America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 3 months ago by RayR. 34 replies replies.
US debt ceiling.
Abrignac Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
A rule vote in the House this afternoon failed. As I understand it a rule needs to pass before can vote on another stop gap spending measure needed to continue funding the government.

One issue is lack of meaningful steps to secure the boxer. Another is the debt limit.

Though the border is something that needs to be addressed more importantly though is the debt.

So my question is directed to anyone who is NOT concerned with another increase in the debt. What is your point of no return? Is there a number that you find too high?
ZRX1200 Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,615
CRs need to end….period.

Politicians need to put their names on a real budget.
HockeyDad Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,135
I’m not concerned with the debt or its limit. We are already past the point of no return.
RayR Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,893
What I heard on the news was that the Republicans caved to the Democrats again, a Faustian bargain of sorts, agreeing to a proposed budget that has no meaningful cuts in spending, but might only if the stars aligned perfectly slow down the increased rate of spending a tiny bit. And the Republican leadership was doing a victory dance as if they were doing something conservative.

And what HockeyDad said

Abrignac Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
ZRX1200 wrote:
CRs need to end….period.

Politicians need to put their names on a real budget.


ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY!!!
Abrignac Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
HockeyDad wrote:
I’m not concerned with the debt or its limit. We are already past the point of no return.


I tend to agree. I personally think we are way pass the point of no return.

The only way I see to reel it in is to make deep cuts. Those cuts would have to be so severe that some programs would need to cease altogether. But, that would require every member of Congress to go on record voting to eliminate something dear to their constituency. Doing so would many of get them voted out of office.
rfenst Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,335
Abrignac wrote:
I tend to agree. I personally think we are way pass the point of no return.

The only way I see to reel it in is to make deep cuts. Those cuts would have to be so severe that some programs would need to cease altogether. But, that would require every member of Congress to go on record voting to eliminate something dear to their constituency. Doing so would many of get them voted out of office.

Cuts, austerity and improving economy will combine to decrease the debt to a more manageable level.
rfenst Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,335
Abrignac wrote:
I tend to agree. I personally think we are way pass the point of no return.

The only way I see to reel it in is to make deep cuts. Those cuts would have to be so severe that some programs would need to cease altogether. But, that would require every member of Congress to go on record voting to eliminate something dear to their constituency. Doing so would many of get them voted out of office.

Cuts, austerity and improving economy will combine to decrease the debt to a more manageable level.
deadeyedick Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 03-13-2003
Posts: 17,100
rfenst wrote:
Cuts, austerity and improving economy will combine to decrease the debt to a more manageable level.


There isn't anybody in congress on either side of the isle that is really willing to make the cuts to all the government programs that are needed. Starting with SS and Medicare. And as far as the border is concerned, vs the debt, they are one and the same issue.
RayR Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,893
deadeyedick wrote:
There isn't anybody in congress on either side of the isle that is really willing to make the cuts to all the government programs that are needed. Starting with SS and Medicare. And as far as the border is concerned, vs the debt, they are one and the same issue.


Pretty much, there is no political will or a moral backbone to do what's right. I heard one Republican congressman say yesterday that there aren't but a few actual conservatives in the Republican party. Most of them are more than happy to just conserve the status quo and not rock the boat.. Some things never seem to change.
RiverRatRuss Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 09-02-2022
Posts: 1,035
Has anyone else noticed in the Past 6-8 Yrs. and especially after Sleepy Joe took office our Supreme Court System is getting backlogged with rulings on Laws these AssClown's have been putting into place?

Oh and the Debt Ceiling? I heard Nasa is working on a location to park it somewhere in our Galaxy!!! DOH... d'oh! d'oh! Brick wall Brick wall
Brewha Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,182
rfenst wrote:
Cuts, austerity and improving economy will combine to decrease the debt to a more manageable level.



But never - NEVER - increase corporate taxes!

Trump's TCJA gave massive tax cuts to businesses. Many large, profitable corporations are paying no tax.

As as we all know; when a company or a rich man pays no tax it makes us all rich!!!
ZRX1200 Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,615
That makes as much sense as getting mad at a bartender for cutting a drunk off.
Brewha Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,182
Don't you know sarcasm when you read it?
Abrignac Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
Brewha wrote:
But never - NEVER - increase corporate taxes!

Trump's TCJA gave massive tax cuts to businesses. Many large, profitable corporations are paying no tax.

As as we all know; when a company or a rich man pays no tax it makes us all rich!!!


Jeez Scott give it a rest. I don’t know the magic percentage but it’s entirely possible to reduce government revenue by raising taxes. I think I read a government jobs report one time that stated around 85% or more jobs in the US are with small businesses. They are much more susceptible to increased taxes than large corporations and as such will be bankrupted by tax increases large enough to support the current level of government spending.

