If Households Budgeted Like The GOP

[filkertom]

Comments

[jadasc.livejournal.com]

So, the *second* thing that came to mind is, "Using a dedicated calculator with paper tape?"

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

Hey. A dedicated calculator with paper tape lets you do one thing a regular calculator can't: check your math later.

[jadasc.livejournal.com]

Sure. But once you've decided to use a bulky standalone device, why not use the laptop, which has a calculator that simulates paper tape without ink, or waste, or waking the kids.

[bonnie-rocks.livejournal.com]

Not all calculators with paper tape are bulky. I own one and it's palm sized.

~*::Meow::*~

[nshoe.livejournal.com]

Except the actual response - from Both Parties - appears to be "We obviously need to spend more money".

Anyone want to guess the last year that the gross federal debt went down?

1957 (the year we had a "surplus" during the Clinton administration was a bookkeeping trick - the Social Security debt is not counted as part of the net public debt...)

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

Well... we do need to spend more money. Money on jobs, infrastructure, jobs, manufacturing, jobs, public safety, environmental protection, enforcement of those pesky regulations that actually keep people from dying from shitty products and production techniques... jobs.

People who are employed spend money.

Rich people use more of all of the above. They don't need tax cuts; they need to kick in closer to their fair share. They'll still be rich.

I have nothing against getting rich; I have a lot against doing so on the backs of poor people.

[lemmozine.livejournal.com]

i pretend this is facebook so i can hit the like button. like! it's not just rich people dodging taxes - it's also rich corporations. how about a law that says US corporations can't dodge taxes by moving their income to another country with lower taxes, on paper? and a second law that says corporations are no longer equivalent to people, and ceos may be indicted for their corporate crimes.

[zibblsnrt.livejournal.com]

it's not just rich people dodging taxes - it's also rich corporations.

Of course, legally speaking, rich corporations are rich people, which is probably a good chunk of the problem...

[lindaneely.livejournal.com]

I agree. Can we go after the churches while we're at it? I went to school in Boston and the amount of prime ocean view real estate owned by the Catholic church made me crazy.

[dysprog.livejournal.com]

I started a Facebook group some time ago called "raise my taxes".

While I am hardly rich, I could afford to pay more then I do. And I would be willing to do so if it paid for things like universal health care.

My group only has 6 members so far.

[lariss.livejournal.com]

I'd join. We DO need to pay more taxes, because the US is running out of civilization.

I and my employer spend WAY more than I actually cost medically annually on my insurance coverage. Paying more taxes to have universal health care would actually SAVE me money.

[nshoe.livejournal.com]

Why do you assume that the increase in taxes needed for universal health care would be less than what you and your employer pay for your insurance coverage?

[dysprog.livejournal.com]

Assume that the insurance is run the exact same way. Now remove the need to make a profit, and reduce the cost by that amount.

Of course, in my tax bracket I will likely pay more. I am fine with that, if it means that my underemployed uncle and his diabetic sons will be able to afford health care.

[nshoe.livejournal.com]

If only it had ever worked that way.

Sadly I have yet to see a service that the government has been able to provide cheaper because they don't need to profit. They may be able to provide it to a wider range of people, but they never make it less expensive.

If you are currently putting more into the system than you are getting out I can almost guarantee that you would be paying more if the government took over.

[dysprog.livejournal.com]

Fine then. If that happens, I will pay more. I am OK with that. I also pay more then my fair share for roads (I rarely drive) the fire department (never had a fire) and the school system (Don't have kids). I am fine with those too. I see a moral imperative to ensure that every human being has adequate health care. Every other first world nation (and quite a few others) has some form of universal health care. Except us.

BTW, if you ever find yourself getting more out of your corporate-run insurance than you put in, it will be a temporary situation. The insurance company WILL be trying to find some way to raise your rates, drop your coverage or deny you claim. Because a corporation is a sociopath that only cares about profit.

