Obama's Debt Commission Reports

[WinePusher]

Recommendations by the Obama Debt Commission are: http://money.cnn.com/2010/11/10/news/ec ... /index.htm

1) Reduce Domestic and Defense Spending by $200 Billion Dollars
2) Raise the retirement age to 68 by 2050
3) Lower income taxes and abolish the "Wealth Tax."
4) And more recommendations.

-Do you favor any of these recommendations?

[Grumpy]

WinePusher

1) Reduce Domestic and Defense Spending by $200 Billion Dollars
2) Raise the retirement age to 68 by 2050
3) Lower income taxes and abolish the "Wealth Tax."
4) And more recommendations.

-Do you favor any of these recommendations?

Sure, the Pentagon has been bloated and wasteful too long, we need to end the wars, cut defense spending by a third and reign in the Homeland security mess by eliminating a few hundred agencies which duplicate each other. In addition we need to gradually raise the retirement age for non blue collar Social security and means test both SS and Medicare(the rich don't need it and won't miss it).

As to taxes, they are already at historic lows, the top percentage of Americans need to pay more and start pulling their own weight. They have had over a decade where they made out like bandits while the middle class dissapeared. A few percent more taxes will not hurt them, the tax cuts that were said to create jobs didn't. Also, if the company wants to participate in the American economy they should be severely penalized for shipping jobs overseas(instead of receiving tax breaks as they did under Bush), the countries that sell their goods here should be forced to allow Americans to sell in their country. Companies that received bailouts should not have ANY bonuses until they pay back every dime(with interest).

In addition, a universal single payer health care system(similar to Denmark's)would save us billions and cover everyone while still allowing the insurance companies a good profit. Lobbying in Washington should be illegal, it gives money more influence than the citizens. Campaign finances should be public for the same reason and makes raising money the only thing our Congress has time for. Term limits should be abolished, some of the best, most effective legislators have been in office for a long time(we would be much better off now if Clinton was still president).

Grumpy

[micatala]

Recommendations by the Obama Debt Commission are: http://money.cnn.com/2010/11/10/news/ec ... /index.htm

1) Reduce Domestic and Defense Spending by $200 Billion Dollars
2) Raise the retirement age to 68 by 2050
3) Lower income taxes and abolish the "Wealth Tax."
4) And more recommendations.

-Do you favor any of these recommendations?

1) I would support. I think we could do this without siginificantly diminishing our real military capabilities. On the other hand, we also need to acknowledge some defense contractors and related industries would lose jobs.

2) is worth considering, given life expectancy increases.

3) is worth considering but the devil is in the details. I think we need a simpler, saner system, but I personally think it should be progressive. I woud ask what exactly is meant by the "wealth tax."

I also think we need a sane discussion on how tax policy effects employment and economic growth. The simplistic formula "tax cuts creates growth, jobs, and more revenue" does not seem to me to be supported by the evidence.

4) Need specifics. I hear one recommendation is cutting COLA increases. I don't t this point support that idea. I would support raising the income cutoff for social security payroll taxes.

[Goat]

Recommendations by the Obama Debt Commission are: http://money.cnn.com/2010/11/10/news/ec ... /index.htm

1) Reduce Domestic and Defense Spending by $200 Billion Dollars
2) Raise the retirement age to 68 by 2050
3) Lower income taxes and abolish the "Wealth Tax."
4) And more recommendations.

-Do you favor any of these recommendations?

1) I would support. I think we could do this without siginificantly diminishing our real military capabilities. On the other hand, we also need to acknowledge some defense contractors and related industries would lose jobs.

2) is worth considering, given life expectancy increases.

3) is worth considering but the devil is in the details. I think we need a simpler, saner system, but I personally think it should be progressive. I woud ask what exactly is meant by the "wealth tax."

I also think we need a sane discussion on how tax policy effects employment and economic growth. The simplistic formula "tax cuts creates growth, jobs, and more revenue" does not seem to me to be supported by the evidence.

4) Need specifics. I hear one recommendation is cutting COLA increases. I don't t this point support that idea. I would support raising the income cutoff for social security payroll taxes.

It seems to me that one reason we are in such debt to begin with was the 'tax cut', without a corrosponding decrease in spending.

You got to get money into the government to pay a good portion of the debt first.

[nogods]

There was also the elimination of all earmarks and a 15 cents a gallon gas tax include in that. Earmarks create jobs and provide federal help for community inprovements that local areas can't afford themselves.

[DeBunkem]

4) And more recommendations.

Such as defunding PBS, the favorite target of the corporate media.

[WinePusher]

I think that these are very harsh policies being proposed by the Commission, but probably neccesary to tackle the reality of this huge debt.

I say that we reduce the Federal Reserve and the Department of Education, eliminate the Department of Commerce, eliminate earmarks, massively reduce discretionary spending, and marginally increase taxes and finally deal with entitlements.

[Board]

...Earmarks create jobs and provide federal help for community inprovements that local areas can't afford themselves.

Earmarks are programs that cannot stand on their own merit and have to piggy back on a popular bill. They should be obliterated from government process entirely.

Every bill passed needs to stand on its own merit and be voted on as a singular issue, not a popular issue with several leeching bills attached.

[micatala]

I think that these are very harsh policies being proposed by the Commission, but probably neccesary to tackle the reality of this huge debt.

I say that we reduce the Federal Reserve and the Department of Education, eliminate the Department of Commerce, eliminate earmarks, massively reduce discretionary spending, and marginally increase taxes and finally deal with entitlements.

First, as I understand, earmarks do not increase the deficit. An earmark designates money that has already been appropriated to a specific purpose. So, the Ed Department might get a disbursement of $2 billion to promote better education in inner city schools. A Congressman from Chicago then might "earmark" $1 million of that for a particular school in his district. The earmark does not add $1 million to the budget. Not doing the earmark just means the Ed Dept gets to spend (or not spend) the money under the broader guidelines of the appropriation.


Next step, put money on all these recommendations. I think you will find slashing discretionary spending across the board even by, say, 20% is not going to do that much to solve the problem.

What is the total budget for the Department of Commerce?

How about the Department of Education?

And what exactly do you mean by "reduce the Federal Reserve?"

[Grumpy]

WinePusher

I say that we reduce the Federal Reserve and the Department of Education,

The Fed is important to reduce the boom and bust cycles that lack of a central monetary policy allows, it consumes very little for the good it does.

And cutting the Department of Education would be the equivalent of slitting our wrists as far as the future competiveness of our country. I realize many conservatives hate that they mandate the teaching of real science as opposed to pseudo-science like Creationism, but this would be a stupid way to go. Education through college for every qualified student, even if financed directly by taxes(as many of our competitors have), would "prime the pump"to increases in revenues greatly exceeding the original outlay(as those competitors have proven). Our schools are already dummied down too much, going further in that direction is national suicide by stupidity. If conservatives want their children to be backward and ignorant they can homeschool or create religiously oriented schools, the rest of us would rather be at the top of the education heap, worldwide, instead of near the bottom as we currently are.

eliminate earmarks, massively reduce discretionary spending, and marginally increase taxes and finally deal with entitlements.

Earmarks should be eliminated, discretionary spending reductions would not really do much, taxes have been way too low for decades but no jobs were created that way and entitlements could be fixed OVERNIGHT by just means testing them.

Grumpy