The winds of change

Mycroft said:

I suggest a 20%, across the board, reduction in government spending for starters. Then I suggest a close and critical look at ALL Departments, Agencies, etc. with the intention to justify their existence based on their cost. If we can do without them, dump them. I suggest a close and critical look at ALL regulations under the same criteria and with the same result...if we can do without them...dump them.

These suggestions will have a twofold effect:

1. They will reduce the size, scope, power and spending of the government.

2. They will eliminate the enormous uncertainty that is afflicting the business community and will result in an increase in hiring and a surge in the economy.

So...there you have it. Those are my suggestions. What are yours?

Click to expand...

Actually I pretty much could agree with yours, but why not go a few steps further.

Like millionares don't need tax cuts, so "no tax cuts for the rich
Free trade is a play on words we get a lot more imports they get a lot less exports come on throw ina tarrif or something.
"Windfall tax" and" inheirtance tax" worked to create more tax money before it can again so bring both back..

With a smaller compact government and more money coming in from 3 differant directions, 4 counting no more loopholes.
Every loophole filed on any tax return that tax return will be asubject to audit.
Oh, and a tax on any foriegn made product coming into America to be sold.
Foriegn aid only to be given to true allies; if any country doesn't like us, step off no more foriegn aid.

Now you have asked a lot of people to make sacrifices to pay off the debt.
I have asked some people to make sacrifices to pay off the debt.

I will agree to your suggestions if you but agree to mine?
I see nothing wrong with thateace

Proud South Korean said:

China had/has the world's biggest population, has the 4th biggest landmass, and has enormous amounts of natural resources. However, it took 30 years of stagnation for them to realize how ****ed up they were and then began developing their economy.
South Korea was devastated from occupation and then civil war, with occupation being for 35 years, and war being 3 years. Our country's population was very low, and we were the receipiant of aid from African countries for God's sake. We have no natural resources, apart from low amounts of low-grade coal. No oil, no iron, no gold, nothing. Our country was divided. Yet in less than 50 years, our country, lacking in natural resources, population, and landmass compared to other countries (153rd in terms of size of landmass), surged from the poorest to one of the richest. Beat that

Click to expand...

I can't beat that.
However I would ask some questions.
1, What time frame are you talking about in America?
2. Is America today the richest country?
3. In 1935 America was in a deression bottom of the barrel, in 1955 America was strong and making money after a world war, in 2000 America had a surplus, in 2004 America had a defeciet it is now 2012 has America recovered or gotten depper in debt?

4.Our country is divided today by class and by politics.eace

FluffyNinja said:

Thank you for your great insight and the free history lesson. Yes, I like history.......I have degrees in it, which I'm still paying for I might add.

Yes, again, very insightful........there have been changes.....led by grassroots movements even and some people didn't like it. So, at what point am I supposed to go "Wow! I never thought of that?"


Okay, changes are coming. So, here we are, three pages in, and we've yet to see exactly what "changes" you are implying. Put down the bong for just a minute and try to focus here. Just let us know what you see coming down the "pipeline." (no pun intended) :shrug:

Click to expand...

Sorry, pal you have me confused with an intellectual or somebody that has the intelligence to know what's wrong and to actually fix it to where it is right.

I am but a lowly factory worker, I got my GED in the Army but I marched shouder to shoulder for civil rights, to stop the war in Viet Nam.

You are looking for men like Medger Evers, Dr. Martin King, John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy,

Men such as these are not born ecceptional thaey are made ecceptional because they had intelligence and stepped up for this country, not for money but for America and it's people

Another will come, he too will step up and changes in America will come.
Many will not like it but a change will come.

As far as the pipeline and put down the bong remark,?
Hell, I've heard worce from a lot more formable adversaries than you..

People like you shake their head and say" I don't hear any changes ", "I don't see any changes" all have one thing in common.
They don't want any changes , for deep down they are afraid of change.
It might not be a change to benifit them so they fear change.eace

presluc said:

Actually I pretty much could agree with yours, but why not go a few steps further.

Like millionares don't need tax cuts, so "no tax cuts for the rich
Free trade is a play on words we get a lot more imports they get a lot less exports come on throw ina tarrif or something.
"Windfall tax" and" inheirtance tax" worked to create more tax money before it can again so bring both back..

With a smaller compact government and more money coming in from 3 differant directions, 4 counting no more loopholes.
Every loophole filed on any tax return that tax return will be asubject to audit.
Oh, and a tax on any foriegn made product coming into America to be sold.
Foriegn aid only to be given to true allies; if any country doesn't like us, step off no more foriegn aid.

Now you have asked a lot of people to make sacrifices to pay off the debt.
I have asked some people to make sacrifices to pay off the debt.

I will agree to your suggestions if you but agree to mine?
I see nothing wrong with thateace

Click to expand...

Sorry, but I don't agree that raising taxes is productive at this point. But you do everything I've suggested and THEN we can look at the issue of raising taxes.

Mycroft said:

Sorry, but I don't agree that raising taxes is productive at this point. But you do everything I've suggested and THEN we can look at the issue of raising taxes.

Click to expand...

Where in my post does it say raiseing taxes?

Why should I agree to do everything you suggest first?
Why not at the same time?

Unless you want only certain people, departments and agencies to make sacrifces while others remain untouched?
That seems hardly fair.
After all, this is the "UNITED"States of America, home of "WE" the people.
Not "we'er with you" through the good times ,"we'll see ya later" in the bad times.eace

presluc said:

Where in my post does it say raiseing taxes?

Why should I agree to do everything you suggest first?
Why not at the same time?

Unless you want only certain people, departments and agencies to make sacrifces while others remain untouched?
That seems hardly fair.
After all, this is the "UNITED"States of America, home of "WE" the people.
Not "we'er with you" through the good times ,"we'll see ya later" in the bad times.eace

Click to expand...

All of your suggestions for increasing revenue amount to raising taxes...

"Like millionares don't need tax cuts, so "no tax cuts for the rich
Free trade is a play on words we get a lot more imports they get a lot less exports come on throw ina tarrif or something.
"Windfall tax" and" inheirtance tax" worked to create more tax money before it can again so bring both back.."

And, perhaps, you missed my first suggestion...

"I suggest a 20%, across the board, reduction in government spending for starters."

Do you understand what "across the board" means?

Anyway, dude, I'm getting tired of you misunderstanding me or downright misinterpreting what I say...and then applying positions to me based on your misunderstanding or misinterpretation. I have never expressed the sentiment you apply to me:

"Not "we'er with you" through the good times ,"we'll see ya later" in the bad times."

Mycroft said:

All of your suggestions for increasing revenue amount to raising taxes...

"Like millionares don't need tax cuts, so "no tax cuts for the rich
Free trade is a play on words we get a lot more imports they get a lot less exports come on throw ina tarrif or something.
"Windfall tax" and" inheirtance tax" worked to create more tax money before it can again so bring both back.."

And, perhaps, you missed my first suggestion...

"I suggest a 20%, across the board, reduction in government spending for starters."

Do you understand what "across the board" means?

Anyway, dude, I'm getting tired of you misunderstanding me or downright misinterpreting what I say...and then applying positions to me based on your misunderstanding or misinterpretation. I have never expressed the sentiment you apply to me:

"Not "we'er with you" through the good times ,"we'll see ya later" in the bad times."

Click to expand...

Stopping tax cuts for the rich is not raiseing taxes
Reinstating the Windfall tax and the Inheirtance tax is not raiseing taxes.
A tarriff on free trade is not raiseing the taxes.
How do these effect what taxes a middle class , working poor class skilled or unskilled labor pay ?
I don't see how it does.

Yes I know what "ACROSS THE BOARD MEANS".

You said 20% across the board reduction in government spending, that's everything or at least I thought that's what "ACROSS THE BOARD"meant

Across the board, but it seems when the reduction of government spending tax cuts for the rich , well that's differant.
When it's a reduction in government spending for imports , well that's differant.
When it comes to paying a windfall tax the way it was , well that's differant
When it comes to paying inheirtance tax the way it was, well that's differant
Cutbacks on reserch money for oil and drug companies ,well that's differant

Across the board?? that is your misinterpretation, that is your misunderstanding not mine.

It seems like it is you who have shrunken the board not I.

