a business can be as cheap as $10 to register a business license and $20 for a used lawn mower and push it down the road knocking on doors or whatever.

Instead we would rather sit on our asses and complain about how bad things are.

 

[werepossum]

This continual blaming of government for peoples problems is increasingly loosing validity. Community College is cheap and if you can't afford that there are student loans and financial aid. Starting a business can be as cheap as $10 to register a business license and $20 for a used lawn mower and push it down the road knocking on doors or whatever.

Instead we would rather sit on our asses and complain about how bad things are.

It's the new entitlement mentality. Sure, I could go to school, learn some job skills, make a good living, but why bother? It's government's responsibility to see that I am educated, so let's just cut out the middle man and start sending me checks now.

 

[Jhhnn]

Righties can't be confused by facts. Faith fills the mental spaces where critical thought would occur otherwise.

 

[Fern]

-snip-

I'm having trouble understanding this chart. The way I'm reading it federal income taxes account for less than 1% of a family's income. That isn't right.

Also, what's a federal offset?

Please explain.

Fern

 

[fskimospy]

I'm having trouble understanding this chart. The way I'm reading it federal income taxes account for less than 1% of a family's income. That isn't right.

Also, what's a federal offset?

Please explain.

Fern

Federal income taxes aren't listed on that chart.

 

[PeshakJang]

Righties can't be confused by facts. Faith fills the mental spaces where critical thought would occur otherwise.

How about lowering the sales tax, which disproportionately hurts the poor, instead of raising the income tax on the rich, which would bring in much less revenue? Income taxes are already progressive, across the board, as well.

I know, I know... it's easy to talk about critical thought.. but you may not be used to applying it. Clear that misplaced faith out of your noggin and give it a shot.

 

[LegendKiller]

I'm trying to figure out where the military cuts are.


Can anybody point out where they are?

 

[Fern]

Federal income taxes aren't listed on that chart.

Haha. Facealm. :$

Well, I'm still surprised state income taxes are that low of a percentage. There aren't that many states with no personal income tax.

Fern

 

[RightIsWrong]

oh I dunno, something that would clearly benefit "We The People" ?

That's exactly what this proposal does...

It clearly benefits "We the people"....that donate the most to campaigns and can make the income gap even more of a chasm.

 

[spidey07]

Mark my words. You are looking at the next president of our once great nation as it was before Obama.

teabagtag2012

 

[ProfJohn]

I'm having trouble understanding this chart. The way I'm reading it federal income taxes account for less than 1% of a family's income. That isn't right.

Also, what's a federal offset?

Please explain.

Fern

I believe federal offset is the fact that you write off state income taxes from your federal taxes.

So the more state taxes you pay the more you save on your federal taxes.

 

[matt0611]

I'm trying to figure out where the military cuts are.


Can anybody point out where they are?

I want military cuts too but I doubt we'll get them any time soon.

Now Obama has brought us into a third military engagement good luck getting any cuts to military.

 

[ProfJohn]

The use of these charts are dishonest.

You are comparing a state with no income tax to one with a high income tax so is obviously going to be a huge difference in how things balance out.

Also, to be completely honest you should add in all the state offered benefits to the poor on these charts.

Start adding food stamps, housing assistance, child care assistance, medicare etc etc and see how the numbers break down.

Also, the charts only illustrate what percentage of income from each group goes to taxes, but ignores the actual dollar amounts paid. Someone in the lowest 20% may only make $10k a year and thus pay $1,200 a year in taxes while someone in the top 1% makes $1 million a year and pays $30,000 in taxes.

In essence the chart is nothing more than a way to take a group of numbers and present it in a format that backs up one argument.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

I don't understand this false notion that 47% don't pay taxes. They pay a shit load of taxes, probably a higher percentage of their income than the wealthy do. Yeah it might not be Fed and State Income tax but they pay taxes on everything else.

Show me some numbers, not bleeding heart "they probably pay more" excuses.