A Boat For Every Family!!!!!

[Ratickle]

Thankful for a new entitlement program?

What a round of meetings last week in the White House about solving the looming “fiscal cliff.” Union leaders came there Tuesday. CEOs from big corporations were invited in on Wednesday (no small businessmen invited). Why, I’ll bet there was even a delegation from Hollywood packed in there one day.

While solving the “cliff” remains elusive, the good news is President Obama summoned reporters to the Rose Garden this morning to announce his newest entitlement initiative, telling the media it’s a bold and even more beneficial move than Obamacare.

The president has issued another executive order (No. 4283 — yes, he holds the record). It says that effective Jan. 1 the administration’s motto for his second term will be “Live and Let’s Boat … a Boat for Every Family!”

As one might expect, the press (well, maybe not Fox) just ate it up. “This is even bigger than forgiving student loan interest,” cheered one reporter. “Beats saving the auto industry,” called out another. And, to no one’s surprise, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, doing flips on the White House grass, proclaimed “Oh, this is Santa Claus at his best!”

“Mr. President, does this mean everyone gets a free boat?” pressed a reporter, probably from the Weekly Standard. “Well, not exactly,” responded the president, “what I mean is everyone who makes less than $250,000. See, here’s the thing: I wouldn’t think of increasing the deficit more, so I’m making this ‘revenue neutral’ by ordering an automatic payroll deduction on anyone making more than $250,000 to pay for the boats for those making less. I think those making over $250,000 will want to pay just a little more so everyone can have a boat.”

But wait — the good news doesn’t stop there. To focus even more of a spotlight on boats the executive order also provides that anyone who makes it to the shores of the U.S. in a boat will again be called “boat people” and they will receive automatic citizenship, immediately qualifying them for their own boat.

“This is immigration reform and economic stimulus all rolled into one,” beamed Senate leader Harry Reid.

House minority leader Nancy Pelosi was equally insightful: “If it were a bill, I’d be for passing it right away … so we could find out what’s in it. But since it’s an executive order,” she added, “I’m all for it because that’s how we can conduct good representative government here in Washington.”

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Dealer Outlook » Blog Archive » Thankful for a new entitlement program?

 

[clayinaustin]

Funny story. However to make it more real you just need to replace "Boat" with "Tank".

The US government is the top spender in the world on its military. In fact, we spend more on our military than the next 19 countries COMBINED! Many agree that the unfunded "war on terror" that Bush started and Obama has continued has left us in a 12-year hole that need to be filled. Raising taxes on the "wealthy" is just one part of what many hope will be in a full income-tax overhaul plan.

Do your research and you will see that three areas (Military Spending including retirement pensions, Social Security, and Medicare) comprise the vast majority of the Federal budget. Together they alone exceed revenue. Many now agree that in addition to deep spending cuts across the board, taxes must be raised. Without any cuts to the Military, Social Security, or Medicare and without raising taxes we will just fall deeper into debt and become like Greece in a few short years.

Just my two-cents... (which means I didn't "cut and paste" any of the above)

 

[clayinaustin]

PS - Anyone receiving a check from the Federal government because of Military service retirement, Civil service retirement, Social Security, and/or Medicare will say that they are "Entitled" to it. They will say thay earned it. I cannot argue with them. In fact 86 year-old my mom receives more than one of these checks every month.

So before you make jokes about "New Entitlement Programs", let's focus on the current ones. OK?

Thanks! :hurray:

 

[Bobcat]

So I'm not getting a free boat ?

 

[fund razor]

So I'm not getting a free boat ?

Nope.

Or social security.

 

[Bobcat]

:cuss:

 

[Ratickle]

PS - Anyone receiving a check from the Federal government because of Military service retirement, Civil service retirement, Social Security, and/or Medicare will say that they are "Entitled" to it. They will say thay earned it. I cannot argue with them. In fact 86 year-old my mom receives more than one of these checks every month.

So before you make jokes about "New Entitlement Programs", let's focus on the current ones. OK?

Thanks! :hurray:

Well, unfortunately you are wrong, interest paid on the debt is the number one issue, (if you make the argument that SS spending is truly a loan to the federal government and must be paid back first as would be the case in a bankruptcy filing of any company).

Over the decade, more than 14% of all revenue the government is projected to collect will be sucked up by interest payments.

