Alternative minimum tax

[Goobieman]

As much as I don't want to let the Democrats get any advantage for 08, i really do hope that we see some of that this next two years.

Not a chance. And when it doesnt happen, you wont hear a peep about it from Iriemon or any of the other liberals/Democrats here.

 

[Iriemon]

As much as I don't want to let the Democrats get any advantage for 08, i really do hope that we see some of that this next two years.

I don't have any particularly high hopes for such demonstrations of political courage, which is not in the general nature of most politicians to take steps that put at risk the likelihood of staying in office. The small surplus we had in 2000 was the result of a rare set of circumstances -- which is why it is so tragic that this administration destroyed it so rapidly.

 

[Kandahar]

Just want to make sure that when what Congress passes for FY2008 isnt balanced, you'll be blaming the Democrats for their lack of fiscal responsibility and describing their claims to that effect as nothing but a politically-motivated lie.

I have no doubt that balancing the budget isn't at the top of their list of priorities. But it's not like they could pass a balanced budget anyway; Bush would veto any spending cuts or tax hikes.

 

[ARealConservative]

I have no doubt that balancing the budget isn't at the top of their list of priorities. But it's not like they could pass a balanced budget anyway; Bush would veto any spending cuts or tax hikes.

BS alert!!!!!

 

[Goobieman]

I have no doubt that balancing the budget isn't at the top of their list of priorities. But it's not like they could pass a balanced budget anyway; Bush would veto any spending cuts or tax hikes.

Depends entirely on the cut, doesnt it?

 

[Kandahar]

Depends entirely on the cut, doesnt it?

There aren't enough things to cut in the federal budget, to compensate for the deficit AND for naturally-ballooning entitlements AND for all the things Bush wants to spend more on. Cutting a few billion from the Department of Energy and Department of Agriculture isn't getting the job done.

 

[Kandahar]

BS alert!!!!!

Which $400 billion in spending will the president support cutting?

 

[Goobieman]

There aren't enough things to cut in the federal budget, to compensate for the deficit AND for naturally-ballooning entitlements AND for all the things Bush wants to spend more on. Cutting a few billion from the Department of Energy and Department of Agriculture isn't getting the job done.

So... cut entitlements.

 

[taxedout]

Public policy has no place for ideologues. The fact is that the budget is not balanced and the government will not cut spending anytime soon because it's so unpopular..

I already agreed with you.
Does this make it right? Did you elect your official to what is right or what is popular ?

Studies have indicated that federal spending grows at a slower rate during periods of relatively high taxation. This makes sense, as people feel the pinch of every new program and are therefore more likely to demand spending constraints. Whereas when taxes are low, Congress (rightly) feels that it can offer all kinds of new social programs, and worry about the mess after the next election..

Hoooray!!!!!! Slowing the rate of growth after jacking my taxes.
Very admirable of them. They're really a bunch of swell guys after all.

 

[ARealConservative]

Which $400 billion in spending will the president support cutting?

anything involving stem cells could be safely cut. :mrgreen:

 

[Jerry]

Sens. Max Baucus (D-MT) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) have called for the repeal of the alternative minimum tax. The AMT is basically designed to prevent wealthy people from taking excessive deductions, by making them pay some minimum amount if their regular tax bill would be less than that. However, in recent years, more and more people have been affected by the AMT, some of whom are merely upper-middle class and not wealthy. Since it is not adjusted for inflation, the AMT affects more and more people every year.

On the other hand, repealing the AMT would cost our government about $100 billion per year at a time when we're already running an enormous deficit.

What do you think should be done?

Repealing the AMT wouldn't cost the gov. anything, because they wouldn't have the money to begin with.

I'm all for the flat/fair tax anyway....@ 23-27% tax on everything you buy, and virtually no other tax at all. That would cut my tax by at least 11% annually, and I'm $32,000 under the poverty level.

Get rid of the IRS.

 

[taxedout]

Cut interest payment on the debt.
The loans were made without tangible asset backing, and all interest payment are therefore unnecessary.

 

[Navy Pride]

Cut welfare and money designated for failed left wing social programs.....

 

[dragonslayer]

Bush want to esculate the war. This will take money. We need increase taxes and especially for corporations and the rich.

There is no more money left to take from Schools, the poor, for the war.

Where is the money for this pointless esculation in Iraq gonna come from?
we can close school, libraries, close waste disposal programs, allow uncontrollable polution of our water and air. we can starve the elderly and take away medical care for the sick. where???

