Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
- No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
- Times and dates in your local timezone.
- Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
- Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
- Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 01:52:51
Subject: The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
It's going to heat up...
I think something will get done right at the last minute.
I found this article interesting (yes, I'm stirring the pot to elicit debate):
GOP don't have the cajones to do this...
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2012/12/03/fiscal-cliff-obama-debt/1741339/
Column: GOP should force Obama's hand
Republicans need some creative ideas to flummox President Obama.
Why not put on extra tax on Obama political appointees turned lobbyist?
If Hollywood likes tax increases so much, why not an extra tax on Left Coast creative types?
If Republicans can't be creative, they'll lose fiscal cliff negotiations.
December 3. 2012 - As we careen toward the "fiscal cliff," the House GOP faces a problem. Obama won't offer his own detailed plan which will involve big tax increases, until they offer their own plan -- which, Obama says, must contain big tax increases or he won't offer his.
That's a mug's game. Some have suggested that the House GOP should just walk away and let the nation go over the fiscal cliff. But I have some better ideas.
Truth is, Obama's not really a key player here. All that he can do is sign or veto whatever legislation comes to him. And since under the Constitution money bills originate in the House, even the Democratic Senate will have to accept, reject or amend whatever the House sends. So if Speaker Boehner et al. are smart, they'll send something that will be awkward, but politically damaging to reject. My advice:
1. Adopt the Bowles-Simpson Plan. The plan was the product of a bipartisan commission, chaired by Democrat Erskine Bowles and Republican Alan Simpson, appointed by President Obama to address America's ballooning deficits and national debt. Most experts agree that it's a pretty good plan. President Obama didn't like it because it shrinks government too much.
Tough. It's a plan, which is more than President Obama has offered, and from a bipartisan commission he appointed. Can Obama get away with vetoing that? Can Senate Democrats get away with rejecting it and bringing on the automatic cuts and tax increases of the sequester? Doubtful. Plus, though the press tends to cover for Obama and blame Republicans, media types love Bipartisan Commissions.
2. Tax the revolving door. I mentioned earlier that Washington is getting richer while the rest of the country gets poorer. (And others are noticing this). One reason why this happens is the revolving door -- people shuttle between government, where they make rules governing business, and lobbying, where they make money by taking advantage of those rules.
Well, if you want less of something, tax it. So I recommend a 50% "excess salary" surtax on the earnings of government officials on the Executive Schedule -- cabinet and subcabinet officials, mostly -- in excess of their government salaries for the first five years after they leave. So, leave a cabinet job paying about $200,000 for a job paying $1 million a year, and the government will take half the $800,000 difference.
That seems fair. When it comes to post-government employment, the "you didn't build that" argument is 100% true. As an ex-official, your value comes from what you learned (or did) while on the public payroll. Let the public take a cut! I look forward to the White House's efforts to argue otherwise. For extra fun, Republicans could raise the rate to 91%, the Eisenhower top tax rate that Democrats have been waxing nostalgic about, and maybe make it retroactive to January 1, 2012.
3. Make Hollywood Pay Its Fair Share. At the DNC, actress Eva Longoria offered to pay more taxes. Well, back during that Eisenhower era that the Dems are so nostalgic for, there was a 20% excise tax on movie theater revenues. It was established to help pay off the post-World War II debt. Now we're in debt again. Bring it back. For added fun, extend it to DVD sales, movie downloads and music on CDs and over the Internet. As a great man once said, at some point, you've made enough money. If we need more tax revenue, who better to pay it than Hollywood fatcats with their swimming pools and private jets?
Well, those are just my thoughts. If the House GOP wants to put Obama on the spot, I'm sure they can come up with similar, but better ideas. If they don't, well, then people across the country will wonder why not -- and maybe look to the primaries in 2014.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 01:58:02
Subject: The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
That guy is brutal...
|
Avatar 720 wrote:You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Come check out my Blood Angels,Crimson Fists, and coming soon Eldar
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391013.page
I have conceded that the Eldar page I started in P&M is their legitimate home. Free Candy! Updated 10/19.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391553.page
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters.. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 02:18:05
Subject: The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
yeah definitely... Though, I don't think he understands how government salary works.