Next time you say ACROSS THE BOARD, be sure to inform me what size board you are talking about.eace

presluc said:

Stopping tax cuts for the rich is not raiseing taxes
Reinstating the Windfall tax and the Inheirtance tax is not raiseing taxes.
A tarriff on free trade is not raiseing the taxes.
How do these effect what taxes a middle class , working poor class skilled or unskilled labor pay ?
I don't see how it does.

Yes I know what "ACROSS THE BOARD MEANS".

You said 20% across the board reduction in government spending, that's everything or at least I thought that's what "ACROSS THE BOARD"meant

Across the board, but it seems when the reduction of government spending tax cuts for the rich , well that's differant.
When it's a reduction in government spending for imports , well that's differant.
When it comes to paying a windfall tax the way it was , well that's differant
When it comes to paying inheirtance tax the way it was, well that's differant
Cutbacks on reserch money for oil and drug companies ,well that's differant

Across the board?? that is your misinterpretation, that is your misunderstanding not mine.

It seems like it is you who have shrunken the board not I.

Next time you say ACROSS THE BOARD, be sure to inform me what size board you are talking about.eace

Click to expand...

LOL!!!

Now I see where you are coming from!!

You make the usual liberal case of not equating ending tax cuts as raising taxes...and you have the usual liberal perception that reducing spending has anything to do with taxes.

Look, the government taxes it's citizens. The government also spends money. At this point, the government spends more money than it receives. Now, I've advocated reducing the spending. I've tabled consideration of the taxes for a later date.

Why would you insist on trying to connect the two? Are you really a liberal?

Mycroft said:

LOL!!!

Now I see where you are coming from!!

You make the usual liberal case of not equating ending tax cuts as raising taxes...and you have the usual liberal perception that reducing spending has anything to do with taxes.

Look, the government taxes it's citizens. The government also spends money. At this point, the government spends more money than it receives. Now, I've advocated reducing the spending. I've tabled consideration of the taxes for a later date.

Why would you insist on trying to connect the two? Are you really a liberal?

Click to expand...

Not a liberal or a rightwinger, INDEPENDENT.

You said reduce government spending yes or no?

Is not tax cuts going to the rich from government ,"government spending"??
Is not reserch grants for oil and drug companies "government spending"?

At one time there was Windfall tax and Inheirtance tax and it was inforced, I don't recall and corporations going hungry then, or no person that got an inheirtance winding up on the street.

Isn't that the government turning over taxes which is money?

Government taxes it's Citizens now that's an LOL.
you make a million you get a tax cut you make 30,000 you get a tax cut , if you're middle class worker you get screwed from the rich and the poor.

You've advocated reducing government spending on what?
You said "ACROSS THE BOARD",now you say reduce government spending across the board EXCEPT" TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH".
What's next cut government spending ACROSS THE BOARD, BUT "NOT RESERCH GRANTS" OR EXCEPT" CERTAIN LOBBYIST"???

That is what is commonly known as double talk.

It's like telling your wife we're going to start saving money , but I'll keep my car, my T.V. and satelite programing for all chanells,my cellphone and my laptop but we can't afford to keep your car, your cellphone, your laptop or your T.V. , have to sell those but we will save money.eace

presluc said:

I can't beat that.
However I would ask some questions.
1, What time frame are you talking about in America?
2. Is America today the richest country?
3. In 1935 America was in a deression bottom of the barrel, in 1955 America was strong and making money after a world war, in 2000 America had a surplus, in 2004 America had a defeciet it is now 2012 has America recovered or gotten depper in debt?

4.Our country is divided today by class and by politics.eace

Click to expand...

The US is a huge country (3rd in terms of landmass), full of natural resources (huge amounts of oil, iron, timber, all the necessities for a nation), and the US is isolated by 2 giant oceans, hence the reason why it never was invaded. It also has 2 very friendly neighbors. Any war the US wages is on the offensive, and mostly have economic gains.
If a country that has such giant advantages isn't the 1st, it either must have a population the size of Liechtenstein or be full of dumb****s.

presluc said:

Not a liberal or a rightwinger, INDEPENDENT.

You said reduce government spending yes or no?

Is not tax cuts going to the rich from government ,"government spending"??
Is not reserch grants for oil and drug companies "government spending"?

