Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film

Bush supporters - answer one question...

Old 11-04-04, 09:34 PM
  #1  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,527
Bush supporters - answer one question...

This war in Iraq is costing us a lot of money. Bush wants to make these tax cuts permanent. WHERE will the money come from to pay for our national debt?
hahn is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 09:39 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Willow Grove, PA
Posts: 3,055
By cutting the fat from social programs.

Kerry was going to cut taxes for the middle class as well, who shoulder most of the tax burden, and was going to continue the war.... where was he going to get the money from?

Last edited by jasonr114; 11-04-04 at 09:41 PM.
Sloth911 is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 09:42 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,503
Raise the deficit ceiling! Everyone does it!
DVD Polizei is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 09:49 PM
  #4  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,527
Originally posted by jasonr114
By cutting the fat from social programs.

Kerry was going to cut taxes for the middle class as well, who shoulder most of the tax burden, and was going to continue the war.... where was he going to get the money from?
You're kidding right?

The current national debt is $7.4 trillion.
The projected 2004 deficit is $521 billion.

Where exactly do you see $521 billion dollars worth of fat to be cut from social programs?

PS. Kerry lost, so let's stop discussing what he would have done. We'll never know now.

Last edited by hahn; 11-04-04 at 09:51 PM.
hahn is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 09:52 PM
  #5  
Admin-Thanos
 
VinVega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
Posts: 31,590
Originally posted by hahn
You're kidding right?

The debt is $7.4 trillion.
The deficit is $521 billion.

Where exactly do you see $521 billion dollars worth of fat to be cut from social programs?
Desperate times call for desperate means. Expect to hear something along those lines.

Beyond the religious legislation this President wants to pass, there is a strong desire amongst the Congressional Republicans to get back to the roots of the party and that means slashing social programs. Libertarians should rejoice over this.
VinVega is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 09:53 PM
  #6  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,527
Originally posted by VinVega
Desperate times call for desperate means. Expect to hear something along those lines.

Beyond the religious legislation this President wants to pass, there is a strong desire amongst the Congressional Republicans to get back to the roots of the party and that means slashing social programs. Libertarians should rejoice over this.
Again, which social programs are we going to slash, and by how much, in order to get $521 billion?
hahn is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 09:57 PM
  #7  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Th0r S1mpson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 36,443
From Iraq.
Th0r S1mpson is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:00 PM
  #8  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: |-|@><0r [email protected]|)
Posts: 17,214
Originally posted by jasonr114
By cutting the fat from social programs.
That's an awful lot of cutting, considering that the 2004 deficit topped $500 billion - <i>without counting Iraq.</i> Basically, you'd have to eliminate all of Medicare and all of Social Security. (And that's not even considering the new drug coverage plan, the costs of which aren't yet fully known or figured in.)

Well, at least we're cutting back on defense spending. Oh wait, my mistake, <a href="http://pubs.acs.org/cen/topstory/8106/8106notw4.html">we're not.</a> ($5.3 billion increase in 2004)

The more you look at this, the more it looks like the federal government will be dipping into Social Security or Medicare in a big way. We just can't continue functioning if we keep throwing away hundreds of billions in debt interest. These things have a way of snowballing.

- David Stein
sfsdfd is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:02 PM
  #9  
Admin-Thanos
 
VinVega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
Posts: 31,590
Originally posted by hahn
Again, which social programs are we going to slash, and by how much, in order to get $521 billion?
Social Security probably takes the biggest bite out of the budget. The privitization of SS will happen. They will also raise the age level where you can receive benefits (if they have any balls that is). Even Greenspan recommended this in an address this year.

The other option of course, as DVDPol mentioned, is to raise the deficit ceiling and punt the issue again to the next administration. It worked with Reagan, why not try it again?
VinVega is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:06 PM
  #10  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: North Bay Area, CA
Posts: 1,076
Buy War Bonds!
Tazwolff is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:12 PM
  #11  
Admin-Thanos
 
VinVega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
Posts: 31,590
Originally posted by Tazwolff
Buy War Bonds!
VinVega is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:12 PM
  #12  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,527
Originally posted by VinVega
Social Security probably takes the biggest bite out of the budget. The privitization of SS will happen. They will also raise the age level where you can receive benefits (if they have any balls that is). Even Greenspan recommended this in an address this year.

The other option of course, as DVDPol mentioned, is to raise the deficit ceiling and punt the issue again to the next administration. It worked with Reagan, why not try it again?
Wait a second. Let's say we DO privatize SS. So the government doesn't pay out SS. BUT it also does not take in any money for SS. PEOPLE pay for the money that goes into SS. The interest or investment returns on THAT money is what goes back to people paying SS. It's a way to force people to invest their money in a retirement nest egg. In my view, this technically doesn't cost the government squat.

In my opinion, people take Medicare and SS way too much for granted. The sad thing is that it's going to have to go missing before people understand its importance. When they eliminate Medicare and/or Medicaid, and your parents, and/or grandparents can no longer afford to get some procedure, test, or drug that may save their lives, opinions about this "cutting" are going to change VERY rapidly. I work in the healthcare field, and I'm telling you, if Medicare or Medicaid is slashed, with the near exponential rise in obesity/diabetes/heart disease, and continuing rises in healthcare costs, this is going to turn into a major healthcare disaster. This is an issue that affects EVERYONE.

As for your punt the issue to the next administration - I hope you're kidding and not really suggesting that we just continue to add to problems by passing it on to the next administration.

Last edited by hahn; 11-04-04 at 10:24 PM.
hahn is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:14 PM
  #13  
DVD Talk Legend
 
darkside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 19,847
Social programs will get cut along with the deficit ceiling getting raised. It is going to be hard times ahead for the poor. However, since the people that are going to suffer most from the Bush regime didn't vote him down I really don't feel sorry for them.

Vote or Die Fuckers.
darkside is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:15 PM
  #14  
DVD Talk Legend
 
darkside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 19,847
Originally posted by hahn

As for your punt the issue to the next administration - I hope you're kidding and not really suggesting that we just continue to add to problems by passing it on to the next administration.
We have been doing that for decades. Why stop now?

Other than the it will eventually bankrupt the country thing. I will hopefully be dead by then.
darkside is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:21 PM
  #15  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
I'm not a budget hawk - never have been.

I'm not particularly concerned about the size of the national debt. I'm considerably more concerned what percentage of that debt is owed to foreigners.

The deficit is even of less concern to me, because I realize that the way it is calculated in phony in the first place. The real deficit is probably approaching 700 billion dollars.

Once again - the real fat is not in social programs but is in defense spending.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:26 PM
  #16  
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,201
Reagan cut taxes and increased revenue. I think that will pay for the war.

And besides, where was Kerry going to get the money? You think rolling back taxes just on the rich was going to make the country flush? Hardly.
kvrdave is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:29 PM
  #17  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: |-|@><0r [email protected]|)
Posts: 17,214
Originally posted by classicman2
I'm not particularly concerned about the size of the national debt. I'm considerably more concerned what percentage of that debt is owed to foreigners.
But even if we're giving that money back to Americans (pension plans, etc.), isn't that terrifically wasteful? We're taking money away from all Americans, and then giving it back to some of them. Our government and the American public get nothing in return for this $200 billion/year.
Originally posted by classicman2
Once again - the real fat is not in social programs but is in defense spending.


- David Stein
sfsdfd is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:31 PM
  #18  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,527
Originally posted by kvrdave
Reagan cut taxes and increased revenue. I think that will pay for the war.

And besides, where was Kerry going to get the money? You think rolling back taxes just on the rich was going to make the country flush? Hardly.
Again, leave Kerry out of this. He lost so we'll NEVER know what he would've done.

However, Bush IS president again. So what's he going to do? I have yet to see a solid response backed up with figures - even hypothetical ones.

The deficit, in my understanding, takes into account the taxes. Therefore, after accounting for taxes (what the government takes in), and what you intend to spend (social programs, defense, etc), you get the deficit. Therefore, mathematically, I don't see how you can cut taxes and decrease the deficit.

And HOW on earth does raising the debt ceiling solve our fiscal problems? It just allows the government to spend even MORE.

If we default on our loans, it sends the interest rates skyrocketing. Why is there so little concern in our country about this?

Last edited by hahn; 11-04-04 at 10:37 PM.
hahn is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:35 PM
  #19  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Question for those that favor privitization of social security?

Do you know how much it would cost to do it?

Or don't you believe it would be a terribly expensive proposition to do it?
classicman2 is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:39 PM
  #20  
Admin-Thanos
 
VinVega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
Posts: 31,590
Originally posted by hahn
As for your punt the issue to the next administration - I hope you're kidding and not really suggesting that we just continue to add to problems by passing it on to the next administration.
Certainly not. I'm not suggesting that they do that. They WILL DO THAT.
So sayeth the c-man
Once again - the real fat is not in social programs but is in defense spending.
When your future wars are going to be regional conflicts and Islamic radicals, do you really need a fleet of Stealth bombers and M1 tanks, to face WHO, guys with rusting AK-47's and RPG's? Fighting these bastards should be pretty cheap in material, but costly in manpower, since if you really want to kill these bastards, you need to sacrifice some troops to get in close. There's more pork in military spending than most of the social programs combined, but remember, military spending really isn't spending because even discussing cutting pork from there means you're unpatriotic.
VinVega is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:50 PM
  #21  
DVD Talk Hero
 
CRM114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 42,731
I'm wondering if those that favor slashing Medicare and Social Security have or will have a family member that will rely on those benefits? If it wasn't for Medicare, my mother would be DEAD. Its that simple.

Secondly, the people who should be concerned with privatization of social security are people my age. Late 30s and 40s. We already paid into the system for 20+ years. The 20 somethings have an opportunity to invest that money at a much younger age. Is the government going to give us adequate return on our 20+ year contribution?

These are people's lives we are dealing with here. In my opinion, that is much more valuable than a $2 billion submarine.
CRM114 is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:52 PM
  #22  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 488
Originally posted by kvrdave
Reagan cut taxes and increased revenue. I think that will pay for the war.
Tax rates were quite a bit higher back then. The current tax rate is a lot closer to the optimal tax rate for maximizing revenue, so a tax cut won't have as much effect. I think that a tax cut may increase revenue, but I highly doubt it will close most of the deficit gap. Something else will have to change.
Aldarion is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:54 PM
  #23  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Island of Sodor
Posts: 622
well I learned one more thing from this election, if someone as dumb as bush can win anyone can win.
kiddk1 is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 10:57 PM
  #24  
DVD Talk Hero
 
CRM114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 42,731
Originally posted by classicman2
Question for those that favor privitization of social security?

Do you know how much it would cost to do it?

Or don't you believe it would be a terribly expensive proposition to do it?
I can see the boardrooms of the big investment banks drooling over the windfall. The expense of running these funds will be paid for by us of course. Instead of paying salaries for moderately paid bureaucrats, we'll be paying for houses in the Hamptons. Personally, I trust my money with the bureaucrats more than the investment banks.
CRM114 is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 11:28 PM
  #25  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
It's amazing that the Repubs haven't asked the CBO to cost out the cost of Bush's privitization of social security scheme.

One wonders why?
classicman2 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.