I may have gotten it wrong, but the way it was explained to me, is that congress cannot legally make "selective" pay raises and pay cuts. Basically, they have to write it into legislation that ALL government employees receive either increase or decrease in pay, but apparently how much CAN be written separately. So, while people are complaining that congressmen need to take pay cuts to help government make ends meat, that would also mean that they'd have to give the military a pay cut as well... and most of us are "barely getting by"
The movie tax thing.. .ehh, I dont know, I mean it's been awhile since Ive been to the movies, but I know it was kinda spendy (minus the fact that it was a matinee). I know that there are plenty of people who will either not go to the movies and get PPV, or the DVD/blu-ray of whatever movie they wish to see.
I watched a segment on Fox News Channel (I was in a doctor's waiting room, on base) and their "experts" were predicting that things will get done as well, and that there are those out there who believe that for whatever reason, the congressional people (senators and reps. alike) seem to have a belief that they need to "act tough" to not appear weak before the people who voted them into office... But my thought is that I didn't vote for a person to "act tough" and vote on party lines, never give an inch and be a staunch a [political party here] as they can be... I voted these people in to office because I can't vote on everything, and I want them to get things done that will benefit the country.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 02:21:10
Subject: Re:The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Lets all go off the cliff muhahahaha. That way everyone is paying their "fair share"
|
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog
Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 02:27:33
Subject: The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
Ensis Ferrae wrote:
I may have gotten it wrong, but the way it was explained to me, is that congress cannot legally make "selective" pay raises and pay cuts. Basically, they have to write it into legislation that ALL government employees receive either increase or decrease in pay, but apparently how much CAN be written separately. So, while people are complaining that congressmen need to take pay cuts to help government make ends meat, that would also mean that they'd have to give the military a pay cut as well... and most of us are "barely getting by"
He wasn't talking about the actual government employees. He meant people who moved from government to the same private sector they regulated. Like say an SEC employee moving to Chase. Not so much for the government lifer grunting away at GS-7.
|
Avatar 720 wrote:You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Come check out my Blood Angels,Crimson Fists, and coming soon Eldar
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391013.page
I have conceded that the Eldar page I started in P&M is their legitimate home. Free Candy! Updated 10/19.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391553.page
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters.. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 02:34:52
Subject: Re:The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Depraved Slaanesh Chaos Lord
|
I'm pretty sure the GOP is going to buckle and significantly increase taxes on the top 1%
I'll just leave this here...
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/11/30/1259051/22-republicans-norquist/
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 02:36:08
Subject: Re:The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
Yeah... that isn't a surprise.
Norquist be burning bridges...
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 02:41:36
Subject: Re:The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak
|
So the guy is in favour of tax hikes, as long as they're on people he thinks are the cultural enemy. He doesn't even pretend to consider how much revenue they might create, or how much or how little impact they migh have on the industry in question, just if they're targeted at people he rails against in his little fictional cultural war. What a feth head.
Meanwhile, I think we'll probably end up with something between a ratio somwhere between an 80/20 and 90/10 ratio between spending cuts and tax increases. The tax increases will be entirely in the form of seeing the Bush tax cuts end, while spending will be across the board, excepting the military.
This will basically mean the Republicans will have given up very little. The Bush tax cuts they put into place without needing to give up anything will have only been partly surrendered, and to give those up they will have extracted considerable spending cuts from the Democrats. Despite this many, many pundits will rail about the awful compromise Boehner fell for, and they will call for his head. They probably won't get it, because they'd be replacing him with Cantor, and even the genuinely crazy know putting that guy in a position of real responsibility is bad news.
It will have a longer term strategic end though, as the pledge to Grover Norquist's pledge to never raise taxes will have been broken. There will much wailing and gnashing about this, but no meaningful impact at the electoral booth. This will mark the first step in the road back to a GOP run by adults, for adults.
But I'm in something of an optimistic mood today.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/04 08:42:11
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 02:42:32
Subject: Re:The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Douglas Bader
|
2. Tax the revolving door. I mentioned earlier that Washington is getting richer while the rest of the country gets poorer. (And others are noticing this). One reason why this happens is the revolving door -- people shuttle between government, where they make rules governing business, and lobbying, where they make money by taking advantage of those rules.
Well, if you want less of something, tax it. So I recommend a 50% "excess salary" surtax on the earnings of government officials on the Executive Schedule -- cabinet and subcabinet officials, mostly -- in excess of their government salaries for the first five years after they leave. So, leave a cabinet job paying about $200,000 for a job paying $1 million a year, and the government will take half the $800,000 difference.
