Where Are The TeaBaggers Now?

[JB3]

I'm getting to the point where I think it's time we let the Tax Cuts expire for everyone and we start getting this country's debt under control. it has to be done at some point.

I'm there as well. Its time for people to own up to the fact that the government can't provide everything they want, and that they're destroying the nation from the inside out.

 

[fetaby]

I'm there as well. Its time for people to own up to the fact that the government can't provide everything they want, and that they're destroying the nation from the inside out.

This post leaves a bad smell in the air...

I'd want some clarity.

Who are the people?

What do the want? From the government?

Define nation? Define destroying?

It could make sense to me if by people you mean corporate interests and wall street gluttons.

 

[MoltenRock III]

I'm there as well. Its time for people to own up to the fact that the government can't provide everything they want, and that they're destroying the nation from the inside out.

Funny how Europe and Asian countries that provide far, far, far, more for their citizens that in-turn have less unemployment, less poverty, less income disparity, and much better schools aren't "destroying their country from the inside out" by providing for their populace. Hence, what if anything is destroying America is the ridiculously low tax rates, and offering tax breaks for people who relocate jobs overseas.

Funny how Germany can have the highest industrial wages in the world, and still be both growing, and be an exporting powerhouse.

 

[fetaby]

When protecting profits becomes more important than the people providing profits.

Increasing the bottom line is always done at the expense of someone.

If money talks and bullshit walks, who do you think is going to carry that expense?

 

[JB3]

Funny how Europe and Asian countries that provide far, far, far, more for their citizens that in-turn have less unemployment, less poverty, less income disparity, and much better schools aren't "destroying their country from the inside out" by providing for their populace. Hence, what if anything is destroying America is the ridiculously low tax rates, and offering tax breaks for people who relocate jobs overseas.

Funny how Germany can have the highest industrial wages in the world, and still be both growing, and be an exporting powerhouse.

Well Americans must make a choice then; they either draw the line in the sand and say that taxes need to be raised and entitlement programs need to stay right where they are, or accept painfully deep cuts in every program the government offers in exchange for a lower tax rate.

There are no other options. If taxes go up, there can be no increase in entitlement/social programs because we can't even afford what we already have. If taxes go down, then we MUST drastically pull back those programs to bring costs in line. (I advocate pulling back the programs AND raising taxes, so that we can start paying down our debt)

(Oh and don't think I've forgotten that you attacked me in a post earlier in this thread, and I responded proving to you how wrong you were, and you have yet to acknowledge that)

 

[Kulindahr]

There are no other options. If taxes go up, there can be no increase in entitlement/social programs because we can't even afford what we already have. If taxes go down, then we MUST drastically pull back those programs to bring costs in line. (I advocate pulling back the programs AND raising taxes, so that we can start paying down our debt)

There is another option: the filthy rich who have been plundering the country whenever Republicans are in charge could step up to the plate and take responsibility for the desert created in their name.

I still think that a one-time levy on personal worth, sufficient to pay off all foreign debt, would be a good thing.

 

[JB3]

There is another option: the filthy rich who have been plundering the country whenever Republicans are in charge could step up to the plate and take responsibility for the desert created in their name.

I still think that a one-time levy on personal worth, sufficient to pay off all foreign debt, would be a good thing.

That's a separate issue. I think a one time punitive tax on millionaires for ill-gotten gains over the last nine years would be entirely fair. But for everyday americans, the options I've identified are the only realistic ones.

 

[Lostlover]

Wow. Looks like someone is holding a grudge over the net.

I like too how a poster can say we must decide to have entitlement programs or cut spending. As if the people bitching about the size of government are willing to let go of their favorite entitlement programs.

And as if cutting entitlement programs will service our national debt. Taxes need to go up pretty much no matter what. Except I'm a firm believer that the pain should be shared by the culprits, not for generations after the fact.

 

[Lostlover]

There is another option: the filthy rich who have been plundering the country whenever Republicans are in charge could step up to the plate and take responsibility for the desert created in their name.

I still think that a one-time levy on personal worth, sufficient to pay off all foreign debt, would be a good thing.

What about a war time tax?

 

[Kulindahr]

That's a separate issue. I think a one time punitive tax on millionaires for ill-gotten gains over the last nine years would be entirely fair. But for everyday americans, the options I've identified are the only realistic ones.

<wince>

If I was after punitive, I'd go for a lot more than just paying off the foreign part of the national debt -- like the entire debt, plus a five-trillion fund for infrastructure, and a one-trillion fund for thermal depolymerization plants (stock to be distributed among the nation's disabled).

I'm just talking responsibility -- from the one to whom more is given, more is required.

But for the rest of us -- yes, except that if the debt and infrastructure were dealt with, the choices wouldn't be so stark. And then something would need to be in place to guarantee the wealth disparity didn't head right back to where it was (or rather is).

 

[JB3]

<wince>

If I was after punitive, I'd go for a lot more than just paying off the foreign part of the national debt -- like the entire debt, plus a five-trillion fund for infrastructure, and a one-trillion fund for thermal depolymerization plants (stock to be distributed among the nation's disabled).

I'm just talking responsibility -- from the one to whom more is given, more is required.

