Tax Cuts for who the top 1%

[ebritt]

But the Dems did pass NAFTA under the Clinton Administration.

Yes they usually tend to omit that one.....

[Imawhosure]

Mr. Cap,

 

That is because people DO NOT pay attention.

 

I understand everyone has a busy life with work, raising a family, etc, etc. But how much is to much to pay? The politicians don't want you to ask that question, so what do they do?!?!?!?!?!?!?! It is absolutely brilliant mind you------------->they play us off against each other, that is exactly what they do!!!!!

 

They create "bad guys" for each group to despise, and of course we being lackeys, insist it is a marvelous idea to pass the tax hike onto them instead of us.

 

DOES ANYONE notice in these people who proclaim that taxes are good......or ok as long as they are aimed at anyone but them, that nowhere have they allowed the notion to creep in their feeble minds that maybe, just maybe, nobody should have to pay more, but instead maybe the spending should be reigned in!!!???!!!

 

Let me put it another way----------->if they, and us, and everyone else would quit trying to get the government to screw the rich, the poor, or the middle class; and instead use our efforts to force them to quit spending at such ridiculous levels, we wouldn't even have to discuss who is going to pay the hike, now would we!!!!!!!!

 

Nobody is suggesting we pay NO taxes, but rather they need to CAP them at cetain overall levels of income. Believe it or not, some people are paying 50% of their income in taxes, if you take into consideration all the taxes they pay.

 

Don't any of you think that is a little ridiculous? Not to mention, if you aren't, if they keep up with the current program, you soon will.

 

As far as the middle class disappearing, I have a question for that statement------------->what would you rather do, make 20 bucks an hr and pay 50% overall in taxes, or make 15 bucks an hr, and pay 25% in taxes???? QUICK, DO THE MATH!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

For union workers, (or any workers for that matter) you can VOTE yourself a raise instead of demanding one, lololol............once you get past these SOCIALISTS who try to make you feel bad by telling you---->YOU AREN'T PAYING YOUR FAIR SHARE!!!!!!!!

 

Next time some goofball politician utters such nonsense, remind them that they are SPENDING not only your Share, but your childrens and grandchildrens SHARE too!!!!!! And if anything, that is not FAIR!!!!!!

[Trimdingman]

In Canada, we have very high taxes. I can't figure out where all of the money goes. I pay gas taxes for the roads, and to subsidize transit users. I pay for my own electricity, heat, telephone, water, sewage, cable, insurance, food, and automobile. My property taxes pay for police, fire department, schools, libraries. Those things are 90% of what I need. How much is military? Maybe 10 billion in Canada. That works out to about $300 per person. National Health Care? $100 billion? $3000 per person. If every person paid $5,000 a year income tax, that would cover it. You would have to pay $5000 for each kid, as well. They are your kids, not mine. Poor, dumb people would be discouraged from having kids, who would heriditarily probably end up being dumb, themselves, and pass that dumbness on to countless future generations. My family of two pays over $50,000 in income tax. Forget income tax. Just make each person pay $5,000 per year regardless of income. Immigrants would have to pay 5 years' tax in advance, because they automatically tap into social programs that we have already paid for. Everyone has a photo ID card which they forfeit when they do not pay their taxes. Without it, you lose all government benefits. If you can't afford the $5,000 a year, I have grass to cut, snow to shovel, laundry to do, cars to wash, washrooms to clean, pool and hot tub to maintain, and bodies to massage. The government could also provide you with work, picking up litter along highways, etc. With all of the money I would save, I could give you a job. Maybe I would get my house painted, buy a boat, build a new deck, buy new furniture, buy a new car, buy a dog, and take a vacation. If the whole middle class was freed from the government bloodsuckers, there would be no more unemployment. Government beaurocrats who now contribute nothing to the economy, just suck from it, could get useful jobs working on auto assembly lines, or in slaughter houses. The government's coffers would swell. Nobody would ever again dream of voting for the socialists. There's the rub.

