So What's the Common Ground Moving Forward

[Irish Stout]

I'd like to believe that all of us as Americans have a strong desire to see our partisan Federal Government work together to reach some solutions that will help to lead us out of our current economic woes and away from the fiscal cliff.

Maybe we can't start immediately with a balanced budget, but there has to be some common ground where both parties can concede and agree. Dems won't give up Obamacare or tax increases for the wealthy, Republicans wants corporate tax rates lowered.

What else do the parties want and where can concessions be made? I'd like honest input. I'd like to write my representatives and ask them to work towards compromise, but I think its important that we as citizens have an idea where we would mutually agree first.

My current suggestion is to lower the corporate tax rates. I don't know that anyone has an issue there. I'd also take Romney's idea to close corporate tax loopholes (though I do not know what they are). I would suggest that the Republicans stop fighting against Obamacare, unless they have a way to improve it. Are these not things that can be agreed on? What else can we agree on?

[Cito Pelon]

Originally Posted by Irish Stout

I'd like to believe that all of us as Americans have a strong desire to see our partisan Federal Government work together to reach some solutions that will help to lead us out of our current economic woes and away from the fiscal cliff.

Maybe we can't start immediately with a balanced budget, but there has to be some common ground where both parties can concede and agree. Dems won't give up Obamacare or tax increases for the wealthy, Republicans wants corporate tax rates lowered.

What else do the parties want and where can concessions be made? I'd like honest input. I'd like to write my representatives and ask them to work towards compromise, but I think its important that we as citizens have an idea where we would mutually agree first.

My current suggestion is to lower the corporate tax rates. I don't know that anyone has an issue there. I'd also take Romney's idea to close corporate tax loopholes (though I do not know what they are). I would suggest that the Republicans stop fighting against Obamacare, unless they have a way to improve it. Are these not things that can be agreed on? What else can we agree on?

Dems gonna have to give up something, maybe energy exploration, giving up the Arctic Refuge in return for something. Having the House which is a big deal for the GOP means they can obstruct anything. Hopefully the House gives some things also like closing corporate loopholes. The GOP has some good ideas same as the Dems.

[Rohirrim]

First, there should be a little honesty before decisions are made. The American people should be told that the boomers payed $2.1 trillion into Social Security to carry their "bulge" through the system, but politicians took that money, spent it to cover tax cuts for the rich, and now don't want to pay it back. Also, inform them that the reason we are having such a tough time funding many of these programs like education, infrastructure, poverty and healthcare is because taxes were cut, especially for the rich, which means we can no longer afford them. Maybe we could also tell them that poverty in America is getting worse. Much worse. Especially for the elderly. http://www.nbcnews.com/business/49-7...says-1C7073315
Maybe we could inform them that Bush blew $1 trillion on unfunded wars while giving tax cuts for the rich. Maybe we could also tell them that since the economy crashed a couple of years ago, the rich have continued to get richer, including the very criminals who destroyed our economy, while millions of Americans lost the equity in their homes, lost their jobs, are falling behind in wages, and pay more of their income in taxes than the rich. Tell them also that our military is so bloated that it exceeds the combined world's defense expenditures.


Let the people have the facts. Then, have the discussion.

[cutthemdown]

Russia and China spend a lot more then that but they don't report as honest as America does. It's the same when comparing still births, infant mortality etc etc. Different countries put out the statitics in different ways.

Our airforce is actually getting old. What military programs do you want cut? I'd like to see. A lot of what is paid out is solider salries, benefits to vets etc. How many troops do you want cut? what bases do you want closed.

Remember once you close a overseas base if our military ever has to go their we will pay the price.

the countries mood seems a lot like how Americans felt after ww1. Just sick of war and wanting to withdraw from other countries problems.

We saw we that got us a couple decades later. I think we could find a lot of wasted money in our military spending but we shouldnt just cut military spending to the point we are going to regret it big time in 10 yrs.

Can't they just spending a few % a yr for a decade, forcing the military to adopt a mantra of trying to be effecient.

Hate to break it to you guys but i could see a huge war in the Mideast within the next yr. Israel is pounding the Gaza Strip. Hezzbollah if Assad goes under is through. They will probably antagonize the Jewish state enough that they go into Lebanon.

Turkey is being pummelled by Kurdish rebels on the border with iraq, and now has a problem with Syria and refugees. I keep thinking no way Russia lets Assad go down, if he does they could lose their one naval base in that region of the world.

