The Obama plan vs. the Ryan plan

[JoSixChip]

ou mean a regressive tax? what shyte.

i could be for a sales tax, but the fact is that someone among the working poor like myself would be taxed at sky high rates as we spend most of what we earn.

Read up on the F.A.I.R. Tax Uncle Buckie. Poor folks like you would get a monthly check from the government to pay the sales tax on your basic necessities. And I couldn't give a whit about Phoenix. Its hot, full of sand and has Gila Monsters.

That is where we part company. No one should be getting a check from the government unless it is in exchange for service. I agree that there are people that need charity, but they should be getting charity not government handouts. It is not the governments place to force charity and it only leads to corruption.

 

[Charlie Ventura]

That is where we part company. No one should be getting a check from the government unless it is in exchange for service. I agree that there are people that need charity, but they should be getting charity not government handouts. It is not the governments place to force charity and it only leads to corruption.

Oh, and I agree with you all the way on this, Jo. But, I'm not stupid. I realize, as do other proponents of the FAIR TAx, that in order to get it passed, we need to get that check to the poorest among us. If we don't every Progressive worth that name will be howling like Banshees. With that said, just think what a national sales tax, replacing the 77,000 page IRS Tax Code would mean. For liberty devotees like myself, it would mean the end of government controlling my behavior through the tax code. They would no longer care how much I make, how I make it, or how I spend it. The only time they should be concerned with any ot that is if I violate the rights of another in the process.

 

[JoSixChip]

Oh, and I agree with you all the way on this, Jo. But, I'm not stupid. I realize, as do other proponents of the FAIR TAx, that in order to get it passed, we need to get that check to the poorest among us. If we don't every Progressive worth that name will be howling like Banshees. With that said, just think what a national sales tax, replacing the 77,000 page IRS Tax Code would mean. For liberty devotees like myself, it would mean the end of government controlling my behavior through the tax code. They would no longer care how much I make, how I make it, or how I spend it. The only time they should be concerned with any ot that is if violate the rights of another in the process.

Well I'm up for any step in the right direction and the F.A.I.R. tax plan would certainly be a giant leap.

 

[UncleBuck]

Oh, and I agree with you all the way on this, Jo. But, I'm not stupid. I realize, as do other proponents of the FAIR TAx, that in order to get it passed, we need to get that check to the poorest among us.

ah....

so it's not that you are concerned that a working joe like myself will pay a disproportionately higher share of my income, it is just a means to an end.

fuck the dude that busts his ass 40 hours a week to put food on the table....unless shared sympathy for him prevents me from implementing my pipe dream!

 

[UncleBuck]

Well I'm up for any step in the right direction and the F.A.I.R. tax plan would certainly be a giant leap.

still undecided on whether or not granny gets to vote?

 

[UncleBuck]

And I couldn't give a whit about Phoenix. Its hot, full of sand and has Gila Monsters.

all joking aside, the construction of the hoover dam, built by private companies and funded by the government, has paid itself back MANY times over.

arizona, california, and nevada all depend on electricity generated by the dam and water from lake mead. it has allowed for growth of these local economies which is good for local businesses, as well as for the government in the form of increased revenues.

this is not the only example by any means. there are many counterexamples to your claim that 'the government does not produce anything'. it is an old talking point, long used by partisan hacks, exactly the same hacks who ignore that a budget consists of spending and revenue.

 

[NoDrama]

all joking aside, the construction of the hoover dam, built by private companies and funded by the government, has paid itself back MANY times over.

arizona, california, and nevada all depend on electricity generated by the dam and water from lake mead. it has allowed for growth of these local economies which is good for local businesses, as well as for the government in the form of increased revenues.

this is not the only example by any means. there are many counterexamples to your claim that 'the government does not produce anything'. it is an old talking point, long used by partisan hacks, exactly the same hacks who ignore that a budget consists of spending and revenue.

Actually the Hoover damn is still being paid for, in fact there are 17 more years to pay on that project. All revenue from Power production goes to paying off the loan. BTW Government did not build it, all those industrious hands of the working class did. Some gave their lives.

