Honest Political Question

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Que

    Meekness ≠ Weakness
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 98%
    48   1   0
    Feb 20, 2009
    16,373
    83
    Blacksburg
    I'm working on becoming better informed on some of the current political issues. I don't pretend to be absolutely ignorant, but I also do not want to believe that my viewpoints are absolutely without fault, either. I am honestly looking for help and not attempting to start flames in any way. And, I don't plan to respond with any smart mouthed responses.

    Now, I have seen the Republicans provide tax cuts, but allow the nation's deficit to skyrocket. Also, I've seen Democrats tax people to the hilt, but drastically reduce the deficit. Now, without placing blame as to how we got where we currently are, is there a way to get out of this? Is there a way to get rid of our deficit; reinstitute Bush's tax breaks, which are ending; provide more tax cuts in the future and return some of the power to the states, which many say is currently in the hands of the federal government? All suggestions are welcomed as long as you can also discuss the ramifications.

    For instance, we simply stop all welfare programs. If so, the result will be the "states may have to..." Some suggestions may sound harsh, but may still be the right way to go. Your thoughts?

    THIS IS A :flamethrower: FREE ZONE
     

    Indy_Guy_77

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    16   0   0
    Apr 30, 2008
    16,576
    48
    Solution: quit spending money like a drunken sailor.

    Then you won't have to raise taxes nor raise the deficit.

    And once you get spending under control, then you can cut taxes. Especially for those who pay the most.

    -J-
     

    BloodEclipse

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 3, 2008
    10,620
    38
    In the trenches for liberty!
    I'm working on becoming better informed on some of the current political issues. I don't pretend to be absolutely ignorant, but I also do not want to believe that my viewpoints are absolutely without fault, either. I am honestly looking for help and not attempting to start flames in any way. And, I don't plan to respond with any smart mouthed responses.

    Now, I have seen the Republicans provide tax cuts, but allow the nation's deficit to skyrocket. Also, I've seen Democrats tax people to the hilt, but drastically reduce the deficit. Now, without placing blame as to how we got where we currently are, is there a way to get out of this? Is there a way to get rid of our deficit; reinstitute Bush's tax breaks, which are ending; provide more tax cuts in the future and return some of the power to the states, which many say is currently in the hands of the federal government? All suggestions are welcomed as long as you can also discuss the ramifications.

    For instance, we simply stop all welfare programs. If so, the result will be the "states may have to..." Some suggestions may sound harsh, but may still be the right way to go. Your thoughts?

    THIS IS A :flamethrower: FREE ZONE

    Watch this. YouTube - Barack Obama on Taxes
     

    smoking357

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 14, 2008
    961
    16
    Mindin' My Own Business
    Now, I have seen the Republicans provide tax cuts, but allow the nation's deficit to skyrocket. Also, I've seen Democrats tax people to the hilt, but drastically reduce the deficit. Now, without placing blame as to how we got where we currently are, is there a way to get out of this? Is there a way to get rid of our deficit; reinstitute Bush's tax breaks, which are ending; provide more tax cuts in the future and return some of the power to the states, which many say is currently in the hands of the federal government? All suggestions are welcomed as long as you can also discuss the ramifications.

    For instance, we simply stop all welfare programs. If so, the result will be the "states may have to..." Some suggestions may sound harsh, but may still be the right way to go. Your thoughts?

    Republicans have rarely provided tax cuts, and the Democrats have never taxed people "to the hilt." Both parties are big government, low Liberty.

    It is true that Clinton was far more Conservative than Bush. Far, far, far more conservative. Government was much smaller, and deficits were eradicated. Of course, the debt and its interest payment was still galloping away. As much as I hated Clinton, I wish he would have had Bush's two terms, and I'd trade him for Obama. Bush forever changed the character of this country and likely made inevitable our destruction.

    There is no way out.
    The country will eventually collapse. The debt is unsustainable. Interest payments on the debt will soon exceed the entire defense budget. We are like a low-wage worker who can only make minimum credit card payments on an outstanding balance of four times his salary. Our defense budget, alone, makes the entire budget unsustainable.