A person who claims to be a Republican (neoCon) is now being likened to Freddie Kruger in NightMare on Elm Street fame.

Here is the real Bush.

Fourth seal is opened : a pale horse appears, its rider is called Death

{7} When the Lamb opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth living creature say, "Come!" {8} I looked, and there before me was a pale horse! Its rider was named Death, and Hades was following close behind him. They were given power over a fourth of the earth to kill by sword, famine and plague, and by the wild beasts of the earth.

 

[dragonslayer]

Cut welfare and money designated for failed left wing social programs.....

I bet that you would really like that. You seem to consistently support things to hurt people. would you feel good about old folks and the disabled dying from starvation and the lack of medicine?

No need to answer, you have already answered in your last post, which is in quotation marks.

Obviously, if social program is helping people it has not failed.

what has failed is Bush and the NeoCons. They almost destroyed America before the voters wised up.

 

[ARealConservative]

Repealing the AMT wouldn't cost the gov. anything, because they wouldn't have the money to begin with.

I'm all for the flat/fair tax anyway....@ 23-27% tax on everything you buy, and virtually no other tax at all. That would cut my tax by at least 11% annually, and I'm $32,000 under the poverty level.

Get rid of the IRS.

Exactly. Ron Paul (who will be running for president in 2008) recently said something quite similar:

Do Tax Cuts Cost the Government Money? by Ron Paul
The American people have every right to fund the federal government at whatever level they deem acceptable, and if they choose – through their elected representatives – to reduce that funding level, they are not somehow injuring the government. If Congresses passes a new law that results in you paying $1000 less in taxes next year, have you taken something from the government that rightfully belongs to it? Or has the government simply taken less from you?

You don’t cost the government money, the government costs you money!

 

[ARealConservative]

I bet that you would really like that. You seem to consistently support things to hurt people. would you feel good about old folks and the disabled dying from starvation and the lack of medicine?

No need to answer, you have already answered in your last post, which is in quotation marks.

Obviously, if social program is helping people it has not failed.

what has failed is Bush and the NeoCons. They almost destroyed America before the voters wised up.

I sure would.

Eliminate the social programs and provide American's with a stable currency and we will have plenty of money left to help family and friends in need.

Furthermore, aid and charity will have a human face now. People constantly making poor decsions and squander their aid will find the charity well dry. Same for people that like to take advantage of a free society and live way outside the norms of acceptable behavior.

 

[Navy Pride]

I bet that you would really like that. You seem to consistently support things to hurt people. would you feel good about old folks and the disabled dying from starvation and the lack of medicine?

No need to answer, you have already answered in your last post, which is in quotation marks.

Obviously, if social program is helping people it has not failed.

what has failed is Bush and the NeoCons. They almost destroyed America before the voters wised up.

I believe in helping people that truly need help but I don't believe in supporting a bunch of free loaders from cradle to grave which thanks to lefties like you is what is happening now..........

Sometimes people have to step up to the plate and do things on their own.......I did......

 

[Kandahar]

Cut interest payment on the debt.
The loans were made without tangible asset backing, and all interest payment are therefore unnecessary.

So in other words, we should default on our debt, because bond-buyers were stupid enough to not ask for collateral? If I'm understanding you correctly (and maybe I'm not), then that is one of the worst economic ideas I've ever heard.

 

[Kandahar]

Cut welfare and money designated for failed left wing social programs.....

That's a good talking point for you to repeat from FOX News, but let's actually examine this:

1. Welfare is an insignificant amount of our budget, because most of the necessary cuts have already been made.

As for these "failed left wing social programs"...
2. You support social security, because it affects you personally.
3. You support a huge prescription drug entitlement, because the guy who passed it has a R next to his name.

So what exactly are you talking about cutting, and what sets those programs apart from the ones you like?

 

[Navy Pride]

That's a good talking point for you to repeat from FOX News, but let's actually examine this:

1. Welfare is an insignificant amount of our budget, because most of the necessary cuts have already been made.

As for these "failed left wing social programs"...
2. You support social security, because it affects you personally.
3. You support a huge prescription drug entitlement, because the guy who passed it has a R next to his name.

So what exactly are you talking about cutting, and what sets those programs apart from the ones you like?