At one time there was Windfall tax and Inheirtance tax and it was inforced, I don't recall and corporations going hungry then, or no person that got an inheirtance winding up on the street.

Isn't that the government turning over taxes which is money?

Government taxes it's Citizens now that's an LOL.
you make a million you get a tax cut you make 30,000 you get a tax cut , if you're middle class worker you get screwed from the rich and the poor.

You've advocated reducing government spending on what?
You said "ACROSS THE BOARD",now you say reduce government spending across the board EXCEPT" TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH".
What's next cut government spending ACROSS THE BOARD, BUT "NOT RESERCH GRANTS" OR EXCEPT" CERTAIN LOBBYIST"???

That is what is commonly known as double talk.

It's like telling your wife we're going to start saving money , but I'll keep my car, my T.V. and satelite programing for all chanells,my cellphone and my laptop but we can't afford to keep your car, your cellphone, your laptop or your T.V. , have to sell those but we will save money.eace

Click to expand...

Reading your posts is an exercise in culling the wheat from the chaff. Because of this, I'll comment on the parts I've highlighted.

Contrary to your liberal mindset, cutting taxes is not reducing government spending. Cutting taxes is reducing government revenue. Look, the government spends more than it takes in right now. If you reduce how much it takes in (cutting taxes) you don't affect spending at all. We are still spending.

"Across the board" means exactly that. If an agency has a budget of X dollars, reduce it to X-20%. And do this to EVERY agency...including the ones who give out research grants. Oh...and I've said nothing about lobbyists...in fact, I didn't know the government was paying lobbyists anything. Can you give me an example?

Proud South Korean said:

The US is a huge country (3rd in terms of landmass), full of natural resources (huge amounts of oil, iron, timber, all the necessities for a nation), and the US is isolated by 2 giant oceans, hence the reason why it never was invaded. It also has 2 very friendly neighbors. Any war the US wages is on the offensive, and mostly have economic gains.
If a country that has such giant advantages isn't the 1st, it either must have a population the size of Liechtenstein or be full of dumb****s.

Click to expand...

Only dumbass leaders.
All the advantages America has and what?
1. America depends on foriegn nations for energy and fuel
2. American corporations depend on foriegn nations for labor
3. American consumers depend on foriegn nations for products and goods.
4. If a country doesn't like America , America sends them foriegn aid
5. Free trade deals America's ideas, when exports become more than imports see how long coutries will want free trade then?eace

Mycroft said:

Reading your posts is an exercise in culling the wheat from the chaff. Because of this, I'll comment on the parts I've highlighted.

Contrary to your liberal mindset, cutting taxes is not reducing government spending. Cutting taxes is reducing government revenue. Look, the government spends more than it takes in right now. If you reduce how much it takes in (cutting taxes) you don't affect spending at all. We are still spending.

"Across the board" means exactly that. If an agency has a budget of X dollars, reduce it to X-20%. And do this to EVERY agency...including the ones who give out research grants. Oh...and I've said nothing about lobbyists...in fact, I didn't know the government was paying lobbyists anything. Can you give me an example?

Click to expand...

I talk of bread. meaning dollars and you talk of wheat.
Distraction is a right wing tool not mine
Nobody said anything about "cutting taxes" that's a right wing thing.
I said stopping tax cuts to the rich
If a rich man pays X amount of taxes the taxes becomes government money tax cuts are paid from government money.
Money is money nobody says where the tax cuts come from if it was from the rich why pay XX amount of taxes to get a tax cut from the taxes you paid in why not pay less taxes, according to the IRS statutes you can't .
You make so much money and after that taxes.
You can not escape death or taxes unless you are poor and imortal or a crook

Well lobbyist ain't in D.C. to take a tour guide, their there to make money and they do.
If you want to check agencies out start at the top the one with the most money and more than a few allegations, Halliburtan, Exxon, Heirtage foundation.

You are quick to point the fingure of sacrifice to agencies of the government and I have agreed.

Now the question remains what sacrifice are the rich, corporations, and big business going to make.
You have said they couldn't give up their tax cuts, they couldn't hire more American workers, they wouldn't put more money into alternitive fuel," DRILL BABY DRILL" .
So what the HELL do we get from them???