    At some point, we will have to repudiate the debt, and our currency will collapse. This is good. With no money, the federal government collapses, and we all get to be free for the first time in our lives. When it collapses, the states will rethink their associations with one another, and Montana may decide to join a union containing Idaho, the Dakotas, British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan. Southern states may decide to form the Less-than-Holy-not-at-all-Roman Empire.

    Of course, at the moment the dollar collapses, all personal savings not held in commodities are also wiped out, so plan accordingly.

    Your questions are discussed regularly at LewRockwell.com. Stop by. You'll get to see what Conservatism is really all about, and you'll be exposed to some of the strongest conservative writing to be found.
     

    smoking357

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 14, 2008
    961
    16
    Mindin' My Own Business

    Libertarian01

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jan 12, 2009
    6,006
    113
    Fort Wayne
    Zphique,

    A very good question. As I will presume you have already guessed there can be no single answer to this question. Rather, it will take a multitude of measures that will improve our nations fiscal health.

    Let's start w/ a simple one: Cut the tax on corporations to about 10% to 15%. Right now corporate profits are taxed up to 35%. By cutting this tax it will give companies an incentive to grow here and to build here. This will stimulate all other areas of the economy by reducing unemployment and creating jobs. Workers can then be moved from unemployment to being taxed and adding to our revenue stream.

    #2) Get the federal govt on the track of not spending more money than we bring in. I would ask for five (5) years. This would give everyone a chance to adjust to the concept of tightening the belt.

    #3) Phase out the sale of Treasury Bonds. These are debts that we must pay on in future years. It would be relatively easy to cut their sale by 5% per year (from the currant year) so that in 20 years we are selling zero (0) debt instruments. Then, w/ 30 year bonds we would be totally debt free in this area in 50 years. Not right around the corner but doable in our childrens lifetime.

    #4) Completely privatize Social Security. This would help many poorer families and minorities break the cycle of poverty. Right now an employee could work their entire life, retire, and two (2) monthes later die. Benefits are marginal. As blacks and other minorities have shorter live expectancies this affects them more. If on the other hand they owned their savings this would allow hundreds of thousands of dollars to be inherited by survivors, giving them opportunities at higher education. Would everyone do this? Of course not. But there would be a percentage who would and this would help transition some families from marginal living to a middle and/or upper middle class lifestyle.

    #5) Simplify the tax code - FOR REAL! I don't care if you go w/ a flat tax, Fair Tax, or whatever else is available. The simpler the code the easier it will be to collect and not allow for payoffs politically. This would give us a better ability to collect everyone's fair amount and keep people from taking advantage of loopholes or dodging their debt load.

    #6) Education, education, education! Start informing people what our debt is and why it is bad! Try to speak at local schools to young people. This is the one area I am a communist! The better informed the public at all levels the better decisions we will be able to make.

    #7) Initiate some significant free market reforms into the health care system. Our health care costs have been skyrocketing and President Obama was right to address this. He did not, however, do a damn thing to address costs! Do you think we would be complaining if an MRI was $250? Or a hip replacement was $3000? What about a broken bone for $1500? I don't think so! The United States has the best health care in the world, the problem with it is cost. It is too expensive to access health care. Chronic diseases would still cause a problem but would be more manageable with some free market reforms. By the way, these could be done on top of the current Federal health care bill. Or EVEN by the State of Indiana!

    #8) Initiate massive cuts in military spending. We don't need hundreds of bases all over the world! They are nice and make things easy, but are unnecessary to maintain over decades of time. Also, start giving congress grief for not putting a choke hold on the executive branch! They declare war on everything with no way to win. I think we still have a war on obesity! How do we win that? What do we need? 500 fat people to march on Washington to discuss terms of surrender? What about our war on poverty? Could a poor person go to Washington and say, "I've got a job now and am doing well, thank you. I wish to surrender and discuss terms. You've won. I'm not poor anymore."
    Sorry, minor rant there...

