We Are Not Collecting Enough Taxes. And Still The Debt Rises; Despite Strong Economy.

Phantasmal said:
I don’t know about you, but I want it documented what medical care I have received. Insurance companies are a lot of the problem, they require documentation and doctors offices have taken on the practice of filing insurance claims for people in order to receive payment. Electronic record keeping is racing the record keeping burden.
Click to expand...

The record keeping burden isn’t going anywhere lol.

It gets worse every year. And that’s just one aspect of the hyper-regulatory environment that healthcare is drowning in. I forget which outfit it was that forced my place to install these huge monitors throughout the OR suite and in pre-OP and post-OP.

It’s really neat because you can track a patient and know where they are at a given time. Between the monitors and the software the bill had to be in the 10’s of thousands.

But nobody looks at the damn things lol! But the regulatory people said we had to have them or we’d lose funding. It’s ridiculous.
 
The increase in debt is the plan of the wealthy and Republicans. Since Reagan, the Repubs have cut taxes and increased spending. Their goal is to end all social programs. They will make the debt so bad that they can justify ending all programs that help the poor, sick and injured. Ryan admitted ending Social Security, Mediacre and Medicaid was his prime goal. The tax cuts for the wealthy are the method they use. Like Cheney told Bush, keep cutting taxes,the debt means nothing, Reagan proved that.

The plutocrats do not care a whit about the people. We are fodder for wars and power.
 
The left continuously harps on this point, that "we're not paying enough taxes", Yet over the past decade the government has set new records for the amount of taxes it collects, and the new radical left(aka the democrats)wants to spend 36 TRILLION dollars over the next 10 years for health insurance for everyone. This doesn't include free college for the bernie bots. You guys also want to throw the borders open and give all the free stuff to the illegals too. So, I guess from your point of view, we're not paying enough taxes. News flash, most of us don't care, despite the racket from you side
 
Fentoine Lum said:
You have to go all the way back to the aftermath of Bacon's Rebellion for that answer. After that incident, the vastly outnumbered colonial aristocracy, knowing reinforcements were weeks and weeks away by sea, began to envision pitting the peasants, indentured servants, slaves; the unsubstantial people, against each other as a means of population control. The unsubstantial people have been pitted one against the other in america ever since. Race has been a very successful tool in this and slave versus indentured versus bondsman versus overseer was all part of the mindfuck. Still is. Those self identifying as overseers will identify with the aristocracy. Or the police when they murder unarmed black citizens in the streets. Or in demonizing the poor as the aristocracy economically cannibalizes society.
Click to expand...

that's a damn good post

I read Wall Street's Think Tank couple a years ago, it details the top of the social order like the Elite Class, the Political Class, the Banking/Merchant Class, the Academic Class etc and how they basically function through the Council on Foreign Relations (and their various satellite orgs). you've probably heard about these fine folks

btw I'm a direct descendant of Nathaniel Bacon, family originally from VA
 
"The left continuously harps on this point, that "we're not paying enough taxes"" c #103
Click to expand...
I remember the good ol' days when it was the Republicans that were the $fiscal $conservatives.

Barry Goldwater has been dead awhile. And now the senator that replace him has also passed on.

Oh for just a hint of fiscal sanity.
"There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt." John Adams
Click to expand...
df61544e691694769beb98a7fa3b0bcb9b927b0.JPG
 
callinectes said:
The left continuously harps on this point, that "we're not paying enough taxes", Yet over the past decade the government has set new records for the amount of taxes it collects, and the new radical left(aka the democrats)wants to spend 36 TRILLION dollars over the next 10 years for health insurance for everyone. This doesn't include free college for the bernie bots. You guys also want to throw the borders open and give all the free stuff to the illegals too. So, I guess from your point of view, we're not paying enough taxes. News flash, most of us don't care, despite the racket from you side
Click to expand...

the days the right always want to go back to had a corporate tax rate of 90%
 
Nordberg said:
The increase in debt is the plan of the wealthy and Republicans. Since Reagan, the Repubs have cut taxes and increased spending. Their goal is to end all social programs. They will make the debt so bad that they can justify ending all programs that help the poor, sick and injured. Ryan admitted ending Social Security, Mediacre and Medicaid was his prime goal. The tax cuts for the wealthy are the method they use. Like Cheney told Bush, keep cutting taxes,the debt means nothing, Reagan proved that.