Edited December 15, 2006 by Trimdingman

[chkchka]

In case you haven't noticed they are the pigs that have us in this mess. Well truely it's our fault for letting it happen.

 

What do you call tax brackets?

 

What do you mean when the lower class becomes the majority? Thats BS. Then we take from the rich and give to the poor. More BS The majority is not supposed to mean shit (unless like you, you were manipulated by the man). The federal Government is supposed to protect the rights given to us by the Constitution and protect us from invaders, and that is it. Not make laws controlling me, telling me what I can and cannot do, TAXING me(by the way show me the written law stating you have to pay taxes, I don't think you will find one), giving me federal guidelines.

 

So then your majority shit is telling me that as a minority I can have my rights trampled on by the majority? According to the Founding Fathers and Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, The Government is not there to make laws to govern me but to protect my rights as an individual. My friend our Government has become way to BIG.

 

My point is when the majority of America is the lower class, with nothing to lose, people will riot, crime will be rampant, the government will have no other choice then to become a military state and there will be a revolution. A revolution because the elite 1% who runs the government does not want to lose their wealth and will do anything to keep that from happening. They are the minority, yet control most of the wealth. Yet you still believe we should give THEM a tax cut.

[fmccap]

My point is when the majority of America is the lower class, with nothing to lose, people will riot, crime will be rampant, the government will have no other choice then to become a military state and there will be a revolution. A revolution because the elite 1% who runs the government does not want to lose their wealth and will do anything to keep that from happening. They are the minority, yet control most of the wealth. Yet you still believe we should give THEM a tax cut.

 

You quit all the BS spending and we all could have alot more.

Here it is again. And this is just the pork spending.

2006 Congressional Pig Book

Now get rid of all the rest of government waste.

 

Finally you have a whole country with alot more money in there pocket to spend and invest.

 

P.S. I only quickly scanned the list. If you see anything on it that is right for the US Government ( Constitutionally) to spend our money on let me know.

 

become a military state and there will be a revolution.

 

Also I don't think that our military personel would allow that. When they finally see something like that they should also WAKE UP and start to wonder what is really going on!

Edited December 15, 2006 by fmccap

[Trimdingman]

It is taxes that got us into this mess. If they would just simplify the tax system so that everyone could figure out how much they owe in five minutes, it would save countless billions of dollars.

 

Say you start off with 1% of the population in need. The government taxes everyone an extra 1% to help them. Everyone spends 1% less, so another 1% of the people lose their jobs. The government taxes everyone another 1% to help them. People spend another 1% less, so another 1% of the people lose their jobs. Twenty years down the road, we have the mess that we have now. It would have been better to have just not helped the first 1%. Charity should be voluntary, and it should start at home. When I was young, people thought a lot differently. People had pride. It would be a disgrace to accept charity. If anyone had to, they would make sure that it was quickly re-paid when they got back on their feet. I know that my family would have probably starved to death first. That would never happen, of course. There are fish in the sea, and rabbits, porcupines, partridges, ducks, and pheasants to snare or shoot to eat in the winter. In addition, we had all of our vegetables, frozen deer meat, salt fish, and firewood stored away. Let the snows come. We were prepared. There was some money coming in anyway. By to-days standards, we would have been considered destitute. We were middle class. More importantly, we were independant. We didn't need government. I never have, and never will.

Edited December 15, 2006 by Trimdingman

[fmccap]

On December 16, 1773 the Sons of Liberty said "No!" to lack of representation and tyranny by tossing crates of British tea into Boston Harbor.

 

Tax Freedom Day 2006 is on 3 June.

[fmccap]

Say you start off with 1% of the population in need. The government taxes everyone an extra 1% to help them. Everyone spends 1% less, so another 1% of the people lose their jobs. The government taxes everyone another 1% to help them. People spend another 1% less, so another 1% of the people lose their jobs. Twenty years down the road, we have the mess that we have now. It would have been better to have just not helped the first 1%. Charity should be voluntary, and it should start at home.