    #9) When we run a surplus we could always discuss early payoffs with large debt holders. Say we owe Great Britain $100 Billion in treasury bonds, on which we will bay $100 Billion in interest payments over the next 30 years. Well, if we come up with an extra $10 Billion we could offer them $10 Billion today for them to agree to wipe $15 or $20 Billion in current debt. You wouldn't want to do this with deficit spending, but with excess revenue.

    #10) Start electing people who want to deal with the problem and won't be part OF the problem.

    Just a few thoughts off the top of my head. I'm certain others will come up with fine ideas as well. It is not the ideas that matter, but getting elected officials to act on them that really matters.

    Regards,

    Doug
     
    Last edited:

    Expat

    Pdub
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    23   0   0
    Feb 27, 2010
    108,736
    113
    Michiana
    Can we get over the "Clinton was conservative" myth? He didn't start out that way. He only turned conservative when he got Newt and John Kasich forced upon him by the mid-term election. Does anyone really think he would have become a conservative if he had the current Congress.
     

    tuoder

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Oct 20, 2009
    951
    18
    Meridian-Kessler, Indianapolis
    I'm working on becoming better informed on some of the current political issues. I don't pretend to be absolutely ignorant, but I also do not want to believe that my viewpoints are absolutely without fault, either. I am honestly looking for help and not attempting to start flames in any way. And, I don't plan to respond with any smart mouthed responses.

    Now, I have seen the Republicans provide tax cuts, but allow the nation's deficit to skyrocket. Also, I've seen Democrats tax people to the hilt, but drastically reduce the deficit. Now, without placing blame as to how we got where we currently are, is there a way to get out of this? Is there a way to get rid of our deficit; reinstitute Bush's tax breaks, which are ending; provide more tax cuts in the future and return some of the power to the states, which many say is currently in the hands of the federal government? All suggestions are welcomed as long as you can also discuss the ramifications.

    For instance, we simply stop all welfare programs. If so, the result will be the "states may have to..." Some suggestions may sound harsh, but may still be the right way to go. Your thoughts?

    THIS IS A :flamethrower: FREE ZONE

    Taxes will have to be raised and benefits will have to be cut. The pain needs to be spread as evenly as possible. It's no individual, or even party's fault alone. Democrats pass spending programs without taxing and Republicans pass tax cuts without spending cuts.

    Then when it's over, we need to pass a balanced budget amendment.
     

    jedi

    Da PinkFather
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    51   0   0
    Oct 27, 2008
    37,669
    113
    NWI, North of US-30
    Libertarian01 said it best.
    The problem is a complex one at best but not in terms of "who do we fix it" but in terms of this nation's "culture/thinking". America (it's people) for too long has gotten into the mentality of "spend, spend, spend", "me, me, me" and blame others. The Rs balme the Ds, the Ds blame the Rs, and neither really brings a solution to the table. Just look at this thread and you see the same occur. Some blasting the Rs, the Ds, clinton, etc when the core of the OP was to bring solutions.

    It's human nature and much easier to blast/blame some one else/group then to look at the problem and think of possible solutions.

    What really needs to happen in America is what I will call a "dave ramesy intervention" in which America really looks at it's finances and comes to terms that it is living beyond it's means. I'm not just talking gov. I'm talking individuals as well. We all know and perhaps are/were at one point in this category. Can't pay the rent this month, but will pay my cellphone or buy ammo for my range time, etc..

    The cold hard truth is (gov wise) we are going to have to cut services (to lower our monthly bill) and raise taxes (to pay off our debt) and we are not going to pay off our debt by next week. We have to think generations at least 2 (60 years) before we are debt-free and living right.

    Now metion this to any politician or voter and they will toss you over the river. America has no patients anymore and are not willing to sacrafice or take their time to do things. As such I do believe that smoking357 is correct. There is no way out. Not becuase we can't do it (financial wise) but becuase we don't have the mind-set (as a whole) to do it.

