The Federal Pie Chart

[luckytxn 2,265]

Of course it isn't, but since spending cuts didn't match the revenue cuts, it increased the amount we had to borrow to balance the budget.

The reason we had to borrow money was because tax revenues were cut. So in a sense, we borrowed to pay for the tax cuts.

We borrow money because we spend more than we take in. No way does cutting tax revenues cause borrowing.

Texas has a balanced budget in the constitution. They are never allowed to have deficit spending. If they have a tax cut and then the budget is not balanced then by law they have to either raise taxes or cut spending.

They borrow money because they wanted to spend more than they brought in.

[Danno 1,228]

When is the big Obama tax increase coming to help pay for the war, he rode Bushs A$$ for a year about how irresponsible it was to not ask the American people to "sacrifice" in a time of war.

Or is this another example of the -Obama Bush Show?

[Dan J 277]

When is the big Obama tax increase coming to help pay for the war, he rode Bushs A$$ for a year about how irresponsible it was to not ask the American people to "sacrifice" in a time of war.

Or is this another example of the -Obama Bush Show?

Since when did Obama invade Iraq and Afghanistan?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Of course it isn't, but since spending cuts didn't match the revenue cuts, it increased the amount we had to borrow to balance the budget.

The reason we had to borrow money was because tax revenues were cut. So in a sense, we borrowed to pay for the tax cuts.

This was the trend for states as well, which is partly why so many of them are in trouble.

[NickD 203]

So why is human resources or more specifically SS payments part of the national budget. Technically, the IRS is taking out 15% of your gross income that is suppose to be in a separate fund drawing interest. Also technically your FICA taxes are post tax, because you cannot deduct this amount from your gross income, your gross income minus other deductions is what you pay income taxes on. So you are paying income taxes on your FICA taxes. Also see on IRS form 1040, if you ever get SS benefits, have to pay additional income taxes on that as well. That's like triple taxation on the money that is stolen from you.

Military budget? Since WW II we elected to be the police department of the world, our so called defense can wipe out the rest of the world, including ourselves.

We spent billions and American lives to defend China during WW II only to have them turn to the Soviets. We spend billions on Japan after we beat the hell out of them to defend them. We spend billions on South Korea defending them and are still enemies with North Korea. And even billions on Viet Nam only to walk away. And its these countries that have taken away millions of American jobs.

What in the hell are we doing this for?

[SMR 368]

80% of the interest on the national debt is because of the military and Homeland Security, half of NASA and the FBI are military programs.

The chart is a piece of #######.

You can't assign the interest on the national debt as being caused by one specific budget item or another. A deficit occurs when spending is greater than revenue. Any individual part of the budget could be cut to reduce or eliminate the deficit, so any part of the budget could be considered responsible for the debt.

Why aren't FICA taxes part of the national budget? This isn't a "trust fund" as some would call it. It isn't storing any money. It might be keeping track of contributions, but the money is coming in and then going back out to pay for current benefits. That isn't a fund. Just because the taxation has a different name, doesn't make it not part of federal taxes (and a significant portion for most taxpayers). Separating the taxes into categories simply allows for double taxation, by forcing you to pay taxes on the taxes.

[alienlovechild 75]

Why aren't FICA taxes part of the national budget? This isn't a "trust fund" as some would call it. It isn't storing any money. It might be keeping track of contributions, but the money is coming in and then going back out to pay for current benefits. That isn't a fund. Just because the taxation has a different name, doesn't make it not part of federal taxes (and a significant portion for most taxpayers). Separating the taxes into categories simply allows for double taxation, by forcing you to pay taxes on the taxes.

I was going to into the SS "trust fund" but it's difficult for most people to understand that their money is going to pay for people already getting SS payments.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I was going to into the SS "trust fund" but it's difficult for most people to understand that their money is going to pay for people already getting SS payments.

I think the best thing I've heard is about people who call the SS administration to see how much money they have in their account.... Employees are like: #######???

Granted, we are supposed to be able to know these things, but don't tell the average American that!

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

It's a Lockkkkkk-box!

