Our Economy Could Be In Surplus In Less Than A Year With A 1% Wall Street Sales Tax

reply to post by neo96


Actually, I was reading an article today that pointed out how our "government spending" is LOWER now, over the last few years (since G-Bu - or "W")
But, I suppose you wouldn't be interested in reading that article.

reply to post by Kali74


I think until your a millionaire billionaire, you cannot really express or make examples of how it is they live, making it sound like its a bad thing to be a wealthy American,

I already made my case and point on this thread, and even the mods on ats missed the point I was trying to prove, so it does not surprise me at all this thread has so many pages after the truth was revealed at least 10 times already..

I guess arguing on ats, makes allot of the members comfortable... the truth is the last thing on the minds of most members...





don't bother trying to argue with me, either, lets see how soon the wall street tax is put into place, so I can stay on topic, and not get censored by some egotistical mod...

The truth was revealed pages ago...

reply to post by Kali74

You're saying that the majority of Americans don't earn money?

What I am saying is those Amerkans on SS and Medicare 60 million each don't earn those benefits.

SS a person only earned 6% of the total benefits receive from SS only then anyone on SS automatically gets their medicare benefits deducted from that first government check which amounts to one government program paying for another one.

Then People don't earn welfare, or food stamps now we are talking well over 100 million Amerikans.

You realize that Big Business is stealing in multiple ways, tax dollars, right?

Then what does that make the majority of Amerikans? Getting money they "didn't earn" ?

off-shore tax dodgers

So which tax dodgers would that be? we already "established corporate tax dodgers are bad" but what about those tax dodgers who have zero tax liability that 47% of Amerikans who are not corporations.

manipulating the market

As opposed to government manipulation of the market that created the mortgage crisis where Fanny and Freddy both government agencies stood by and said nothing to see there move along.

Government is the one who created bubbles, saw it with the Dot com's, and the housing markets, and the current one Gold.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by neo96

 

Actually, I was reading an article today that pointed out how our "government spending" is LOWER now, over the last few years (since G-Bu - or "W")
But, I suppose you wouldn't be interested in reading that article.

Because that article is Bull Crap last administration spent 6 trillion dollars during the last term the debt ceiling has been raised numerous times,

CBO projections put the national deficit at well over 21 trillion dollars by 2016.

The current state of the union does not reflect that article.

reply to post by neo96


I'm having trouble finding the article I saw earlier, but here's a related-issue article:
Feder al Spending, Taxes, and Deficits Are Lower Today Than When Obama Took Office

Just in case you get bored and feel like reading something.

Dude, what is with "Amerikuns" or "Amerkans"....

Why does anyone think that the people in charge would use this to pay off our debt? The government has not made any truly responsible fiscal decisions in I don't know how long. This would just add more to spending, and to grow the government, not help out the "little people". Anyone who even has a little bit invested in a 401k would be affected by this, believe me. I am not saying it is right, but come on, if you can't work with what you have got, why should anyone give you more?

reply to post by wildtimes


A tactic used to imply one is more American than another.

This is from the article linked above.

Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower? Would You Believe It's Barack Obama?
Here's another one.
Almost a year old.

It’s enough to make even the most ardent Obama cynic scratch his head in confusion.

Amidst all the cries of Barack Obama being the most prolific big government spender the nation has ever suffered, Marketwatch is reporting that our president has actually been tighter with a buck than any United States president since Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Who knew?

Apparently, not many "knew."

reply to post by wildtimes

Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower? Would You Believe It's Barack Obama?

Lies for two reasonswww.usdebtclock.org... the national debt in 2008 was 9 trillion dollars

as of this year the national debt has grown over 16 trillion which is a rise of 6 trillion dollars for 1 term and the end of his second term the national debt will be 21 plus trillion.

When he started office 9 trillion leaves office 21 trillion do the math 12 ish trillion dollars more than all the preceding presidents.

Oh and then there is that pesky thing called inflation then there is that little fact of not passing a budget in 4 years.

Hell student loan debt has grown over 1 trillion dollars alone under his admin.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by neo96

 

Actually, I was reading an article today that pointed out how our "government spending" is LOWER now, over the last few years (since G-Bu - or "W")
But, I suppose you wouldn't be interested in reading that article.

Speaking in non-partisan terms, no matter whether the Prez is R or D, there are unfunded liabilities as program spending which were put in place before whatever administration is there presently starting with FDR and his Socialist New Deal.

Social Security is primarily funded through dedicated payroll taxes called Federal Insurance Contributions Act tax (FICA). Tax deposits are formally entrusted to the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund, the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, or the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund which comprise the Social Security Trust Fund.[4] Upward redistribution of income is responsible for about 43% of the projected Social Security shortfall over the next 75 years.[5]

According to economist Martin Feldstein, the combined spending for all social insurance programs in 2003 constituted 37% of government expenditure and 7% of the gross domestic product.[6] Social Security is currently estimated to keep roughly 40 percent of all Americans age 65 or older out of poverty

A limited form of the Social Security program began, during President Franklin D. Roosevelt's first term, as a measure to implement "social insurance" during the Great Depression of the 1930s, when poverty rates among senior citizens exceeded 50 percent.[8] The Act was an attempt to limit what were seen as dangers in the modern American life, including old age, poverty, unemployment, and the burdens of widows and fatherless children.
Opponents, however, decried the proposal as socialism. In a Senate Finance Committee hearing, one Senator asked Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins, "Isn't this socialism?" She said that it was not, but he continued, "Isn't this a teeny-weeny bit of socialism?"[9]

en.wikipedia.org...(United_States)

So yeh, why is G Wubya responsible for 37% of govt spending which has it's roots in FDR's New Deal? And FDR was decidedly DEMOCRAT.

