• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

U.S. budget deficit down 37.6 percent

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
This pretty clearly shows why your views on government are so bad, you just have no clue what you're talking about.

The purpose of a business is to create profit. Period.

The purpose of a government is to deliver services. Period.

Those two objectives are not the same thing, therefore the two systems are not run the same way.

BULLSHIT.

What is the purpose of welfare? Is it to feed the poor and starving? Maybe to you people such as yourself that can't understand the logical indirect point of it. It's not meant to serve as an all-you-can-eat buffet. It's meant to cycle the people who get into bad situations in life (and their career) and to give them a trampoline to jump back into the workforce with.

Why? To START PAYING TAXES AGAIN. I know you like to dream that your government is made for loving and cuddling you and spoon feeding you, but that is simply not the case. I'm sorry for your inability to look at the indirect point of government programs.
 
Dude, where I'm at, LINKS is used to let people buy Pepsi and Cheetos on the taxpayer dime. Or let a mom buy a bunch of stuff that her family doesn't need to survive. WTF is with all this, like, how it's supposed to be stuff? You realize the programs are operating exactly as the Politicians who ensure the people that run them want right? You cannot believe that Politicians on the Left want the people on these programs actually off them, right? You cannot believe that Politicians on the Right want these programs to stop using their businesses to run/supply them, right? Next you'll tell me our Politicians actually have any interest in securing the border. Craziness...
 
I should say "for the sake of debate". I am not advocate to quit cold turkey.

I am saying with all the money we spent lately (from 2000 to 2012, from a debt of under 6 Trillion USD to 16 Trillion and growing), we surely did not grown much our economy/GDP. Look at the percentage of the debt to our GDP% then to now and you think things will get better?

U.S._National_Debt_-_Dollars_and_Relative_to_GDP.png

I would agree that the debt we ran up from 2000 to 2008 was mostly foolish. As for the debt we ran up after the financial crisis hit, I think that was quite wisely spent. If only we had spent more.

As for its effect on our GDP, what is important is what our economy and debt/GDP ratio would look like without the debt. The closest counterfactual we can use to measure that is the Eurozone. I think they provide a pretty powerful case for just how good an idea that debt was, and how had we not spent it how it could have made our debt/GDP ratio worse, not better.
 
BULLSHIT.

What is the purpose of welfare? Is it to feed the poor and starving? Maybe to you people such as yourself that can't understand the logical indirect point of it. It's not meant to serve as an all-you-can-eat buffet. It's meant to cycle the people who get into bad situations in life (and their career) and to give them a trampoline to jump back into the workforce with.

Why? To START PAYING TAXES AGAIN. I know you like to dream that your government is made for loving and cuddling you and spoon feeding you, but that is simply not the case. I'm sorry for your inability to look at the indirect point of government programs.

I have no idea how this relates to the discussion on whether or not the US should be run like a business.
 
Then you need help - I can't explain it any more clear than that.

Let me propose something to you:

Rather than fight Spender ideology, embrace it! I've got a plan that already has 3-4 other non-Spenders onboard with it. Basically, since money means nothing to Spenders, seeing how we can print, borrow, and spend it at will for infinity, my proposal is: For all net taxpayers, we each get a sum total of $25k, paid out in $5k chunks 6 months apart (gap can be increased/decreased, I'm flexible within reason here). It'll be sent on debit cards, cannot be deposited into a bank, must be spent in that 6 month period.

Now, tell me, would you have a problem with that plan? Keep in mind before you answer about living within your means or some other insane idea: The voting demographic(s) that want unsustainable social services are ever growing, along with demographics that expect the Gov to provide services to them they're not net paying for. Those choosing to vote for Politicians that want Gov to live within its means (without just raising taxes to cover ever bloated expenses) are F'd. Basically, you need to realize what you want is never going to happen. In light of that, do you want $25k of tax "free" money or not?

Nick...I sense another taker here, take note...

Chuck
 
Let me propose something to you:

Rather than fight Spender ideology, embrace it! I've got a plan that already has 3-4 other non-Spenders onboard with it. Basically, since money means nothing to Spenders, seeing how we can print, borrow, and spend it at will for infinity, my proposal is: For all net taxpayers, we each get a sum total of $25k, paid out in $5k chunks 6 months apart (gap can be increased/decreased, I'm flexible within reason here). It'll be sent on debit cards, cannot be deposited into a bank, must be spent in that 6 month period.

