So what exactly does the Tea Party want to cut?

[sammyunltd]

See. Now you're just lying.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=30700757&postcount=21

No. I am not a Tea Bagger. I do believe they're the closest (fiscally and economically speaking) to my views, but I disagree with a lot of their policies as well.

Stop trying to troll me and answer my posts in this thread.

 

[Engineer]

You have nothing better to do than troll. I corrected my statement. Am I not allowed to do that?

WTF? You said that you wanted a VAT to replace the income tax. He commented on that (and dead on mind you) and you say that you "corrected your statement" and that he is trolling? Replacing the viewable income tax with a hidden VAT is exactly what you are saying and he called you on it.

 

[CallMeJoe]

You have nothing better to do than troll. I corrected my statement. Am I not allowed to do that?
Bottom line, the American people have spoken. They want REAL change this time. Not only in form, but also in substance. Obama has talked the talk but not walked the walk. What has he done to fix immigration, spending, social inequality, deficits, debt repayment, rising health care costs, etc.
NOTHING.

Where did you "correct" the post I quoted? You want to cut income taxes and implement an "invisible" VAT.

FWIW, VAT is the most regressive of all taxes. Cutting income tax and replacing it with a VAT shifts tax burden from millionaires to people living in poverty.

 

[her209]

No. I am not a Tea Bagger. I do believe they're the closest (fiscally and economically speaking) to my views, but I disagree with a lot of their policies as well.

Stop trying to troll me and answer my posts in this thread.

Do you claim anyone who doesn't agree with your POV as trolls? So far you've called two people in this thread, trolls.

 

[sammyunltd]

WTF? You said that you wanted a VAT to replace the income tax. He commented on that (and dead on mind you) and you say that you "corrected your statement" and that he is trolling? Replacing the viewable income tax with a hidden VAT is exactly what you are saying and he called you on it.

The way for the Government to ear some tax revenue is through a VAT.

The Gov't should get rid of SS and Medicare and abolish the taxes related to those inefficient programs.

Is it clear, now?!

Gosh... you have nothing better to do than this.... no wonder why the Dems are being destroyed today.

 

[sammyunltd]

Where did you "correct" the post I quoted? You want to cut income taxes and implement an "invisible" VAT.

FWIW, VAT is the most regressive of all taxes. Cutting income tax and replacing it with a VAT shifts tax burden from millionaires to people living in poverty.

A VAT as been hailed as the best taxation method by most financiers and economists.

It is discretionary. This is exactly what people wants. Since the US a primarily a consumption economy, the Government stands to make a lot with a VAT.

 

[sammyunltd]

Do you claim anyone who doesn't agree with your POV as trolls? So far you've called two people in this thread, trolls.

They're trolling because they're clinging onto semantics to bring me down, not the substance of my arguments.

I have corrected myself regarding a VAT, why still try to bring me down?

 

[Engineer]

Gosh... you have nothing better to do than this.... no wonder why the Dems are being destroyed today.

The Dems being destroyed have nothing to do with my posting on this forum, just the same as the GOP winning has nothing to do with what you are posting on this forum.

I'll say one thing....just go ahead and kill SS/Medicare and you will see the responsible party killed into the ground the next election cycle. Count on it (and I've hated SS for years but I've paid in long enough now that I won't give up my paid in amounts without getting something even if it's pennies on the dollar).

 

[her209]

They're trolling because they're clinging onto semantics to bring me down, not the substance of my arguments.

I have corrected myself regarding a VAT, why still try to bring me down?

You said what you said. Then you're changing it now after being called on it.

Please explain how this VAT will work since you keep harping on it.

 

[Engineer]

A VAT as been hailed as the best taxation method by most financiers and economists.

It is discretionary. This is exactly what people wants. Since the US a primarily a consumption economy, the Government stands to make a lot with a VAT.

Where can I read up on the financiers and economists (seriously) that think that this VAT is so much better? I want to know why it will be better for me and those around me (middle class folks)?

 

[sammyunltd]

The Dems being destroyed have nothing to do with my posting on this forum, just the same as the GOP winning has nothing to do with what you are posting on this forum.