On the other hand, Obama is responsible for helping facilitate the biggest addition to welfare spending and liabilities since the New Deal. More people are food stamp recipients in his admin than any other time.

reply to post by neo96


Employer contributions to SS is counted as employee compensation, which is why businesses charge far more for services than the employee is paid, on top of businesses costs, just like insurance, vacation, retirement funding.

Again, if employer contributions weren't accounted for as part of compensation, companies would lose money by hiring workers. Clearly you know nothing about accounting.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


What pure drivel. SS pays for itself, and loans huge amounts of money to the general budget. The fed gov debt was not created by SS.

The huge fed debt was created by military expenditures protecting the corporate empire around the globe, wall street bailouts, and illegal immigration.

What you want to do is steal from the working class to pay for Wall Street theft.

Your empiricism ideology has never worked.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

What pure drivel. SS pays for itself, and loans huge amounts of money to the general budget. The fed gov debt was not created by SS.

The huge fed debt was created by military expenditures protecting the corporate empire around the globe, wall street bailouts, and illegal immigration.

What you want to do is steal from the working class to pay for Wall Street theft.

Your empiricism ideology has never worked.

It should pay for itself if not for arming all anti-communist rebels and anti-muslim fundamentalist rebels throughout the world. How many legitimate democratic governments have been over-thrown throughout the world by cia-mossad action? How many legitimate governments have been bombed by NATO forces? Who encourages drug trafficking?

Zionist warmongers have an aversion for truth. As long as they can spark WW3 that is all they care for. As for 6 million jews gassed to death that must be the worst hoax in human history. Most jews simply died from starvation in work camps, not gassed to death. When you are losing a war you don't feed people you intensely dislike. Sure there might have been small time massacres but nothing as large scale and automated as what the lying scumbag rothschilds suggest.

Originally posted by wildtimes
This is from the article linked above.

edit on 24-3-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

I wouldn't put any more faith in thinkprogress charts than heritage foundation charts. Both are one dimensional and put emphasis to achieve an agenda. The fact Obama has continued and expanded the bush era wars and the fact he has increased the corporate bailouts at least 5-fold tells me both parties are full of #!

Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by sonnny1

 

BS again.

Either the poor have a choice, or they don't.

Which one is it?

I go on further saying EVERYONE has a choice.

answer this question

did the people who lost their jobs to china have a say in the matter?

simple question?

did the corps who off shored those jobs have a choice?

xploder

Great, answer my questions why we are at it.


Why cant you realize that their are people who don't quit, or have a defeatist attitude like you? Why label people "haters of the poor" if they don't think like you?

See, we all have choices and decisions. Obviously you don't want to answer the question, because it will prove the point of our discussion that people can do what they want to do, regardless if they work for a Company that doesn't care about them, or one that does care.


Also, those who worked, and had their Jobs "off-shored" had a choice to better their lives by either finding another job, not working for a Company that cared so little about their well being, or starting their own business. There are things in life called OPTIONS. You make it seem like these Corporations held guns to their workers heads, and forced them to take the Jobs, or forced them to quit. Many Company's, right or wrong gave their employees OPTIONS. And Even if a Company didn't give them Options, an Employee has the right to better their own life, and living Condition's. Many of my Family and Friends understand this simple concept, and refuse to play the victim card.

Jobs were outsourced to China but I can bet you Money the same people who lost their Jobs to someone in China, are STILL buying Made in China goods. Oh, the Irony...........

Something to consider.......

Air Conditioning, Cable TV, and an Xbox: What is Poverty in the United States Today?


One Final question.

Do you really believe that those in Power, those running the United States, Democrat or Republican care about your well being, or mine, or poor, or rich ?

If so, I pity you, because they ONLY care about themselves.

BTW, Wall Street is a Giant Lottery. Anyone playing knows full well the risk they are taking. I see nothing wrong with a small Tax, to help with our debt problem. With that said.......



Peace.

reply to post by sonnny1


So you are saying that whatever the current unemployment rate is that they are all lazy or unskilled? Literally tens of millions of americans.

There is no such thing as bad luck. There is no such thing as getting sick or injured. Outsourcing is not that bad. Automation isn't too bad either.

I guess its all ok until you become a victim yourself. Then it would be horrible and you will create a new account to hide your shame for misleading everyone, complaining like a little child how bad things are. I have already seen a few conservative posters do that.

Me, me, me, me, me, me...........ITS ALL ABOUT ME world! I exist and no else does. MEEEEEE (Talk about a strawman, damm)

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07


I guess its all ok until you become a victim yourself.

Been there, done that. Sacrificed everything. Gained it all back. I could have quit, or stopped trying. I decided not to.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
Then it would be horrible and you will create a new account to hide your shame for misleading everyone, complaining like a little child how bad things are. I have already seen a few conservative posters do that.

Don't know what this has to do with Rich or Poor, Wall Street or Me.

Sounds Personal....

Back on Topic.

I am probobly the only "conservative" that says yes to the Tax, if its done right. Been saying it for pages and pages. Ive already said things are bad also. I have also been saying the system needs to be fixed. Those that don't have, do have option's. They might not be the best, but options they are. I also know plenty of folks that would prove to you and those who believe in continuing Americas Caste System, wrong.

reply to post by Kali74


Yeah another tax will fix everything LOL The government will just see it as more money to spend... Sigh

reply to post by hawkiye


The answer would be a large middle class tax cut.

The US middle class shouldn't be taxed to support the global corporate empire that exports our jobs to communist slave labor.