Yeah, that's just wishful thinking. Does the author really not understand that both parties benefit from this, and neither one is going to propose any serious changes to the system? Expecting the republicans to voluntarily offer a tax on their wealthy supporters is just laughably idealistic.
(Of course it's still a good idea, even if there's no chance of it ever happening.)
|
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 02:43:31
Subject: Re:The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
sebster wrote:So the guy is in favour of tax hikes, as long as they're on people he thinks are the cultural enemy. He doesn't even pretend to consider how much revenue they might create, or how much or how little impact they migh have on the industry in question, just if they're targeted at people he rails against in his little fictional cultural war. What a feth head.
Meanwhile, I think we'll probably end up with something between a ratio somwhere between an 80/20 and 90/10 ratio between spending cuts and tax increases. The tax increases will be entirely in the form of seeing the Bush tax cuts end, while spending will be across the board, excepting the military.
This will basically mean the Republicans will have given up very little. The Bush tax cuts they put into place without needing to give up anything will have only been partly surrendered, and to give those up they will have extracted considerable spending cuts from the Democrats. Despite this many, many pundits will rail about the awful compromise Boehner fell for, and they will call for his head. They probably won't get it, because they'd be replacing him with Cantor, and even the genuinely crazy know putting that guy in a position of real responsibility is bad news.
It will have a longer term strategic end though, as the pledge to Grover Norquist's pledge to never raise taxes will have been broken. There will much wailing and gnashing about this, but no meaningful impact at the electoral booth. This will mark the first step in the road back to a GOP run by adults, for adults.
But I'm in something of an optimistic mood today.
Heh... good point.
But, I'm all for that Simpson-Bowles idea...
Again, I'd be VERY surprise if they don't get a deal done.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/04 08:42:36
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 02:43:33
Subject: Re:The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Depraved Slaanesh Chaos Lord
|
Jihadin wrote:Lets all go off the cliff muhahahaha. That way everyone is paying their "fair share"
I think the top 1% will not fare as well as they think, should the country go over the edge, so to speak.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 02:43:51
Subject: Re:The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak
|
Thanks for that. So my prediction looks a little more likely. Automatically Appended Next Post: whembly wrote:But, I'm all for that Simpson-Bowles idea...
Again, I'd be VERY surprise if they don't get a deal done.
Yeah, I believe so too. Last time was a very strange set of circumstances, with Cantor trying to use the Tea Party faction of the GOP to usurp Boehner's negotiating position (either as part of a coup or just because he's a nut, I don't think anyone knows), coupled with it being a particularly heated political environment, and Obama handling the negotiations really terribly (offering up front, in public all kinds of concessions but then not conceding any more, basically giving Boehner nothing to 'win' in negotiation).
Add in that Republicans basically have nothing to win this time around - they can't make Obama a one term president anymore, and there is no point looking bad and hurting their own popularity if the other guy doesn't care about re-election any more.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/04 02:48:26
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 03:09:00
Subject: Re:The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
Let me ask you, Whembly. Honest question. You are a conservative republican, correct? Regardless of what you label yourself, your postings on here make that fairly clear.
Doesn't ever ever bother you that your party essentially has ceded control over the tax policy of 300 million Americans to an unelected lobbyist? I mean, you guys hate "unelected bureaucrats" when it comes to healthcare, so why does this guy deserve such worship, exactly?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/04 03:09:27
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 03:21:07
Subject: The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
Anime High School
|
I want to see what happens if they don't do anything. Chaos is the spice of life.. or something. They'll probably squeeze out something with seconds on the clock and call it a day, but I'm genuinely curious as to what would happen, and how the public's faith shifts.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 03:22:26
Subject: Re:The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
Ouze wrote:
Let me ask you, Whembly. Honest question. You are a conservative republican, correct? Regardless of what you label yourself, your postings on here make that fairly clear.
Doesn't ever ever bother you that your party essentially has ceded control over the tax policy of 300 million Americans to an unelected lobbyist? I mean, you guys hate "unelected bureaucrats" when it comes to healthcare, so why does this guy deserve such worship, exactly?
I'm socially liberal (for gay marriage, don't really have a problem with welfare, tolerate Bieber (just kidding))
I'm a Defense hawk... (have utmost respect to those who serve)
I'm for smaller goverment and not too big on Social Policies in nature ( but, I've come to terms to the thinking that Single Payor Healthcare, ala Canada)
I REALLY believe in states rights, and I get aggravated that the Feds think that they can do it all.