But for the rest of us -- yes, except that if the debt and infrastructure were dealt with, the choices wouldn't be so stark. And then something would need to be in place to guarantee the wealth disparity didn't head right back to where it was (or rather is).

Oh I'd go for punitive. Make the bastards pay for what they got on the backs of workers in a recession.

 

[JB3]

Wow. Looks like someone is holding a grudge over the net.

I like too how a poster can say we must decide to have entitlement programs or cut spending. As if the people bitching about the size of government are willing to let go of their favorite entitlement programs.

Who cares what they do or think. Ram it down their throats. They'll adjust.

And as if cutting entitlement programs will service our national debt. Taxes need to go up pretty much no matter what. Except I'm a firm believer that the pain should be shared by the culprits, not for generations after the fact.

You can't simultaneously pay off the debt and keep entitlement programs whose costs are only going to keep going up. There are going to have to be cuts in those programs, regardless of the tax situation.

Right now we're living large. Sure, the cuts will be painful at first. But future generations won't know what it was like now and won't long for the good old days of trillion dollar deficits. They'll adapt, and other entities will fill the void when the government services are pulled back.

 

[MoltenRock III]

^ I agree. It's all about the math.

<runs for cover> (boy, am I gonna get a lickin'!)

No it's fucking not! Unless of course you mean that REPUBLICANS ran up HUGE and MASSIVE deficits to put the country in this very, exact, predicted, spot! For 2 1/2 decades experts and economists have warned that our economic picture would erode until entitlements had to be cut. Wingnuts like Ronda Reagan clucked, and giggled, about "starving the beast", meaning they purposely were running up huge deficits so they could kill off the New Deal and other social programs. That's exactly what you are now buying into??? Shame on you!

The wingnuts are forcing the USA back to it's roots.... an impoverished, 3rd world country, much like it was most of the 19th, and 20th century, until reaching its zenith in the 1960s.

 

[Kulindahr]

But really what I was saying, MoltenRock, is that it's time to reassess our approach towards Social Security and Medicare.

Minor tweaks will save SS.

I don't know about Medicare. It might be doomed.

Get the debt eliminated and infrastructure back to being the envy of the world, and things should change.

 

[thewiz]

You all know what's odd?

Someone mentioned that they were at Glenn Beck's huge demonstration in Washington, and what he saw was a vast sea of senior citizens.

What's wrong with this picture?

I walked down to see what the real turnout would be (and also went to the one a couple weeks later with Cobert which I enjoyed much more). The Beck event was very old, very white, and was very polite. I felt a much more electric atmosphere for the Cobert event; much like the inauguration.

I noticed when it was discovered McConnell had larded up the latest tax cut bill, he actually went on television with a straight face and said he had done it because "he didn't expect it to pass anyway." Rrrrrriiiiiggghhht....and I'm the tooth fairy.

When I was a city manager in Michigan, the Republicans were very good about talking "cuts to taxes." Matter of fact, John Engler cut taxes dozens of times and set up for additional cuts well after he left office. The result today is that much of the safety net has been removed for those who can least afford it; Michigan ranks either 1 or 2 in unemployment and foreclosure rates; cities have slashed libraries, parks, and now are cutting police and fire; and there does not appear to be any end in sight. If cutting taxes would have exploded the economy, then Michigan should be number 1. In addition, when Jennifer Granholm took office, the first thing she had to deal with was a $1.5 billion deficit that was caused by the voodoo structural deficits that the Repubs had left. For years they had been moving the shell game and masking what would inevitably come to roost.

I see the same thing happening now in Washington; the Repubs talk a good line but have never cut (even under Reagan the size of the federal government INCREASED). Now they want to cut the social net and taxes for the rich who, of course, will run out and create all kinds of jobs. What they fail to ignore is: why would someone create jobs if there is no demand? Do they think the rich are stupid and will just add employees because they are nice? If one wants to see the result, all they have to do is look at the automakers....

 

[JB3]

No it's fucking not! Unless of course you mean that REPUBLICANS ran up HUGE and MASSIVE deficits to put the country in this very, exact, predicted, spot! For 2 1/2 decades experts and economists have warned that our economic picture would erode until entitlements had to be cut. Wingnuts like Ronda Reagan clucked, and giggled, about "starving the beast", meaning they purposely were running up huge deficits so they could kill off the New Deal and other social programs. That's exactly what you are now buying into??? Shame on you!

The wingnuts are forcing the USA back to it's roots.... an impoverished, 3rd world country, much like it was most of the 19th, and 20th century, until reaching its zenith in the 1960s.

It most certainly is about the math. Right now the financial picture doesn't add up, and because of mismanagement by BOTH parties the programs WILL have to be scaled back and reformed and nothing is going to stop that.

 

[Kulindahr]

It most certainly is about the math. Right now the financial picture doesn't add up, and because of mismanagement by BOTH parties the programs WILL have to be scaled back and reformed and nothing is going to stop that.

There are a few entire departments that can go (energy, education), and some lesser entities (BATFE, arts), and some that could be trimmed (a lot of BLM land currently on lease could be sold; a lot of Forest Service land could be handed to localities and some be sold).

Of course then the "starve the beast!" cohort will parade around proudly -- too bad we can't attach their wages/salaries to pay down the debt they generated.