I'll say one thing....just go ahead and kill SS/Medicare and you will see the responsible party killed into the ground the next election cycle. Count on it (and I've hated SS for years but I've paid in long enough now that I won't give up my paid in amounts without getting something even if it's pennies on the dollar).

I don't think so.

SS and Medicare are inefficient and should be privatized. Markets are way more efficient than governments.

 

[Medellon]

Your nuts off. Oh pardon me, that was said by your #1 shakedown artist Jesse Jackson referring to Barack Obama. Well he did get his wish somewhat , as Obama is now officially neutered with tonight's results.

 

[sammyunltd]

Where can I read up on the financiers and economists (seriously) that think that this VAT is so much better? I want to know why it will be better for me and those around me (middle class folks)?

Read the Economist, Business Week, Forbes, Financial Times, WSJ, Harvard Business Review, etc.

Unanimously. VAT is the best model. Low income tax are better to help an economy grow out of a depression. Obama wants the total opposite. No wonder why the USA has a below-expectation growth rate at the moment. His policies are total failure. His stimulus was one of the worst of the OECD.

 

[LegendKiller]

I don't think so.

SS and Medicare are inefficient and should be privatized. Markets are way more efficient than governments.

Which is why we are at 5% unemployment and have 3% GDP growth.

Ohh, fuck.

 

[LegendKiller]

Read the Economist, Business Week, Forbes, Financial Times, WSJ, Harvard Business Review, etc.

Unanimously. VAT is the best model. Low income tax are better to help an economy grow out of a depression. Obama wants the total opposite. No wonder why the USA has a below-expectation growth rate at the moment. His policies are total failure. His stimulus was one of the worst of the OECD.

If lower taxes were such a perfect model then we would have a far more robust economy than we do now, especially after the Bush tax cuts.

Joke is on you.

 

[her209]

Read the Economist, Business Week, Forbes, Financial Times, WSJ, Harvard Business Review, etc.

Unanimously. VAT is the best model. Low income tax are better to help an economy grow out of a depression. Obama wants the total opposite. No wonder why the USA has a below-expectation growth rate at the moment. His policies are total failure. His stimulus was one of the worst of the OECD.

Still waiting for that VAT explanation... even a quick summary will do.

 

[HomerJS]

Answers from Tea Party/GOP

Q: What are you going to cut to get spending under control?
A: Washington is not listening to the american people and spending is out of control

Q: Since the debt is a primary concern will you refuse to raise the debt ceiling?
A: Washington is not listening to the american people and spending is out of control

Q: Will you use your newly aquired sobpoena powers to investigate Demorats?
A: Washington is not listening to the american people and spending is out of control

As you can see its easy to throw stones with meaningless rhetoric from the sidelines but govering is a bitch

 

[mizzou]

Answers from Tea Party/GOP

Q: What are you going to cut to get spending under control?
A: Washington is not listening to the american people and spending is out of control

Q: Since the debt is a primary concern will you refuse to raise the debt ceiling?
A: Washington is not listening to the american people and spending is out of control

Q: Will you use your newly aquired sobpoena powers to investigate Demorats?
A: Washington is not listening to the american people and spending is out of control

As you can see its easy to throw stones with meaningless rhetoric from the sidelines but govering is a bitch

*waves tea party flag*



You are ruining my party

 

[rudder]

A Google turns up some interesting answers.

http://www.examiner.com/populist-in-national/does-the-tea-party-really-want-smaller-government

Before you answer that question, keep this in mind: 43 percent of the federal budget goes to just three guaranteed benefit programs: Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid (which is health care for the poor). Shall we cut those? Go through that NY Times poll profiling Tea Party members (with both some surprising results and some level of vindication for Tea Party members), and you'll find that the majority of tea partiers like their Social Security and their Medicare.


http://trueslant.com/rickungar/2010/04/15/what-does-the-tea-party-really-want/

• 52% of Tea Party supporters believe the amount they pay in taxes is fair.
• The majority of the Tea Party believes that Social Security and Medicare are worth the cost to taxpayers.
• The majority support the amount of money spent by the federal government on defense.
Via CBS News

http://rightwingnews.com/2010/09/obama-challenges-tea-party-to-identify-actual-spending-cuts/
This proud right wing website has some ideas:

How about tanking the Endowment for the Arts? The Departments of Education and Agriculture, along with NASA, can be seriously reduced



I mean, seriously, if you look for the actual things the Tea Party wants to cut, its pretty hard to find anything outside of the Health Care bill. And if you add up all the ideas that you can find, it comes to like 2-3 percent of the total budget, tops, as far as I can tell.
However, if you add up the tax cuts they want, like ending the estate tax, you wind up with a larger government deficit, or, higher taxes on the middle class.