Large corporations are also sensitive to tax increases. But due to their size there are many offshore locations willing to host them at much more favorable tax rates. When the leave so does their taxes. Ever wonder why companies like Amazon pay a low taxes? Exxon-Mobil? Berkshire Hathaway? Because they have moved many of their corporate operations offshore. Seems there was an another government report that showed that even if the corporate tax was raised it would add very little to actual revenue relative to total intake.

Can you do better are will you just continue to troll with your raise corporate tax mantra?
RayR Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,893
LEFTY sloganeering about taxes and the state:

"Taxes are what we pay for a civilized society"
"I like to pay taxes. With them I buy civilization."
"The power to tax is the power to save more lives."
“Only the savage pays no taxes.”


I like these truthful quotes though:

"Taxation is theft"
“The state is the great fiction by which everyone endeavors to live at the expense of everyone else.“
“Taxes are the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society”
"If, as many people seem to believe, “taxes are the price of civilization,” this seems to imply not only that we live under the implicit threat of barbaric chaos, but also that there is some mischievous organization out there which, in order not to unleash that chaos on our doorstep, demands that we pay an expensive ransom."

Even that commie Engels wrote the truth about taxation and the state: “the state is nothing but a machine for the oppression of one class by another, and indeed in the democratic republic no less than in the monarchy.”
HockeyDad Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,135
rfenst wrote:
Cuts, austerity and improving economy will combine to decrease the debt to a more manageable level.


Spend $6.1 trillion. Bring in $4.4 trillion in taxes.

Required cuts and austerity = $1.7 trillion per year. Good luck with that.

50% tax increase to every Federal tax. Good luck with that.


Abrignac Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
HockeyDad wrote:
Spend $6.1 trillion. Bring in $4.4 trillion in taxes.

Required cuts and austerity = $1.7 trillion per year. Good luck with that.

50% tax increase to every Federal tax. Good luck with that.




Add to that the fact that no one on either side of the isle is willing to make cuts to programs held sacred in their platforms means business as usual.
HockeyDad Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,135
Brewha wrote:
But never - NEVER - increase corporate taxes!

Trump's TCJA gave massive tax cuts to businesses. Many large, profitable corporations are paying no tax.

As as we all know; when a company or a rich man pays no tax it makes us all rich!!!


People who identify as poor and victims should not have the internet.
HockeyDad Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,135
Abrignac wrote:
Add to that the fact that no one on either side of the isle is willing to make cuts to programs held sacred in their platforms means business as usual.


$1.7 trillion in cuts means elimination of social security and the entire military.
Abrignac Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
HockeyDad wrote:
$1.7 trillion in cuts means elimination of social security and the entire military.


Well this intrigued me so I went surfing.

The 2021 “budget” was $7.1 Trillion. To be fair this budget includes COVID relief/stimulus money. I’ll see if I can find a more recent budget for comparison’s sake.

Of that:

$2.81 T (39.63 %) for Social Security, Unemployment and Labor
$773.28 B (10.91 %) for Military

Now to find revenue for 2021 to see how much was added to the debt for 2021.


HockeyDad Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,135
Abrignac wrote:
Well this intrigued me so I went surfing.

The 2021 “budget” was $7.1 Trillion. To be fair this budget includes COVID relief/stimulus money. I’ll see if I can find a more recent budget for comparison’s sake.

Of that:

$2.81 T (39.63 %) for Social Security, Unemployment and Labor
$773.28 B (10.91 %) for Military

Now to find revenue for 2021 to see how much was added to the debt for 2021.





You can’t use 2021 Great Reset spending numbers. They’re crazy.


$6.1T spend $4.4T revenue is 2023 FY

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1829#:~:text=Outlays%20were%20%246.1%20trillion%20in,%24137%20billion%2C%20or%202.2%20percent.
RayR Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,893
HD, the regime is taking us down the tubes pretty fast. I wouldn't believe a thing Grandma Yellen says, she lies a lot. Things must be much worse than that press release.
Brewha Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,182
Abrignac wrote:
Jeez Scott give it a rest. I don’t know the magic percentage but it’s entirely possible to reduce government revenue by raising taxes. I think I read a government jobs report one time that stated around 85% or more jobs in the US are with small businesses. They are much more susceptible to increased taxes than large corporations and as such will be bankrupted by tax increases large enough to support the current level of government spending.

Large corporations are also sensitive to tax increases. But due to their size there are many offshore locations willing to host them at much more favorable tax rates. When the leave so does their taxes. Ever wonder why companies like Amazon pay a low taxes? Exxon-Mobil? Berkshire Hathaway? Because they have moved many of their corporate operations offshore. Seems there was an another government report that showed that even if the corporate tax was raised it would add very little to actual revenue relative to total intake.