 

I think people can't imagine this though. It's not in there head, they have grown up like this. Could it be they are scared of change? Imagine if tax freedom day was Feb.1. Imagine having 10,000 dollars more a year just from payroll taxes. Remember the early tax refund the Gov. gave us and the few dollars a week tax cut? That gave the economy a good boost, but they just kept spending away which just made a wash, and in the long run is'nt good. Now imagine again that 10,000 dollars giving the boost to the economy from every person.

[fmccap]

Once again.

 

Not Yours To Give

"It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means.

 

What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he.

 

If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give at all; and as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. 'No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity.'

[Trimdingman]

That is one of my favorite speeches of all time.

[fmccap]

That is one of my favorite speeches of all time.

 

Mine to. Sad part is that it's right in front of our face and so many don't see it.

[Imawhosure]

You are right CAP!!!!!!

 

Not to mention to those who can't figure it out-------------->we really didn't get an overall tax cut, we stayed neutral.

 

What you say, you are just trying to blow smoke!!!!!!

 

Umm, no I am not..........and here is why for the people of the US it is so-------------->when Bush gave that tax cut, to pay part of it he cut back the states. (have you heard YOUR state crying yet?) Most of the programs that were cut in to, were direct compensation on state programs.

 

Now then, what do you think the states did??????????? Go ahead and guess. I will give you three chances, and the first 2 don't count.

 

Correct!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Instead of cutting THEIR spending, they raised YOUR taxes!!!!!!!!!!!!! You wouldn't want your LOCAL politicians NOT to be able to give out largess either would ya?!?!?!?!?!?!

 

Now then------------>since we KNOW that the largest percentage of states RAISED their taxes to cover their shortfall instead of CUTTING spending; should the next congress get YOU to listen to "you are not paying YOUR fair share" again so they can resupply the states (AKA buy votes on special bills) with their stipend, how many states do YOU think will roll back their tax hikes since the federal cash now rolls in??????

 

How many of you are willing to say all???? 85%?????? 75%??????? 10%????????? Are ya willing to bet even 1???????? Can I have an Amen????????? lololololol!!!!!!!!!

 

You are being hoodwinked, plain and simple. You are transferring YOUR ability to spend to politicians, and they are convincing you it is one group or anothers fault, so their taxes should be raised!!!!!!!!!

 

Not to mention------------->their appetite is never ending, even if we do it YOUR way and allow taxes to rise for specific individuals. All you need do is forget what you pay, and look what overall percentage of income has been payed in the last 50yrs. The percentage has risen dramatically, and will continue to do so.

 

The only way to stop YOUR taxes from eventually rising past the 50% mark unless you pay no taxes, is NOT have them take their hunger out on any person or group, but tell them to go on a diet, PERMANENTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

No offense intended towards Canada, but this will be your tax structure............and worse, if you do NOT wake up soon. And even most of their citizens on here will tell ya, the program is SOCIALIST!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Is that what we AMERICANS want, socialism?????????? See if you can compete with Mexico then, unless of course you wanna pay 70 or 75% of your income to finance the programs, and only making 20 bucks an hr so as you can compete globally.

 

And all this to protect the poooooooor. Keep it up, and when your poor, see if Japan will help you!!!!!!!

[chkchka]

What's a bigger waste of money then the Iraq war? How many of you tax cut, less government spending morons voted republican? I'm not arguing that the government wastes our money. But you can't just say I'm not going to pay taxes because of it. We are still the wealthiest people in the world and without our government that would not be possible.

[Imawhosure]

What's a bigger waste of money then the Iraq war? How many of you tax cut, less government spending morons voted republican? I'm not arguing that the government wastes our money. But you can't just say I'm not going to pay taxes because of it. We are still the wealthiest people in the world and without our government that would not be possible.

 

 

But our government doesn't need 50% of our money...........in fact, if they cut spending and taxes, our country would be even MORE wealthy than it now is.

 

Once more, as you stated although I can't quote it, I will paraphrase it------------->most of the money lies with the rich.