Oh and Hoover was first and foremost an irrigation project and secondly a power production facility.

 

[UncleBuck]

Actually the Hoover damn is still being paid for, in fact there are 17 more years to pay on that project. All revenue from Power production goes to paying off the loan. BTW Government did not build it, all those industrious hands of the working class did. Some gave their lives.

Oh and Hoover was first and foremost an irrigation project and secondly a power production facility.

didn't it cost something like $50 million to build?

btw, way to completely sidestep the fact that it created economies that have created jobs and revenue.

also, i already mentioned it was built by private companies. do you delude yourself into believing they would have done so without the fed gov?

 

[Ernst]

What I find most despicable so far is that Republicans voted to take food away from WIC Woman Infant and Child programs and then they turned around and protested raising taxes on the most wealthy.

Now our President is doing the right thing. He is standing fast in defence of our elderly, poor and disabled.
These are things a modern country must do in modern times.

We will be raising the Debt ceiling so we can borrow more but still the Republicans are calling for more cuts on the poor and public services.

Shouldn't this be a time to stand up and tell the American people that we will save the Country and not imply that our primary goal is to save the Rich?

My opinion is our elected officials have spent us silly with War so let the Tax Man pass the Hat. After all America makes their wealth possible.

This is a time for us to join together to save our Nations future.

 

[Ernst]

That is where we part company. No one should be getting a check from the government unless it is in exchange for service. I agree that there are people that need charity, but they should be getting charity not government handouts. It is not the governments place to force charity and it only leads to corruption.

You are not in favor of taking care of our disabled?

 

[Dan Kone]

Obama finished his speech a bit ago about his proposal to cut $4 trillion over the next 10 years. Ryan, who also released his plan recently, has proposed $4.4 trillion.

Obama's plan includes dropping earners making more than 250k off of the bush tax cuts, closing loopholes and lowering the tax rate, cuts ~600 billion from the discretionary budget, and seeks to control medicare costs. There are plenty more details, I'll link to them once I find the complete plan (.pdf).

Ryan's plan, found here, cuts taxes on the wealthy by ~3 trillion, cuts discretionary spending by about 1.6 trillion, privatizes Medicare via a voucher system, makes the bush tax cuts permanent, closes loopholes and drops rates, among other things...

I have plenty of beef about Ryan's plan including that they cut ~3 trillion total spending (discretionary and medicare cuts) and literally hand that money to the top earners in cuts. They claim this will actually amount to net increase in revenue because they'd be "broadening the base" but to do this - we'd have to be on the wrong side of the Laffer curve (hint: up is up, down is down at current rates).

Almost all of the proposed savings in medicare come via shifting the costs from ~70% government contribution to ~30%. Doing nothing to control costs - instead pushing them onto medicare receipiants.

Besides that, Ryan offers no cuts in military spending. He also leaves subsidies for big oil in place while removing those for clean energy like solar and wind.

thoughts?

Obama's plan is more practical and blows Ryan's plan out of the water. Although Ryan has a very good point about closing loopholes. Tax loopholes are just as big of a problem as the reduced tax rates on the wealthy.

 

[Dan Kone]

You are not in favor of taking care of our disabled?

Either way we are going to end up taking care of people's medical needs that cannot afford to take care of themselves.

The real question is do we want these people to be on a government health care plan or do we want them to receive lower quality and more expensive emergency room care.

We can either help them get quality care on a government plan or have them go to the ER every time they need medical care which gives them less access to care, is more expensive, raises all of our health insurance costs, and clogs up ER's for people who have real emergencies.

I know a lot of conservatives like to say things like "that's not the governments place!", but bottom line is that if we give them government insurance, we all benefit. We will end up paying for them either way, it's just a question of how we want to pay.

It really isn't a conservative vs liberal issue. It's a smart vs stupid issue.

It's stupid to clog up or ER's and pay higher health insurance costs so they are forced to go to the ER when they need treatment. In theory people may think the government shouldn't be involved in health insurance, but in reality it's better for everyone if they are.

