Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 56

Thread: Cut Military or Raise Taxes, take your pick

  1. #1

    Default Cut Military or Raise Taxes, take your pick

    In my view the battle lines for 2016, and in general the soul of the Republican party are being drawn.

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...ers/?hpt=hp_t1

    Anti-tax activist Grover Norquist said Monday that his group, Americans for Tax Reform, would work to unseat Republicans who break their pledge to never vote for higher taxes.
    Do you raise taxes to pay for military and foreign aid?

    Nut case war mongers & Israel firsters like Lindsey Graham and Peter King certainly think that war is worth raising taxes.

    The GOP's got to decide whether or not it's actually for small government or merely big military.
    Last edited by furface; 11-26-2012 at 12:40 PM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    Peter King is a terrorist sympathizer. I'd love to see him go.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Eze 22:25 There's a conspiracy of prophets within her....

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.

  4. #3

    Default

    Sadly, I think this was the message which fell off the radar after the elections.

    Republicans still don't get it. You can't just attack domestic spending and ignore military spending.
    If something bad happens, we will be blamed. If something good happens, we will get no credit. If nothing happens, we will be forgotten.

  5. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nobody's_hero View Post
    Sadly, I think this was the message which fell off the radar after the elections.

    Republicans still don't get it. You can't just attack domestic spending and ignore military spending.
    Ignore it?! Hell, they had some presidential candidate out there talking about INCREASING it! More than even the military wanted!
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

  6. #5
    Truth is treason ... Occam's Banana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Empire of Lies
    Posts
    7,214
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Anti-tax activist Grover Norquist said Monday that his group, Americans for Tax Reform, would work to unseat Republicans who break their pledge to never vote for higher taxes.
    Good man! Make the bastards feel the pain. It's the only language they understand.

    Let Chambliss & Co. spout their nonsense about how they "must" raise taxes because they "care" so much about the country.

    Norquist has been doing this long enough that he seems unlikely to sell out at this point. (Unlike that idiot Amy Kremer who basically told the GOP that they could safely ignore her and her tea party org because she & her org would support whoever the Republican nominee turned out to be, no matter what).

    Grover knows the score. This whole scenario is a textbook example of what Michael Rothfeld talks about here: http://training4liberty.org/facl2/info.htm

    and here:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QCzww6EG7E



    Give 'em hell, Grover!
    quod omnes tangit, ab omnibus approbetur · fiat justitia, ruat caelum · sic semper tyrannis
    The Bastiat Collection - FREE PDF

    Frιdιric Bastiat
    • "When law and morality are in contradiction to each other, the citizen finds himself in the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense, or of losing his respect for the law."
      - The Law (p. 54)
    • "Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
      - Government (p. 99)
    • "[W]ar is always begun in the interest of the few, and at the expense of the many."
      - Economic Sophisms - Second Series (p. 312)
    • "There are two principles that can never be reconciled - Liberty and Constraint."
      - Harmonies of Political Economy - Book One (p. 447)

  7. #6
    Member Zippyjuan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Hosting FEMA Party
    Posts
    18,562

    Default

    Let's check the math. Can we balance the budget without raising taxes? (let's assume that this is a goal though I am not convinced it really is). What and where do we cut?

    Try to take $1.3 trillion from this (figures for 2010- latest I can find with a nice breakdown and $1.3 trillion was the shortfall for that year). If we skip Defense and Social Security/ Medicare stuff (voters won't like you if you touch them)you have to cut $1.3 trillion out of $715 billion in spending. Can't be done. We can let you keep about $78 billion for defense if we cut everything else to zero (keeping Social Security/ Medicare) and not worry about raising taxes.

    Mandatory spending: $2.173 trillion (+14.9%)

    $695 billion (+4.9%) – Social Security
    $571 billion (+58.6%) – Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending
    $453 billion (+6.6%) – Medicare
    $290 billion (+12.0%) – Medicaid
    $164 billion (+18.0%) – Interest on National Debt


    Discretionary spending: $1.378 trillion (+13.8%)