Any negoiation is give and take , any recovery EVERYONE WILL HAVE TO MAKE SACRIICES.
The average , the poor the elderly are there, where is the rich, corporations and big business???eace

presluc said:

Only dumbass leaders.
All the advantages America has and what?
1. America depends on foriegn nations for energy and fuel
2. American corporations depend on foriegn nations for labor
3. American consumers depend on foriegn nations for products and goods.
4. If a country doesn't like America , America sends them foriegn aid
5. Free trade deals America's ideas, when exports become more than imports see how long coutries will want free trade then?eace

Click to expand...

Only a moron thinks a country can rely upon its domestic market

Presluc, you should write poetry or music, since you're so apt in writing all of your posts like that.

When will your posts start rhyming?

Proud South Korean said:

Only a moron thinks a country can rely upon its domestic market

Click to expand...

Really. who did America rely on from 1930 until 1940?
How about who America relied on from 1941 till 1945?
From 1949 until 1975?

Check the imports coming into America against the exports going out.eace

Wake said:

Presluc, you should write poetry or music, since you're so apt in writing all of your posts like that.

When will your posts start rhyming?

Click to expand...

I write books,stories and have written some poetry in my time.

However I get the feeling that was not meant as a compliment.
I guess that's why I like detective shows, like does undisclosed politicaly mean RIGHT WING?eace

presluc said:

Really. who did America rely on from 1930 until 1940?
How about who America relied on from 1941 till 1945?
From 1949 until 1975?

Check the imports coming into America against the exports going out.eace

Click to expand...

(Sigh). Your post was about how the US relies so much upon the international market for its economy. My post was about how it's ridiculous to think that a country don't have to trade or rely upon world trade

Proud South Korean said:

(Sigh). Your post was about how the US relies so much upon the international market for its economy. My post was about how it's ridiculous to think that a country don't have to trade or rely upon world trade

Click to expand...

Well, in 2000 American corporations started to rely more on trade and world trade as well as labor and energy to foriegn nations.
Care to campare America's economic status in 2000 to America's economic status in 2012eace

presluc said:

Well, in 2000 American corporations started to rely more on trade and world trade as well as labor and energy to foriegn nations.
Care to campare America's economic status in 2000 to America's economic status in 2012eace

Click to expand...

What the **** is your point?
Make it more readable.

Proud South Korean said:

What the **** is your point?
Make it more readable.

Click to expand...

His point is that too many acid trips in the 60's and 70's will make you look at history in a whole new way.........................man. :shrug:

Proud South Korean said:

What the **** is your point?
Make it more readable.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure, but I THINK his point is that he thinks the solution to all of our ills is to remove ourselves from the global market and rely on ourselves for the products we want and need. He thinks this will increase the jobs available to our citizens and the resulting increased tax base will take care of the deficit and the debt.

The Macro Economics course I took almost thirty years ago causes me to disagree with him.

Proud South Korean said:

What the **** is your point?
Make it more readable.

Click to expand...

Sorry let me make it more plain for ya.

1999 LESS OUTSOURCEING LESS FREE TRADE = AMERICA = SURPLUS
2012 MORE OUTSOURCEING MORE FREE TRADE = AMERICA = 15 TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT

That's math.eace

FluffyNinja said:

His point is that too many acid trips in the 60's and 70's will make you look at history in a whole new way.........................man. :shrug:

Click to expand...

Noo, my point is when American labor made products they had money, America had money. more exports
Foriegn labor makes American products Americans have less money, America has less money less exports
PROVE ME WRONG

Looking at America through rose collored glasses will give you a headache America is 15 trillion + in debt.eace

Mycroft said:

I'm not sure, but I THINK his point is that he thinks the solution to all of our ills is to remove ourselves from the global market and rely on ourselves for the products we want and need. He thinks this will increase the jobs available to our citizens and the resulting increased tax base will take care of the deficit and the debt.

The Macro Economics course I took almost thirty years ago causes me to disagree with him.

Click to expand...

WRONG!, I don't think we should remove ourselves from the global market.
However in the global market , in any market for that matter one must compete.
I think America should stop depending on others in the global market and start competeing with others in the global market.eace