 

My solution is to allow you more of your money to be wealthier, your solution is to HAMMER those with to much money.

 

Let me see now, I get to spend more money, or I can make someone lay someone off cause they are the ones who provide all the jobs, which means it probably won't hurt the rich much more than one iota. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, logic tells me you are in error!!!!!!! My disliking rich people does me no good, me having more of my own money does!!!!!!!!!

[sprinter]

The government waste will end only if the people rebel against the government. It will not take the whole population maybe around 25%. They will have to willing to give up their life for the same cause that was fought for in 1776. For what I have seen, I have strong doubts that the current population here can do the task. But I think the government is already planning for an uprising.

 

 

Homeland Security Contracts for Vast New Detention Camps

[Trimdingman]

The government waste will end only if the people rebel against the government. It will not take the whole population maybe around 25%. They will have to willing to give up their life for the same cause that was fought for in 1776. For what I have seen, I have strong doubts that the current population here can do the task. But I think the government is already planning for an uprising.

Homeland Security Contracts for Vast New Detention Camps

 

Who will start an uprising? The left would not fight for any reason. They want to turn the other cheek to Al Quada. They believe that if we let them blow up a few government buildings in Washington, they will be satisfied, and stop. The right is fighting the enemy. They are not going to go against their own country. Rome was a great empire. Every year, near the end, they bribed the barbarians so that they would leave them alone. Finally, the barbarians realized that the Romans had become nothing but a bunch of chickenshits, so they just walked in and took it all. That is what the Democrats are telling the terrorists. If we pull out now, in twenty years, the Middle East will have enough wealth from the sale of oil to conquer the USA, and that is what they would do. Who knows what they have planned already? Maybe they have terrorist cells in major US cities assembling nukes. Maybe Blitzkreig is just around the corner. They have been telling us for the last thirty years that they want to kill us all, and have never stopped trying to do just that. Money spent on the war is money well spent. We can get it all back and more from their oil. Chkchka says that the Iraq war is a waste of money. I disagree. We are fighting a war against a country, the majority of whose people are on our side. We are taking care not to kill too many of the good guys. Unfortunately, that costs us more casualties, and drags the war out longer. The Democrats criticize every move that is made, just for the sake of criticizm. To please the Democrats, and obtain speedy victory, would mean decimating the Iraqi people. That could be accomplished in a few days. If they were in power, they would not do that either. Power is all that they want. In time of war we should forget politics, and pull together. The Democrats will live to regret what they have done.

Edited December 16, 2006 by Trimdingman

[chkchka]

But our government doesn't need 50% of our money...........in fact, if they cut spending and taxes, our country would be even MORE wealthy than it now is.

 

Once more, as you stated although I can't quote it, I will paraphrase it------------->most of the money lies with the rich.

 

My solution is to allow you more of your money to be wealthier, your solution is to HAMMER those with to much money.

 

Let me see now, I get to spend more money, or I can make someone lay someone off cause they are the ones who provide all the jobs, which means it probably won't hurt the rich much more than one iota. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, logic tells me you are in error!!!!!!! My disliking rich people does me no good, me having more of my own money does!!!!!!!!!

 

How do rich people provide jobs? By buying foreign luxury cars? Vacationing in Europe? Investing in foreign companies? The lower and middle class provide our jobs. They are the ones buying American cars. Not the yuppie BMW/Mercedes/Acura fucks.

 