[Danno 1,228]

QUOTE (Danno @ Mar 9 2010, 10:35 PM)

When is the big Obama tax increase coming to help pay for the war, he rode Bushs A$$ for a year about how irresponsible it was to not ask the American people to "sacrifice" in a time of war.

Or is this another example of the -Obama Bush Show?

Since when did Obama invade Iraq and Afghanistan?

YOu are addressing another unrelated issue all together, but since you did bring it up I will say. Obama supported the invasion of Afghanistan and called it the -necessary war.

My point was, he claimed that during times of war, extra tax monies should be collected to pay for it, it was a valid position to take... and many on the left parroted this exact line of his yet now that Obama is in position to do what he claims Bush should have done.... he does nothing.

Not only that but the parrots on the left (some right here on this board) say nothing.

If you like I could use the [search function] to prove the hypocrisy?

Obama and Bush are much more alike than they are different.

[alienlovechild 75]

QUOTE (Danno @ Mar 9 2010, 10:35 PM)

YOu are addressing another unrelated issue all together, but since you did bring it up I will say. Obama supported the invasion of Afghanistan and called it the -necessary war.

The same is true for the military contractors that the Left screamed about for years. There's more of them in Afghanistan than there are troops. But since Obama is in charge it's no big deal now.

[Ali G. 37]

The problem isn't taxation. The problem is the spending!

You are pulling the old, current government is inefficient, therefore, it must mean the concept of government that is a problem.

How can anyone not see a problem with the military spending $1.3 trillion per year? Anyone who supports that sort of wastage yet scolds other projects is a freagin hypocrite. Country in position two spend $85 billion. Heck, even China is not stupid enough to repeat the Soviet Unions mistake to put a majority of their eggs into the military alone - an industry that is basically a net loss. Instead they are heavily investing into their country, which goes against the tea-party libertarian mindset of government. Lets see who wins in the end, my money is on them.

This is a recession, as such, the government needs to spend accordingly to get us out of the recession and get the economy rolling again. Low taxes being the answer to all problems is a baseless myth. Lower taxes is why American infrastructure looks the way it is, second world at its best.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Booyah

[Ali G. 37]

You can't assign the interest on the national debt as being caused by one specific budget item or another. A deficit occurs when spending is greater than revenue. Any individual part of the budget could be cut to reduce or eliminate the deficit, so any part of the budget could be considered responsible for the debt.

So cut the military expenditure in half and you will have the deficit reduced in a matter of no time.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Booyah

[Obama 2012 1,714]

You are pulling the old, current government is inefficient, therefore, it must mean the concept of government that is a problem.

How can anyone not see a problem with the military spending $1.3 trillion per year? Anyone who supports that sort of wastage yet scolds other projects is a freagin hypocrite. Country in position two spend $85 billion. Heck, even China is not stupid enough to repeat the Soviet Unions mistake to put a majority of their eggs into the military alone - An industry that is basically a net loss. Instead they are heavily investing into their country, which goes against the tea-party libertarian mindset of government. Lets see who wins in the end, my money is on them.

This is a recession, as such, the government needs to spend accordingly to get us out of the recession and get the economy rolling again. Low taxes being the answer to all problems is a baseless myth. Lower taxes is why American infrastructure looks the way it is, second world at its best.

You're overexpanding on what I said.

"Spending" is the problem refers to overall spending....

The only pro-military argument at all, is atleast that is something our government can 'legally' spend money on....

So cut the military expenditure in half and you will have the deficit reduced in a matter of no time.

Take out SS and Medicare and it would do the same.

[Ali G. 37]

Military budget? Since WW II we elected to be the police department of the world, our so called defense can wipe out the rest of the world, including ourselves.

We spent billions and American lives to defend China during WW II only to have them turn to the Soviets. We spend billions on Japan after we beat the hell out of them to defend them. We spend billions on South Korea defending them and are still enemies with North Korea. And even billions on Viet Nam only to walk away. And its these countries that have taken away millions of American jobs.

What in the hell are we doing this for?

Borrow billions to defend these people. We borrow billions from China to apparently defend the world from China.