The plutocrats do not care a whit about the people. We are fodder for wars and power.
Click to expand...

bingo

they want a boom and bust society with NO protection for the people


that way the wealthy can just keep milking the populace and treat them like slaves


Pay those slaves so little they can barely feed themselves


they need to remember their hero himself said that if you press the people too much they will revolt


80/20 rule

Pereto
 
evince said:
bingo

they want a boom and bust society with NO protection for the people


that way the wealthy can just keep milking the populace and treat them like slaves


Pay those slaves so little they can barely feed themselves


they need to remember their hero himself said that if you press the people too much they will revolt


80/20 rule

Pereto
Click to expand...


it's all the same Kabuki dance over and over..........we're reliving the Robber Baron days, reminds me of that frog being slowly brought to boil
 
"If democrats were in control they will raise taxes before they give us ‘free’ healthcare." DO #95
Click to expand...
The Democrats have explained that:

a) Healthcare is a substantial part of the U.S. GDP, about a third.

b) Several of our best military allies and business partners have what in the U.S. might be called "socialized medicine".
Some of the benefits to citizens in those countries include:

b1) Lower per capita health care costs.

b2) Longer life expectancy.

c) Thus here to fore U.S. citizens / tax payers have been paying more, and getting less.

d) The Clinton's tried to do something about that, and failed.

e) Obama tried, and met with marginal success. But

f) If the objective is to bring world class healthcare RESULTS at or below global average cost, the Democrats have done more than the Republicans.

Why would it matter?

Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats have a plan to increase government resources for rebuilding / updating our U.S. military, & other top priorities.

But the Dems. the deficit hawks understand, if we reduce by 10% GDP our nation's healthcare costs, that potentially leaves 10% GDP $more for U.S. military, and even building a wall.
"Then comes the socialism death spiral.
No thanks." DO #95
Click to expand...
Enjoy your Kool-aid.
But our trading partners and military allies I mentioned above are in nothing like a "socialism death spiral". To the contrary, they are thriving.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has faced domestic German criticism for the number of refugees they have accepted. And yet their role in global leadership is only expanding as Trump continues to press his "America First" agenda.

That's the opposite of a "socialism death spiral" even though Germany has had "free healthcare" (your term) since long before re-unification.

News Flash DO:
Substantially improving economic U.S. efficiency so without raising revenues we can substantially improve military procurement, and other top U.S. federal spending priorities, is not a recipe for a "socialism death spiral".

I apologize to you for inconveniencing you with the truth.
 
Hello Darth,

Darth Omar said:
...’to keep up with spending’ is the key concept lol.
Click to expand...

It's basic math. We have tried to cut the spending and found that it is all justified. So we have to increase revenue by increasing taxes on the rich. They are the only ones who can withstand a tax increase without impacting the economy.

Darth Omar said:
If democrats were in control they will raise taxes before they give us ‘free’ healthcare. Then comes the socialism death spiral.

No thanks.
Click to expand...

We already have socialism and it is helping us.

If we had socialized health care, yes, taxes would need to go up to cover that. But insurance premiums would GO AWAY. The net diff would be a savings.
 
Hello Sailor,

Sailor said:
For those of you that worried about it, put your money where your mouth is:

Here you go: https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/gift/gift.htm

Gift Contributions to Reduce Debt Held by the Public

The Bureau of the Fiscal Service may accept gifts donated to the United States Government to reduce debt held by the public. Acting for the Secretary of the Treasury, Fiscal Service may accept a gift of:

Money, made only on the condition that it be used to reduce debt held by the public.
An outstanding government obligation, made only on the condition that the obligation be retired and the redemption proceeds used to reduce debt held by the public.
Other intangible personal property made only on the condition that the property is sold and the proceeds from the sale used to reduce the public debt.

Gifts to reduce debt held by the public may be inter vivos gifts or testamentary bequests.
Click to expand...

Not a solution to irresponsible Republican power shirking proper fiscal management.
 
Hello Darth,

Darth Omar said:
I don’t need to name them lol.