That's a lot of money that can't be used on the country's other priorities.

Indeed, between 2013 and 2022, estimated interest costs will be:

higher than Medicaid spending;
equal to half of Social Security spending;
close to what is spent on all of defense.

And here's the thing -- the estimated interest costs assume a fairly steady and moderate increase in rates over the decade.

The CBO assumes that the yield on the 10-year Treasury will rise from an estimated 2.3% this year to 5% by the end of the decade; and the yield on the 3-month T-bill will increase from 0.1% to 3.8% during the same time.

If interest rates increase to the amounts projected by the nations bankers, the country's interest payments will more than triple.

 

[rschap1]

So that is where my IRA and 401K will go after it gets STOLEN from me !!!!

 

[clayinaustin]

@Ratickle -

1) Ignoring the fact that you quoted my post about entitlements and then talked about interest on the debt,
2) Assuming that you are correct about the amount of interest currently paid and future interest rates (which no one can predict)

What is your proposed solution to lowering and possibly payign off the debt? Higher taxes or cuts to entitlement programs. Or both?

 

[fund razor]

@Ratickle -

1) Ignoring the fact that you quoted my post about entitlements and then talked about interest on the debt,
2) Assuming that you are correct about the amount of interest currently paid and future interest rates (which no one can predict)

What is your proposed solution to lowering and possibly payign off the debt? Higher taxes or cuts to entitlement programs. Or both?

May I?
Let's just assume that he is correct about the current interest problem. I think that he is.

My assessment is this: They pushed the invoice for the recovery that we are just coming out of until after the election. Deferred billing, if you will. That bill is now due. The bill will come in the form of higher taxes for everybody, more of health care costs pushed off of the government and on to the health care systems and the insured, and less social programs. It will come in the form of enormous taxes on multi-generational wealth transfer at death. It will come in the form of massive increases in capital gains tax.

And it's coming January 1.

 

[clayinaustin]

@fund - I agree that higher taxes are coming. There is no avoiding that. The debate in Washington is now about who will pay more taxes and how much.

But getting back to spending cuts... Unless we are willing to make some serious cuts to the Defense budget, Social Security, and Health Care, there is little chance for a balance budget in our lifetime.

 

[fund razor]

I believe in a reduction in spending across the board. I didn't like "9-9-9" but I do like a flat tax. Whatever it needs to be to balance one year's budget without regard to the back debt. That can be addressed by cuts.
Perhaps it would be 16% on earnings. Less on capital gains. Much less on inheritance.
If I earn $10,000 a year, I pay $1,600
If you make $1,000,000 a year, you pay $160,000
A billion? $160,000,000

Here are some thoughts:
-The IRS is way too big. The less loopholes and less complicated the tax code, the less they are needed. Flat tax.
-Get out of Iraq and Afghanistan now. Any security that we think that we create is overcome by the security concerns over going into debt to be there. In today's world, a team of 20 guys on a private jet can sometimes do more than several supported divisions.
What we can't do with tactical, limited deployments, do with economic sanctions.
-Raise the SS retirement age.
-Allow individual "opt-out" of social security in favor of privately held IRAs.
-Reduce the size and scope of federally funded social programs. Provide incentives for philanthropy instead.
-Eliminate welfare. If you are old, get SS. If you are disabled, get SS. If you are unemployed, get unemployment compensation. If you are underemployed, apply yourself. If you are a hustler, go to jail or die on the streets.
-Provide tax credits for demonstrable job creation at all income levels.
-Stop government "investment" in business. No more bail outs. No more solar energy scams. No more GM bondholder theft.
-Layoff government workers and privatize government work when essential. If the Bell system managed to realign salaries so that phone men were no longer making $50 an hour, the Capital can too.
-Privatize the national park system.
-Drill for domestic oil.
-Mine for domestic coal.
-Reduce the interest on the debt by reducing the amount borrowed.
-Divert every dollar saved in interest and military industrial complex to infrastructure. If the army can build bridges around the world, bridge contractors can do it here for a lot less.

 

[Ratickle]

@Ratickle -

1) Ignoring the fact that you quoted my post about entitlements and then talked about interest on the debt,
2) Assuming that you are correct about the amount of interest currently paid and future interest rates (which no one can predict)

What is your proposed solution to lowering and possibly payign off the debt? Higher taxes or cuts to entitlement programs. Or both?