Who will start an uprising? The left would not fight for any reason. They want to turn the other cheek to Al Quada. They believe that if we let them blow up a few government buildings in Washington, they will be satisfied, and stop. The right is fighting the enemy. They are not going to go against their own country. Rome was a great empire. Every year, near the end, they bribed the barbarians so that they would leave them alone. Finally, the barbarians realized that the Romans had become nothing but a bunch of chickenshits, so they just walked in and took it all. That is what the Democrats are telling the terrorists. If we pull out now, in twenty years, the Middle East will have enough wealth from the sale of oil to conquer the USA, and that is what they would do. Who knows what they have planned already? Maybe they have terrorist cells in major US cities assembling nukes. Maybe Blitzkreig is just around the corner. They have been telling us for the last thirty years that they want to kill us all, and have never stopped trying to do just that. Money spent on the war is money well spent. We can get it all back and more from their oil. Chkchka says that the Iraq war is a waste of money. I disagree. We are fighting a war against a country, the majority of whose people are on our side. We are taking care not to kill too many of the good guys. Unfortunately, that costs us more casualties, and drags the war out longer. The Democrats criticize every move that is made, just for the sake of criticizm. To please the Democrats, and obtain speedy victory, would mean decimating the Iraqi people. That could be accomplished in a few days. If they were in power, they would not do that either. Power is all that they want. In time of war we should forget politics, and pull together. The Democrats will live to regret what they have done.

 

 

We had Iraq under our thumb. Bush's reasoning for invading Iraq was WMD. Remember that bullshit? Oh whoops, never found none of that. On to the backup plan. We are there to free an oppressed people. That'd be the shiite's and kurds? Unfortunately when we leave, the Shiites(who are allied with Iran) will oppress the Sunni's and kurds. All we did was waste a bunch of young american lives and money to fuck up the balance in the middle east and give Iran a new ally. Do you people read anything besides what Bush or Limbaugh or O'riley says? Ignorant fuckers.

[NLPRacing]

We had Iraq under our thumb. Bush's reasoning for invading Iraq was WMD. Remember that bullshit? Oh whoops, never found none of that. On to the backup plan. We are there to free an oppressed people. That'd be the shiite's and kurds? Unfortunately when we leave, the Shiites(who are allied with Iran) will oppress the Sunni's and kurds. All we did was waste a bunch of young american lives and money to fuck up the balance in the middle east and give Iran a new ally. Do you people read anything besides what Bush or Limbaugh or O'riley says? Ignorant fuckers.

 

Warning, sarcasm ahead...

 

Saddam and Bin Laden were buddies. Now that we invaded & occupied a country that had NOTHING to do with 9/11, we are now safer because it is the "war on terror" and it's "better to fight them there then here". What the hell is a Shiite, Sunni or Kurd anyway? Aren't they all effin raghead Islamic something or others?

 

Sarcasm over...

 

What bullshit. Hopefully this crap will make people want to do a little more research before voting.

[fmccap]

No offense intended towards Canada, but this will be your tax structure............and worse, if you do NOT wake up soon. And even most of their citizens on here will tell ya, the program is SOCIALIST!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Just another thought.

Socialism

1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.

3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism[/b], characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

 

Socialism

1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

2. The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.

 

Like I've said before, It's right in front of your face, just open your eyes and look.

Edited December 16, 2006 by fmccap

[Trimdingman]

We had Iraq under our thumb. Bush's reasoning for invading Iraq was WMD. Remember that bullshit? Oh whoops, never found none of that. On to the backup plan. We are there to free an oppressed people. That'd be the shiite's and kurds? Unfortunately when we leave, the Shiites(who are allied with Iran) will oppress the Sunni's and kurds. All we did was waste a bunch of young american lives and money to fuck up the balance in the middle east and give Iran a new ally. Do you people read anything besides what Bush or Limbaugh or O'riley says? Ignorant fuckers.

 

[The above words are not mine. I am quoting chkchka.]

 

"WMD" is a red herring that the left is using to evade the issue. The war is, and always has been, against terror. Terrorists are in Iraq, are they not? They are blowing people up almost on a daily basis, so they must be. You cannot prove a negative; so the left cannot prove that there are no WMDs. It is a stupid term to keep harping on, anyway. The training bases were in Afghanistan. The product is in Iraq. Just open your eyes. We WANT to "fuck up the balance in the Middle East". We want to get rid of the dictators, and give them Democracy, so that there will be no more terrorists. Otherwise, in twenty years or so, they will defeat us, or at least give us a run for our money. Taking them out twenty years down the road would cost tens of millions of lives. It is best that we do it now. If we had taken out the Nazis in 1936, many millions of lives would have been saved, or are you on their side, too? Iran is.