Can you do better are will you just continue to troll with your raise corporate tax mantra?

You would ask anyone this clown show to “give it a rest”? You know better than that.

You believe that Amazon moved its corporate operations off shore - and there for pay little to no tax? You know that Amazon has a huge corporate operation in the 50 states, right?

Oh - and we should raise corporate taxes.
Brewha Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,182
HockeyDad wrote:
People who identify as poor and victims should not have the internet.

Trump says he is a victim - should we keep him off the internets?
Abrignac Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
Brewha wrote:
You would ask anyone this clown show to “give it a rest”? You know better than that.

You believe that Amazon moved its corporate operations off shore - and there for pay little to no tax? You know that Amazon has a huge corporate operation in the 50 states, right?

Oh - and we should raise corporate taxes.


Forgive my mistakes.

1) I should have used Apple as an example vs Amazon.
2) Should have said operations not corporate headquarters.

https://itep.org/fortune-500-companies-hold-a-record-26-trillion-offshore/#:~:text=Congressional%20hearings%20over%20the%20past%20few%20years%20have,lesser%20known%20companies%20such%20as%20Oracle%20and%20Symantec.

And yes I do certainly believe Amazon pays little to no taxes. In fact, its net tax burden for 2020 was 9.4%, which less than half of the statutory rate of 21%, on revenue of $24B.

https://itep.org/amazon-has-record-breaking-profits-in-2020-avoids-2-3-billion-in-federal-income-taxes/

But, isn’t its founder and CEO a Democrat supporter and mega donor? Don’t Democrats as a whole espouse higher taxes. I guess they do as long as they’re not the ones paying them.
RayR Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,893
The less Amazon pays in taxes, the more they have to donate to the DNC.

Democrats only encourage higher taxes for their non-supporters, so to facilitate support even from the unwilling they promote a complex tax code with deductions, incentives related to investment, research, and employee compensation. Then they'll threaten to raise taxes by taking take away those loopholes, those tax avoidance perks thus forcing their victims to seek relief by donating to their causes and their campaigns, all of which involve boosting their power and wealth.
Brewha Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,182
Abrignac wrote:
Forgive my mistakes.

1) I should have used Apple as an example vs Amazon.
2) Should have said operations not corporate headquarters.

https://itep.org/fortune-500-companies-hold-a-record-26-trillion-offshore/#:~:text=Congressional%20hearings%20over%20the%20past%20few%20years%20have,lesser%20known%20companies%20such%20as%20Oracle%20and%20Symantec.

And yes I do certainly believe Amazon pays little to no taxes. In fact, its net tax burden for 2020 was 9.4%, which less than half of the statutory rate of 21%, on revenue of $24B.

https://itep.org/amazon-has-record-breaking-profits-in-2020-avoids-2-3-billion-in-federal-income-taxes/

But, isn’t its founder and CEO a Democrat supporter and mega donor? Don’t Democrats as a whole espouse higher taxes. I guess they do as long as they’re not the ones paying them.


As a someone who votes Democrat, I’ll tell you the problem is too much of the tax burden is on the middle class. And that large corporation and the wealthy do not pay what they should as they have lobbyist and in general own officials that can see to their interest at the expense of the middle class.

And while I’m at it; I’ll tell you that the mega churches and their businesses should be taxed. This is because I’m no only a crazy liberal but and agnostic as well.
RayR Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,893
Brewha wrote:
As a someone who votes Democrat, I’ll tell you the problem is too much of the tax burden is on the middle class. And that large corporation and the wealthy do not pay what they should as they have lobbyist and in general own officials that can see to their interest at the expense of the middle class.

And while I’m at it; I’ll tell you that the mega churches and their businesses should be taxed. This is because I’m no only a crazy liberal but and agnostic as well.


Interesting Think You sound just like one of those flighty TAX THE RICH commies like AOC and Bernie Sanders with their shoddy economics. Brew, why do you love the idea of taxing everybody you don't like until it hurts? Are you a sadist?



Abrignac Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
Brewha wrote:
As a someone who votes Democrat, I’ll tell you the problem is too much of the tax burden is on the middle class. And that large corporation and the wealthy do not pay what they should as they have lobbyist and in general own officials that can see to their interest at the expense of the middle class.

And while I’m at it; I’ll tell you that the mega churches and their businesses should be taxed. This is because I’m no only a crazy liberal but and agnostic as well.


Don’t disagree that the middle class shoulders a large overall percentage of the tax burden. But, the notion of ever collecting a statistical significant portion of taxes from the corporate sector has been, currently is and forever will be a pipe dream.

