And I would just like to add, seeing as this thread has taken off, that my surfeit of exclamation points was to mock the New York Times’ threepeat of this headline. They have never done this before, AFAIK, at the most repeating a news flash in their regular morning or afternoon emails. But this time it was a news flash, AND a morning and afternoon email. Yes, NYT, God forbid we should hold the line on taxes and stand in the way of the socialist paradise you so desire…
Mmmmmm… Socialist Paradise…
drools
:rolleyes:
Wipe it off your chin and try to make a cogent comment…
Follow your own advice. I was making fun of you.
You’re fighting decades of police culture & political bias here. Maybe if an angel from heaven comes down and anoints you Tsar you can do that by fiat.
What do you think the Dept. of Education does? We have local control. DoE’s budget is largely grants and loans for post-secondary students, isn’t it?
I don’t think you understand what a government department is for.
In any case, Education used to be part of the department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Abolishing the cabinet post doesn’t mean getting the federal government out of the field. The Department of Energy would just be folded into Interior, or split between Interior and Defense.
Man, we need verifiable time travel, so you can meet your alternate reality self from a timeline where the Koreshians slaughtered a supermarket full of innocent bystanders, & he (you) is saying BATF should have done what they did in our timeline.
Seriously, the Waco situation was a cock-up, doesn’t mean the bureau of redneck vices needs to go.
This is the only one of these that would save enough money to balance the budget. All the other agencies have tiny budgets by comparison. We do not collect enough income tax to cover DoD, so we borrow. But again, a lot of unionized private sector jobs rely on building military hardware, and much of the US relies on those workers’ incomes.
Isn’t Planned Parenthood private?
Only by cutting the military-industrial complex. Even Eisenhower failed to stop those guys. Maybe you should run for office on that. Near-term you’ll still need to repeal the Bush tax cuts or you’ll end up paying a lot more in interest on the debt.
Oh good lord. Are you against all pensions or just Social Security? Yeah, it should be restructured. Also, it should be repaid for all the money kiped from it over the last 25 years, which is another reason to raise marginal income taxes (other than good monetarist theory).
As for farm subsidies, I think I mentioned this earlier. I really want you to pay the full cost (or what Marx would have called the “work-value”) of your food. But you’ll whine that there’s no money left for ciggies!
This is the only one of these that would save enough money to balance the budget. All the other agencies have tiny budgets by comparison. We do not collect enough income tax to cover DoD, so we borrow. But again, a lot of unionized private sector jobs rely on building military hardware, and much of the US relies on those workers’ incomes.
Only by cutting the military-industrial complex. Even Eisenhower failed to stop those guys. Maybe you should run for office on that. Near-term you’ll still need to repeal the Bush tax cuts or you’ll end up paying a lot more in interest on the debt.
Oh good lord. Are you against all pensions or just Social Security? Yeah, it should be restructured. Also, it should be repaid for all the money kiped from it over the last 25 years, which is another reason to raise marginal income taxes (other than good monetarist theory).
Wowsers. Couple of nutcases here. No wonder we are in such dire straights! And they let these people vote…
If only more people thought like you, Stan, America would be a completely different country.
[Nitpick]
dire straits
[/nitpick[
I’m cool with that.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaa. Snerk. Ha ha. Ever hear of the farce called “No Child Left Behind”? No, of course you haven’t. Moron.
No, I have a very good understanding of what a government department is for. It is for sucking in an increasing and endless vortex of the people’s money in order to establish control over the populace.
All functions of government that are extraconstitutional and should cease, forthwith.
The cabinet post would dissolve when the useless alphabet soup agency is dissolved. God you are a moron.
What part of zero it out don’t you understand? No it wouldn’t. Personnel in the department would be made to take honest work, and the department would be dissolved. It would cease to exist and it’s regulatory authority would be over with and it’s budget would end.
WTF?
No duh.
Now, here we have it. Constitutional rights are a redneck vice. Thanks for playing. You are now officially done. Bye.
I would like you to look up the definition of the word “fungible”. We borrow, but according to you, all that borrowing is because of the military. Fail.
Actually, a very small amount of private sector jobs depend on military spending, and if those jobs are unionized, that is between the contractors and the labor force they employ. They take this into consideration when they bid on defense contracts, and when they negotiate with labor unions. This is in stark contrast to public employee labor unions where there is a built in conflict of interest in that the labor unions are major contributors to the elected officials who supposedly are negotiating in the public interest.
Yes, and I would have no problem with them if they didn’t TAKE PUBLIC MONEY. I, personally, feel abortion should be legal. I also feel that it is a horrific procedure that many people have a legitimate philosophical objection to, and that they shouldn’t be required to fund through their taxes at the point of a gun.
I am not running for office.
Did I say anything about the Bush tax cuts? I think taxes should be cut far more than Bush ever dreamed of, and that they should be targeted more at the working class.
Under my plan, the budget would have a surplus and we would pay down the national debt in maybe ten years.
I am against a tax that targets the poor linked to a benefit that helps the rich. Social Security in a nutshell.
I have no idea what you are talking about here, and I suspect neither do you.
Again, WTF? What does cutting ADM off the gravy train have to do with Marx? Maybe Groucho? You sir are a first class maroon.
Ohhhhhhh I get it now: you’re crazy. And not the good kind of crazy; the kind of crazy who wants to vote for Sharron Angle.
Waitaminnit…are you saying Mark Knopfler is a nutcase? I’m confused. 
Ever play poker on an airplane while it’s crash landing, the engine on fire and snakes biting you in the dick? Now those are dire straights.
I agree, and you are one of them!
That’s the corporations job!!
Indictment pending.
The Fox network may have confused the issue but the New York Times still understands the concept of how news reporting works.
Reporting that the budget is nearing collapse and a GOP leader is quitting? Those are objective facts and therefore news items.
Advocating for tax cuts? That’s opinion writing.
Why you allow the NYT to send you updates by email is beyond me to fathom, given your general political position as expressed here.
Inflation’s a funny thing. If a government is unable to increase revenue by imposing truly progressive taxes, then it may well end up printing money to fund the necessary functions of government. And this type of inflation is nothing more or less than a flat sales tax across the board.
Admittedly you and I will probably never agree on what government functions are necessary.
And incidentally it’s Weimar
These quotes help show the fundamental differences in thinking between “conservatives” and “liberals.” We are not running in the red because we, the taxpayers, don’t pay enough, we are in the red because politicians spend too much. And there can’t be “tax giveaways,” only reduced tax takeaways - it is not the government’s money to give. And I’ll skip the notion that having money makes you a fellator in the first degree.
Try to divorce yourself from this slavish pavlovian devotion to paying taxes and compare the situation to the “real world.” If you make $100 a week and spend $150, the solution to your woes is to spend less, not to demand that your boss pay you more. If you don’t believe this, try it some time - I guarantee that your employer will not see your side of things. And don’t worry about losing your job - there are plenty of social programs, untouched by those horrible “tax giveaways,” that will support you in the manner to which you’re accustomed.
And when the bare minimum cost of living to support your family, after cutting every single corner you possibly can, leaving your family in a state of uncertain health but not dead, is $1200 a month, but you’re only earning $1000? What then?
There is a point at which you cannot legitimately cut any more from the budget without severely harming the health of the citizenry. At that point, “just cut spending, duh” doesn’t fucking cut it.
If the employer is GE, they may be OK with it. They paid no taxes on their multi-billions in profit. In fact, they got a refund.