Now, tell me, would you have a problem with that plan?

It won't ever happen. It devalues money, in a worse way than QA, which means the rich would be losing value on their savings. Since the rich own most of the lobbyists, they would prevent anything like this from happening.


Me? Sure, I'd be for it. It would devalue USD, but I'd be getting more out of it than I lose, so why not?
 
It won't ever happen. It devalues money, in a worse way than QA, which means the rich would be losing value on their savings. Since the rich own most of the lobbyists, they would prevent anything like this from happening.


Me? Sure, I'd be for it. It would devalue USD, but I'd be getting more out of it than I lose, so why not?

:thumbsup:

Nick, take note! Another taker!
 
Isn't that because Social Security no longer generates much of an excess for government to borrow? Used to be we relied heavily on borrowing the surplus from the Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid funds, but I think the former is about even and the latter is in the red. Can't borrow it if it isn't generated, so we've replaced that with Red Chinese and, increasingly, Fed money. (The latter is one hell of a trick in my book.)

That makes sense and I was thinking it was something along those lines but I was still surprised to see the number go down instead of, at worst, stay static.
 
Let me propose something to you:

Rather than fight Spender ideology, embrace it! I've got a plan that already has 3-4 other non-Spenders onboard with it. Basically, since money means nothing to Spenders, seeing how we can print, borrow, and spend it at will for infinity, my proposal is: For all net taxpayers, we each get a sum total of $25k, paid out in $5k chunks 6 months apart (gap can be increased/decreased, I'm flexible within reason here). It'll be sent on debit cards, cannot be deposited into a bank, must be spent in that 6 month period.

Now, tell me, would you have a problem with that plan? Keep in mind before you answer about living within your means or some other insane idea: The voting demographic(s) that want unsustainable social services are ever growing, along with demographics that expect the Gov to provide services to them they're not net paying for. Those choosing to vote for Politicians that want Gov to live within its means (without just raising taxes to cover ever bloated expenses) are F'd. Basically, you need to realize what you want is never going to happen. In light of that, do you want $25k of tax "free" money or not?

Nick...I sense another taker here, take note...

Chuck

Let me propose something to you Chuck. Spender ideology has been alive and rampant for the past 50+ years - the problem is its growth has been in astronomical exponential figures of "Is my purse/car/home/shoes/clothes better than The Jones?" All is well and fine - as you are right - the spending feeds the market, which in turns spins the market around for the better good. All is well.

The problem with the spending ideology is that it has reached past the point of actually having money. The obvious clue here - is debt. But we have been past the debt issue for quite some time now too - this is no secret. The market however MUST continue to hold its gains or else it will fall flat. So while people such as yourself and I are putting money away for retirement (as well as realizing SS probably wont be there so we account for extra) and saving for when disasters occur, the rest are spending. However, the life has already been squeezed the living shit out of. All that is left are the people who know how to budget. The difference is that they won't budge. They know the best ways to survive. So whom gets squeezed? The spenders. They continue to spend spend spend so the government says "Toss more wood on the fire!". The end result? A circle-jerk of a never-ending recession as we build more lower class, few upper class - and demolish the middle class.
 
Up to this point, what federal taxes have been raised (besides the expiration of the "temporary" SS tax cut from a few years ago)?

IIRC, Obama started out by raising lessor known taxes such as federal taxes on cigarettes.

Obamacare has about 20 new or increased taxes.

A income tax increase was passed that took effect Jan '13.

Fern
 
IIRC, Obama started out by raising lessor known taxes such as federal taxes on cigarettes.

Obamacare has about 20 new or increased taxes.

A income tax increase was passed that took effect Jan '13.

Fern

...Any chance you can pull out all the tax increases under Obama? It's funny, so far all I have noticed is lower to middle-class taxes that hurt them the most.

Cigarettes? Definitely see those in the hands of the poor more than the rich

Obamacare? Mandated crap health insurance is a tax no one had to pay for until now. Prior to this, the poor simply didn't pay their $60k health bills. Now they get a cut from every paycheck.

SS Tax increase (or rather expiration of cut)? Hurt middle class the most.
 
Let me propose something to you Chuck. Spender ideology has been alive and rampant for the past 50+ years - the problem is its growth has been in astronomical exponential figures of "Is my purse/car/home/shoes/clothes better than The Jones?" All is well and fine - as you are right - the spending feeds the market, which in turns spins the market around for the better good. All is well.