 

[Serapis]

He made a valid point.... You said only land owners should get to vote... there are a LOT of military on base and in apartments.... are they inferior citizens whom should get a vote? the idea of no representation was why we fought for independence to begin with.... for you to sit here and state who should and shouldn't vote is disgusting to me...

It isn't typical liberal shit at all.... it is your conservative blinders that are the problem...

Typical liberal BS, A soldiers pay is not welfare.

 

[Serapis]

I like Ryan's plan when it comes to closing tax loopholes as well.... G.E. Took more than 3.2 billion in tax credits for 2010 and didn't pay a single dime of tax on their revenue. They claim they are within the law, and they probably are. That is the problem. How many other GE's are out there? And Obama made it very clear, as long as he was president we will not give tax breaks to the wealthy and ask the elderly to shoulder a larger burden. they very idea that they would propose that is just sickening. The plan also cuts 1 trillion in social programs, and in the same document, gives it back to the wealthy in more cuts! Where is the logic in that? Haven't we learned in 30 years that trickle down economics is BS? Look at the disproportionate distribution of wealth in this country for the last 10 years.

And to the person's that believe government creates nothing, it only consumes.... have you ever stopped to think? I mean really, universities, highways, airports, national security, railroads, the Internet, safe food and water and air, and on and on and on.... yeah, we need less of those things...

 

[Himself]

Ryan's plan is a nonstarter. It is NOT realistic and r's know this. The 2 plans, Obama's and Ryan's are not even comparable because of this.

We DO NOT HAVE A BUDGET PROBLEM. WE DO NOT HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM. What we have is a framing problem. At this time with US businesses sitting on 2 TRILLION DOLLARS when we need to be spending money. The Federal Gov't needs to be spending money-lots of it. We could keep our bridges from collapsing into the Mississippi, we could staff out ATC towers with enough people so they don't fall asleep on the job. We could make it cheaper to go to college, we could fully fund HEADSTART. But first we have to eat the rich.

Plus any politition who advocates cutting spending without killing the Bush now Obama tax gifts to the top 1% is not being realistic. Simply repealing those cuts cuts the deficit in half in 5 years.

 

[BudMcLovin]

Here’s The Wall Street Journal’s take on Obama’s speech.

"We ask because President Obama's extraordinary response to Paul Ryan's budget yesterday—with its blistering partisanship and multiple distortions—was the kind Presidents usually outsource to some junior lieutenant.

Mr. Obama presented what some might call the false choice of merely preserving the government we have with no realistic plan for doing so,

Mr. Obama really went off on Mr. Ryan's plan to increase health-care competition and give consumers more control, barely stopping short of calling it murderous. It's hardly beyond criticism or debate, but the Ryan plan is neither Big Rock Candy Mountain nor some radical departure from American norms.

According to Internal Revenue Service data, the entire taxable income of everyone earning over $100,000 in 2008 was about $1.582 trillion. Even if all these Americans—most of whom are far from wealthy—were taxed at 100%, it wouldn't cover Mr. Obama's deficit for this year."

If you want to read moore. Here's the link. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703730104576260911986870054.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

 

[Serapis]

It is an opinion piece that they don't even have the balls to attribute to an author... who wrote that? Obviously someone spinning from the right....

 

[Balzac89]

You would think that if we were to find ways to save poor money they would spend more in the economy rather than on health which would increase taxes and create more jobs.

Rich people don't create jobs poor people do with demand for products and services. If poor people were more prosperous than the economy would rebound.

 

[Serapis]

The major problem I have with Mr Ryan's plan is the once again, redistribution of wealth.. his plan calls for another 1 trillion in tax cuts to the wealthy, why they cut education and social services... That alone is insane.

 

[Balzac89]

Progressive taxes should be implemented more in this country because it would benefit everyone. Rich people can start more companies to make more profit and poor people will have a better standard of life.

Everyone would benefit, but the rich are worried about taxes. I think being against taxes in unpatriotic if you ask me. Paying taxes is like paying dues to live in this country.