Once Considered Unthinkable, U.S. Sales Tax Gets Fresh Look - Page 2 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #11 of 56 (permalink) Old 05-27-2009, 10:41 AM
DP
Moderator
 
DP's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 190E, 400E, SLK350
Location: Chesapeak Bay
Posts: 64,125
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 991 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakarta Expat View Post
ON TOP OF of course it is an AIPAC plan to keep Obama at 1 term.....
.. a tax revolt!
DP is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 56 (permalink) Old 05-27-2009, 10:53 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Feb 2003
Location: Estados Unidos
Posts: 3,222
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Looks like more tea parties to come??
el pres is offline  
post #13 of 56 (permalink) Old 05-27-2009, 02:47 PM
Moderately subtle
 
edfreeman's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2003
Vehicle: 94 E500, 97 500SL
Location: Soddy Daisy, TN
Posts: 8,508
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Send a message via AIM to edfreeman
Interesting that, with a budget problem, raising revenue, and not reducing spending, is what is being discussed.

edfreeman is offline  
post #14 of 56 (permalink) Old 05-27-2009, 08:46 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Well, the lowering taxes while raising spending didn't do it. I doubt this will either but at some point, no matter how we slice it, there are going to be tax increases. There are just no ways to run government [even if you cut some services], service debt and pay down debt without increasing the revenue stream. The math just does not exist to make that happen [that trick is called magic].

And cutting services, appropriations would be interesting. What services would be cut and what impacts would those cuts cause? With just about all services and appropriations there are going to be unintended consequences that end up costing as much or more than the cuts [just look at cuts in Air Traffic Control or bridge upgrades]. We cut the services and appropriations requiring prioritization of funds and now we have two infrastructure systems that are failing daily [pick falling bridges or near misses for $500].

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #15 of 56 (permalink) Old 05-27-2009, 09:18 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
DoD:
Cut a couple of aircraft carrier battle groups and several submarines. Delay construction of replacements. Continue the base closures/consolidations. Continue the evolution from heavy armor/mechanized infantry to small, highly lethal combined arms forces and SF integration. Retire the B-1 fleet. Cut USACE projects/devolve to states except strictly navigable waterways.

DHS:
Disassemble and return to previous departments.

Department of Education:
Delete/devolve to states.

CIA:
Get out of the paramilitary business and leave that to DoD.

Department of Transportation:
Dissolve. Put NOAA in DoI.

Open all federal lands & waters to oil/gas exploration.

Reduce coporate taxes.
Reduce capital gains taxes.
Adopt as much of Fair Tax as practical.

The biggest problems we are facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all and thatís what I intend to reverse.

~ Senator Barack H. Obama
Botnst is offline  
post #16 of 56 (permalink) Old 05-27-2009, 09:45 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst View Post
DoD:
Cut a couple of aircraft carrier battle groups and several submarines. Delay construction of replacements. Continue the base closures/consolidations. Continue the evolution from heavy armor/mechanized infantry to small, highly lethal combined arms forces and SF integration. Retire the B-1 fleet. Cut USACE projects/devolve to states except strictly navigable waterways.

DHS:
Disassemble and return to previous departments.

Department of Education:
Delete/devolve to states.

CIA:
Get out of the paramilitary business and leave that to DoD.

Department of Transportation:
Dissolve. Put NOAA in DoI.

Open all federal lands & waters to oil/gas exploration.

Reduce coporate taxes.
Reduce capital gains taxes.
Adopt as much of Fair Tax as practical.
Right now, as an example 30% of the 10 carrier force is in SLEP or SRA. With normal hotspots, we are already spread thin in carriers when there is an issue [Iraq, Straits of Hormuz with Iran, NK and Middle East currently]. That leaves no backup incase things get stupid.

We are already retiring both boomers and attack subs, even though more and more rogue nations now have access.

BRAC is continuing . It does however have the down side of tanking the economy of the towns [and sometimes states] with which they are associated. I did a bunch of Base Master Plans in the early 1990s for BRAC and it is not as simple as just moving boxes.

How do these items either improve revenue stream or reduce appropriations:
  • Open all federal lands & waters to oil/gas exploration.
  • Reduce coporate taxes.
  • Reduce capital gains taxes.

And Fair Tax, by whatever version floated is still going to have to address the reduction of workforce and expectation of X services and be addressed in a responsible way. There are two groups of folks who pay little or no taxes, the very poor and the very rich. Most fair tax proposals compensate for the very poor and that leave the very rich who right now have loopholes and tax havens and more tax breaks than anyone. Close those down first, cleaning up the current system before beginning to think about instituting a new system that doesn't even seem to have working projections.

If taxes by that or another system are just "pushed down to the state level" that provides no improvement whatsoever for the tax burdens of the American taxpayer.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #17 of 56 (permalink) Old 05-27-2009, 09:57 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Reduing the fleet reduces fleet manpower and logistics. For example, one LPD burns about a half million gallons of JP-5 per month. One DD burns a couple hundred thousand. Carriers and many surface vessels use nuke power. It's more cost effective but is still expensive.

Retiring subs are replaced by new subs. Reduce the number of subs.

Reducing carrier battle groups and subs presupposes reductions in foreign commitments. There is no need for the USA to maintain standing armies in Korea, Japan, or Europe. There are plenty of Koreans, Japanese, and Europeans. They don't like us anyway. Fine. Bye-bye.

you're right that reducing military (and any other government expenditure) has local impact. That's why every congressman has (or wants) some portion of some mil equipment manufactured in his district -- even the doves in congress suck that teat. So what? Spit out the teat. Federal dollars are expensive because of overhead costs. For example, USACE charges about 50% admin overhead for every project dollar they get.

By cutting federal expenditures, we can pay-down the damned ballooning debt. It wont be long before debt service will be the largest single expenditure. That is freaking crazy. We cannot afford the gov we have and I'll be damned if I think the one we have is worth what I contribute to it. Cut the damned thing.

B

The biggest problems we are facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all and thatís what I intend to reverse.

~ Senator Barack H. Obama
Botnst is offline  
post #18 of 56 (permalink) Old 05-27-2009, 09:57 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by el pres View Post
Looks like more tea parties to come??
Definitely. I didn't participate in the recent one. The next one I'll be there.

The biggest problems we are facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all and thatís what I intend to reverse.

~ Senator Barack H. Obama
Botnst is offline  
post #19 of 56 (permalink) Old 05-27-2009, 10:01 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Jul 2007
Vehicle: 1973 450 SL
Location: Castle Rock, CO
Posts: 5,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
Right now, as an example 30% of the 10 carrier force is in SLEP or SRA. With normal hotspots, we are already spread thin in carriers when there is an issue [Iraq, Straits of Hormuz with Iran, NK and Middle East currently]. That leaves no backup incase things get stupid.

We are already retiring both boomers and attack subs, even though more and more rogue nations now have access.

BRAC is continuing . It does however have the down side of tanking the economy of the towns [and sometimes states] with which they are associated. I did a bunch of Base Master Plans in the early 1990s for BRAC and it is not as simple as just moving boxes.

How do these items either improve revenue stream or reduce appropriations:[LIST][*]Open all federal lands & waters to oil/gas exploration. [*]Reduce coporate taxes.[*]Reduce capital gains taxes.[/LIST]

And Fair Tax, by whatever version floated is still going to have to address the reduction of workforce and expectation of X services and be addressed in a responsible way. There are two groups of folks who pay little or no taxes, the very poor and the very rich. Most fair tax proposals compensate for the very poor and that leave the very rich who right now have loopholes and tax havens and more tax breaks than anyone. Close those down first, cleaning up the current system before beginning to think about instituting a new system that doesn't even seem to have working projections.

If taxes by that or another system are just "pushed down to the state level" that provides no improvement whatsoever for the tax burdens of the American taxpayer.
The gains from the items you question would be enormous and immediate. But you libs have a set of blinders on regarding them. I've posted many times on the last two; you just don't get it.

Charter member of the Vast Rightwing Conspiracy and proud of it.

God Bless the America we're trying to create.
--Hillary Rodham Clinton
bottomline1 is offline  
post #20 of 56 (permalink) Old 05-28-2009, 12:49 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by McBear
  • Reduce coporate taxes.
  • Reduce capital gains taxes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bottomline1 View Post
The gains from the items you question would be enormous and immediate. But you libs have a set of blinders on regarding them. I've posted many times on the last two; you just don't get it.
Explain then why the last times that Corporate taxes have been reduced [loopholes expanded] and the last time Capital gains were reduced [down near 50% from the 1990s] we did not experience a REVENUE GROWTH that kept up with spending instead of us having to borrow $5Trillion in the reduced tax time frame.

See, you SAY that it will improve revenue but when we see it in practice, we find that Revenues don't keep up with expectations. FYI, Bush projections show us having a GDP of $17.8T this year.

To keep is simple. You THINK that reduction of taxes will somehow spur new business and revenue but you base that on no experience or no model that has shown it to actually do as promised. THAT I get.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    The trillion dollar tax fight - DEMS PLAN TRILLION DOLLAR TAX BILL Jakarta Expat Off-Topic 10 10-12-2007 12:22 PM
    Sales Tax Rate in Jersey increase??? jjl1 W164 M-Class 3 10-18-2005 08:06 PM
    Has anyone considered.... C-Rod W163 M-Class 5 11-08-2002 08:48 PM
    How to avoid SALES TAX on purchase Guest (MBNZ) W220 S-Class 0 10-19-2001 05:12 PM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome