Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

What Must We Defend?


Recommended Posts

  • Members

We ARE paying for what Congress is doing. That is why they need to be reined in. Raising taxes HURTS the economy, kob. And hurting the economy throws us deeper into debt. Raising taxes is not the answer. CUTTING SPENDING is the answer. Massive cutting. Not just little bits here and there, although every little bit helps toward the total. (being self-employed, our tax rate was much higher...and, believe you me, we feel it. We feel it horribly.)

All that history you cited is proof that raising taxes doesn't work. Did "war tax" eliminate our debt? Nope...we are worse off now than ever before. And that isn't because of the current war. It is because of irresponsibility in the halls of Congress. It is Congress' responsibility to rein in the POTUS, and it is our responsibility to rein in Congress. Until we take that responsibility seriously and get people into office who will do what is necessary, we will remain the second-world country (or go into third-world status) we have become.

The mantra that we need to raise taxes is just blather that doesn't go an economy or a country any good. History proves that.


Ironically, deficit spending has only skyrocketed since the 1980's when taxes were cut. Ronald Regan even scaled back his tax cuts and increased taxes when he realized his cuts were too deep. During the Clinton presidency, taxes were raised, and he left us with a surplus. The economy boomed despite his tax increases in the mid nineties. A recesion begain in the early 2000's, and Bush cut taxes again. His tax cuts did nothing to help the economy, but the deficit skyrocketed at this time due to tax cuts, a sluggish economy and two wars.

We need a tax hike. Someone has to pay for the wars.

So raise taxes temporarily. Make it hurt people, because honestly, while we do not hurt today, our grandchildren will feel the hurt when they have to pay high taxes to pay for our spending today. So make it hit people hard in the pocketbook now. It will be a temporary pain, but necessary to get our fiscal house back in order and to make the government responsive to us, snce people would then really care about what is going on, instead of who is winning Dancing of the Stars this week.

I agree that spending cuts are also needed. I have no doubt about that and do not argue that point. But spending cuts alone will not get us there. It will take spending cuts AND increased taxes to get our fiscal house in shape. Only when we stop these wars and reduce debt, will lowering taxes be appropriate again.

I am telling you, increase taxes, and then people will demand spending cuts. They will not really demand them until you make them pay for what Congress is doing. By borrowing, people do not realize how much this is costing us. Make them pay up today, and they realize it and will then question the spending. Congress will not reduce spending until people really demand it. People have not realy demanded it because they are not really paying for it all and do not feel the pain. In theory they like it, but citizens (most of them anyway), will not demand change nad put real pressure on Congress until they see it directly effect their bank accounts. It will not directly effect their bank accounts until Congerss raises taxes to pay for everything. If taxes are not raised, it will only defer the pain until later, perhaps until it is too late.

If I go out and borrow money for a vacation, I don't feel the pain. I just get the pleasure of taking a nice trip. I can max out my credit cards and really live it up. One day though, the pain of paying for it will come. That is the situation we are in. We must 1) cut spending 2) raise taxes to pay for what is provided. If we do not do both, we are just kicking the bucket down the road and living on funds we do not have. If we allow Congress to spend money we do not have, we are taxing future generations who are not represented by our government. If we pay taxes, goverment has to be responsive to us.

Will raising taxes temporarily cause an economic strain? Perhaps. But the fact is our government must pay for our commitments...war, and everything else. Do you really think people will demand change in spending as long as taxes remain low? Not a chance. In theory it sounds good, but when start cutting programs that effects people (and when these programs are run on borrowed money that the taxpayers have not paid) cutting programs hurts more than paying the relativly low rates we pay today. So people will not demand change. Rather, people will say, oh, don't cut that program. If you take it from their pocket and it hurts them today to make us really pay for the programs, then it forces the taxpaer to perform a careful analysis. Does it hurt more to pay taxes to pay for this program, or are the taxes I pay worth keeping this program. At that point, Congress MUST listen becaue it really is the taxpayer's money they are spending, not borrowed money to be taxed later.

Do people like this? Not a chance. Most people want to feel good, enjoy what the government does, and pay low taxes. Just like many today are living on credit cards, deferring the problem to their children after they die. If people were serious about holding the g'ment accountable, they would demand a tax rate that equals are spending. BUt that would cause many people to get upset and demand less spending. Congress does not really want that, so they will not raise taxes. They want people to be complacent about what they do, so if they keep tax rates low, hide spending, and borrow mass amounts of money, then they really do not have to be responsive to a small fraction of people who actually pay attention. If everyone pays high taxes, then I guarantee you everyone would pay attention and there would be mass revolt and outcry over spending, which honestly, is what we need. Edited by kindofblue1977
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

We ARE paying for what Congress is doing. That is why they need to be reined in. Raising taxes HURTS the economy, kob. And hurting the economy throws us deeper into debt. Raising taxes is not the answer. CUTTING SPENDING is the answer. Massive cutting. Not just little bits here and there, although every little bit helps toward the total. (being self-employed, our tax rate was much higher...and, believe you me, we feel it. We feel it horribly.)

All that history you cited is proof that raising taxes doesn't work. Did "war tax" eliminate our debt? Nope...we are worse off now than ever before. And that isn't because of the current war. It is because of irresponsibility in the halls of Congress. It is Congress' responsibility to rein in the POTUS, and it is our responsibility to rein in Congress. Until we take that responsibility seriously and get people into office who will do what is necessary, we will remain the second-world country (or go into third-world status) we have become.

The mantra that we need to raise taxes is just blather that doesn't go an economy or a country any good. History proves that.

That's about the size of it. The only thing I might add is that it's more the job of the POTUS to rein in congress when they send him excessive or just plain wrong spending bills (by using his veto power, influence and the bully pulpit). Congress needs to let the POTUS know they won't accept his budget proposals if they are excessive, go against the Constitution, isn't what's in the best interest of the country, etc. (by the way, I do agree this could be viewed as congress reining in the POTUS).

The sad fact is, none of the branches of government are rightly performing their constitutional duties of abiding by the Constitution or holding one another accountable by using their "check and balance" powers.

Indeed, we need massive budget cuts but career politicians won't make such because they fear losing their jobs. Millions of voters would be outraged when their pet handouts and benefits were cut or ended. Who is willing to bite the bullet and force the hard medicine on this country?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

kob, the reason the deficit has risen is because Congress has increased spending. Um, anyone who does a personal budget should know that. If a person spends MORE than they make, they have deficit increase. If a nation spends MORE than is brought in, ta-da! deficit increase. That's a real duh! moment, there. And check out that surplus. It's rather disingenuous to call it that when there is still a deficit. In a family situation, a true surplus comes when the debt is gone. Speak for yourself that Dubya's tax cuts didn't help the economy - they certainly did! Again, deficits don't arise due to cutting taxes, they arise due to spending too much. Dubya did that, yes indeedy. And BO has taken it to a much higher level.

You are just way off base in the idea of raising taxes, even temporarily. Cutting spending is the way families get control of their budgets, and it's the same with nations. In order to balance any budget, spending must be cut. A good place to begin is with Congress and the POTUS. Does anyone here make a 6 figure annual salary? No? Then, why on earth should our public servants. Sorry, but they should make less...

John, I have to disagree with you a bit. Yes, the POTUS can veto bills, but the Constitution has protection written in there for an override for a reason: because the POTUS does not make the final decisions, especially on economic bills. If the POTUS vetoes something that Congress believes is necessary, then they can override it. As to the bully pulpit...there's been a bit too much emphasis on "bully" by this current POTUS. Everything's a crisis, everything has to be done NOW, everything's a scare tactic.

Congress has within its Constitutional powers to impeach and remove the POTUS (and the SCOTUS). He cannot do so to them. They can consider his proposals for bills, in whatever area he wishes to recommend. But it is their Constitutional power to pass or vote down any bill.