So, what exactly does the tea party want to cut spending wise, and tax wise? I'd just like to see the numbers.

ummm perhaps cut new spending? Worse case scenario is that you maintain the same budget level for the next few years and stop any new spending programs and entitlements. Put a hard freeze the Federal budget. As the economy improves eventually tax revenues will catch up with current spending levels. The CBO predicts tax revenue will increase 7%/year for the next 10 years. I would like to see the government downsized... like getting rid of the NEA, energy subsidy programs, and a couple of departments that are out of the scope of what the federal government should be doing. Likely that latter will not happen... but if the government can show some fiscal restraint... things will not be so glum.

 

[HomerJS]

ummm perhaps cut new spending? Worse case scenario is that you maintain the same budget level for the next few years and stop any new spending programs and entitlements. Put a hard freeze the Federal budget. As the economy improves eventually tax revenues will catch up with current spending levels. The CBO predicts tax revenue will increase 7%/year for the next 10 years. I would like to see the government downsized... like getting rid of the NEA, energy subsidy programs, and a couple of departments that are out of the scope of what the federal government should be doing. Likely that latter will not happen... but if the government can show some fiscal restraint... things will not be so glum.

End farm subsidies? All those red states start bitching. So much for cutting spending

 

[lamarsess]

Why doesn't the GOP/Tea Party or Dems make means testing a requirement for social security and medicare? “Means testing” — cutting back on payments to the relatively wealthy — is one way to better allocate benefits. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/20/business/economy/20view.html

 

[Steeplerot]

:biggrin:

 

[Throckmorton]

Obama has been in office for 2 years with a supermajority in congress and the senate. The deficit has gone from ~400 billion under Bush to 1.3 - 1.4 trillion under Obama. Are you seriously going to claim that Obama has done something to control spending? The Bush tax cuts, according to most numbers, are 100 billion per year for the next 10 years. So where's the other 1.2 trillion coming from?

Reduced revenue and stimulus. Duh?

Of course you lack the basic economics knowledge to even realize that stimulus was and is the right thing to do....

 

[JulesMaximus]

Obama has been in office for 2 years with a supermajority in congress and the senate. The deficit has gone from ~400 billion under Bush to 1.3 - 1.4 trillion under Obama. Are you seriously going to claim that Obama has done something to control spending? The Bush tax cuts, according to most numbers, are 100 billion per year for the next 10 years. So where's the other 1.2 trillion coming from?

That doesn't add up. The national debt doubled under Bush from $6 trillion to over $12 trillion. Where did the other $3 trillion of debt come from? 😕

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Quote: Originally Posted by Fear No Evil Obama has been in office for 2 years with a supermajority in congress and the senate. The deficit has gone from ~400 billion under Bush to 1.3 - 1.4 trillion under Obama. Are you seriously going to claim that Obama has done something to control spending? The Bush tax cuts, according to most numbers, are 100 billion per year for the next 10 years. So where's the other 1.2 trillion coming from?



That doesn't add up. The national debt doubled under Bush from $6 trillion to over $12 trillion. Where did the other $3 trillion of debt come from?

Thats because Republicans and their followers lie! They conveniently excluded the costs of the wars in Irag and Afganistan from their deficit calculations, as if that money fell out of the sky 😕 Evidently if the money was spent blowing shit up and killing brown people it doesn't count as real spending and was not even included in the budget under GWB's administration. The first thing Obama did when he was elected was put those numbers back in the budget and deficit calculations.

So in the republican mind that portion of the deficit belongs to Obama. When in reality the annual deficits for 2009 and 2010 only look bad in comparison to 2008 because the reported deficit for 2008 didn't include the cost of the wars.