Trump cut them and the economy improved. As predicted.
Click to expand...

If a corporation has to spend some money to prevent destroying our environment, and then some wealth advocate gets the power to allow that corporation to avoid spending that money (to protect the environment we all have to live in) then OF COURSE their stock value is going to rise.

Corporate stock rise is inversely proportional to public protection
 
Hello Darth,

Darth Omar said:
The record keeping burden isn’t going anywhere lol.

It gets worse every year. And that’s just one aspect of the hyper-regulatory environment that healthcare is drowning in. I forget which outfit it was that forced my place to install these huge monitors throughout the OR suite and in pre-OP and post-OP.

It’s really neat because you can track a patient and know where they are at a given time. Between the monitors and the software the bill had to be in the 10’s of thousands.

But nobody looks at the damn things lol! But the regulatory people said we had to have them or we’d lose funding. It’s ridiculous.
Click to expand...

After abortions are done in back alleys you won't have to worry about any regulation of them.

If your side keeps it up and prevails you will get your wish for at least part of health care.

Good luck on getting a good outcome.
 
PoliTalker said:
That means the economy is not (as Republicans promised,) generating enough taxes to pay down the debt.
Click to expand...

We can't pay down the debt until we eliminate the deficit and even then the debt will continue to rise because of redeeming the treasuries in the Social Security trust fund. Even when Clinton eliminated the deficit the debt continued to increase:

09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38

That is because we never "pay down" the debt but just roll over current treasuries when they come due by borrowing more to pay those debts.
 
Hello callinectes,

callinectes said:
The left continuously harps on this point, that "we're not paying enough taxes", Yet over the past decade the government has set new records for the amount of taxes it collects, and the new radical left(aka the democrats)wants to spend 36 TRILLION dollars over the next 10 years for health insurance for everyone. This doesn't include free college for the bernie bots. You guys also want to throw the borders open and give all the free stuff to the illegals too. So, I guess from your point of view, we're not paying enough taxes. News flash, most of us don't care, despite the racket from you side
Click to expand...

The tax cut for the rich had a minority of public support. The 'most of us' comment? You wish. If wishes were horses you'd have a stable full.

Just make big corporations pay for the social safety net that supports all their part time workers.

Make the super-rich pay for the higher education of the workers whose work fills the pockets of the super-rich.

And get the greedy health care insurance racket middle man OUT of health care! Single Payer Now!
 
Hello Flash,

Flash said:
We can't pay down the debt until we eliminate the deficit and even then the debt will continue to rise because of redeeming the treasuries in the Social Security trust fund. Even when Clinton eliminated the deficit the debt continued to increase:

09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38

That is because we never "pay down" the debt but just roll over current treasuries when they come due by borrowing more to pay those debts.
Click to expand...

I notice you didn't include the figure for 9/30/2000.

Clinton was President for 8 years, not 7.

If you look at the link in the OP, and you click the 'time machine' you can see the debt on this day in 2000.

Notice also, if you please, that it was dropping, and there was a surplus, not a deficit.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Flash,

I notice you didn't include the figure for 9/30/2000.

Clinton was President for 8 years, not 7.

If you look at the link in the OP, and you click the 'time machine' you can see the debt on this day in 2000.

Notice also, if you please, that it was dropping, and there was a surplus, not a deficit.
Click to expand...

Not true. I did not include 2000 because it was on a separate chart (2000-2017) and continued the same trend. Here is the chart including 2000:

09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86
09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38

I know there was a surplus--that was my point; even when the deficit is eliminated and there is a surplus the debt continues to increase.
 
Hello Flash,

Flash said:
Not true. I did not include 2000 because it was on a separate chart (2000-2017) and continued the same trend. Here is the chart including 2000:

09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86
09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38

I know there was a surplus--that was my point; even when the deficit is eliminated and there is a surplus the debt continues to increase.
Click to expand...

The only reason the surplus did not result in a year-to-year debt decrease is because the surplus did not exist long enough. W took over and wiped it out.

If we maintain a surplus, the debt will fall.

Clinton was fiscally responsible.

W was fiscally irresponsible.

Obama was fiscally responsible.

Trump has been very fiscally irresponsible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top