I like the idea of Flat Tax ( but, accepted that it will never, ever happen).
I don't believe in a "living Constitution".
For repealing 17th amendment.
I'm pro-life, but want pro-choice society. (simply because govt shouldn't "control" your body).
Etc...
What the hell does that peg me? A South Park Republican? Loco Democrat???
As to answer your question: I disagree with your ascertation that the GOP"ceded control over the tax policy of 300 million Americans to an unelected lobbyist". That's not what happened. However, the whole idea that you "sign a pledge" promising never ever to raise taxes is asinine and it does bother me that politican play this game like this.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 03:23:43
Subject: Re:The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
But you seem to think it's OK, even laudable, to play such stupid games as micro-targetting tax increases for ex-employees of the executive branch? Automatically Appended Next Post: whembly wrote:I don't believe in a "living Constitution".
For repealing 17th amendment.
uh
Please tell me this was a subtle troll, right?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/04 03:26:11
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 03:32:06
Subject: Re:The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
Ouze wrote:But you seem to think it's OK, even laudable, to play such stupid games as micro-targetting tax increases for ex-employees of the executive branch?
The tax code is a mess... I should know, I have family in the accounting world (mum's works for Ernst&Young). We have very strong opinion on this in my family. It's so riddled with favoritism and shenanigans that you really, really need to know these things in order to take advantage of them... the wealthy can afford to do that.
Having said that, would I be "okay" with micro-targeting on ex-employees of the executive branch? Don't care... that's what happens all over in the current tax code.
The writer of that article is supposing that if you leave public office, and use that recent knowledge to your advantage (a roundabout "insider trading"), then any $$ earned beyond what you've earned in office should be taxed higher in x number of years.
That's ugly... but, so is the tax code.
I'm curious... what would happen if we just cap ALL deductions to some arbitrary number (like, $15,000) for ALL tax brackets. I wonder how much more taxes the wealthy would pay?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
[quote=Ouze 492619 5042524 62008de968df211111bfd97ca416e433.jpg
Automatically Appended Next Post:
whembly wrote:I don't believe in a "living Constitution".
For repealing 17th amendment.
uh
Please tell me this was a subtle troll, right?
??? what part? The repeal of 17th amendment or the "living constitution" thing?
If it's the 17th amendment...
The direct representation of our Senators as opposed to have State Legislatures electing Federal Senators?
Tell you what. In Washington DC, there are Embassy / Consulates for Foreign nations that has "representative" to engage with our Federal Bureaucracy. Our STATES do not have this.
The Senators answers to the people. What about the State government?
The way it should be, is the the House should answer to the people and the Senator should answer to the State's legislatures. That's just my opinion. If you think that's flat out wrong, I'd be happy to engage you on this topic.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2012/12/04 03:39:13
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 03:53:55
Subject: The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
I think he meant the living constiution thing. Even strict textualists know, or should, that the constiution was meant to be a living document. Flexibility is key to survival, ask the Jews.
|
Avatar 720 wrote:You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Come check out my Blood Angels,Crimson Fists, and coming soon Eldar
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391013.page
I have conceded that the Eldar page I started in P&M is their legitimate home. Free Candy! Updated 10/19.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391553.page
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters.. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 03:59:25
Subject: The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
AustonT wrote:I think he meant the living constiution thing. Even strict textualists know, or should, that the constiution was meant to be a living document. Flexibility is key to survival, ask the Jews.
Amend it. There's a mechanism in place to change it. It's not that hard. THAT'S how to have a living constitution.
EDIT: I guess what I'm trying to articulate is the laws should be interpreted in a "strict constituionalist" viewpoint. Not, when given the opportunity, allow deviations because "we are now ready for it" or "times a changing".
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/04 04:02:20
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 04:03:48
Subject: The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Do we need a constitutional ammendmen to have an Air Force?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 04:07:01
Subject: The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
d-usa wrote:Do we need a constitutional ammendmen to have an Air Force?
Er.. naw.
I'm assuming that the Constitution only describes the Navy and the Army.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 04:08:25
Subject: The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Posts with Authority
|
d-usa wrote:Do we need a constitutional ammendmen to have an Air Force?
Nah, the Air Force will be rendered irrelevant when we pass the amendment creating the Solar Navy.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 04:11:09
Subject: The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
whembly wrote: d-usa wrote:Do we need a constitutional ammendmen to have an Air Force?
Er.. naw.