Both.

Well, I just wanted to point out that our largest forecast expense is the interest on the national debt, and no one appears to make that a concern. It is the main reason that the Feds are keeping the rates low. If they went back to historical averages, the interest paid on that debt would rocket to the top of the expenses we currently have.

As for entitlements, a tough nut and they would have to be attacked individually.

1. Social Security; It has a COLA attached to it for inflation. It should have a similar COLA attached to it for longevity.
2. Medicare; Should be privatized with oversight by the individual states where the recepient lives.
3. Medicaid; Same as Medicare.
4. Food Stamps; Abolish. Make food stores where they can come and get groceries that meet nutritional requirements and are from farms that receive subsidies from the government, milk, sugar, honey, etc cpme to mind immediately.
5. Unemployment and welfare; You must perform some type of community service to receive either. That we pay people to do nothing, then pay someone else to sweep a government building or clean streets, is nuts. Have a job pool of required positions to be filled for everyone who receives a government assistance check.

I do not consider SS a government entitlement or assistance check. If you paid into it, you should get it back with compounded interest. If they had not raided the SS coffer, all US retirees would be sitting pretty, instead of every penny being spent and now it's another IOU from the government of over $5 Trillion to us. Medicare and medicaid should be reduced. There is no way a person in their 70's should receive a new hip at my expense. There has to be a limit of what will be covered, and what will not. You can go purchase additional insurance, or pay for it yourself. Just as if some obese person developes diabetes, Sorry, your choice, you better have saved for the result of your choice. Same with alcoholism, smoking related cancers, and drugs. Your choice, your problem. I didn't force you to do those things, so I should not have to pay a single penny to assist you.

Higher taxes should be the main way to pay off the National Debt. But, they should only be raised on imports. The biggest rape of American Society was Bill Clinton. He drives me nuts when he says something like "Even I couldn't fix this in 3 years!" Well, he caused most of it. Maybe all of it.

1. In December of 1993 he pushed for, and signed, NAFTA into law. How many jobs went to Mexico since then?
2. In 2000 he pushed for, had renamed and signed, permanent Most Favored Trading Status for China. That gave them access, and membership, to the WTO and also made it so that they paid less in import taxes to the US Government than what existing US Government rules cost US manufacturers to make the same product in the US. Check the employment numbers for US manufacturing since those two Clinton idiocies took place. Also check the trade deficit with Mexico and China. Especially China!



How we pay Chinese taxes. 20% of their government revenue from import taxes – Trade Reform

Matching Chinese border taxes would raise $2 trillion: How the US can avoid savage cuts to social security and steep income tax increases while paying for new infrastructure and leveling the playing field for US manufacturers.

The Chinese impose three major taxes on most imported products: a value-added tax of 17% on imported goods destined for domestic consumption, a variety of consumption taxes and also tariffs which vary by import category and are generally higher on manufactured goods. For example, there is a 45% tariff on motorcycle imports, which is particularly damaging for the US given that the US consistently enjoys a large trade surplus in motorcycles. Chinese value added tax and consumption taxes are typically waived for imported raw materials and inputs destined for goods to be exported.

China’s import taxes generate a tremendous amount of revenue for Beijing, almost 825 billion RMB in 2009 (US $126 billion at current exchange rates). This was the equivalent of about 13.5% of the value of Chinese imports in 2009. If the US had imposed a comparable level of taxes on its $1.6 trillion worth of imports in 2009, the federal government would have raised $216 billion in customs revenue rather than the paltry $29.1 billion it did raise. For Washington to have depended on border taxes for 22% of its revenue in 2009, it would have had to raise $463 billion in import taxes, which could have reduced payroll and income taxes by almost a quarter.

Of course, the main item is to cut spending.

It is also crazy what we spend on public programs and public employees. The most simple way to fix that, make all public employess, up to and including the President, subject to the exact same laws as the rest of us when it comes to benefits and retirement, no exceptions. We talk about stuff like, why would someone want to be a senator or congressman. Because they can serve a term or two and get 80% of their last years pay for the rest of their life, with COLA's built in. And most expenses paid. It's crazy. They should get SS just like the rest of us, and have to pay into it just like the rest of us. Same with medical insurance. They can either buy it themselves, or use Medicare and Medicaid like the majority of US citizens do upon retirement.