Which is one reason, why government provided health care probably will cost more: they will have to stop intentionally screwing people over.

[nshoe.livejournal.com]

Of course none of them want to bother with actually getting the income to spend more - that wouldn't be popular.

So they continue to steal from tomorrow to pay for what they cannot afford today.

We currently owe about 4 times the federal budget. And that budget is 180% of our tax revenues.

Raising taxes on the rich won't be enough - to make up the deficit (not even touching the debt) - if you only raised taxes on the top 10% of income (those making over $113000/year) you would have to nearly triple their taxes (280% of what they currently pay). And given that they currently pay almost 70% of the income taxes currently, that would be a rather hard tax increase to sell.

But then I figure that the politicians will continue to do what they always have - do whatever they can to push the problem off so that they don't have to deal with it. The question is, will someone decide to deal with the problem before it becomes impossible to deal with.

[unclelumpy.livejournal.com]

Out of curiosity, what was the average percentage of income tax per wealth bracket in 1957?

[reyl.livejournal.com]

I am glad I'm not the only one who thinks that the answer to the US deficit should absolutely NOT be:

"AMERICANS ARE POOR. MORE BABIES FOR THEM!!! AND ALSO SCREW WOMEN, LOTS, YEAH."

[allandaros.livejournal.com]

Matt Bors is awesome.

[beldar.livejournal.com]

And the "national household" includes the constantly-huge bill for two wars, which we are supposed to ignore in this debate. Those who want the budget to be something resembling what it was under Clinton forget that during the 90s we closed numerous military posts in the U.S. and overseas, and kept our overseas adventures mostly limited to the siege of Iraq and intervention in former Yugoslavia. Under Dubya, we got two wars and numerous additional bases built in central Asia.

[nshoe.livejournal.com]

Sadly, even completely dismantling the military wouldn't be enough.

Currently Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and paying the interest on our national debt takes up 78% of our federal tax income.

But none of the real answers are politically popular or easy to swallow.

[catnip13.livejournal.com]

Cite your source, please?

[lariss.livejournal.com]

I'd believe it. These agencies are not set up correctly. I'm the LAST person on the planet who would want to abolish Medicaid/Social Security - the people I work with are all severely disabled with schizophrenia and other funfun brain diseases and rely on Medicaid/Social Security for housing, food and clothing.

HOWEVER! The number of administrative positions used to deliver these services is completely ridiculous. We need to restructure the program so that less of the fundage goes to administrative tasks and more goes to the actual people in need.

The average Social Security check for my clients is about $750 (and that's only because several of them went crazy AFTER working for decades). My blind boyfriend who is currently between jobs gets $670 a month. (unemployment among the blind is about 80% - reference the National Federation of the Blind study - because many employers ASSUME that blind people will need unrealistic amounts of accommodation, which most really don't, and so don't hire them EVEN when they are highly skilled). I don't know about you, but these numbers are in the scary-low levels in my mind. Even with housing programs (if you don't mind living in the ghetto with Section 8) and food stamps, this is poverty.

[tvskyle.livejournal.com]

Woah. Shit's going down in the Angry Video Game Nerd household.

[wildcard9.livejournal.com]

So friggen true. We need to hold these people FINANCIALLY responcible for ignoring the problem. Maybe then they will start working on what matters.

[liddle-oldman.livejournal.com]

This is also how to create jobs.

[kirylyn.livejournal.com]

wanna turn the economy around *and* create moar jobs??

STOP GIVING TAX CUTS for outsourcing jobs overseas!!

if we want to be a "high tech developed" country, we need more white collar jobs, not less

and I'm sorry if this makes me isolationist but I really don't care that India is even more overpopulated than we are. If things are so bad *here* why does it seem more people come *here* to have medical procedures done?

[mythdude.livejournal.com]

I've started using this to end any argument no matter how crazy. :P

[gypsy1969.livejournal.com]

Instead of "no more abortion" the cartoon should say "no more birth control for you or our daughters" or "no more health care for this family".