 

You are afraid that the enemy will get mad at us, and get new allies? That is what we want. We need to take them all out, whoever they are. You must have a soft spot for these creatures. Naziism=Fascism=Communism=Muslim Tyrrany. Socialists envy them. Freedom to a socialist is like a cross to Dracula. They can't make it, so they need to be supported by those who can. They need to be ruled by a dictator who will take hard-working peoples' money and give a little of it to them. Losers like to stick it to winners, even if it costs them. Socialists make me sick.

Edited December 16, 2006 by Trimdingman

[Imawhosure]

How do rich people provide jobs? By buying foreign luxury cars? Vacationing in Europe? Investing in foreign companies? The lower and middle class provide our jobs. They are the ones buying American cars. Not the yuppie BMW/Mercedes/Acura fucks.

 

Because fool, the rich people OWN the companys!!!!!!!!!

 

I know, lets collapse all the rich peoples companys, and we will work for the poor and middle class.

 

Ok, bye Bill Gates, bye Bill Ford, and the list goes on and on.

 

I am not suggesting the middle class is NOT the economic engine, I am telling you that the RICH are the ones who own the companys who produce the goods that they buy!!!!!!

 

Get smart will you!!!!!!

 

As you have already noticed, the rich can make their stuff elsewhere, then send it here to be sold while still living in their million plus homes, and sailing their yachts.

 

What do you want to do about it?!?!?!?!?!?! Why screw them more of course, making more of them send their factorys and manufacturing businesses offshore. BRILLIANT, absolutely BRILLIANT!!!!!!!

 

You are so caught up in screwing them instead of making your life better, you can't see the forest through the trees. People who think like you have such tunnelvision, it is unbelievable. You insist upon saving everyone, at the expense of giving YOU PERSONALLY the inability to save no one; including yourself.

 

All this rolled into the theory of a vendetta that, "it's just not fair!"

 

I am not going to tell you that during Clinton things were not good! What I am going to tell you is------------>the federal government continues to take MORE of your wealth, regardless of what party is in power........or, they let you have it, and run a huge deficit.

 

This is not about Clinton and Bush as you want to portray it, nor is it about repubs and dems as you would also like to paint it; this is about how much money you actually give your government, and how much more they want!!!!!!!!!!

 

Tell all of us------------->at what percentage of YOUR income will you decide you are now paying to much!!!

 

I say, a total of 40% is pushing it.(in overall taxes MOST of us already pay more than that!)

 

What do you say, cause at some point they gonna reach it, and probably very soon, then like most intelligent people you will become an ally instead of a nay saying debater!!!!!!

[fmccap]

Statement from the Directo of Fiscal policy

Such a program of substantial spending cuts would likely be opposed by current benefit recipients. But it should be noted that Americans will be substantially wealthier in the future than in the past, which will provide greater scope to make the needed cuts to entitlements and other programs. For example, real per-capita GDP is expected to grow at at least 1.7 percent during the next few decades, a rate that would double U.S. living standards in the next 40 years. As income levels rise, there should be less need for government transfers for retirement, health care, housing, education, and other programs.

 

Conclusion

 

In closing, let me challenge both parties to revisit some of their budget restraint efforts from the mid-1990s. The Republicans should live up to their pledge in the 1994 Contract with America to "restore fiscal responsibility to an out-of-control Congress, requiring them to live under the same budget constraints as families and businesses."15 And I'd like to see all policymakers take to heart President Clinton's 1995 State of the Union message: "Let's change the government-let's make it smaller, less costly and smarter."

 

 

Are Future Deficits Caused by Revenue Shortfalls or Spending Increases?

