How to Fix Our Democracy

twofbyc

Hall of Fame
Oct 14, 2009
12,195
3,329
187
in general, catastrophic and other plans were able to be grandfathered in
Still trying to confuse morons with facts, I see. You get an A for effort.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,157
44,878
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
Last edited:

Clubfitter

Hall of Fame
Feb 21, 2009
6,494
0
55
Meridianville, Al
www.amtrustwebsite.com
However if the creation of those widgets produces a toxin that destroys the water table for 100 miles around the widget plant or causes children to be born with 3 heads then the government is just about the only entity that can theoretically hold the creator of those widgets responsible and help make sure other widget producers aren't destroying other things. Yes there are lawsuits but when you're talking about huge corporations they have mostly proven to be a non-deterrent.

The Constitution was written in a world without things that could so easily have global consequences.

I'm perfectly good with limits to government intervention and rolling back a lot of it, but to say that all government intervention should be done away with because it's not in the Constitution is attempting to live in a past that no longer exists in a modern world.
One of the major issues that always comes up in any debate is, Do we need more government or less government. Objectivity usually carries no weight in any debate these days because we are so polarized. I think Milton Friedman addresses this best in the following youtube; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2KHvGW0KaM
 

BamaInMo1

All-American
Oct 27, 2006
2,012
481
102
53
Cumming, GA
"Still trying to confuse morons with facts, I see. You get an A for effort."

And calling people morons simply because they do not agree with you does exactly what to carry this conversation forward in a meaningful manner how?


 

twofbyc

Hall of Fame
Oct 14, 2009
12,195
3,329
187
"Still trying to confuse morons with facts, I see. You get an A for effort."

And calling people morons simply because they do not agree with you does exactly what to carry this conversation forward in a meaningful manner how?


You confuse me with someone who’s interested in carrying on a conversation with anyone who distorts reality and refuse to acknowledge facts.
Try again - with someone who’s OK with banging their head against a brick wall.
Join the club.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Bamaro

TideFans Legend
Oct 19, 2001
26,561
10,622
287
Jacksonville, Md USA
One of the major issues that always comes up in any debate is, Do we need more government or less government. Objectivity usually carries no weight in any debate these days because we are so polarized. I think Milton Friedman addresses this best in the following youtube; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2KHvGW0KaM
The real question is not more or less, it's better or worse.
 

Tidewater

Hall of Fame
Mar 15, 2003
22,401
13,177
287
Hooterville, Vir.
The real question is not more or less, it's better or worse.
I think we are on the verge of getting a whole lot less government, regardless of whether it is good or bad.

WSJ said:
In 2017, interest costs on federal debt of $263 billion accounted for 6.6% of all government spending and 1.4% of gross domestic product, well below averages of the previous 50 years. The Congressional Budget Office estimates interest spending will rise to $915 billion by 2028, or 13% of all outlays and 3.1% of gross domestic product. Along that path, the government is expected to pass the following milestones: It will spend more on interest than it spends on Medicaid in 2020; more in 2023 than it spends on national defense; and more in 2025 than it spends on all nondefense discretionary programs combined, from funding for national parks to scientific research, to health care and education, to the court system and infrastructure, according to the CBO.
Here we go.
This could be an event on par with the collapse of the western Roman Empire in terms of its impact on world history.
 

twofbyc

Hall of Fame
Oct 14, 2009
12,195
3,329
187
I think we are on the verge of getting a whole lot less government, regardless of whether it is good or bad.


Here we go.
This could be an event on par with the collapse of the western Roman Empire in terms of its impact on world history.
Aw, heck, let’s just give the rich another tax cut. That’ll fix it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Tidewater

Hall of Fame
Mar 15, 2003
22,401
13,177
287
Hooterville, Vir.
Aw, heck, let’s just give the rich another tax cut. That’ll fix it.
In fairness, the last six years of the Obama Administration set records for the collection of Federal revenues.

FY 2017 - $3.32 trillion.*
FY 2016 - $3.27 trillion.*
FY 2015 - $3.25 trillion.*
FY 2014 - $3.02 trillion.*
FY 2013 - $2.77 trillion.*
FY 2012 - $2.45 trillion.*
FY 2011 - $2.30 trillion.
FY 2010 - $2.16 trillion.
* Record revenue amount.