The problem with the spending ideology is that it has reached past the point of actually having money. The obvious clue here - is debt. But we have been past the debt issue for quite some time now too - this is no secret. The market however MUST continue to hold its gains or else it will fall flat. So while people such as yourself and I are putting money away for retirement (as well as realizing SS probably wont be there so we account for extra) and saving for when disasters occur, the rest are spending. However, the life has already been squeezed the living shit out of. All that is left are the people who know how to budget. The difference is that they won't budge. They know the best ways to survive. So whom gets squeezed? The spenders. They continue to spend spend spend so the government says "Toss more wood on the fire!". The end result? A circle-jerk of a never-ending recession as we build more lower class, few upper class - and demolish the middle class.

Look, I used to worry about stuff like that, about socially indoctrinating generations of people to keep the consumption game going so Politicians wouldn't have to start making hard choices, and thus, demographics would stop rewarding them in lock step with their votes because they finally started to feel the pain. I really did! Trust me on this, I was where you are at. But it finally occurred to me, that really, I was simply swimming against the current not to win the race, or for the benefit of my team (my team being America), but rather, simply for my own pride. Now I'm not saying not to have pride...pride is a good thing to have for certain. It's what keeps neighborhoods from having grass 2' high in their yards, and trees growing out of the gutters.

But pride can also F you if you're not careful. And the simple fact is, we have reached, and exceeded, the tipping point in the What can Gov give me/us voter level - and that level is just ever increasing, never decreasing; there are super smart guys who do their absolute best to ensure that it's ever increasing, they need it to increase/remain high. The long and short of it is, Gov is going to continue blowing money it doesn't have in fantastical sums. In the highly - highly - unlikely scenario that it finally hits parity with income, Gov spending will simply be so high as to never be cut. It's the saying, When I say jump!, you ask, How high?! The Gov version of this is, When I say how much can you spend?!, Gov says How high can you count?! Gov is limitless. It is controlled by Politicians who simply do not consider the reality of money. Those Politicians decide what to spend on, and how much. And those Politicians are elected by...that's right, those demographics that at ever increasing rates want that Gov interaction in their/our lives.

So what are you really fighting against I ask? What you're fighting against is pride my friend. Certainly you can't think by you standing fast against the ever absurd amounts of spending (and, what Gov actually spends money on) that you'll win? There is no winning this battle. My advice to you, rather than paying for and missing out all these great Gov "free" services, is to advocate for getting something for yourself! Without question that's what the poor think they're doing when they vote Dem...they understand which group at least says, and even sometimes minimally delivers some scraps to them, their sellout payment for their vote. I'm merely telling you to get yours while there is even a remote chance for the getting to be had.

Look, we can bill it as 'Saving our childrens economic future', or some other such BS moniker. What could be better than every net taxpayer stimulating the economy at literally every level with "free" money? Just think of the social ramifications of that! Every local shop will be booming with business. No more layoffs or closings. Heck, they'll have to hire people, and, those people will now have jobs and they can buy things. This will go on for 30 months!. This is a long term jobs program for not just Wall St., not just Union St., but for Main St.! (it helps if you say that in Obama common man voice inflection mode)

Come on over to the Spender side, the watahs fine!
 
Darwin,

When the DJIA hits 20k I will bail, I expect that to happen during Obama's presidency. If it does get that high, I will almost certainly have more than 1 million dollars in my retirement accounts.

Can you imagine where America would be right now with a Republican in charge? Instead of a market at record highs, the DJIA would be less than 5k and we would be in free fall. Until I retire, I don't want to see another Republican president. One failed Republican presidency can easily destory all the market capitalization that I accrued under a competent Democrat administration. If you are in the market, you are slitting your own throat when you vote for a Republican president.

What exactly do you think that Obama has done that has caused this increase in your retirement account? What exactly did Bush do to cause the market to crash, especially considering that the largest piece of the foundation was laid prior to Bush's first term?
 
Let me propose something to you:

Rather than fight Spender ideology, embrace it! I've got a plan that already has 3-4 other non-Spenders onboard with it. Basically, since money means nothing to Spenders, seeing how we can print, borrow, and spend it at will for infinity, my proposal is: For all net taxpayers, we each get a sum total of $25k, paid out in $5k chunks 6 months apart (gap can be increased/decreased, I'm flexible within reason here). It'll be sent on debit cards, cannot be deposited into a bank, must be spent in that 6 month period.