The check and balance is more for the American people than the branches of government: none of the branches are going to police the other properly. That is why the American people need to be informed and active - to ensure that the right people are in place to demand that each branch do what it should.

There are several who are willing to bite the bullet and are attempting to do so. Paul Ryan is one. Although his budget plan doesn't go far enough, it is better than what is out there now. And it has a better chance of being adopted than something more stringent. As you mentioned, people won't be happy that their entitlements are shut off. These entitlements gradually grew to mammoth proportions, and it will likely take time to shrink them...time that many Americans will need to be able to learn how to stand on their own two feet, instead of allowing taxpayers in the form of government handouts to support them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

We've got a group in congress, and one in the White House, that's cut from the same thing many Americans are cut from, they think if I've got a credit card, borrowing power, I should use it an borrow every penny I can get my hands on and spend it all those thing I lust for.

This group changed things so that even those that did not have borrowing power could borrow money, that had bad credit so they could buy any thing they want including houses, that has us in the position America has found itself in the last few years.

Now add to that all the retirement pay that city, county, state, federal, and even private own companies has promised to its employees, that to has put us in the position we find our self in.

America is founded on money, and it will lead to its destruction, for Americans are greedy and it cannot stand the pace that has been set, especially with so much corruption is Washington with companies getting such wonderful favors from our politicians.

Our government would work very good, if only our politicians were honest, as well as the high judges, that is if it were not for all the sin. They are not, so we will fall as did Rome, just a matter of time. But that is not really our problem to slove. we are given instructions by God to 'Go, teach, baptize,' making disciples for Christ. That is what we ought to be doing, we will not leave this world a better place for our children, we will not leave this country a better place for our children. God has already informed us of that, as well as the judgment He has given this world becasue of its sin. Its only a matter of time before its carried out. Men's only hope is Christ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

kob, the reason the deficit has risen is because Congress has increased spending. Um, anyone who does a personal budget should know that. If a person spends MORE than they make, they have deficit increase. If a nation spends MORE than is brought in, ta-da! deficit increase. That's a real duh! moment, there. And check out that surplus. It's rather disingenuous to call it that when there is still a deficit. In a family situation, a true surplus comes when the debt is gone. Speak for yourself that Dubya's tax cuts didn't help the economy - they certainly did! Again, deficits don't arise due to cutting taxes, they arise due to spending too much. Dubya did that, yes indeedy. And BO has taken it to a much higher level.

You are just way off base in the idea of raising taxes, even temporarily. Cutting spending is the way families get control of their budgets, and it's the same with nations. In order to balance any budget, spending must be cut. A good place to begin is with Congress and the POTUS. Does anyone here make a 6 figure annual salary? No? Then, why on earth should our public servants. Sorry, but they should make less...


I don't think I am off base. The majority of Americans, while they say they want to cut spending, when you start touching a program that benefits them, they do not want it cut. Social security, for one. Medicare for another. Highways, are another example. Defense spending is another. I could go on and on.

My point is not merely to increase taxes to balance the budget (though I do believe a modest tax hike is in order at this point). My point is that when government had debt spending, people like their programs too much to give them up and cut them. Why? Because they are not really paying for it. My point is to make people pay for what they say they want. Raise taxes across the board to a level necessary to sustain current spending, then EVERYONE will see that this is a huge problem. When EVERYONE pays in and is hurt financially, then true reform will come. Why? People will be forced to either accept drastic cuts to their beloved programs, OR they will decide higher taxes are worth the keeping the programs.

In an ideal world, I might agree with you. But in reality, people just do not care unless it hits them financially. Congress knows this. Republicans say they are for a balanced budged, but I don't think they really are. Democrats say the same thing, but I don't think they really are. If they were serious, they would cut programs and raise taxes. They can say they want to cut programs, but their constituents do not want that, so they will not make necessary cuts. They will not raie taxes for the same reason. What if they did raise taxes so we could pay for everything they were doing? What do you think would happen then? I truly believe you would see a movement like none other we have seen in recent decades. I believe it would motivate citizens to really pay attention and then demand what they want. It would b a mass reform, which may be exactely what we want. But that will not happen. Why? Politicians are too cowardly to do what is necessary. they like the like of accountablity.