1. I don't support SS but some people rely on it....
2. You would be surprised how much you could save if you failed social programs
3. Senior citizens need help in paying for their Prescription drugs.....If it were not for that I would cancel the program tomorrow............I don't need it......as I am retired military I don't pay for my PD.......Its one of the few benefits I get for protecting your *** for 20 years....

Try again.........

I would scrap the welfare program and start over from scratch.........For example some people need medical payment help but don't need food stamps or a monthly stipend.........Don't force them to take them if they just need the card..........

Check out people whose family has been on welfare for 50 years through 3 generations....their just might be a little fraud there...........

Do away with the IRS and institute a user fee tax............It would eliminate the deficit, balance the budget, pay for SS Medicare and Medicad.......

Check our fairtax.org...........

 

[Jerry]

Exactly. Ron Paul (who will be running for president in 2008) recently said something quite similar:

Do Tax Cuts Cost the Government Money? by Ron Paul
The American people have every right to fund the federal government at whatever level they deem acceptable, and if they choose – through their elected representatives – to reduce that funding level, they are not somehow injuring the government. If Congresses passes a new law that results in you paying $1000 less in taxes next year, have you taken something from the government that rightfully belongs to it? Or has the government simply taken less from you?

You don’t cost the government money, the government costs you money!

I have always thought of government as being a service....a product of sorts....being sold to me for a premium. I am more than willing to pay for securities, various regulations from transportation and food to weights and measures, and for a verity of fail-safe social programs.

However, I do not want as many of the features as I am being sold, so while I can elect to not participate in any given service, I think it's fair to also elect to not pay for any service I choose not to receive, to not pay for a product I do not want.

I think we could sell such an idea to Liberals by giving them the option to decline to pay for a war they do not want.

 

[Iriemon]

Exactly. Ron Paul (who will be running for president in 2008) recently said something quite similar:

Do Tax Cuts Cost the Government Money? by Ron Paul
The American people have every right to fund the federal government at whatever level they deem acceptable, and if they choose – through their elected representatives – to reduce that funding level, they are not somehow injuring the government. If Congresses passes a new law that results in you paying $1000 less in taxes next year, have you taken something from the government that rightfully belongs to it? Or has the government simply taken less from you?

You don’t cost the government money, the government costs you money!

My question to Ron Paul. Thanks to your kind the public debt is $8.7 trillion. Whose debt is that?

Ron Paul and the run up the debt Republicans have given us decades of this kind of "charge it" mentality and now we have a huge credit card debt to pay, which unfortunately is still growing at $1/2 trillion a year.

The Republican leaders of the pass the buck generation

 

[Jerry]

Bush want to esculate the war. This will take money. We need increase taxes and especially for corporations and the rich.

There is no more money left to take from Schools, the poor, for the war.

Where is the money for this pointless esculation in Iraq gonna come from?
we can close school, libraries, close waste disposal programs, allow uncontrollable polution of our water and air. we can starve the elderly and take away medical care for the sick. where???

A person who claims to be a Republican (neoCon) is now being likened to Freddie Kruger in NightMare on Elm Street fame.

Here is the real Bush.

Fourth seal is opened : a pale horse appears, its rider is called Death

{7} When the Lamb opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth living creature say, "Come!" {8} I looked, and there before me was a pale horse! Its rider was named Death, and Hades was following close behind him. They were given power over a fourth of the earth to kill by sword, famine and plague, and by the wild beasts of the earth.

Radical Islam is the pail horse.

Democricy is the Black horse:
Revolations 6: 5-6;
5 When the Lamb opened the third seal, I heard the third living creature say, "Come!" I looked, and there before me was a black horse! Its rider was holding a pair of scales in his hand. 6 Then I heard what sounded like a voice among the four living creatures, saying, "A quart of wheat for a day's wages, and three quarts of barley for a day's wages, and do not damage the oil and the wine!"

".....and do not damage the oil and the wine....."...I bet allot of people will love that.....

 

[Iriemon]

So in other words, we should default on our debt, because bond-buyers were stupid enough to not ask for collateral? If I'm understanding you correctly (and maybe I'm not), then that is one of the worst economic ideas I've ever heard.

The conservative strategy these days seems to be 1) pander to the electorate with tax cuts that run up the debt. 2) Run up as much debt as possible while getting re-elected. 3) Default on the debt.

It is absolutely astounding these folks can call themselves "conservatives." Gives a stink to the name, IMO.