U.S. Presidential race - Democrat Discussion

[belfpala]

"How to lie with statistics" should be required reading.

Hey, this might be the first time we agree on something!

[Grizzly Willy]

If you create the climate where businesses create jobs it goes a long way, best way to increase tax revenue is job growth.

I can understand that. More people to tax would mean having to tax people for less.

[belfpala]

I can understand that. More people to tax would mean having to tax people for less.

Even Reagan's economic adviser thinks otherwise, though.

Remember that when Reagan took office and the "cut taxes to increase jobs" and such mantra became the Republican theme, taxes were significantly higher than now. They are currently lower than when Reagan left office. His advisers have been on record saying its disastrous to just say "cut taxes".

[Grizzly Willy]

Except Romney hasn't said he would just cut taxes.

[belfpala]

Except Romney hasn't said he would just cut taxes.

Right, he's said he's going to do things but he can't tell us until after the election.

Which leaves us with the Paul Ryan plan.

[Grizzly Willy]

He says things about cutting supposed waste, but given the GOP's view on waste, I'm not so optimistic.

In fact, here's his stance via his website: http://www.mittromney.com/issues/spending

[belfpala]

In fact, here's his stance via his website: http://www.mittromney.com/issues/spending

Cool.

Two lines in...

Every dollar of deficit spending must be borrowed, with the bill sent to our children to pay back.

I wonder about his environmental stances. Does he apply that same logic to everything?

Oh wait, no he doesn't. He wants Amtrak to fail.

He also hates: Art. Women. Foreign Countries.

And likes firing people.

And he thinks Americans "can't afford" healthcare. Says it right there. Not my words.

I'll just stop. I could pick that thing apart line by line, but... not worth my time.

[Grizzly Willy]

Yeah, it's rather terrible. I balk at the cutting of services related to the sciences and the arts. We should be encouraging people to get an education, and cutting spending isn't going to help.

[belfpala]

What I find interesting: the word "welfare" is never used, not even once, in the whole thing. "Entitlement" is used, then links to a couple articles about medicare and social security.

[smelltheglove]

ok im going to rant just a little. it really pisses me off the way some people want to tee of on social security, as if the people receiving it didnt pay into it their whole fucking lives. they arent some damned freeloaders or something, and that attitude is pretty fucked up imo. not saying anyone specific in this thread, just the tenor of certain rhetoric i hear

[Kalyyn]

ok im going to rant just a little. it really pisses me off the way some people want to tee of on social security, as if the people receiving it didnt pay into it their whole fucking lives. they arent some damned freeloaders or something, and that attitude is pretty fucked up imo. not saying anyone specific in this thread, just the tenor of certain rhetoric i hear

My issue with social security isn't that. I don't consider old people to be freeloaders, and ideally I'd like to give them that money. They deserve it. The issue is that the system can't sustain itself. Pretty soon we'll have more people taking social security than paying into it. Then what? Unless we get another population explosion, where are we going to get that money? Sure, we can pull money from other things like defense or healthcare, but that only delays the issue. Eventually we have to fix the system, or it will crash. Right now we're delaying the inevitable. Eventually we have to bite the bullet.


Also, your rants are shorter than most of my sentences O.o
Which is a good thing, because my rants tend to go on for days.

[smelltheglove]

that is a criticism that makes sense kalyyn, and i agree that something has to change. but i have heard plenty of talk with the attitude that seniors are freeloaders, the talk of "entitlement" and all of that shit, and that is just wrong. of course it would help if we didnt treat the fund like a piggy bank that we can "borrow" from to fund wars and shit

[belfpala]

The issue is that the system can't sustain itself.

True.

But what should be done? Remove the SS tax on everyone under a certain age, phase the program out, fund people over that given age as they retire, and hope the younger people are responsible enough to build their own retirement funds?

I'm not trying to make a point here. Just asking a question.

[Maleficus]

I wonder about his environmental stances. Does he apply that same logic to everything?

Oh wait, no he doesn't. He wants Amtrak to fail.

Oh boy...here's a news flash for ya (so new, it came by telegraph).

Amtrack is the definition of failure. The ONLY reason it is still around is the constant infusion of taxpayer dollars to make up the losses. Yeah, when you brag about recovering 85% of your operating costs, you know how bad it has been. http://articles.philly.com/2011-05-0...-acela-express

He also hates: Art. Women. Foreign Countries.

Mind providing a reliable quote? I won't wait around since i know it won't come.

And he thinks Americans "can't afford" healthcare. Says it right there. Not my words.

Interesting. http://washingtonexaminer.com/franch...0#.UFJh3KOoZ8F I know, i know...the libbies hate profits (i bet some smashed their keyboards just reading the word) but ultimately profits = jobs, and i hate to turn the light on, but we kinda need jobs right now. I'm sure the link is "cherry picking" or "anecdotal" or "doesn't-agree-with-the-lefty-hive-mind-so-it-must-be-dismissed", but the math looks to be fairly simple. Eh, evil business owner is surely fudging the numbers to reach his partisan views.

[belfpala]

Amtrack is the definition of failure.

Yup, but it's more complex than just saying "train=fail".

Mind providing a reliable quote? I won't wait around since i know it won't come.

My interpretation of the thing that was linked, and that I linked as I responded. Wants to cut funds to all of those.

i know...the libbies hate profits

I must not be a libbie then... I like profits. Or... maybe I can save my libbie status by saying I like MY profits, but not anyone else's profits? Does that work? (Kidding).

[oblivionx]

Yeah, it's rather terrible. I balk at the cutting of services related to the sciences and the arts. We should be encouraging people to get an education, and cutting spending isn't going to help.

Every dollar we borrow and it's interest cuts spending.

[belfpala]

Every dollar we borrow and it's interest cuts spending.

Nice place to drop that. Every technology we produce balances that out. Of all the things to cut, science should be the last on the list.

[Naxere]

I thought only people that backed Republicans were allowed to spend millions of dollars supporting their candidates:


http://freebeacon.com/katzenberg-fun...lion-to-obama/

The New York Times reported Wednesday on previously undisclosed documents showing the breadth of Hollywood mogul Jeffrey Katzenberg’s support for the Obama campaign since 2008.

While the Obama campaign has itself disclosed that Jeffrey Katzenberg is a bundler for the Obama campaign, the campaign had only said that he had raised more than $500,000 for President Obama’s reelection.

In fact, the actual amount raised by Katzenberg and bundled for President Obama is more than 13 times the publicly disclosed figure. The total is more than $6.6 million.

[Kalyyn]

True.

But what should be done? Remove the SS tax on everyone under a certain age, phase the program out, fund people over that given age as they retire, and hope the younger people are responsible enough to build their own retirement funds?

I'm not trying to make a point here. Just asking a question.

I'm no expert, but that sounds like a good plan to me. I'd be up for it.

As young as I am, I'd probably be under the cutoff, but I'd be willing to take one for the team. And I'm guessing that the private sector would jump in to fill the void.

[oblivionx]

Nice place to drop that. Every technology we produce balances that out. Of all the things to cut, science should be the last on the list.

That's if, in theory, the spending is on "technology" that balances it out.

Suffice to say, that currently... our debt due to interest on loans equals our social spending and our defense spending. It's roughly 30% on each, depending on the ideology of the government (which doesn't make too much a difference).

If we stop borrowing we don't pay as much interest on debt and money is freed up to spend on whatever it is you want in the future.