The sanctions could run out of time for Iran and if that happens it would set the whole thing off. Or it could set it off.

is now the time to cut troop levels or deprive them of the tools they need to kick ass?

[Odysseus]

Originally Posted by Irish Stout

I'd like to believe that all of us as Americans have a strong desire to see our partisan Federal Government work together to reach some solutions that will help to lead us out of our current economic woes and away from the fiscal cliff.

Maybe we can't start immediately with a balanced budget, but there has to be some common ground where both parties can concede and agree. Dems won't give up Obamacare or tax increases for the wealthy, Republicans wants corporate tax rates lowered.

What else do the parties want and where can concessions be made? I'd like honest input. I'd like to write my representatives and ask them to work towards compromise, but I think its important that we as citizens have an idea where we would mutually agree first.

My current suggestion is to lower the corporate tax rates. I don't know that anyone has an issue there. I'd also take Romney's idea to close corporate tax loopholes (though I do not know what they are). I would suggest that the Republicans stop fighting against Obamacare, unless they have a way to improve it. Are these not things that can be agreed on? What else can we agree on?

Obama needs to trade.

He needs to offer tax cuts, tax incentives, and tax breaks for hiring the chronically unemployed as well as incentivizing corporations to hire Americans. The tax breaks they want should come at the price of more jobs, more green jobs, and special consideration for people who have been out of work for awhile or the under employed.

Obama needs to right size the military which does mean cuts but it means spending on better technology, cross training your war fighters, and better government accounting, supply, and systems that benefit the war fighter. We can fight wars on all fronts if stop fighting our own infrastructure. Real time battle field information versus multiple layers of commands. Cut makes a good point. We cannot gut the military in order to have a military but in the same aspect we need to do more with less. Get rid of stupid soldiers and keep the ones who can perform at the highest levels.

One of the best green job initiatives that can be created is better support for telework, co-working, and flex jobs. Americans who are job searching would rather have a half of a job than nothing. They should create tax breaks for companies who hire flex workers after 90 days try out. Since Obamacare is the law of the land why not use that to create a more flexible workforce?

There needs to be transparency on Social Security even if it's a modified and truncated version of the truth. Ro makes a good point. This is critical to understand why Obamacare was needed and what the real issues are with Medicare and Medicaid that no congressmen of record has addressed.

Energy "exploration" needs to be reviewed so that the strictest standards for "TRANSPORT" and strictest standards for "STORAGE" of oil are coveted. No more preventable natural disasters. The environment needs to be protected while we harvest needed fuel. China needs to be brought into this discussion. Alone we save nothing.

I think if that if corporations want lower tax rates it should be in exchange for effective R&D, educating it's workforce, job training centers where workers are not trapped in one position their whole careers, and reward good corporate citizenship instead of greed.

The bottomline is our average slack jawed moron citizen needs to be able to make a working wage so he can afford the consumerism he was sold when he was conceived by meaner circumstances which created him. We have to build a nation where the stupidest bubba can be treated like an equal because he has the opportunity to be better than he really is.

The fastest way to end racism is through education. The quickest way to let old antipathy die is having opportunity. Poverty breeds contempt and the rich need to realize their long term interest (globally) is with American citizens.

[Doggcow]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

First, there should be a little honesty before decisions are made. The American people should be told that the boomers payed $2.1 trillion into Social Security to carry their "bulge" through the system, but politicians took that money, spent it to cover tax cuts for the rich, and now don't want to pay it back. Also, inform them that the reason we are having such a tough time funding many of these programs like education, infrastructure, poverty and healthcare is because taxes were cut, especially for the rich, which means we can no longer afford them. Maybe we could also tell them that poverty in America is getting worse. Much worse. Especially for the elderly. http://www.nbcnews.com/business/49-7...says-1C7073315
Maybe we could inform them that Bush blew $1 trillion on unfunded wars while giving tax cuts for the rich. Maybe we could also tell them that since the economy crashed a couple of years ago, the rich have continued to get richer, including the very criminals who destroyed our economy, while millions of Americans lost the equity in their homes, lost their jobs, are falling behind in wages, and pay more of their income in taxes than the rich. Tell them also that our military is so bloated that it exceeds the combined world's defense expenditures.


Let the people have the facts. Then, have the discussion.

Or we could conquer the world!

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

Russia and China spend a lot more then that but they don't report as honest as America does. It's the same when comparing still births, infant mortality etc etc. Different countries put out the statitics in different ways.

Our airforce is actually getting old. What military programs do you want cut? I'd like to see. A lot of what is paid out is solider salries, benefits to vets etc. How many troops do you want cut? what bases do you want closed.