I'm not sure Obama has taken it to a new level. I think it all about evens out when you compare Bush and Obama. The difference is where they want to spend the money.

One more thing....I think Democrats and Republicans are both delusional right now. Republicans think the problem can be fixed solely by spending cuts. In looking at the numbers, this just isn't possible. Democrats think that the problem can be fixed solely be tax hikes. The same can be said for their belief. It will take both. It will take a modest tax hike, plus spending cuts, plus a growing economy. It takes all three. However, Democrats won't budge on spending, Republicans won't budge on taxes, and we are just stuck. It is ridiculous. Politics is all about compromise to come up with a good solution where everyone will get a part of what they want, but give up some of what they want. R and D's won't compromise anymore. Partisan media multiplies that problem. Edited by kindofblue1977
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

I heartily disagree that Dubya and BO even out. Dubya did damage, that is for sure. But BO has taken it much higher...our debt is worse now than ever. I do agree that I am not sure many people are serious about balancing the budget. But cutting spending is the way to do it. The same criteria for families applies to nations. Family members can only bring in so much money before they have to start cutting. The government already extorts money from the taxpayers (yep, I believe it's extortion...the IRS yellow book calls income tax voluntary....just try unvolunteering!), and the well is running dry.

Cuts that are needed - with no raising of taxes:
Foreign aid: almost 500 billion$ - that would be a great step
Federal departments that are not constitutional,like the Dept. of Ed. that Carter saddled us with - the Dept of Ed alone to the tune of &31 billion; Health and Human Services: Medicare/Medicaid: $788 billion (again, would need to be gradual because people don't know how to take care of themselves anymore)

Defense spending is constitutional (albeit there could be some severe cuts there); most of the discretionary spending in the federal budget is not and should be eliminated.

Did you know that the net worth of all the wealthy people comes to less than the national debt? Taxing them more simply won't do anything.

Cutting spending is the key. Just like in our homes...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

LuAnne, I don't think we are in actual disagreement, just looking at different sides of the same coin. We have had the problem with many presidents signing spending bills filled with pork barrel projects, excessive spending in unnecessary areas and that sort and the president signed the bill with the excuse that it was what congress sent him and there was important stuff in the bill that made it worth signing. Instead of this, the president should veto such bills, meet with key congressmen about the matter and then (if still necessary) take to the bully pulpit. I agree that congress has the ultimate voice in what goes forth regarding spending in that they are the ones who present the spending bills and they do have the potential to override a veto. In any given case, it would depend upon the make-up of a particular congress as to how much of a real threat of an overirde might be.

Taxes and debt have been paying our way, with far too much of it coming from taking on increasingly burdonsome debt. The government needs to operate on something along the lines of a "pay as you go" deal where they must, by law, maintain an actual (not by accounting tricks) balanced budget.

Such an arrangement would take pressure off congressmen who today fear to vote on certain matters. If cuts were necessary they could rightly point out the law required them to vote as they did. At the same time, if there were a public uproar over the cutting or ending of a program or agency, such as the Department of Education, then congress could submit how much of a tax increase it would require to maintain the DoE and see if the public liked that option any better.

I can understand why some are so upset with what they see as wasted defense spending when we have a president who commits our military to an unnecessary (and having nothing to do with our defense) war in Libya which has cost hundreds of millions of dollars and is continuting to cost. On top of this, if any other nation interferred in any of the attacking nations as they are with Libya, they would be screaming about the illegality of it.

As things currently stand, American can't continue to pump the same sort of money into SS, Medicare and defense without making draconian cuts elsewhere AND extensively raising taxes. Very tough decisions have to be made regarding all three (as well as the budget in general) before they either collapse or indebt the country so deeply America defaults on her loans...and then what!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...