    $663.7 billion (+12.7%) - Department of Defense (including Overseas Contingency Operations)
    $78.7 billion (−1.7%) – Department of Health and Human Services
    $72.5 billion (+2.8%) – Department of Transportation
    $52.5 billion (+10.3%) – Department of Veterans Affairs
    $51.7 billion (+40.9%) – Department of State and Other International Programs
    $47.5 billion (+18.5%) – Department of Housing and Urban Development
    $46.7 billion (+12.8%) – Department of Education
    $42.7 billion (+1.2%) – Department of Homeland Security
    $26.3 billion (−0.4%) – Department of Energy
    $26.0 billion (+8.8%) – Department of Agriculture
    $23.9 billion (−6.3%) – Department of Justice
    $18.7 billion (+5.1%) – National Aeronautics and Space Administration
    $13.8 billion (+48.4%) – Department of Commerce
    $13.3 billion (+4.7%) – Department of Labor
    $13.3 billion (+4.7%) – Department of the Treasury
    $12.0 billion (+6.2%) – Department of the Interior
    $10.5 billion (+34.6%) – Environmental Protection Agency
    $9.7 billion (+10.2%) – Social Security Administration
    $7.0 billion (+1.4%) – National Science Foundation
    $5.1 billion (−3.8%) – Corps of Engineers
    $5.0 billion (+100%-NA) – National Infrastructure Bank
    $1.1 billion (+22.2%) – Corporation for National and Community Service
    $0.7 billion (0.0%) – Small Business Administration
    $0.6 billion (−14.3%) – General Services Administration
    $0 billion (−100%-NA) – Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)
    $0 billion (−100%-NA) – Financial stabilization efforts
    $11 billion (+275%-NA) – Potential disaster costs
    $19.8 billion (+3.7%) – Other Agencies
    $105 billion – Other
    Last edited by Zippyjuan; 11-26-2012 at 02:23 PM.
    I am Zippy and I approve of this message. But you don't have to.

  8. #7

    Default

    $78 billion for defense?

    I think that is sufficient. Simply defend the country and leave it that.
    Quote Originally Posted by torchbearer View Post
    the government is my servant.
    I am not its servant.
    Quote Originally Posted by aGameOfThrones View Post
    They are there to eat doughnuts and fuck people up and throw them in jail... and they're all out of doughnuts.
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    Yes, they did.

    The warnings were simply ignored.

    They were warned by men called the Anti Federalists.

  9. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    $78 billion for defense?

    I think that is sufficient. Simply defend the country and leave it that.
    Yes, this can handle the nuclear arsenal (or close, IIRC). Also, they should gut SS/medica**.

  10. #9

    Default

    I think the deficit will be about $1 trillion for fiscal 2013.

    http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/...cit_chart.html

    $78 billion for defense?

    I think that is sufficient. Simply defend the country and leave it that.
    I agree with that. Cut or eliminate military & a few other hidden military programs like Homeland Security, NASA, & Department of State, & Dept of Energy. Things like Dept of Education? Do we really need that at a federal level?

    Then there's the question of how taxation is carried out. These are my suggestions:

    1. Move towards taxing truly wealthy people instead of people who merely make a few hundred thousand dollars in a single year. We used to have something called "income averaging." Bringing that back would be a good start. My guess is that it would be difficult, though, because tax laws are written by people with steady incomes like career government officials & government union representatives.

    2. Move towards a true consumption tax, where you tax natural resource consumption, not the "Fair Tax" which is an only slightly better form of the income tax.

    3. Tax imported goods that don't meet labor & environmental quality standards that we force American manufacturers to adhere to.

    4. Allow people to keep more of what they make in order to become financially secure so they won't have to rely on governments to make a living.

    5. Not directly a tax issue, but work to bring competitiveness into the medical industry, which is eating up huge portions of individual and business budgets. The lack of medical competitiveness is a defacto tax.

    6. Also not directly a tax issue, but have true tort reform so that people can be free to take risks and innovate in order to boost the economy. Lawsuits are a defacto tax written by the same people who write tax laws.

    Well, that's my list.
    Last edited by furface; 11-26-2012 at 04:24 PM.

  11. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    $78 billion for defense?

    I think that is sufficient. Simply defend the country and leave it that.
    Yep, that would eliminate the offense spending they are always forgetting about.

  12. #11

    Default

    If we cut our military spending... the terrorists will get us =(

  13. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alucard13mmfmj View Post
    If we cut our military spending... the terrorists will get us =(
    Maybe, just maybe if we quit offending them, they will leave us alone.

  14. #13

    Default

    The department of Veteran Affairs budget alone has grown incredibily large.
    http://www.va.gov/budget/docs/summar...et_Rollout.pdf

    FY 2013

    • The budget request for 2013 is:
    – Total budget $140.3 billion (+10.5%)
    – Mandatory budget $76.3 billion (+16.2%)
    – Discretionary budget $64 billion (+4.5%)
    • Medical Care request is $165 million above the enacted Advance

    Appropriations level

    2014
    • Request for Medical Care Advance Appropriations is $ 1.8 billion (3.3%)
    above the 2013 request
    Last edited by HOLLYWOOD; 11-26-2012 at 05:20 PM.
    The American Dream, Wake Up People, This is our country! <===click

    "All eyes are opened, or opening to the rights of man, let the annual return of this day(July 4th), forever refresh our recollections of these rights, and an undiminished devotion to them."
    Thomas Jefferson
    June 1826



    Rock The World!
    USAF Veteran

  15. #14

    Default

    Good, Lindsey is just making 2014 look better and better all the time. Maybe Grover can help Davis take down Graham.

  16. #15

    Default

    welp....I guess the average American is getting a tax increase then....
    Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect - Mark Twain

    Why Government Doesn't Work

    The American Ideal of 1776: The Twelve Basic American Principles

  17. #16

    Default

    All we can do is try and turn it around...however...

    ''Why did Rome Fall?

    There are adherents to single factors, but more people think a combination of such factors as Christianity, decadence, lead, monetary trouble, and military problems caused the Fall of Rome. Imperial incompetence and chance could be added to the list. Even the rise of Islam is proposed as the reason for Rome's fall, by some who think the Fall of Rome happened at Constantinople in A.D. 1453.''
    “Tyrants and empires cling desperately, and their best weapon is lying.”

    ---Ron Paul

  18. #17

    Default

    does Norquist ever emphasize defense cuts?

    imo, he lacks credibility if he does not

  19. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by surf View Post
    does Norquist ever emphasize defense cuts?

    imo, he lacks credibility if he does not
    http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/po...efense_budgets

    "We can afford to have an adequate national defense which keeps us free and safe and keeps everybody afraid to throw a punch at us, as long as we don't make some of the decisions that previous administrations have, which is to over extend ourselves overseas and think we can run foreign governments," Norquist said Monday at an event at the Center for the National Interest, formerly the Nixon Center.
    Seriously, I think this is a major ideological issue that's going to have to be fought out in the Republican party. The time to start is right now for support for small government, which includes small standing military. It will be important in 2014 & 2016 to increase representation of small government oriented legislators & presidential candidates like Rand Paul.
    Last edited by furface; 11-27-2012 at 01:24 PM.

  20. #19

    Default

    I was at a party in Beverly Hills over the weekend. As demographics would suggest most of the people there voted for Romney. This drunk guy started rambling on about how the only thing the Republicans have left is "defense," like they've lost on all their federal policy issues like taxation, but at least they can keep their beloved defense budget.

    I don't drink, so I was stone sober and asked him about why military was so important to him. My question turned into a bunch of drunken fools screaming at me and accusing me of being a "liberal" because I wanted lower military budgets. When I pointed out that I was for lower taxes and they all were the ones who seemed "liberal" because of them wanting higher taxes to support bloated military budgets, I got a bunch of alcohol fueled epithets in return.

    That's about the extent of it. Republicans drunk with the hubris of their failed policies. In fact I would say that Republicans don't have policies at all anymore. They have a point of view, which is that they don't want to pay taxes, but they still want to get rich with their own set of government handouts including military contracting & monetary monopolies. At least Democrats stand for something, which is why they increasingly continue to win in every demographic that is growing.

  21. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Land of Indians
    Posts
    23,528

    Default

    Military spending can be cut , so can taxes , so can everything else.

  22. #21

    Default

    If California agreed to raise their own damn taxes (without cuts).. I am sure the rest of America will agree to it too

  23. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alucard13mmfmj View Post
    If California agreed to raise their own damn taxes (without cuts).. I am sure the rest of America will agree to it too
    I attribute this to Republicans losing their focus, which should be small government. If Republicans were pure in their ideology, people would take them more seriously. As it is people see them as hypocrites. They claim to be in favor of small government, yet push for huge militaries and big, gnarly police forces + prison states chasing after things like the war on drugs.

    A more libertarian Republican party would have more credibility and thus the ability to sway people with their arguments.

  24. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by furface View Post
    I attribute this to Republicans losing their focus, which should be small government. If Republicans were pure in their ideology, people would take them more seriously. As it is people see them as hypocrites. They claim to be in favor of small government, yet push for huge militaries and big, gnarly police forces + prison states chasing after things like the war on drugs.

    A more libertarian Republican party would have more credibility and thus the ability to sway people with their arguments.
    I am a lil bit angry about it. State sales tax increase AND income tax increase starting jan 2013.

  25. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alucard13mmfmj View Post
    I am a lil bit angry about it. State sales tax increase AND income tax increase starting jan 2013.
    To pay to enrich the largest idle/affluent class in history, US public sector unions. Republicans have failed to get this message across. At the federal level it's because too many Republicans & too much Republican money comes from people & entities that benefit from federal over spending.

    At the CA state level it's because Republicans are in bed with "public safety" and prison unions. CA Democrats are linked to school + administrative unions, Republicans to "public safety." A few libertarian leaning politicians are attempting to change the situation, but it's going very slowly in CA.