Remember once you close a overseas base if our military ever has to go their we will pay the price.

the countries mood seems a lot like how Americans felt after ww1. Just sick of war and wanting to withdraw from other countries problems.

We saw we that got us a couple decades later. I think we could find a lot of wasted money in our military spending but we shouldnt just cut military spending to the point we are going to regret it big time in 10 yrs.

Can't they just spending a few % a yr for a decade, forcing the military to adopt a mantra of trying to be effecient.

Hate to break it to you guys but i could see a huge war in the Mideast within the next yr. Israel is pounding the Gaza Strip. Hezzbollah if Assad goes under is through. They will probably antagonize the Jewish state enough that they go into Lebanon.

Turkey is being pummelled by Kurdish rebels on the border with iraq, and now has a problem with Syria and refugees. I keep thinking no way Russia lets Assad go down, if he does they could lose their one naval base in that region of the world.

The sanctions could run out of time for Iran and if that happens it would set the whole thing off. Or it could set it off.

is now the time to cut troop levels or deprive them of the tools they need to kick ass?

You do know that our military spending is greater than that of the next ten countries combined, correct?

Also, there's an awful lot of inefficiency in the military. Spending on weapons that do not work -- and doing it for decades at a time -- can stop, and it's not going to affect soldier pay or base closures.

Be intellectually honest. For once.

[Rohirrim]

What has brought America down is older than the Old Testament: Greed.

Simple.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Hard to find common ground with people who simply refuse to believe that greed exists.

[Bacchus]

there could be a jobs bill, maybe a highway bill, I do not expect much though.

I fully expect to go over the fiscal cliff. It will be fun to watch!!

[houghtam]

The same carriers we had 10 years ago can hit 9 times the targets they could then.

Our military will be fine.

Slash it in half (or more), put vets to work building roads and bridges and working on renewable energy, and place more responsibility on states for upholding their National Guard units. Those are the first responders in times of crisis anyway.

[Fedaykin]

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

Russia and China spend a lot more then that but they don't report as honest as America does. It's the same when comparing still births, infant mortality etc etc. Different countries put out the statitics in different ways.

Our airforce is actually getting old. What military programs do you want cut? I'd like to see. A lot of what is paid out is solider salries, benefits to vets etc. How many troops do you want cut? what bases do you want closed.

Remember once you close a overseas base if our military ever has to go their we will pay the price.

the countries mood seems a lot like how Americans felt after ww1. Just sick of war and wanting to withdraw from other countries problems.

We saw we that got us a couple decades later. I think we could find a lot of wasted money in our military spending but we shouldnt just cut military spending to the point we are going to regret it big time in 10 yrs.

Can't they just spending a few % a yr for a decade, forcing the military to adopt a mantra of trying to be effecient.

Hate to break it to you guys but i could see a huge war in the Mideast within the next yr. Israel is pounding the Gaza Strip. Hezzbollah if Assad goes under is through. They will probably antagonize the Jewish state enough that they go into Lebanon.

Turkey is being pummelled by Kurdish rebels on the border with iraq, and now has a problem with Syria and refugees. I keep thinking no way Russia lets Assad go down, if he does they could lose their one naval base in that region of the world.

The sanctions could run out of time for Iran and if that happens it would set the whole thing off. Or it could set it off.

is now the time to cut troop levels or deprive them of the tools they need to kick ass?

What are we doing today that requires the massive increase in defense spending over the last decade (not even including direct war spending)?

In 2000, we were spending $300bn/year on DoD. Today we are spending over $600bn/year (+$100bn in war spending for a total over over $700bn).

Inflation adjusted, the 2000 budget would be about $386bn/year, making the real spending increase:

55% excluding war spending and
81% including war spending.

What have we bought for 155%/181% of what we were spending in 2000?

That, btw, doesn't even include the VA and other indirect costs that have mounted because of the wars. We're talking $500bn++ in extra spending/yr on defense since 2000, or, you know, half the current deficit.

What is it buying us Cutt?

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by Fedaykin

What are we doing today that requires the massive increase in defense spending over the last decade (not even including direct war spending)?

In 2000, we were spending $300bn/year on DoD. Today we are spending over $600bn/year (+$100bn in war spending for a total over over $700bn).

Inflation adjusted, the 2000 budget would be about $386bn/year, making the real spending increase:

55% excluding war spending and
81% including war spending.

What have we bought for 155%/181% of what we were spending in 2000?

That, btw, doesn't even include the VA and other indirect costs that have mounted because of the wars. We're talking $500bn++ in extra spending/yr on defense since 2000, or, you know, half the current deficit.

What is it buying us Cutt?

He already answered this.

It's buying us the constitutionally endowed power of protecting us from an attack by the entire world.

It's Congress' first responsibility, you know.

[Rohirrim]

Do we still have the Pacific Ocean on one side of us and the Atlantic Ocean on the other?

Good.

[Crushaholic]

Eliminate estate taxes. The federal government cannot let people rest in peace. They have to stick them, one more time. We can TALK about higher taxes, for the living wealthy. Don't punish their families...

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by Crushaholic

Eliminate estate taxes. The federal government cannot let people rest in peace. They have to stick them, one more time. We can TALK about higher taxes, for the living wealthy. Don't punish their families...

Estates worth less than $5 million are exempt from estate tax.

~80% of Americans will never pay a dime on it.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Crushaholic

Eliminate estate taxes. The federal government cannot let people rest in peace. They have to stick them, one more time. We can TALK about higher taxes, for the living wealthy. Don't punish their families...

Paris Hilton thanks you for making her interests your interests.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by houghtam

Estates worth less than $5 million are exempt from estate tax.

~80% of Americans will never pay a dime on it.

He should also educate himself on the reason why the founders conceived the estate tax in the first place.

[Fedaykin]

Originally Posted by houghtam

Estates worth less than $5 million are exempt from estate tax.

~80% of Americans will never pay a dime on it.

More like 90-95%

A *really* good retirement for current retirees is about $2-3,000,000 in various securities, a few hundred in a house and some other misc stuff.

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by Fedaykin

More like 90-95%

A *really* good retirement for current retirees is about $2-3,000,000 in various securities, a few hundred in a house and some other misc stuff.

Well I figured maybe 10-15% of Americans may have a life insurance policy that would push that over the top.

I'm probably a bit too generous.

[cutthemdown]

If you tax rich peoples estates too much they will just leave the USA and set up in some other country before they die. Besides do you really need to tax someones money again after they die? I mean cmon enough is enough regardless if the cut off is 5 million.

[Drek]

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

Russia and China spend a lot more then that but they don't report as honest as America does. It's the same when comparing still births, infant mortality etc etc. Different countries put out the statitics in different ways.

Our airforce is actually getting old. What military programs do you want cut? I'd like to see. A lot of what is paid out is solider salries, benefits to vets etc. How many troops do you want cut? what bases do you want closed.

Remember once you close a overseas base if our military ever has to go their we will pay the price.

Close all foreign military bases. We got aircraft carriers and allies with military bases all around the world. Bring all our troops home.

If we need to get involved in a foreign conflict (get into when that should happen later) we send a carrier or two out to the nearest large body of water and carpet bomb and drone strike our opponent into the stone age. Problem solved.

the countries mood seems a lot like how Americans felt after ww1. Just sick of war and wanting to withdraw from other countries problems.

Wasn't this the spirit that our nation was founded on? You can't just gift liberty and democracy onto people. We've found that out all too clearly in the last several decades of American foreign conflict.

We saw we that got us a couple decades later. I think we could find a lot of wasted money in our military spending but we shouldnt just cut military spending to the point we are going to regret it big time in 10 yrs.

After WWI we were not an unquestioned super power like we are now, and there was nothing close to the coalition of allies currently constructed via NATO, etc..

Can't they just spending a few % a yr for a decade, forcing the military to adopt a mantra of trying to be effecient.

That would be the ideal. Shave military spending down to ~3.0% of GDP via extracting ourselves from foreign involvement and more efficient management.

Hate to break it to you guys but i could see a huge war in the Mideast within the next yr. Israel is pounding the Gaza Strip. Hezzbollah if Assad goes under is through. They will probably antagonize the Jewish state enough that they go into Lebanon.

When did peace in the middle east become entirely a U.S. responsibility? Can't get along with your neighbors? Sort it out. We've carried water for Israel for too damn long as it is and now they're back antagonizing other nations because they think big brother (the U.S.) will always have their back. Time for them to grow up.

Turkey is being pummelled by Kurdish rebels on the border with iraq, and now has a problem with Syria and refugees. I keep thinking no way Russia lets Assad go down, if he does they could lose their one naval base in that region of the world.

Russia is militarily weak and will not directly intercede to save Assad. Turkey is militarily capable of protecting themselves.

The sanctions could run out of time for Iran and if that happens it would set the whole thing off. Or it could set it off.

And they're years away from a strike on U.S. soil. Sounds like other people's problem.

is now the time to cut troop levels or deprive them of the tools they need to kick ass?

Not at all. Its just time to stop playing world police. We can still help NATO and provide a lot of the muscle to joint efforts, but we should no longer obligate ourselves to ensuring peace across the world.

Consolidate all military R&D into a single multi-branch chaired board where new technologies are developed based on cross-branch synergy. No more heavy R&D on three or four different jets spread throughout the branches, or service rifles, etc.. No more iterative annual upgrades to state of the art tech that adds zero increased functionality.

Instead all R&D should be focused on the long term game. Develop a fighter that can last several years for example and spend the time in between iterations planning on a true step forward. Stagger updates throughout the entire fleet of aircraft, watercraft, firearms, etc..

It would add significant efficiency and let the gov't. suppliers actually meet demand for updates, not being behind in production until well after the next iteration is already ready to replace it.

Further, our military needs to change how it approaches military personnel. Standards of conduct need to be overhauled so that personal failings (like adultery) are set aside and instead we focus on actual results. Thomas E. Ricks' new book "The Generals" underscores the kind of change we need. The Peter Principle can't be allowed to occur in our military. You only reach the highest point of your greatest efficiency, not the point of incompetence. This should be achieved through demotions which need to be viewed as a move to better the nation, not a slight.

[Drek]

Originally Posted by houghtam

Well I figured maybe 10-15% of Americans may have a life insurance policy that would push that over the top.

I'm probably a bit too generous.

Life insurance is non-taxed income.

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

If you tax rich peoples estates too much they will just leave the USA and set up in some other country before they die. Besides do you really need to tax someones money again after they die? I mean cmon enough is enough regardless if the cut off is 5 million.

They can feel free. When their family wants to bring it back we'll tax it then. It would also lead to the liquidation of their land assets, which is the real point of estate tax.

A few words from historic figures on this:

Adam Smith (once quoted by Thomas Jefferson on the floor of the Virginia legislature), considered one of the fathers of free market capitalism:

A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fulness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural. There is no point more difficult to account for than the right we conceive men to have to dispose of their goods after death.

Select quotes of Thomas Paine:
“All hereditary government is in its nature tyranny.” “Hereditary succession . . . is in its nature an absurdity, because it is impossible to make wisdom hereditary. . . . History informs us that the son of Solomon was a fool.” “To the evil of monarchy we have added that of hereditary succession; and as the first is a degradation and lessening of ourselves, so the second . . . is an insult and an imposition on posterity.”

Theodore Roosevelt on the inheritance of great wealth and it's effects on the inheritors (first POTUS to propose a steep estate tax):

does not do them any real service and is of great and genuine detriment to the community at large.'

Winston Churchill argued that estate taxes where "a certain corrective against the development of a race of idle rich".

Sounds like some of the greatest free market capitalists/small gov't. guys in history saw the problem with familial inheritance. Maybe they were on to something.

[Fedaykin]

Originally Posted by Drek

Life insurance is non-taxed income.


They can feel free. When their family wants to bring it back we'll tax it then. It would also lead to the liquidation of their land assets, which is the real point of estate tax.

A few words from historic figures on this:

Adam Smith (once quoted by Thomas Jefferson on the floor of the Virginia legislature), considered one of the fathers of free market capitalism:


Select quotes of Thomas Paine:
“All hereditary government is in its nature tyranny.” “Hereditary succession . . . is in its nature an absurdity, because it is impossible to make wisdom hereditary. . . . History informs us that the son of Solomon was a fool.” “To the evil of monarchy we have added that of hereditary succession; and as the first is a degradation and lessening of ourselves, so the second . . . is an insult and an imposition on posterity.”

Theodore Roosevelt on the inheritance of great wealth and it's effects on the inheritors (first POTUS to propose a steep estate tax):


Winston Churchill argued that estate taxes where "a certain corrective against the development of a race of idle rich".

Sounds like some of the greatest free market capitalists/small gov't. guys in history saw the problem with familial inheritance. Maybe they were on to something.

Yep, the purpose of the estate tax is to prevent the rise of an American Aristocracy/Feudalism. It hasn't done a great job, but that was the intent.

[Drek]

Originally Posted by Fedaykin

Yep, the purpose of the estate tax is to prevent the rise of an American Aristocracy/Feudalism. It hasn't done a great job, but that was the intent.

That is because politicians refuse to let it do it's job.