It would seem we do not have a taxing problem, we have a spending problem.
 
Last edited:

Bodhisattva

Hall of Fame
Aug 22, 2001
21,596
2,241
287
Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida
In fairness, the last six years of the Obama Administration set records for the collection of Federal revenues.

FY 2017 - $3.32 trillion.*
FY 2016 - $3.27 trillion.*
FY 2015 - $3.25 trillion.*
FY 2014 - $3.02 trillion.*
FY 2013 - $2.77 trillion.*
FY 2012 - $2.45 trillion.*
FY 2011 - $2.30 trillion.
FY 2010 - $2.16 trillion.
* Record revenue amount.

It would seem we do not have a taxing problem, we have a spending problem.
This is a fundamental point some are incapable of understanding.
 

twofbyc

Hall of Fame
Oct 14, 2009
12,195
3,329
187
In fairness, the last six years of the Obama Administration set records for the collection of Federal revenues.

FY 2017 - $3.32 trillion.*
FY 2016 - $3.27 trillion.*
FY 2015 - $3.25 trillion.*
FY 2014 - $3.02 trillion.*
FY 2013 - $2.77 trillion.*
FY 2012 - $2.45 trillion.*
FY 2011 - $2.30 trillion.
FY 2010 - $2.16 trillion.
* Record revenue amount.

It would seem we do not have a taxing problem, we have a spending problem.
Well, cutting taxes nets the same result as increasing spending, so in that regard, I agree.
Unless, of course, you buy into the fallacy that cutting taxes for the rich results in higher pay and thus increase in revenue to make up for the cuts.
It has never worked - like states and municipalities giving huge tax breaks to Amazon (or other “job producers”).
It’s not how much you spend, it’s how you spend it.
Republicans have never wanted responsible spending because then they couldn’t criticize the Democrats.
Politics “trumps” the “general welfare” every time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

NationalTitles18

TideFans Legend
May 25, 2003
29,639
34,744
362
Mountainous Northern California
This whole taxes vs spending argument is like the old Reese's Cup commercial when the peanut butter and chocolate finally came together after everyone was arguing one vs the other.

IOW, both are a problem and both are part of the fix to a real world issue and not some utopian fantasy either side imagines.
 

Tidewater

Hall of Fame
Mar 15, 2003
22,401
13,177
287
Hooterville, Vir.
Well, cutting taxes nets the same result as increasing spending, so in that regard, I agree.
Unless, of course, you buy into the fallacy that cutting taxes for the rich results in higher pay and thus increase in revenue to make up for the cuts.
Generally, I would agree. I do believe in the Laffer Curve, maximizing revenues just depends on where you currently are on that curve. The highest marginal income tax rate (1942) was 100%. Congress cut that tax rate to 97% probably increased tax revenues.
If the top marginal rate is 30%, cutting the rate to 20% probably would not increase revenues.
It has never worked - like states and municipalities giving huge tax breaks to Amazon (or other “job producers”).
Here we agree. Also, locating the new "HQ2" right next to the seat of the legislature is probably just coincidental.
It’s not how much you spend, it’s how you spend it.
I disagree. When it comes to the United States avoiding the fiscal debacle heading our way, how much the Federal government spends matters very much. In fact, nothing matters more.
Republicans have never wanted responsible spending because then they couldn’t criticize the Democrats.
Agreed. This is why I am not a Republican.
Politics “trumps” the “general welfare” every time.
The "general welfare" is about to be replaced with the "general disaster."
 
Last edited:

twofbyc

Hall of Fame
Oct 14, 2009
12,195
3,329
187
As for the tax rates, how many people do you know in the top tax bracket that actually pay that marginal rate?
Trump didn’t last year (bragged he didn’t pay any), most big corporations pay a small percentage of that rate (if they pay any at all); this is why I have a problem with it.
Take away all write offs for everybody and we can talk; but the facts are those affected by the highest marginal rate have the greatest access to write offs and deductions, so they pay much less (if anything at all).
This is not true for those in the middle tax brackets, who pay a higher percentage of their marginal rate; with the possible exception of those having children (or multiple children) at years end.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.