I'm assuming that the Constitution only describes the Navy and the Army.
Yup.
It's my favorite troll-tactic for the Air Force Tea Party super-strict constitutionalists I work with.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 04:13:28
Subject: The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
d-usa wrote: whembly wrote: d-usa wrote:Do we need a constitutional ammendmen to have an Air Force?
Er.. naw.
I'm assuming that the Constitution only describes the Navy and the Army.
Yup.
It's my favorite troll-tactic for the Air Force Tea Party super-strict constitutionalists I work with.
Didn't the Air force spawn off the Army? ...heading to interweb to reseach now...
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 04:14:07
Subject: The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Used to be an Army Air Wing or something like that.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 04:17:57
Subject: The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
d-usa wrote:Used to be an Army Air Wing or something like that.
Yup... derived from the National Security Act of 1947.
That's fine.
But, I was more gearing towards things like the Electoral College... we can change it, but it takes public will.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 04:19:05
Subject: The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Posts with Authority
|
Yeah, it was the army air corps, then their britches got too big after the old dubbya dubbya two.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 04:20:23
Subject: Re:The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
Peregrine wrote:2. Tax the revolving door. I mentioned earlier that Washington is getting richer while the rest of the country gets poorer. (And others are noticing this). One reason why this happens is the revolving door -- people shuttle between government, where they make rules governing business, and lobbying, where they make money by taking advantage of those rules.
Well, if you want less of something, tax it. So I recommend a 50% "excess salary" surtax on the earnings of government officials on the Executive Schedule -- cabinet and subcabinet officials, mostly -- in excess of their government salaries for the first five years after they leave. So, leave a cabinet job paying about $200,000 for a job paying $1 million a year, and the government will take half the $800,000 difference.
Yeah, that's just wishful thinking. Does the author really not understand that both parties benefit from this, and neither one is going to propose any serious changes to the system? Expecting the republicans to voluntarily offer a tax on their wealthy supporters is just laughably idealistic.
(Of course it's still a good idea, even if there's no chance of it ever happening.)
Sorry... missed your response.
Glenn is a conservative (sort of), but he rails against the GOP as well as the Demoncrats.
Conceptually, it's a good idea... but, do we really need this sort of shenanigan in the tax code? (not that it matters  )
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 04:25:08
Subject: The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
Bromsy wrote:Yeah, it was the army air corps, then their britches got too big after the old dubbya dubbya two.
There's an argument to be made they needed to get away from the Army, I would opine they needed a separate budget but needed to remain more closely related to the Army to meet its needs without overlapping the Army's organic air component...or you know making it so the Amry didn't need it. But that's a long time gone.
|
Avatar 720 wrote:You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Come check out my Blood Angels,Crimson Fists, and coming soon Eldar
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391013.page
I have conceded that the Eldar page I started in P&M is their legitimate home. Free Candy! Updated 10/19.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/391553.page
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters.. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/12/04 06:29:31
Subject: Re:The fiscal cliff...
|
 |
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak
|
whembly wrote:As to answer your question: I disagree with your ascertation that the GOP"ceded control over the tax policy of 300 million Americans to an unelected lobbyist". That's not what happened. However, the whole idea that you "sign a pledge" promising never ever to raise taxes is asinine and it does bother me that politican play this game like this.
Basically, Norquist rose to power in the wake of Bush I defeat in 1992, in large part due to breaking his promise not to raise taxes. That led to the pledge, and for a bunch of reasons and no shortage of shrewd skill by Norquist the whole thing has snowballed and gotten out of control, to the point where a political party has effectively denied itself an entire half of fiscal policy.
It is so extreme as to be unsustainable though, and I think once it comes down, and doesn't result in electoral annihilation, Norquist will be given a spot in the irrelevance room next to Rove. Automatically Appended Next Post: whembly wrote:Conceptually, it's a good idea... but, do we really need this sort of shenanigan in the tax code? (not that it matters  )
It's not really a place for the tax code. I mean, the problem isn't that these people are earning lots of money, the problem is how much influence they have (and how much the promise of a job after a candidate's term has ended might sway legislation). The better solution is to place restrictions on how soon after leaving office you might take up such a position, if allowed at all.
And personally, I don't think it's ever a good idea to use the tax code to target specific industries. It's why that 'hit the bankers with extra taxes thing' in the wake of the bail out was a bad idea. And here it's even worse.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/04 06:33:43
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. |
|
 |
 |
|