|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 7/25/2009
Posts: 77
Points: 230
Location: United States
|
As we know, our economy is not the greatest. However, we have Republicans wanting to give tax breaks to oil companies. This is wrong because OIL COMPANIES HAVEN'T PAID THEIR TAXES!!!!! That makes me angry. Democrats want to redistribute the wealth, so do Republicans. No party is rocking my socks right now. How would I fix the economy?
1. Flat tax to everyone, including businesses.
2. Invest the rest of the failed stimulus money to manufacturing. We have to invest in factories and manufacturing. Jobs will be created through the roof!
3. Make CEOs and big businesses pay their taxes. If not, they will pay a fine or face 1-3 years in jail.
4. Drill for oil. We have to stop foreign dependence on oil.
5. Give $ to small businesses. This will expand consumer ideas, job growth, and determination within communities.
Dream as if you'll live forever, live as if you'll die today~ James Dean
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 7/6/2010
Posts: 1,214
Points: 3,601
Location: United States
|
You've got the right ideas drew34. I think a flat tax is the only fair way to tax and if corporations are now equal to citizens they should do their fair share like every other citizen. We have lost sooo much of manufacturing. I read how GM not only closed it's factories but actually shipped the plant piece by piece to Mexico. I don't think they should be able to take the very wealth of America and re-build it in a foreign country. And how do they treat those new employees? They have no unions and no EPA to protect them. How the treat those people is how they want to treat us. That is why they are busting up unions. I think that I am a Social Democrat. I believe in democracy but I also believe in social equity. These companies are also trying to monopolize and don't sell US products. I am all for the small business man.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/3/2010
Posts: 428
Points: 1,256
Location: United States
|
I would:
End Oil and Agribusiness Subsidies.
Put Penalty Clause in Defence Contracts
I'd change the tax code to make it more fair.Closing loop hole and incentives to look a broad for manufacturing.
I'd sell all the old Aircraft,Tanks and Ships over 25 years in preservation for scrap.
I'd make each department of the government legitimize each expenditure.
I'd cut Congressional and Presidential Pay by 10% and cut the benefit's to no health care until after 5 Terms or 15 Years and cut their pensions to 25% after 25 Years and 75% after 30 Years. and they have to pick their health care from a pool like the rest of us.
I'd make it so they had to go to the American People for each benefit and pay increase.
I'd make it so that any company who has a contract to supply goods and services to the US Government must have 50% of it's blue collar work force here in the US.
I'd invest in infrastructure, education and alternative energy sources.
I think then you would find the the log jams would begin to break up.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 2/20/2011
Posts: 1,297
Points: 3,887
Location: Spain
|
Likely. Still, a taxpayer may be asked to take action to pay the taxes -such as selling or mortgaging any assets owned or getting a loan. If effort is still not made to pay the bill, or make other payment arrangements, more serious enforced collection action could also be taken...
Is it that way with everybody? -Not at all...
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Joined: 5/11/2011
Posts: 1
Points: 3
Location: United States
|
 Ok, so what can help the economy in 10 steps.. 1. Take over Mexico. 2. Take all New England states and join them together into one and make it "New England" state. 3. Take all the states that begin with North, South, West, and join them, for example, South & North Carolina to Carolina, West Virginia & Virginia to Virginia. While doing all this, eliminate senators/mayors/governors, etc.. 4. Create a water path from Michigan lake down to the Gulf waters for trading 5. Change the conventional name "Speed Limit" to "Speed Post", while changing 55 to 65 and 65 to 80, having "Minimum Speed. 6. Only in the cities, having all parking meters be able to swip credit/debit cards. 7. Eliminate all tolls within states and have them ONLY on borders from state to state at a higher price, for example, state of NH has 10 tolls at .50cents so charge at borders $5.00 8. Change the conventional public libraries into social media libraries with all it's toppings that the name signifies. 9. Instead of having one vice president, have two, one for internal affairs and the other for foreign only. 10. All jails/prisons... eliminate workout rooms, weights and sport Equipment’s. Anyone doing more than 3years will have a gps tracker in them for life.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 8/3/2009
Posts: 1,895
Points: 5,709
Location: Columbia, SC, United States
|
My father was an IRS man and believed firmly in a flat tax for all.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 7/16/2010
Posts: 252
Points: 756
Location: United States
|
I used to say do away with "income" tax and just have an "outgo" (sales) tax only because this would drive people to save more, but then realized that this would just become a bigger driver for an underground economy. So a flat income tax is the winner for me as well. Would put many accountants, IRS employees and offshore bankers out of business. And while we're at it, let's eliminate sales taxes on essentials... food, non-alcoholic beverages, medicines/medical care. Agreed, ALL government subsidies must cease. Long-term welfare payments... history.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 3/18/2009
Posts: 2,036
Points: 6,040
Location: United States
|
I'm a firm believer in the business philisophy of "Diversify."