The corporate tax rate is 21% on net earnings. Yet, as evidenced by the second article I sent you large corporations will NEVER pay that rate and in most cases nowhere near that rate. Why? As sure as taxes or increased or some credit expires a new credit will take its place. Congress “fixes” loop holes only for 3 to take its place. Then Congress bickers over the new loop hole for x number of years. Then closes it. However that closing is usually offset by something new. Or savy accountants figure a way around it. Lather, rinse, repeat.

However, suppose Congress finally gets it right. A perfect and equitable tax code is by some miracle born. Now corporations have to pay their fair share. Well that’s going to play havoc on their share price. Investors are going to start looking for new stocks whose sale price was least affected. Do you think these formally greedy corporations are going to be satisfied and tow the new line? Doubtful. They will simply start raising prices to offset after tax earnings drops to push their share price as high as possible back the their prices before this new tax.

So now we’re right back where we started. The middle class shouldering too large a burden because they are paying a new tax. However, it’s not an income tax. It’s an inflation tax. So when it’s all said and done what was accomplished? Probably very little.

I forget what caused it but I remember when Biden was touting what has become known as Bideomics he promised lower taxes on people whose earnings were below a certain threshold. The reality is that program actually raised the costs born by the middle class.

The answer is to not keep increasing corporate taxes in an unending search of some holy grail solution that doesn’t exist. It would be far wiser to find a way to disincentivize retained corporate earnings. By doing so more dollars enter the economy and as a nation we benefit from the multiplier affect. It sounds like Reaganomics in a way but with some tweaks. It needs to ensure that money currently removed from the economy is brought in to the economy.
RayR Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,893
As long as you keep supporting progressive tax codes, the middle class will always be tax serfs complaining others are not being taxed enough.

"Progressive taxation of income and profits means that precisely those parts of the income which people would have saved and invested are taxed away." - Von Mises (Economic Policy)

"Nothing is more calculated to make a demagogue popular than a constantly reiterated demand for heavy taxes on the rich. Capital levies and high income taxes on the larger incomes are extraordinarily popular with the masses, who do not have to pay them." - Von Mises (Human Action)
Brewha Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,182
Abrignac wrote:
Don’t disagree that the middle class shoulders a large overall percentage of the tax burden. But, the notion of ever collecting a statistical significant portion of taxes from the corporate sector has been, currently is and forever will be a pipe dream.

The corporate tax rate is 21% on net earnings. Yet, as evidenced by the second article I sent you large corporations will NEVER pay that rate and in most cases nowhere near that rate. Why? As sure as taxes or increased or some credit expires a new credit will take its place. Congress “fixes” loop holes only for 3 to take its place. Then Congress bickers over the new loop hole for x number of years. Then closes it. However that closing is usually offset by something new. Or savy accountants figure a way around it. Lather, rinse, repeat.

However, suppose Congress finally gets it right. A perfect and equitable tax code is by some miracle born. Now corporations have to pay their fair share. Well that’s going to play havoc on their share price. Investors are going to start looking for new stocks whose sale price was least affected. Do you think these formally greedy corporations are going to be satisfied and tow the new line? Doubtful. They will simply start raising prices to offset after tax earnings drops to push their share price as high as possible back the their prices before this new tax.

So now we’re right back where we started. The middle class shouldering too large a burden because they are paying a new tax. However, it’s not an income tax. It’s an inflation tax. So when it’s all said and done what was accomplished? Probably very little.

I forget what caused it but I remember when Biden was touting what has become known as Bideomics he promised lower taxes on people whose earnings were below a certain threshold. The reality is that program actually raised the costs born by the middle class.

The answer is to not keep increasing corporate taxes in an unending search of some holy grail solution that doesn’t exist. It would be far wiser to find a way to disincentivize retained corporate earnings. By doing so more dollars enter the economy and as a nation we benefit from the multiplier affect. It sounds like Reaganomics in a way but with some tweaks. It needs to ensure that money currently removed from the economy is brought in to the economy.


First off I don't think the rich people would like that idea - then there is the matter of how to do it.

It does worry me that it sounds like your idea is base on the idea that companies will never "net net" pay their fair share - you're prolly right about that.

But when Cinnamon Hitler give them a huge tax break - and then we don't want to undo it - who to blame them?
Us I think.
ZRX1200 Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,615
Keep your pitchfork sharp and your torches dry…..

*sigh*
RayR Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,893
ZRX1200 wrote:
Keep your pitchfork sharp and your torches dry…..

*sigh*


Brewha is most definitely a sadist. He can't deny it.
It's been a Jacobin lefty thing since the French Revolution to inflict as much pain as they can on people they don't like.

Users browsing this topic
Guest