Now, tell me, would you have a problem with that plan? Keep in mind before you answer about living within your means or some other insane idea: The voting demographic(s) that want unsustainable social services are ever growing, along with demographics that expect the Gov to provide services to them they're not net paying for. Those choosing to vote for Politicians that want Gov to live within its means (without just raising taxes to cover ever bloated expenses) are F'd. Basically, you need to realize what you want is never going to happen. In light of that, do you want $25k of tax "free" money or not?

Nick...I sense another taker here, take note...

Chuck

Other restrictions.
Cash can not be taken out of the card.
Must be used to purchase Made in America items if not used for services. such is determined by content & UPC code.
 
I would agree that the debt we ran up from 2000 to 2008 was mostly foolish. As for the debt we ran up after the financial crisis hit, I think that was quite wisely spent. If only we had spent more.

As for its effect on our GDP, what is important is what our economy and debt/GDP ratio would look like without the debt. The closest counterfactual we can use to measure that is the Eurozone. I think they provide a pretty powerful case for just how good an idea that debt was, and how had we not spent it how it could have made our debt/GDP ratio worse, not better.

I still don't buy the "spend to prosperity" philosophy. Eurozone? You mean like Greece, Spain, Cyprus, Ireland, Italy? The only saving grace for us is that we can print more USD because other countries prefer them as their reserve currency.
 
Last edited:
Are you serious? And many more new taxes coming as well. Google is your friend.

Yes, I'm quite serious. My taxes are the same level that they were when Obama came into office (well, actually a tad bit lower as the brackets have been pushed up faster than my income).

Google didn't really turn up anything of substance but I may not have Googled the right thing. Care to help?

(note: I said "up to this point").
 
What exactly do you think that Obama has done that has caused this increase in your retirement account? What exactly did Bush do to cause the market to crash, especially considering that the largest piece of the foundation was laid prior to Bush's first term?

Just because the "foundation" was laid prior to the Bush Admin doesn't mean that this had to be built on it, touted from the bully pulpit & cheered on by regulators who bent over backwards to enable it-

27leon_graph2.large.gif


It was built to fail, to crash, but not after greatly enriching the Lootocracy.
 
They keep it parked offshore because bringing it back into the United States carries a high tax rate on money already taxed in the country the money was made. What idiot would move their money back here to have it taxed twice? If we really want that wealth to come back to our shores. We should drop the idiotic idea of taxing money made in a foreign country.


Let's see ... how does this work?

Apple China contracts with Foxconn in China to make Iphones for $200. Apple China sells these Iphones to Apple Ireland for $205. Apple Ireland sells these Iphones to Apple USA for $500. Apple USA sells these Iphones to Verizon/ATT/USA TMobil etc for $510.

Profits? Apple Ireland makes a shitload of profit because the Ireland corp tax rate is low. Apple Ireland does nothing besides writing up an invoice for the Iphones. Probably the Iphones never even go to Ireland. The transaction is entirely on paper. Not many Iphones are sold in Ireland but that doesn't matter to Apple because of their creative accounting.

Apple USA only makes a small profit from each Iphone sold in the USA to American consumers because they pay such a high price to Apple Ireland for the Iphones sold in the USA ( which of course are actually made in China, by an Apple contractor for a much lower price).

Money "made" in a foreign country shouldn't be taxed? How naive are you?

The profit actually is being made here in the USA because the Iphones are being sold here in the USA to USA citizens. Cost of the Iphones to Apple Corp. is $200, sale price to the wireless companies is $510. Because of creative bookkeeping Apple shows that the money is being made somewhere else thus avoiding the USA tax.

You call this fair? You want to allow these crooks to "repatriate" the profits made in the USA with no tax?
 
Last edited:
Seriously?

Are you not aware that the military budget has been cut twice already, each cut was $400 billion?

Fern

Are you completely nuts?

The war/defense budget from Bush in 2008 was approaching $800 billion. To carry out the "military budget has been cut twice already, each cut was $400 billion" would mean that the budget would be at zero or below.

Are you talking about some long term cut that you are not sharing with us?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Engineer
Up to this point, what federal taxes have been raised (besides the expiration of the "temporary" SS tax cut from a few years ago)?

Are you serious? And many more new taxes coming as well. Google is your friend.

Doc Savage Fan seems to have left the conversation at this point.

No more input Doc Savage Fan? What taxes might be coming our way?
 
Back
Top