Unfortunately businesspeople,Republicans and Democrats don't want to apply it. I think ideas and the economy work best when government, small business, big business, academics, inherited wealth and povert with oppurtinity plus science are all pushing each other. As an example computing and the internet came about in part because of the military, in part because of the need to provide statistics for the Census Bureau, in part because of academic development ofthe ENIAC 9(for the purpose of satisfying the aforesaid military and Census Bureau) at the University of Pennsylvania, in part because of Bill Gates and Paul Allen who were turned away by the big business of IMB,in part because of other businesses who wanted to best Microsoft and so on and so on.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/3/2010
Posts: 428
Points: 1,256
Location: United States
|
boneyfriend wrote:My father was an IRS man and believed firmly in a flat tax for all. I don't know anyone who disagress with a fair flat tax. Except the Republicans.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 1/6/2010
Posts: 917
Points: 2,690
Location: United States
|
What would be a fair flat tax? 20%?
You must realize that many people don't pay any income tax or get most of it back. Would these people be included in the flat tax? I think they should.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/30/2010
Posts: 434
Points: 1,311
Location: United States
|
i would say a flat tax of 10% would be fair and everyone could afford it ... tax breaks would be for only companies that needed it and requested it along with an application with your open statements to verify the information .... the prison system should be able to feed itself .... create farms and jobs that provide a service to the community with no volunteers everyone participates (minus the handicap) ... for those counties (or parrishes) that have dual governments abolish those in favor of one ... put a limit on big oil companies by putting a cap on how much they can charge people at the pump (oil has been roughly the same amout per barrel for the past two or three years yet the price of gas has risen dramatically) and charge the violators ... that's what i can think of of the top of my head
your signature is silly!
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/30/2010
Posts: 434
Points: 1,311
Location: United States
|
also ... legalize gay marriage it would help put more money in the economy by planning more weddings, buying more homes together, buying insurance, paying taxes as a family, and paying for more divorces .... it's a win-win ... also, keep abortion legal ... those that can't afford, or don't want a child shouldn't be forced into having one
your signature is silly!
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 1/6/2010
Posts: 917
Points: 2,690
Location: United States
|
Those that can't afford or don't want a child are not "forced" to have one now.
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Joined: 5/20/2011
Posts: 1
Points: 3
Location: Keystone
|
Cut spending and also increase taxes the rich. We need both. Stop borrowing from China and stop future Republicans from looting the treasury with elective wars like the War In Iraq -- which really busted our piggy bank more than anything.
Hello from Rocky Mountains and lake Dillon real estate
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 10/2/2009
Posts: 1,546
Points: 4,705
Location: United States
|
mailady wrote:What would be a fair flat tax? 20%?
You must realize that many people don't pay any income tax or get most of it back. Would these people be included in the flat tax? I think they should. A flat tax is an incredibly bad idea. Simplify the tax code, and eliminate the loopholes? Sure. But a progressive tax is government 101.
