Übergeek 바둑이: Actually, Obama added more to the debt, in his first 19 months, than all presidents from Washington to Reagan, COMBINED.

So are you saying he and the Libs should be allowed to spend spend spend us into oblivion?

Seems regardless of whatever blame games everyone wants to play, FORCED cuts in spending are VITAL.

rod03801: as you said upto Reagan. Raygun gave America more debt than the previous 200 years of American government.

"FORCED cuts in spending are VITAL."

Ok.. so why is the Republicans against raising taxes a little? Here in the UK VAT has been increased so everyone pays. The more you spend, the more you pay.

What's a percent or two to someone with $10 million+ in their account? One less bottle of champers??

(V): You go right ahead and raise all the taxes you want in the UK. We aren't the UK. We fought not to be over 200 years ago.

The "rich" already pay more than their share of the taxes.

We spend MORE than we should be. If we cut down to the bare minimum, and more is needed? Then MAYBE I'd agree that more taxes are needed. We haven't even scratched the surface of what spending needs to be cut though.

Most of us are forced to live within our budget. The wasteful Federal Govt. needs to be forced to do the same.

rod03801:

> The "rich" already pay more than their share of the taxes.

I want you to prove that by telling us all how much General Electric paid in taxes last year. That might show us how the rich pay "their fair share".

Übergeek 바둑이: Well the problem with someone like G.E. is taken care of by fixing stupid tax loop-holes. NOT increasing taxes. Increasing taxes will just have G.E. finding loop holes for that too.

rod03801:

> Well the problem with someone like G.E. is taken care of by fixing stupid tax loop-holes. NOT increasing taxes. Increasing taxes will just have G.E. finding loop holes for that too.

That's precisely the point. You say that the rich pay their fair share, but the truth is that they don't. All those "loopholes" are the exemptions and tax breaks that the rich can exploit to get away with paying less taxes. The entire taxation system (and that is not only in the USA but in most western capitalist countries) is designed to favor the rich and make sure that they pay far less taxes than the middle class. There is a myriad of exemptions and breaks that the big corporations can employ, and when that is nor enough they lobby for even more tax breaks. That is what is happening now. Republicans are pushing for tax breaks, but on behalf of big corporations. GE paid $0 in taxes. that's right, the third largest company in the world paid NO taxes in 2010. Then you have to wonder what other corporations are getting away with, and why the dificit is so bad. Is it because of massive spending or because of tax breaks for the rich? In reality it is both, but the proposed solution is to cut spending and at the same time give more tax breaks to the rich. That means that the burden of sustaining the deficit falls on the middle class, while the poor have less services from the government they elected.

Übergeek 바둑이: I stand by what I said. The answer is fixing the loop holes, NOT RAISING taxes. And the bigger more important part is lowering spending significantly.

Obviously there is nothing I can say to convince you and other libs otherwise, and there is nothing you or them can say to convince me otherwise.

rod03801: Do they? As every real look at tax income and who it comes from that I see of the USA. Says NO THEY DON'T.

So. I'd like to see proof (official notes/docs/site)

As it seems now as a percentage of actual taxes collected re what percentage they pay in relation to income.... THEY DON'T.

loopholes, havens.

"We aren't the UK. We fought not to be over 200 years ago. "

And at the moment do you think with all the lobbyists greasing government (local/state/federal) you actually have real representation?

(V): Are you for real? You'd like to see proof (official notes/docs/site) ???
LOL. I am an average person, typing on a discussion board on a game web site. This is NOT the floor of congress, and I don't even know you.

And, unlike some people I don't have all day to Google everything. However, just to entertain you I took a quick minute and found this article.
Is it skewed to the right? Quite possibly. Is it a few years old? Sure is, but things haven't changed much since 2007. I don't care, frankly. It's really common sense anyway.

http://www.american.com/archive/2007/november-december-magazine-contents/guess-who-really-pays-the-taxes

rod03801: It's a reasonable request if you make 'claims'. I like to see if you know your stuff or are just quoting political hogwash.

"This is NOT the floor of congress, and I don't even know you."

Amnesia?

As to your article, it goes some way but is to general. Your rich? (I say it as this due to differences in exchange rates and what we consider rich in the UK) already pay less than they ever have. That your top percentage earners pay less isn't stopping loopholes and haven use. The deregulation that has caused the mess with the banks only has shown to make them rich quicker.

And all because big business can buy politicians.. especially Raygun and the Bush's.

rod03801:

> Seems regardless of whatever blame games everyone wants to play, FORCED cuts in spending are VITAL.

There is no other choice left. The USA will be forced to go into austerity measures like Greek and Portugal have done. The spending cuts that have been pushed through due to Republican pressure are not enough, and the tax cuts are simply adding wood to the fire.

Obama wants to leave Afghanistan because the USA has no choice. The cost of the war is too great. That lesson was learned during the Vietnam era. The US withdrew when the OPEC crisis caused a big spike in interest rates and the American government had no choice but to cut spending and leave the war.

The only thing that I dislike is how Republicans are bullying Obama when they started the mess in the first place.

Übergeek 바둑이: Personally, regardless of what party is in Congress, or what party is in the White House, I'd be "bullying" to cut spending.

It's not a middle school playground. It's time to stop blaming and crying about who did what. It's past time to FIX it.

rod03801:

> It's time to stop blaming and crying about who did what. It's past time to FIX it.

The question is: Can it be fixed? Cinsidering the number if manufacturing jobs that have been shipped overseas, and the large number of people employed by the military, can the American economy be sustained? Once the wars end and the troops come home, unemployment will rise very quickly and tax revenues will shrink. Retailers and manufacturers are quite happy to continue to manufacture overseas where salaries are low. That means that less Americans will contribute into the taxation system.

The only solution I see is to make the tax cuts targetted. Companies that manufacture domestically would receive a tax cut. Those that manufacture abroad would get no tax cuts at all. Not only that, but a tariff should be imposed when they import their products into North America. In the short term a measure like that would cause inflation, but in the long term it would create jobs and the revenue necessary to increase tax dollars coming into the treasury.

This idea will never fly because the companies that manufacture abroad (like Walmart, GE, Intel, etc.) have too much power and they would lobby to kill any legislation that protects American jobs.