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

Thread: Cut Military or Raise Taxes, take your pick

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    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 01:40 PM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Peter King is a terrorist sympathizer. I'd love to see him go.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "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

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- 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.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  4. #3
    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.
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    This is getting silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It started silly.
    T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men

    "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." - Plato

    We Are Running Out of Time - Mini Me

    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm
    I part ways with "libertarianism" when it transitions from ideology grounded in logic into self-defeating autism for the sake of ideological purity.

  5. #4
    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
    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.

    At least not for more than fifty or sixty years or so.



    It sticks out like a sore thumb where they went to war against everyone about everything, does it not?

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Carson View Post
    At least not for more than fifty or sixty years or so.

    It sticks out like a sore thumb where they went to war against everyone about everything, does it not?
    Do you have any idea how they calculated inflation before 1913? Not that I doubt this graph; I was just curious.
    Last edited by kcchiefs6465; 12-04-2012 at 10:30 PM.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    Do you have any idea how they calculated inflation before 1913? Not that I doubt this graph; I was just curious.

    No. I wouldn't see why you would have to. Money was real. It was what it was until a war came along and people wouldn't' show up unless they counterfeited some money.

    Actually I read some of the Doctors stuff and his explanation years ago about how it was put together. Even then, like now, I mostly like it because it feels right. It mirrors what I've felt happen in my life time and the impression I've had of the history I've heard about.


    Robert Sahr main page;

    http://oregonstate.edu/cla/polisci/node/87


    2012 inflation conversion factor revision;

    http://oregonfuture.oregonstate.edu/...isci/sahr/sahr


    Individual Year Conversion Factor Tables ( I don't see as far back as 1913 );

    http://oregonstate.edu/cla/polisci/i...-factor-tables


    Answer; Oh Yah. Here we go.

    Note: In tiny type at the bottom of the chart it says,

    "Calculations for 1665 to 1912 use data adapted from John J. McCusker, "How Much Is That in Real Money?," Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society (2001) , Table A-1.
    Calculations starting 1913 are based on CPI data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.


    And then there is the way it goes so well with this chart I found showing the Dow Jones Industrial Average.



    It trips me out that all of my life I thought the DOW meant something totally different when it went up. These two charts together really opened my eyes to the what the counterfeiting by the central banks has been doing.

    Are you seeing it?

    When they double the money supply by counterfeiting, sure you get twice as many dollars when you sell your stock, but they are worth half as much! Then on top of it the government that has been behind a lot of it cuts themselves in on your stuff through capital gains taxes! It's insidious. (What ever that word means.)

    Anyway if your still not seeing the charts move hand in hand pretend the DOW is made up of one hundred stocks. Now divide the 13000 at the top and the 500 at the bottom by 100 by knocking off two zeros and then compare with the chart showing it now taking about 130 dollars to do what it used to take 5. Pretty darn close anyway.

    Once I caught onto this it has helped me put so many pieces of the puzzle, of the way the world works, together for myself.

  9. #8
    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!
    The Bastiat Collection · FREE PDF · FREE EPUB · PAPER
    Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850)

    • "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)

    · tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito ·



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    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 03:23 PM.

  12. #10
    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

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Kregisen View Post
    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.
    Ron's plan also assumed that revenues (tax collections) rose 24% over those three years. That is a pretty significant amount.
    Last edited by Zippyjuan; 12-04-2012 at 07:37 PM.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Ron's plan also assumed that revenues (tax collections) rose 24% over those three years. That is a pretty significant amount.
    How would you propose to answer this million (trillion, rather) dollar question Zippy?
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    How would you propose to answer this million (trillion, rather) dollar question Zippy?
    It is incredibly difficult. If your want to balance the budget with tax increases only you would have to double the current income tax. If you want to do it by cuts only and leave off Social Security and Medicare/ Medicaid, you basically have to cut 100% of everything including defense. Neither is realistic therefor it must include everything- making changes in the social programs (any savings would come in the future on that) and you must have cuts in other things and you must raise taxes.

  16. #14
    Everything from NASA to state university research and development is also military spending. The one that really chaffs my hide is the military contractors can use the public university school system for free research and development. When the product is finished the contractor gets the copyrights and all profits after the taxpayers paid all the R&D.

    Foreign Aid is also military contractor welfare. All but a tiny percentage of foreign aid is in military arms. Most of them go to countries who already have military's stronger than any of their potential threats.

  17. #15
    $78 billion for defense?

    I think that is sufficient. Simply defend the country and leave it that.
    "The Patriarch"

  18. #16
    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**.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    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 05:24 PM.

  21. #18
    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.

  22. #19
    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.

  23. #20
    $663.7 billion (+12.7%) - Department of Defense (including Overseas Contingency Operations)

    448.8 BILLION CUTS

    =================

    214.9 = same Defence budget as Russia and China COMBINED http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...y_expenditures

    'We endorse the idea of voluntarism; self-responsibility: Family, friends, and churches to solve problems, rather than saying that some monolithic government is going to make you take care of yourself and be a better person. It's a preposterous notion: It never worked, it never will. The government can't make you a better person; it can't make you follow good habits.' - Ron Paul 1988

    Awareness is the Root of Liberation Revolution is Action upon Revelation

    'Resistance and Disobedience in Economic Activity is the Most Moral Human Action Possible' - SEK3

    Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo.

    ...the familiar ritual of institutional self-absolution...
    ...for protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment...


  24. #21
    If we cut our military spending... the terrorists will get us =(

  25. #22
    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.

  26. #23
    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 06:20 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

  27. #24
    Good, Lindsey is just making 2014 look better and better all the time. Maybe Grover can help Davis take down Graham.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    welp....I guess the average American is getting a tax increase then....
    The wisdom of Swordy:

    On bringing the troops home
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    They are coming home, all the naysayers said they would never leave Syria and then they said they were going to stay in Iraq forever.

    It won't take very long to get them home but it won't be overnight either but Iraq says they can't stay and they are coming home just like Trump said.

    On fighting corruption:
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Trump had to donate the "right way" and hang out with the "right people" in order to do business in NYC and Hollyweird and in order to investigate and expose them.
    Fascism Defined

  30. #26
    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.''

  31. #27
    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 03:39 PM.

  32. #28
    does Norquist ever emphasize defense cuts?

    imo, he lacks credibility if he does not

  33. #29
    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 02:24 PM.

  34. #30
    Military spending can be cut , so can taxes , so can everything else.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. My City Taxes include curbside trash pick up. If.....
    By Schifference in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12-05-2013, 06:46 PM
  2. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-03-2013, 03:51 PM
  3. Don't raise taxes!!! ???
    By Sematary in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 08-02-2011, 04:23 PM
  4. Billionaires: Raise My Taxes!
    By Brian4Liberty in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 04-25-2011, 07:58 PM
  5. Maybe we should raise taxes?
    By RonPaulCult in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 11-13-2010, 07:58 PM

Posting Permissions

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