    A life changing event is what is going to have to occur to change the mind-set of this country. Just like it takes a life changing event to convert a ANTi-2A to a PRO-2A the same will be needed here. What the life changing event is I'm not sure. Not sure in terms of "shock value". As in Civil War 2, the us dollar collapse, being nuked by bin laden, etc...

    Gov. may be corrupt but gov is only the mirror represenation of it's people as a whole.
     

    Que

    Meekness ≠ Weakness
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 98%
    48   1   0
    Feb 20, 2009
    16,373
    83
    Blacksburg
    Many of you have provided me with understanding concerning some issues that I've not quite been able to grasp. I really like the idea of cutting services on the federal level, but when would/could that take place? I'm not depending on social security and if I do get it, my plan is to use the money to reinvest for my grandchildren. So, what if the government said, "Social Security for those 40 and below will not exist"? Bottom line, I want to see a change and like it was already stated, we need to stop spending money like "drunken sailors."
     

    EvilElmo

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Feb 11, 2009
    1,235
    48
    Dearborn Co.
    Solution: quit spending money like a drunken sailor.

    -J-

    I have nothing constructive to add but this might provide a chuckle:

    worland-wyoming-letter-e1271683608731.jpg


    Image courtesy of I Hate the Media.
     
    Last edited:

    SSGSAD

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    14   0   0
    Dec 22, 2009
    12,404
    48
    Town of 900 miles
    Absolutely. Real military expenditures are a trillion, per year.

    Defense Spending Is Much Greater than You Think | The Beacon

    Cut the military by 80%. Close bases, left and right. Bring the troops home from over 100 foreign bases. Let's stop the Liberal practice of a big military and meddling in the world's affairs.
    It may be, but when you add up ALL the "welfare", just since 1968, it TOTALS, MORE than we, (U.S.) has spent on ALL wars, since the Revolutionary... You can check this out...
     

    Que

    Meekness ≠ Weakness
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 98%
    48   1   0
    Feb 20, 2009
    16,373
    83
    Blacksburg
    It may be, but when you add up ALL the "welfare", just since 1968, it TOTALS, MORE than we, (U.S.) has spent on ALL wars, since the Revolutionary... You can check this out...

    Welfare, more specifically, funding that goes to people who CANNOT work, is the area that concerns me the most. My father was a vet who was denied benefits because of reasons I don't care to mention right now. Anyway, he served and was disabled, then went on to work a job, then suffered a stroke. He could not work at all after that. Would we totally cut off people in this situation; provide assistance for a certain period of time or leave them to their own resolve?
     

    lashicoN

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 2, 2009
    2,130
    38
    North
    Welfare, more specifically, funding that goes to people who CANNOT work, is the area that concerns me the most. My father was a vet who was denied benefits because of reasons I don't care to mention right now. Anyway, he served and was disabled, then went on to work a job, then suffered a stroke. He could not work at all after that. Would we totally cut off people in this situation; provide assistance for a certain period of time or leave them to their own resolve?

    It may sound cold, but I think people who can't work would have to move in with family. If they have no family...who knows. This country would be a lot better off if we had to depend on our family, not our government. Kids wouldn't rebel as much, there wouldn't be all these family feuds, because you HAVE to depend on your family, or you die. Build a home, make a good living, raise a good family, save your extra earnings for when you have to retire, then live off of that or move in with your kids. If we didn't have to pay for all of these things, like social security, we would have more money to save to begin with.
     

    jedi

    Da PinkFather
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    51   0   0
    Oct 27, 2008
    37,669
    113
    NWI, North of US-30
    Welfare, more specifically, funding that goes to people who CANNOT work, is the area that concerns me the most. My father was a vet who was denied benefits because of reasons I don't care to mention right now. Anyway, he served and was disabled, then went on to work a job, then suffered a stroke. He could not work at all after that. Would we totally cut off people in this situation; provide assistance for a certain period of time or leave them to their own resolve?

