Where is the US economy headed?

@Cycloptichorn,

Sorry, I didn't make that clear. If we're going to keep any of the Bush tax cuts they need to be for the lower income levels. I'm not sure what that cut point should be, but anything above some mid-level should be allowed to expire. I'm not in favor of an arbitrary political number, such as $250,000, that would garner greater public support because it benefits more folks, but I do agree that the GWB cuts should be eliminated for all but the lower income groups.

2 Replies

@JPB,

I can agree with your thesis, but the problem I have with establishing some arbitrary income level that should be taxed at a higher rate needs to include those making much less than $250,000, but I'm not sure where that level should be.

0 Replies

@JPB,

JPB wrote:

Sorry, I didn't make that clear. If we're going to keep any of the Bush tax cuts they need to be for the lower income levels. I'm not sure what that cut point should be, but anything above some mid-level should be allowed to expire. I'm not in favor of an arbitrary political number, such as $250,000, that would garner greater public support because it benefits more folks, but I do agree that the GWB cuts should be eliminated for all but the lower income groups.

Great, thanks for clarifying. I do agree with this. Allowing the upper AND middle class cuts to expire would bring in something like 3.3 trillion dollars in revenue over the next ten years, and that's assuming that our economy stays mostly flat (like the 2000-10 period did).

Regarding SS, a little means-testing combined with 1-year rises in the retirement age spaced out every 25 years makes the plan work ad infinitum. We don't need to take the steps that these commissioners seem to think are necessary.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

I like the slower increase in the age requirement for social security over what's being proposed. The biggest problem I now see are the baby-boomers retiring soon while the employment picture remains stagnant. It's not going to be an easy problem to solve when nobody seems to know when our econ0my will pick up again to a strong, growing. one.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

ci, cyclops, and JPB, thanks for the debate. It is not only enlightening but entertaining to read your arguments between you folks that are on the left side of the aisle, as to what to do about the budget, taxes, etc.

2 Replies

@okie,

okie, Was it really "enlightening?" Really?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Probably not enlightening in the way you might be thinking, ci. Listening to two kids in a sand box trying to figure out how to do something they don't know how to do, that is also enlightening in the sense that it tells us how confused they are, that they don't agree, and that they don't know how to do it.

2 Replies

@okie,

To clarify, ci, I am not trying to insult you, I am merely being honest. See ya tomorrow or so.

0 Replies

@okie,

So, Cyclo and JPB are two kids playing in the sand box trying to figure out how to do something - and they really don't know how to do it.

Sounds to me like most of your opinions; it's not based on facts, history, or knowledge about the subject.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

So, Cyclo and JPB are two kids playing in the sand box trying to figure out how to do something - and they really don't know how to do it.

Wow! You got it right this time.

0 Replies

@okie,

Cyclo thinks I'm a righty and you think I'm on the left. I must be doing something right. Smile

1 Reply

@realjohnboy,

realjohnboy wrote:

Good evening. I agree that the Bowles-Simpson draft is a trial balloon that will go nowhere. There is too much for members of Congress to oppose. The Commission was designed (with bi-partisan support) to punt the deficit issue past the election. Now, the cynic in me says, we will get these proposals to eliminate the IRS etc that will go nowhere until a new Commission gets appointed a year ahead of the 2012 election.
I see that the federal deficit in October, 2010, is listed as $140Bn. Extrapolating that out for 12 months = $1.7 Trillion (if my calculator can handle the zeros).
The trade deficit numbers are out today for October. We exported only $44Bn less then we imported. A 5.3% improvement over last month and the lowest gap since August, 2008. That was spurred by a 7.5% decline in the value of the dollar over the last 4 months.
The Fed is driving down the value of the dollar in order to stimulate exports.
Other countries are crying foul, of course. And the cost of imports for us will rise, resulting in inflation.
New claims for unemployment fell to a 4-month low.

I agree. The commission was a political stunt and we'll be having these same discussions 2, 4, 6, 8,... years from now. That doesn't mean that I don't want to solve our economic problems, just that I don't think are politicians are up to the task. I also agree that the mad running of the printing presses will result in inflation. The rest of the world will continue to tell Geithner and Obama that they're delusional if they think everyone is going to rescue and return to the US dollar. The G20 meetings will be interesting to follow this week.

0 Replies

@JPB,

JPB wrote:

Cyclo thinks I'm a righty and you think I'm on the left. I must be doing something right.

JPB, sorry for any possible offense! Actually, I have not totally figured out where you stand in regard to left or right. I have recognized some of your opinions being to the right, while others seem to me to be more left.

2 Replies

@okie,

Gee, okie, that sounds like most voters in this country; some issues are right and some issues are on the left.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Once in a great while, you give a hint of a right opinion, ci, but most of your weight of opinion seems to fall on the left. Again, my opinion, but I am certainly not alone. I think you are being disengenuous to claim to be in the middle.

1 Reply

@okie,

okie, Did you know that the majority of what I believe are codified in the republicanism core beliefs? What I have seen and experienced is that the recent past and current republicanism doesn't represent their own beliefs; they claim they believe in the Constitution, but they discriminate against gays and lesbians. FYI, our Constitution says "all men are created equal." Do you understand the meaning of this?

I believe in small government. Can you really tell me that the GOP has lived by their core belief in small government? Show me?

I believe in less government intrusion into our private lives? What was GW Bush doing illegal wiretaps against Americans?

I don't believe in torture. Do you know that GW Bush authorized torture?

I could list more, but I think even you should understand that you so-called conservatives are lost in the forest. I'm more conservative than you are; you just don't know it.

My only liberal stance is my advocacy for universal health care; to ensure that all our children have health care.

You have also probably missed all of my criticisms of Obama's actions during the past two years. That's not my problem; your memory is non-existent.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

What was Obama doing by illegally forcing Americans to buy health insurance?

Do you know that Obama's presidency is torture to the American people?

1 Reply

@H2O MAN,

When were you forced to buy health insurance? When was anyone else forced to do so?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

okie, Did you know that the majority of what I believe are codified in the republicanism core beliefs? What I have seen and experienced is that the recent past and current republicanism doesn't represent their own beliefs; they claim they believe in the Constitution, but they discriminate against gays and lesbians. FYI, our Constitution says "all men are created equal." Do you understand the meaning of this?

This is a good example of what I would consider your very poor understanding of the constitution and what the founders intended. I hope you are aware that gays and lesbians have the same rights as anyone, they can marry anyone they please as long as that person is of the opposite sex. I doubt very seriously that the founders would have advocated same sex marriage, so I am equally doubtful that your interpretation of the constitution is correct. In the same way, the constitution does not legalize incest, merely by virtue of the idea that men are created equal, nor does it mandate the legality of all kinds of personal behavior on the basis of equality. We have always placed limitations and regulations to contractual situations, ci.

I do not wish to get into a debate here about the liberal agenda's desire to legalize same sex marriage, but I simply point out to you that your use of that issue is really not a valid example for your attempted argument that the Republicans are not following the constitution.

2 Replies

@okie,

That's where your thinking about the Constitution goes haywire. You subjectively interpret the Constitution based on your religious beliefs. You do know about the separation of church and state? Freedom of religion also means freedom from religion too!

You fail to understand the meaning of discrimination. That's a failure on your part, not mine.

0 Replies

Where is the US economy headed?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know