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Joined: 4/12/2010
Posts: 4
Points: 12
Location: Bangladesh
|
The worsening market trauma has piled pressure on the US Federal Reserve to announce fresh measures of support for the US economy at a regular policy meeting in August, but analysts said its options are limited. Investors fear that, with confidence in the global economy's prospects evaporating, financial markets will remain in a slump, feeding a vicious circle of pessimism. MSCI's all-country world index was down 1.2 percent, and has now shed about 20 percent since peaking in May. The market rule of thumb is that a fall of that magnitude constitutes a "bear market". More info: Global economy stumbled deeper into crisis
Firojbd
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 8/31/2011
Posts: 1,086
Points: 3,136
Location: Canada
|
Hopefully Duende, a newbie, is spamming us. Or, to be more generous, maybe all the happy faces are saying the post is meant as sarcasm?
I sure( ly) hope so!
Every man has a right to his opinion, but no man has a right to be wrong in his facts. Bernard M. Baruch 1870-1965
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 12/22/2010
Posts: 1,662
Points: 4,934
Location: Gaeltacht, Ireland
|
Learn Mandarin quickly.
Off to Singapore for a spell!
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 973
Points: 2,765
Location: United Kingdom
|
Privatise absolutely everything so you only get what you pay for. No taxes. No Public Services. No National or Local Government. If you want Healthcare you pay into a private company.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/12/2011
Posts: 2,181
Points: 6,571
Location: Scotland (via Earth, Sol system)
|
I can't say I agree with NO government - it's a bit dangerous (you could just get criminal gangs using force to become the government.)
But simplification of government, actually handle the tax 'loopholes' used by the rich to become richer etc - yes.
Two particular things:
1. Cancel 'disability benefit' for cases like the 34-year-old who can not work because he suffers from depression because he has 17 children (and another due soon). This is an actual case, not imaginary - the fifteen mothers of his children are all supported by our taxes.
2. A flat 0.5% tax on all transactions over a certain limit (say £500,000), with no loopholes (including watching for two similar transactions of £490,000 in a short time). this taxes the real Capitalist - the person who 'makes money' by buying and selling capital, producing nothing.
Though lovers be lost, love shall not, and Death shall have no dominion. - Dylan Thomas
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Joined: 1/9/2012
Posts: 25
Points: -63
Location: New Zealand
|
economy does not look like a simple solution, if it was wouldnt it had been solved. a flat tax might make things simpler in terms of budgeting what you have to pay for taxes, regardless of personal or business tax. problem could be not enough tax money is collected, thus providing the government less money to fund government programs. as it is there is a huge number of people on the government's payroll, from county, city, state to federal. a smaller budget government would not provide a source of income for many in america. infrastructure dependent contractors and it's employees would less employable. it does show that government does play a social role with it's welfare programs, many of few people dont feel this should be the case, that government provides a lively hood. a flat tax sure looks simpler and has the impression that most of the americans would like to have, but would it provide funding for sufficient programs. it could be, it not hard to accept that its human natural behaviour to see other humans suffer and have a lower life style, one of the proofs would be in the funding of social programs, why one group's income be used to support another group's life style. it does look like that. history does not provide a good model for how to produce economic model that satisfies. keep it simple stupid: kiss.: 
Light of Night.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/10/2009
Posts: 1,251
Points: 3,690
|
One of the things I would do, is do away with insurance companies, forcing the cost of doctors, lawyers and Indian chiefs--and all their appendages--to be in line with what the working class can reasonably pay.
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Joined: 2/23/2012
Posts: 7
Points: 21
Location: uk
|
And while we're at it, let's eliminate sales taxes on essentials... food, non-alcoholic beverages, medicines/medical care. Agreed, ALL government subsidies must cease. Long-term welfare payments... history.