    The cold hard turth is YES.
    Not sure if you are familiar with Dave Ramsey's method to getting out of debt. There are 7 steps to it and in the pre-text of doing it he advises that you need only 3 things to ensure you can get out of debt.

    1) Food
    2) Shelther
    3) Pay your basic utilities (gas, lights, water)
    4) all else to pay your debt

    Everything else is a luxury that you right now can not afford so it must be cut. Cable is a luxry cut it, cellphone is a luxury cut it, fast food (ie yes it's a food but it's a luxury cut it), magazine subscription cut, day out at the range (spending for ammo) cut it, etc., etc...

    Now translate this into gov (it's not a one for one translation) but what would that be?

    1) not applicable since the gov does not "eat"
    2) shelther = defense
    3) pay your basic items (some government services (USPS, FAA, etc..)
    4) all else to pay of the debt

    When doing the ramsey program on a personal level it can be quite harsh to face reality and at times tough to have to cut the cable, cellphone, sell teh 2nd car, sell off stuff you have, etc.. but the end goal is to be debt free.

    It's the same with government. If we really want t get out of debt its going to take time and sacrafice and that means everything that is non-essintial for government to go. (see above the only thing gov needs to run is defense and some limited agencies). The rest back to the states and/or local government and/or charities.

    Yes it's a hard pill to swallow and for many it's one that they won't/can't do. It means that the elders will need to be taken care of my the kids or charaties since no more gov help. It means that we will have less services and mroe taxes to pay off everything that we spent on and "needed" but did not want to pay for, it means that two generations will need to re-learn that while this is the land of oppurtunity it is an "oppurtunity" to do whatever you want so long as you work for it.

    But as recent yahoo news showed 49% of america pays no taxes (ie gets something for nothing) as such we have lost that mindset of hard work = reward. Now it's why work = uncle sam will suppose.
     

    BloodEclipse

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 3, 2008
    10,620
    38
    In the trenches for liberty!
    Then when it's over, we need to pass a balanced budget amendment.

    Kind of like the Paygo law they passsed in Feb? How is that working for you?

    Obama signs debt limit-paygo bill into law

    Fri, Feb 12 2010
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama signed a law on Friday lifting the U.S. government's borrowing authority to $14.3 trillion and installing a pay-as-you-go rule to curb spending, the White House said.
    The U.S. House of Representatives passed the debt limit bill last week, giving it final congressional approval and sending it to the White House for Obama's signature.
    The U.S. Treasury was expected within weeks to exceed the current $12.4 trillion government debt limit set in December. Failure to raise the limit would roil financial markets.
    The bill also contained 'pay-as-you-go' legislation that requires new spending to be offset with cuts elsewhere.
    Democrats, who control the U.S. Congress, crafted the "paygo" language to deflect voter anger over soaring spending and to show they are serious about fiscal responsibility. They say paygo rules helped the country turn budget deficits into surpluses in the 1990s.
    Obama has proposed a record $1.56 trillion deficit for fiscal 2010 as he tries to boost growth and jobs, equivalent to 10.6 percent of gross domestic product, but projects this funding gap to have halved as a share of the economy by 2013.
     
    Last edited:

    Que

    Meekness ≠ Weakness
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 98%
    48   1   0
    Feb 20, 2009
    16,373
    83
    Blacksburg
    It may sound cold, but I think people who can't work would have to move in with family. If they have no family...who knows. This country would be a lot better off if we had to depend on our family, not our government. Kids wouldn't rebel as much, there wouldn't be all these family feuds, because you HAVE to depend on your family, or you die. Build a home, make a good living, raise a good family, save your extra earnings for when you have to retire, then live off of that or move in with your kids. If we didn't have to pay for all of these things, like social security, we would have more money to save to begin with.

    I agree that we have gotten too far from the days when children felt an obligation to care for their aging parents and the parents didn't feel guilty about being supported by their children. We have too many retirement homes that are filled with people who have children with 1-2 EXTRA bedrooms in their homes. Many of the people in retirement homes are visited more often by area church members than their own children.
     
    Top Bottom