Edwards nails it: Tax Fairness

[Cancel7]

Tiana, a presidential candidate is only going to make promises that they think realistically they might be able to keep. Only snake oil salesmen are going to make promises that are unrealistic.

It’s unrealistic to presume that we can address our fiscal mess by cutting spending. Now, if I were a dictator, I would cut Defense by 50%, eliminate pork spending, and withdraw from Iraq. But, that’s not going to happen. No President or senator is ever going to get elected by promising to gut the pentagon. At best, we can expect to see someone freeze pentagon spending, or marginally cut it. At very best.

Edwards job is to offer proposals that are realistic. Not pie-in-the-sky.

We have a ten trillion dollar debt and a $300 billion a year account deficit.

I mean, what would you realistically cut to address that? Probably 90% of the federal budget is Defense, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and interest payments on the national debt:

-SS and Medicare: No one is realistically going to make any significant cuts to that. There are entitlements. Tens of millions of millions of Americans spent a lifetime paying into those programs, and they can be expected to be paid for that lifetime investment

-Defense: No one is going to get elected proposing draconian cuts to Defense spending. At best, it can be frozen.

-National Debt interest payments: We’re not going to default on interest payments. We have to make these.

-Iraq War: Yes, it would be great to withdraw and stop the hemorrhaging. But let’s face it – the horse has left the barn: we’ve already incurred a trillion dollar liability, and we have to pay it.

-Medicaid: I don’t believe in balancing the budget by cutting healthcare to children, the disabled, and the poor.


I mean, what realistically are you proposing gets cut to address a ten trillion dollar deficit? And a $300 billion a year account deficit?


I think Edwards is being pragmatic, and promising only what he thinks he can realistically deliver on. Yes, it is important to restrain spending, get out of Iraq, monitor fraud and waste, and create efficiencies. But, at best, were talking maybe tens of billions of dollars here. You have to address the revenue side to really deal with the fiscal mess bush left. Realistically speaking.

I’m not interested in candidates who make empty promises about 50% cuts to the Pentagon. They aren’t going to get elected.

Great post.

 

[Damocles]

You probably have A.D.D..... go take some drugs for that.

mMMMMM.... Drugs..... Beeeeer!

 

[Litmus]

mMMMMM.... Drugs..... Beeeeer!

i'm real excited about my 1/2 oz out in the car.

 

[TRGLDTE]

The whole point of the retirement account is to make sure you don't spend it until you are near retirment age. Hence the 59.5 age limit.

non-sequestered? Are you saying you want complete control of the investments or that you want access to the money any time you want? I am not following this part of your post...

The example I gave is a system the Japanese use that is totally apart and separate from IRA / 401. They allow up to $2000 in a tax exempt, interest bearing account that can be accessed at will, just like any regular savings account. This might be something that people of limited means could employ because tying up money when you have little is a very hard and very scary thing to do.

The Japanese do not restrict who can have an account - everyone could have one. I do not recall if this was limited to one account, and maybe the limit has been raised as I recall this from 15 - 20 years ago. As I recall the interest rates weren't spectacular - 1,2, maybe 2.5%

It's just a different idea. Maybe we need some different ideas. Maybe just make the first $xxx of interest income from any source excluded from tax?

I don't like edward's idea of yet ANOTHER income redistribution scheme, but maybe he has a point in that we need to try something different.

 

[Topspin]

like edwards would get that socialist crap past. LOFL

Screw indexing for cost of living, northeast gets paid double what the Gulf Coast does for the same job.

 

[LadyT]

-SS and Medicare: No one is realistically going to make any significant cuts to that. There are entitlements. Tens of millions of millions of Americans spent a lifetime paying into those programs, and they can be expected to be paid for that lifetime investment

Yes. They are entitlements. But that doesn't mean that there isn't room for improvement. I've always stated that we should institute governmental programs that give incentives for gov't employees to identify and eliminate waste. If a person identifies $10K in processes that can be eliminated, they should get 10% of the annual savings in the form of a bonus for the next year if it materializes. I'm not saying it will cut Medicare in half, but its a start.

We've got a gap of around $200 Billion we need to surmount each year in order to close the gap between receipts and spending. If a program like were enacted and we saw savings of only 5%, that would improve our deficit by at least $60B (see table s-11 > ss, md, mc make up approximately $1.2 Trillion of our mandatory budget).

-Defense: No one is going to get elected proposing draconian cuts to Defense spending. At best, it can be frozen.

There is a better way to handle defense and that is to cut out a large portion of the middlemen, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, etc, by bringing contractors in house under the governments payroll. Its absolultely disgusting what they charge the government. I believe the baseline charge on top of their cost is like 20% in a lot of cases. And then a lot of times, those companies will contract some of their work out and then there is another charge of 10 - 20% on top of what the original contractor will charge. The defense department should look into hiring a lot of the engineers and programmers that currently are contracted out. In addition to implementing my first suggestion. Additionally we need to think about reducing bases around the world.

-National Debt interest payments: We’re not going to default on interest payments. We have to make these.

Yep. No way around those.

-Iraq War: Yes, it would be great to withdraw and stop the hemorrhaging. But let’s face it – the horse has left the barn: we’ve already incurred a trillion dollar liability, and we have to pay it.

Well, I think you know my feelings on Iraq. I've been calling for the immediate withdrawal and cutting of our losses for the last 3 years.

-Medicaid: I don’t believe in balancing the budget by cutting healthcare to children, the disabled, and the poor.

see my above post in regards to SS, MD, and MC. But I will also say that a lot of the problem are the absurd prices that hospitals and insurance companies pay. We really need to think about regulating and getting a little more clarity on the premiums that insurance companies charge. I suspect they are hosing everyone - particularly since its like trying to bleed a stone when you want a payout.

I mean, what realistically are you proposing gets cut to address a ten trillion dollar deficit? And a $300 billion a year account deficit?

I think my suggestions are a good start.

You have to address the revenue side to really deal with the fiscal mess bush left. Realistically speaking.

I found the budget to be pretty confusing to read. Between Discretionaries and Mandatory spends.

Discretionary:
Defense 481
HS 34.3
Others 414.6
Total 929.9

Mandatory
SS 609
MC 393
MD 215
Other 330
1547


I'm finding a $185 gap that I can't really piece together. If these are where the pork projects are (and unless I just totally skipped over something - which is possible) that's what you start to attack.