 

Projections of large future budget deficits are based on rapidly rising spending, not a shortage of revenues. Assuming that the Bush tax cuts are made permanent and the alternative minimum tax is fixed, federal revenues as a percentage of GDP will steadily rise from 16.2 percent in FY2004 to about 18 percent by FY2013. Since 1970, revenues as a percentage of GDP have averaged 18.2 percent.11 Thus, the Bush tax cuts do not starve the government for funds, and revenues will slowly and steadily rise over time due to "real bracket creep" under the income tax.

 

Looking at the spending side of the budget, outlays have increased from 18.4 percent of GDP in FY2000 to 20.5 percent today. Recent spending increases are higher than usually recognized. That is because interest costs have fallen substantially since the late 1990s, which has partly offset increases in program spending. For example, total federal outlays rose $147 billion in FY2002, but outlays excluding interest, or actual spending on programs, rose $182 billion.

 

Looking far ahead to 2040, outlays will rise from 20.5 percent of GDP today to more than 28 percent, given the CBO's current entitlement projections and assuming that the rest of government stays at the same size relative to the economy.13 That means that without spending reforms the government will claim at least a 37 percent greater share of the average American's income by 2040 than today.

Edited December 16, 2006 by fmccap

[fmccap]

Use of RFID in ePassport and National ID Cards Coming Under Fire

When's it going to stop?

The Real ID Act enacted by Congress last year mandates that every state overhaul its driver's license ID card system by 2008.

 

The act requires real-time authentication for documents such as birth certificates and social security cards—which would require a massive electronic, interoperable network—and the creation of a national database to store the electronic data gathered at the state level.

Another waste of money.

Sen. Akaka pointed to a study by the National Governor's Association that estimated states would have to come up with a total of about $11 billion each to implement the necessary infrastructure to verify information electronically.

 

And before you tell me that it's for our security and to make us safe.

"For some reason State has been deeply committed to ePassport despite the fact that there is no benefit at all from the technology," said Harper, in Washington. "It will take a relatively long time for them to fail at it. A program has to fail consistently over several years, or maybe many years, for a system to fail [within the State Department]. Rarely is there a, 'oh, this doesn't work, let's move on.' It will just fail for several years, and finally be abandoned."

 

And all the while the sheep just shovel out money.

[Big Ed]

In case you haven't noticed, the politicians are the top 1% or are bought by the top 1%. You probably are not even in the top 10% yet you still feel that the elite need a tax cut? Then you call tax brackets socialist? The middle class is shrinking(that's you and me jackass), and we are becoming a tertiary society of a few have's and the majority havenot's. When the lower class becomes the majority, you can expect a sudden and drastic distribution of wealth(revolution). But by all means keep believing the propaganda and be happy being manipulated by the man.

 

You are truly a mindnumb robot following the propaganda of the dems and of the UAW. Thats a shame because you , like them you have forgotten how the dems controlled the house and the senate for 40 years from 64 to 2004, and in that time they also had control of the oval office with Johnson ,Carter , Clinton and in all that time they did nothing to protect the working man. Remember the amount of inflation that Carter left us with, And it was Carter that signed the bill allowing big business to file bankruptcy and continue to operate while throwing union contracts out the door. It took Reaganomics 12yrs to straighten out his 4 yrs of screwing the people, and it will take even longer to fix the crap Clinton left us with.

Know this, you can strip all the people in the US of their money and property and start them all out with a clean slate and within 20 years the poor of before will still be poor , the mid -class will again be mid-class and the rich will once again be rich, because they are rich because they are smarter than you. Economic power will always follow intelectual power .

[fmccap]

Some Americans Abroad Turn in Passports

I don’t care if I die with only one Swiss franc to my name, but the U.S. shouldn’t get money I earned here when I die.â€

But after Congress sharply raised taxes this year for many Americans living abroad, some international tax lawyers say they detect rising demand from citizens to renounce ties with the United States, the only developed country that taxes it citizens while they live overseas. Americans abroad are also taxed in the countries where they live.

 

“The administrative costs of being an American and living outside the U.S. have gone up dramatically,†said Marnin Michaels, a tax lawyer with Baker & McKenzie in Zurich.