    That's my take on what's going on. Too many people leeching off the system. Public sector unions, private contractors, & monetary monopolists including banks & investment houses.
    Last edited by furface; 12-04-2012 at 01:20 PM.

  26. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alucard13mmfmj View Post
    I am a lil bit angry about it. State sales tax increase AND income tax increase starting jan 2013.
    Is there a reason you don't move?

  27. #26

    Default

    The best way to defend the country would to have a well regulated militia and the right to bear arms.
    Definition of political insanity: Voting for the same people expecting different results.

  28. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    Is there a reason you don't move?
    These 'just move' comments are getting a little ridiculous, IMO. I would say the vast majority of Americans are not financially stable to move to another state. (This rant isn't entirely directed towards you. I've just been seeing this comment a lot lately and finally decided to respond.)

    One- Moving out of state costs a lot of money. Most people don't have the kind of savings to afford this, let alone to live off of while looking for employment.

    Two- Family. Many people can't simply up and go because they have obligations to their kids, parents, etc. Not to mention it is always a good idea to have family nearby to fall back on should something unexpected happen. (House burning down, medical problems, etc.)

    Three- Chances are it is not going to be any better where ever you happen to end up. The risk does not come close to the reward of a few hundred to few thousand dollars a year savings on taxes. Not unless you are offered a hell of a job that would be considered a sure thing is it at all wise to move out of state.

    Meant with all due respect tod evans. I've seen this comment a few times too many times and really don't believe it to be feasible to the majority of the population. And even if it was finanically feasible for one to just up and move to New Hampshire, it is not emotionally feasible for a lot of people to travel too far away from family and what they consider home.
    Last edited by kcchiefs6465; 12-04-2012 at 01:58 PM.
    As for those who said: "Let us eliminate every injustice, for there is no such thing as a partial injustice; let us tolerate no robbery, for there is no such thing as a half-robbery or a quarter-robbery," they were regarded as idle visionaries, tiresome dreamers who kept repeating the same thing over and over again. Besides, the people found their arguments too easy to understand. How can one believe that what is so simple can be true?

  29. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elwar View Post
    The best way to defend the country would to have a well regulated militia and the right to bear arms.
    Amen. Unban automatic rifles and they'd see what would happen if someone rolled up on our shores.
    Last edited by kcchiefs6465; 12-04-2012 at 01:59 PM.
    As for those who said: "Let us eliminate every injustice, for there is no such thing as a partial injustice; let us tolerate no robbery, for there is no such thing as a half-robbery or a quarter-robbery," they were regarded as idle visionaries, tiresome dreamers who kept repeating the same thing over and over again. Besides, the people found their arguments too easy to understand. How can one believe that what is so simple can be true?

  30. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Let's check the math. Can we balance the budget without raising taxes? (let's assume that this is a goal though I am not convinced it really is). What and where do we cut?

    Try to take $1.3 trillion from this (figures for 2010- latest I can find with a nice breakdown and $1.3 trillion was the shortfall for that year). If we skip Defense and Social Security/ Medicare stuff (voters won't like you if you touch them)you have to cut $1.3 trillion out of $715 billion in spending. Can't be done. We can let you keep about $78 billion for defense if we cut everything else to zero (keeping Social Security/ Medicare) and not worry about raising taxes.
    Keep in mind U.S. military spending is much more than simply Department of Defense spending. Look at analysis here:
    http://antiwar.com/blog/2012/02/20/t...et-1-trillion/

    or here:

    http://www.alternet.org/story/150401...get?paging=off


    To answer your question....yes we can balance the budget. Ron Paul's plan balanced it in year 3.
    The Heart of Conservatism is Libertarianism - Ronald Reagan

  31. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JK/SEA View Post
    All we can do is try and turn it around...however...

    ''Why did Rome Fall?

    There are adherents to single factors, but more people think a combination of such factors as Christianity, decadence, lead, monetary trouble, and military problems caused the Fall of Rome. Imperial incompetence and chance could be added to the list. Even the rise of Islam is proposed as the reason for Rome's fall, by some who think the Fall of Rome happened at Constantinople in A.D. 1453.''
    Well Rome did fell in Carigrad/Constantinople in 1453,and the only reason Carigrad/Constantinople lasted almost 1000 years more than Rome although facing much more powerful enemies on all fronts is because unlike the west the East never inflated their currency and always used gold and silver as their currency of choice + having a more local structure of direct governance + no religious unrest.But the decadence problem was one they inherited and in the end it destroyed them.
    Last edited by Demigod; 12-04-2012 at 02:39 PM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast




« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •