U.S. Politics - Page 546 - Cyclingnews Forum

Go Back   Cyclingnews Forum > Cafe > General

General Grab a short black and come join in the non-cycling discussion. Favourite books, movies, holiday destinations, other sports - chat about it all in the cafe.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #5451  
Old 12-06-12, 04:34
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,434
Default

Democrats. One gear.

Quote:
Retirement savings tax breaks face scrutiny

The taxes deferred every year through 401(k)s, as as well individual retirement accounts and other employer pension plans, constitute the second largest tax “expenditure” in the tax code — a tax loophole, in the minds of many, and a tempting target.
If the government forced workers to immediately pay tax on the earnings they put in these accounts, the government could put $162.7 billion back into its coffers, in 2014 alone, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation figures.
http://www.politico.com/story/2012/1...43.html?hp=l10

There is monumental irony here. I'm not sure if anybody here will see it.
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
  #5452  
Old 12-06-12, 10:49
Glenn_Wilson's Avatar
Glenn_Wilson Glenn_Wilson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 2,836
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott SoCal View Post
How about 5 cents a mile for you Dodge pick up and 10 cents when you mount your 50 cal?
SOCIALIST talk! Don't get me all worked up. Start messing with a milage tax and that is the line in the sand man! The 50cal tax ....Ill say NO!
__________________
something less offensive
Reply With Quote
  #5453  
Old 12-06-12, 11:26
Glenn_Wilson's Avatar
Glenn_Wilson Glenn_Wilson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 2,836
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott SoCal View Post
Democrats. One gear.



http://www.politico.com/story/2012/1...43.html?hp=l10

There is monumental irony here. I'm not sure if anybody here will see it.
If they do this then I will vote against each and every democrat from now until I become dust. (Which is not that far off according to some....exactly 14days 15hours 25 min 5 sec from now)
__________________
something less offensive
Reply With Quote
  #5454  
Old 12-06-12, 15:33
rhubroma's Avatar
rhubroma rhubroma is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,522
Default

It would appear quite elementary, Scott, that today's capitalism and financialization have generated the opposite effect of the "trickle-down" theory; thus a "bottom-up" economy, rather than a "top-down" in terms of the movement of wealth. This gravity shift has meant that the ideologically based economic metaphor of the Reagan years has merely proven to be a false myth, given that the gap between the gains of the top wage earners and the diminishing salaries of those at the bottom has significantly grown since the 70's and 80's. Against the promise of that myth, therefore, the current generation of workers is worse off than those of their fathers and grandfathers.

What has rather panned out is consistent with the mental framework that animates the neoliberal agenda (less taxes for the rich, cuts in state run programs like education and health care, delocalization of manufacturing and production to more "labor friendly markets," mass credit consumption and private debt - to profit further on workers' salary deficiencies, Far West finance at the "casino" stock markets): namely, an enfeebled middle class and a precarious social state in exchange for uber-wealth at the highest tier of the civic pyramid.

This is why when a CEO who fails to produce the desired dividends for the shareholders and is then fired, but receives a multi-million dollar severance payment that was predetermined in the terms of his contract - while perhaps hundreds of 40k wage earner employees get laid-off in a massive downsizing policy to cut costs - the grotesque injustices of such an economic model become glaringly apparent.

The current economic malaise, moreover, that liberalism at the financial markets has wrought, demonstrates how its applied mental practices are poisonous to our democratic and progressive civilization.

Last edited by rhubroma; 12-06-12 at 16:44.
Reply With Quote
  #5455  
Old 12-06-12, 15:44
VeloCity's Avatar
VeloCity VeloCity is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,115
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott SoCal View Post
Democrats. One gear.



http://www.politico.com/story/2012/1...43.html?hp=l10

There is monumental irony here. I'm not sure if anybody here will see it.
There is indeed monumental irony in all of this and I've pointed it out a thousand times. But you just go ahead and keep voting for that "party of fiscal responsibility" m'kay?

btw what ever happened to Rs calling for privatizing SS? Odd how you never hear that anymore. Wonder why.

Hey just saw that Jim DeMint is leaving the Senate. Awesome. What a ****ing joke that guy was.
Reply With Quote
  #5456  
Old 12-06-12, 17:05
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,434
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeloCity View Post
There is indeed monumental irony in all of this and I've pointed it out a thousand times. But you just go ahead and keep voting for that "party of fiscal responsibility" m'kay?

btw what ever happened to Rs calling for privatizing SS? Odd how you never hear that anymore. Wonder why.

Hey just saw that Jim DeMint is leaving the Senate. Awesome. What a ****ing joke that guy was.
Quote:
There is indeed monumental irony in all of this and I've pointed it out a thousand times. But you just go ahead and keep voting for that "party of fiscal responsibility" m'kay?
You clearly have no idea what irony I'm talking about. Always the same. It's not about additional revenue and what's good long term. It's always about right now with you guys. This 401k tax now plan is sheer stupidity over the long haul. But you guys don't give a **** about that.... it's all about getting even with them, whomever 'them' is.

Quote:
btw what ever happened to Rs calling for privatizing SS? Odd how you never hear that anymore. Wonder why.
Well, lessee... it was actually a portion of for younger workers. But, since we are stripping all contributions to pay for current beneficiaries there wouldn't be much to invest differently, now would there? Besides, you guys did what you always do. demonized the idea to death and scared the hell out of the average low information voter. Congrats on that.

Quote:
Hey just saw that Jim DeMint is leaving the Senate. Awesome. What a ****ing joke that guy was.
Probably a step backwards for Heritage. Oh well. You guys don't listen to a thing they say anyways so no worries.
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
  #5457  
Old 12-06-12, 17:28
VeloCity's Avatar
VeloCity VeloCity is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,115
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott SoCal View Post
You clearly have no idea what irony I'm talking about. Always the same.
Look, Scott, hate to tell you buddy, but none of this would be necessary and we wouldn't be in this mess if you're guys had been a bit more fiscally responsible. Don't blame us or Obama for the mess your guys (and you, by voting for them) made. It's as simple as that. Stop blaming everyone else. We didn't do it.

Quote:
It's not about...what's good long term. It's always about right now with you guys.
eh, carbon mitigation is too expensive so let's not do anything about emissions...

Quote:
Well, lessee... it was actually a portion of for younger workers. But, since we are stripping all contributions to pay for current beneficiaries there wouldn't be much to invest differently, now would there? Besides, you guys did what you always do. demonized the idea to death and scared the hell out of the average low information voter. Congrats on that.
See, now, this is exactly what I'm talking about:

Quote:
In 2001, Ryan led a coterie of conservatives who complained that George W. Bush’s $1.2 trillion tax cut was too small, and too focused on the middle class. In 2003, he lobbied Republicans to pass Bush’s deficit-*financed prescription-drug benefit, which bestowed huge profits on the pharmaceutical and insurance industries. In 2005, when Bush campaigned to introduce private accounts into Social Security, Ryan fervently crusaded for the concept. He was the sponsor in the House of a bill to create new private accounts funded entirely by borrowing, with no benefit cuts. Ryan’s plan was so staggeringly profligate, entailing more than $2 trillion in new debt over the first decade alone, that even the Bush administration opposed it as “irresponsible.” When Democrats took control of Congress in the 2006 elections, they reimposed a budget rule requiring that any new spending or tax cuts be offset by new revenue or spending cuts. Ryan opposed it, preferring to let new spending or tax cuts go on the national credit card. Instead, he continued to endorse Bush’s line that tax cuts were leading us to a glorious new era of prosperity and budget balance. “Higher revenues flowing into the Treasury, as a result of economic and job growth, have given us a real chance to balance the budget,” Ryan announced in 2007. “The president’s budget achieves the important goal of balancing the budget in the near term—without raising taxes,” he wrote in August 2008.
Are you starting to see the light, Scott? The guy who even the Bush people thought was too irresponsible is the same guy you think is Being Very Serious and Making the Tough Choices on fiscal issues. You've been royally duped, dude. It's the right who like to spend - and have been spending - taxpayer money freely and who don't understand basic economics. Tax cuts don't pay for themselves, never have, never will, but folks like the Very Serious Paul Ryan cling to the idea for purely ideological reasons, not for economic ones.

Quote:
Probably a step backwards for Heritage. Oh well. You guys don't listen to a thing they say anyways so no worries.
Sure we do. Where do you think Obamacare came from?

Last edited by VeloCity; 12-06-12 at 17:32.
Reply With Quote
  #5458  
Old 12-06-12, 17:47
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,434
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rhubroma View Post
It would appear quite elementary, Scott, that today's capitalism and financialization have generated the opposite effect of the "trickle-down" theory; thus a "bottom-up" economy, rather than a "top-down" in terms of the movement of wealth. This gravity shift has meant that the ideologically based economic metaphor of the Reagan years has merely proven to be a false myth, given that the gap between the gains of the top wage earners and the diminishing salaries of those at the bottom has significantly grown since the 70's and 80's. Against the promise of that myth, therefore, the current generation of workers is worse off than those of their fathers and grandfathers.

What has rather panned out is consistent with the mental framework that animates the neoliberal agenda (less taxes for the rich, cuts in state run programs like education and health care, delocalization of manufacturing and production to more "labor friendly markets," mass credit consumption and private debt - to profit further on workers' salary deficiencies, Far West finance at the "casino" stock markets): namely, an enfeebled middle class and a precarious social state in exchange for uber-wealth at the highest tier of the civic pyramid.

This is why when a CEO who fails to produce the desired dividends for the shareholders and is then fired, but receives a multi-million dollar severance payment that was predetermined in the terms of his contract - while perhaps hundreds of 40k wage earner employees get laid-off in a massive downsizing policy to cut costs - the grotesque injustices of such an economic model become glaringly apparent.

The current economic malaise, moreover, that liberalism at the financial markets has wrought, demonstrates how its applied mental practices are poisonous to our democratic and progressive civilization.
Quote:
It would appear quite elementary, Scott, that today's capitalism and financialization have generated the opposite effect of the "trickle-down" theory; thus a "bottom-up" economy, rather than a "top-down" in terms of the movement of wealth. This gravity shift has meant that the ideologically based economic metaphor of the Reagan years has merely proven to be a false myth, given that the gap between the gains of the top wage earners and the diminishing salaries of those at the bottom has significantly grown since the 70's and 80's. Against the promise of that myth, therefore, the current generation of workers is worse off than those of their fathers and grandfathers.
Current generations are worse off in terms of retirement/health issues. that's true. You can blame it on Reagan if that makes you feel better. Look around... this current bunch is not concerned with bottom up, they are concerned with redistributing from the top. The unintended consequence is of course creating a dependency class that will lack incentive.

Don't know why you guys won't take pages out of Clinton's playbook.

Quote:
cuts in state run programs like education and health care
Talk about myths... base-line budgeting allows a reduction in the rate of increase to be called a cut. It's tailor made for the low information electorate that the D's pander to. There are no cuts... just look at our current situation right now. What's acutally being cut?

Quote:
workers' salary deficiencies
Deficient to what? The $100/hour baseline to raise a family of four?

Quote:
The current economic malaise, moreover, that liberalism at the financial markets has wrought, demonstrates how its applied mental practices are poisonous to our democratic and progressive civilization.
The current economic malaise is due to stupid policies by stupid policy makers and there is no end in sight.
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
  #5459  
Old 12-06-12, 18:05
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,434
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeloCity View Post
Look, Scott, hate to tell you buddy, but none of this would be necessary and we wouldn't be in this mess if you're guys had been a bit more fiscally responsible. Don't blame us or Obama for the mess your guys (and you, by voting for them) made. It's as simple as that. Stop blaming everyone else. We didn't do it.

eh, carbon mitigation is too expensive so let's not do anything about emissions...

See, now, this is exactly what I'm talking about:

Are you starting to see the light, Scott? The guy who even the Bush people thought was too irresponsible is the same guy you think is Being Very Serious and Making the Tough Choices on fiscal issues. You've been royally duped, dude. It's the right who like to spend - and have been spending - taxpayer money freely and who don't understand basic economics. Tax cuts don't pay for themselves, never have, never will, but folks like the Very Serious Paul Ryan cling to the idea for purely ideological reasons, not for economic ones.



Sure we do. Where do you think Obamacare came from?
Quote:
Look, Scott, hate to tell you buddy, but none of this would be necessary and we wouldn't be in this mess if you're guys had been a bit more fiscally responsible. Don't blame us or Obama for the mess your guys (and you, by voting for them) made. It's as simple as that. Stop blaming everyone else. We didn't do it.
Yep. The dog ate my homework.

The policies you embrace are doing it right now. Today. The taxing of retirement plans will n ot achieve what you guys think and will actually reduce tax revenue over the long term. But you guys don't care about that.

Quote:
eh, carbon mitigation is too expensive so let's not do anything about emissions...
Outlaw it. Start today. No time to waste. Tax anything that exhales. All part of the broader plan, right?

Quote:
Are you starting to see the light, Scott? The guy who even the Bush people thought was too irresponsible is the same guy you think is Being Very Serious and Making the Tough Choices on fiscal issues. You've been royally duped, dude. It's the right who like to spend - and have been spending - taxpayer money freely and who don't understand basic economics. Tax cuts don't pay for themselves, never have, never will, but folks like the Very Serious Paul Ryan cling to the idea for purely ideological reasons, not for economic ones.
You have to be kidding.

The most efficient tax rate is somewhere between zero and 100%. This;

Quote:
Tax cuts don't pay for themselves, never have, never will
is among your dumber declarations.

Quote:
Sure we do. Where do you think Obamacare came from?
Ah yes, the mandate. Is that the primary feature of Obamacare? If so, why is the bill thousands of pages long?
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
Reply With Quote
  #5460  
Old 12-06-12, 18:42
rhubroma's Avatar
rhubroma rhubroma is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,522
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott SoCal View Post
Current generations are worse off in terms of retirement/health issues. that's true. You can blame it on Reagan if that makes you feel better. Look around... this current bunch is not concerned with bottom up, they are concerned with redistributing from the top. The unintended consequence is of course creating a dependency class that will lack incentive.
Now that sounds like some paranoid hysteria from the anti-communist propaganda machine of the Cold War era. Well that’s just so passé. Haven't we gotten past that mentality Scott? There is no dependency class. There is, however, a tax avoiding class with huge capital deposits in Cayman, while many working slobs can't afford health insurance. The other paranoid obsession of you guys, is to see the current administration's calls for the rich to bear a greater fiscal responsibility (or even just pay their fair share), in the wake of a crisis the financialists caused, as somehow being an indictment against their wealth. I think in the name of those same poor slobs, who after all are the ones who have been called to bear the brunt of the fiscal burden caused by the crisis, this has been the only inevitable socially sane thing to do. I mean, why can’t we have a more democratic economy in this regard?.

Quote:
Don't know why you guys won't take pages out of Clinton's playbook.
I don't see Clinton as anything but a more able politician than Reagan.



Quote:
Talk about myths... base-line budgeting allows a reduction in the rate of increase to be called a cut. It's tailor made for the low information electorate that the D's pander to. There are no cuts... just look at our current situation right now. What's acutally being cut?
Look at the public schools Scott. They certainly have not been given adequite financing in relation to cost of living hikes and overhead costs. While they have not been subsidized to the extent that a mordern progressive state, which thinks of its collective future, demands. Whereas military spending has literally gone through the roof.


Quote:
Deficient to what? The $100/hour baseline to raise a family of four?
Ever since liberalism's first war to "discipline" labor back in the 70's, US workers (and for that matter the world’s) have seen their baseline salaries diminish in proportion to inflation and cost of living increases. In compensation they were offered a "sweet deal" of readily accessible credit to offset their insufficient buying capacity. The deleterious results have been obvious: lifelong private debt, which is compounded further by not having their taxes pay for things like healthcare, university tuition and retirement pensions; so that one is always gasping for air, while the credit suppliers keep raking it in. Nice system.




Quote:
The current economic malaise is due to stupid policies by stupid policy makers and there is no end in sight.
The current economic malaise was caused by one and only one thing: human greed.

What this world needs is more democracy in the economy, and not more economy in democracy. Why can’t we achieve this? Progressive policies had brought our civilization on the brink of achieving an auspicious proper balance, before greed took over. You mentioned Reagan as being a convenient scapegoat for guys like me to feel better. Certainly US capitalism has always fostered a level of greed in what must be regarded as simply endemic to "the system," however, I do find that Reagan marked the transition into an era with which the 80's has come to be synonymous. That era replaced one in which the material dreams of the masses were grounded in a certain ethic that perceived raw avidity as bad, into one that now sees greed as a most commendable virtue of financial. I don't think I'm wrong in believing that such a transition, was a lethal blow for democracy and progressive civilization.

Last edited by rhubroma; 12-06-12 at 20:22.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not 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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 23:20.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.