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Joined: 2/23/2012
Posts: 7
Points: 21
Location: uk
|
They have no unions and no EPA to protect them. How the treat those people is how they want to treat us. That is why they are busting up unions. I think that I am a Social Democrat. I believe in democracy but I also believe in social equity. These companies are also trying to monopolize and don't sell US products. I am all for the small business man.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 973
Points: 2,765
Location: United Kingdom
|
A lot of our economic woes have been caused by dishonesty: Banks, Insurance Companies, Politicians, Journalists, Lawyers, Accountants and Tax Dodgers. I think we should arrest the assets of everyone convicted of dishonest trading and put the monsy into the Public Purse. Anyone assisting dishonest traders by receiving/hiding their assets would also lose their assets.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 10/27/2009
Posts: 630
Points: 1,828
Location: United States
|
redgriffin wrote:[
I don't know anyone who disagress with a fair flat tax. Except the Republicans. Was this a typo, Red? I think most Republicans would be very happy with a flat tax.
"The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth is a government program." - Ronald Reagan
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Joined: 2/26/2012
Posts: 27
Points: 81
Location: United States
|
A flat tax would be a very bad thing to do. We need to increase taxes on the wealthy, both income and property. After all, they own the most of it. We should continue to have more involvement of government in industry and business ownership so that profits will go to ALL the people rather than to a select few.
Redistribute the wealth. Give everyone their fair share.
"The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them." Lenin
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 973
Points: 2,765
Location: United Kingdom
|
RedStar wrote:A flat tax would be a very bad thing to do. We need to increase taxes on the wealthy, both income and property. After all, they own the most of it. We should continue to have more involvement of government in industry and business ownership so that profits will go to ALL the people rather than to a select few.
Redistribute the wealth. Give everyone their fair share. How do you define a fair share? Does it mean more for those who work hardest, taking risks with there money and careers? Less for those who just do enough to get by and pay their taxes? Even less for those who cannot succeed due to a poor upbringing? Nothing at all for those who will not make an effort? That sounds fair to me.It's what we have got. If we could just remove greed and envy it would work fine. But human nature being what it is....
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Joined: 2/26/2012
Posts: 27
Points: 81
Location: United States
|
jacobusmaximus wrote:
How do you define a fair share? Does it mean more for those who work hardest, taking risks with there money and careers? Less for those who just do enough to get by and pay their taxes? Even less for those who cannot succeed due to a poor upbringing? Nothing at all for those who will not make an effort? That sounds fair to me.It's what we have got. If we could just remove greed and envy it would work fine. But human nature being what it is....
To answer all your questions in a word: yes. It may seem unfair to you, but it's time for all of us, skilled or unskilled, monied or poor, to share in the wealth of this nation. The healthcare program is a great start. Yes, the cost will be far more than is being said, but that's not important, because it's going to be paid for by those who can afford it. Those of us who cannot will benefit from the wealth at the top. Move over capitalism. It's time. We must reelect this president so we can join the other nations of the world in sharing the resources equally.
"The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them." Lenin
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/30/2010
Posts: 5,697
Points: 17,030
Location: Canada
|
Burn it all, bury it ( you have to burn it first in case it grows again ), and start all over.
Sanity is not statistical
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 1/6/2010
Posts: 917
Points: 2,690
Location: United States
|
Good grief,redstar,get a job.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/9/2010
Posts: 909
Points: 2,642
Location: Australia
|
If socialism worked, then where is the U.S.S.R?
It has gone, disappeared.The Red Star burnt out many years ago.
Why?
Because the same things that happens in capitalism, greed, corruption,the divide between the haves and have-nots, still flourishes. The main difference is that in socialist countries, if you complain, they probably shoot you.
This forum would not be operating because you would have "no freedom of speech".
Also, why should someone study for years, then work 80 hours a week for the same privileges as the useless sod who doesn't bother "as he gets the same" for sitting on his backside doing nothing?
There will always be the wealthy and the poor, because, if we didn't have the 'go-getter's' that become wealthy, everybody would be poor.
Long term welfare payments cannot be eliminated as there are many genuine people who cannot work, the elderly, the maimed and injured, all the returned service personnel who are too stuffed up by war experiences,etc.
If socialism is the answer, why did China adopt a capitalist policy???
RULES ARE FOR THE OBEYENCE OF FOOLS AND FOR THE GUIDENCE OF WISE MEN
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 2/13/2010
Posts: 3,098
Points: 9,315
Location: United States
|
RedStar wrote:jacobusmaximus wrote:
How do you define a fair share? Does it mean more for those who work hardest, taking risks with there money and careers? Less for those who just do enough to get by and pay their taxes? Even less for those who cannot succeed due to a poor upbringing? Nothing at all for those who will not make an effort? That sounds fair to me.It's what we have got. If we could just remove greed and envy it would work fine. But human nature being what it is....
To answer all your questions in a word: yes. It may seem unfair to you, but it's time for all of us, skilled or unskilled, monied or poor, to share in the wealth of this nation. The healthcare program is a great start. Yes, the cost will be far more than is being said, but that's not important, because it's going to be paid for by those who can afford it. Those of us who cannot will benefit from the wealth at the top. Move over capitalism. It's time. We must reelect this president so we can join the other nations of the world in sharing the resources equally. Red:
1. The health care law will save money over time, not raise costs. This according to the CBO.
2. Beyond the possibility of a re-elected Obama letting the Bush tax cuts end later this year, there is no tax increase posited to pay for health. Also, the revenue increases from the higher tax rates would go to the General Fund, not to one specific program, and, hopefully much would be used to reduce the debt.
3. You don't say so directly, but, to avoid any possible confusion...Barack Obama isn't a socialist. He'd best be described as "center-left". If merely having a progressive tax code qualfies you as "socialist" then every President since WWI was a commie....
"Be without fear in the face of your enemies. Be brave and upright that God may love thee. Speak the truth always, even if it leads to your death. Safeguard the helpless, and do no wrong". (Knight's Oath, Kingdom of Heaven)
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Joined: 2/26/2012
Posts: 27
Points: 81
Location: United States
|
HWNN1961 wrote:Red:
1. The health care law will save money over time, not raise costs. This according to the CBO.
2. Beyond the possibility of a re-elected Obama letting the Bush tax cuts end later this year, there is no tax increase posited to pay for health. Also, the revenue increases from the higher tax rates would go to the General Fund, not to one specific program, and, hopefully much would be used to reduce the debt.
3. You don't say so directly, but, to avoid any possible confusion...Barack Obama isn't a socialist. He'd best be described as "center-left". If merely having a progressive tax code qualfies you as "socialist" then every President since WWI was a commie.... I have great respect for your posts, HWNN, and because we agree on so many things, it really doesn’t matter that we see a few little numbers differently. It doesn’t matter that health care will cost more, because the system will take care of it. And like Hope1 asked, why do Americans run for cover every time the word Socialist or Marxist is mentioned? Even you seem to want to avoid it, when deep down that’s what we all want. Our president did a wonderful job in using necessary vagueness to get elected. Otherwise, the right would have crucified him with their accusations about socialist and Marxist. They tried anyway, but thankfully they were not successful. He is taking us where we need to go, and if he must use a little vagueness to bring some others along, then so be it. The important thing is for the government to gradually take more power and control, and to mete out resources in a fair and just manner. Once the health care law is fully operational, then they’ll be just about where they need to be to take us over the hump. As for the progressive tax code, I think that all income over 200,000 should be taxed at 100 percent. 200,000 is enough for anyone to live comfortably, and the rest is simply waste that could be used for the betterment of all. I look forward to more of your posts, HWNN. You are one of the most reasonable people here, and I value your insights.
"The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them." Lenin
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 10/27/2009
Posts: 630
Points: 1,828
Location: United States
|
HWNN1961 wrote:
1. The health care law will save money over time, not raise costs. This according to the CBO.
Once again, I beg to differ with you, H. There are a number of recent articles saying that the CBO now estimtes that this new law will cost us MUCH more than was originally estimated.
Just Google it with CBO health care. There are tons of hits.
"The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth is a government program." - Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
Guest |