Is fiscal conservatism not Christian?

[vern_humphrey]

Thought was very thoughful spareselly worded English Do you prefer Hungarian or Bavarian? or Suthern?
Don’t you recall Bush Administration Cutting VA funding, in time of War? And privatizing Walter Reed last year? Or Combat wounded veterans being Denied, or greatly reduced Disability by armed forces/VA last year? To save MONEY? Was National Scandal Last summer! I forgot! Fox News et al does not cover Reality not in Their Agenda. Don’t you remember the Republican Senator from prairie state, a Viet War veteran, warning Non-Vet Bush/Chaney last summer that they would face Impeachment if they Attacked Iran? Honest news is essential to know what going on To avoid fantasy-land

Do YOU Know that i – a viet nam War VeTran – know A bit About the VA? Do you know that the VA is for discharged or REtiReD Soldiers, and that the WOUNDED are treated in MiLiTaRy facilities?

Do YOU Know that the BRAC closed Walter Reed, Which IS why it was run-down – because Congress WouLD AppRopriate no MaIntEnanCe fundS?

What FanTasy Land are YOU getting YoUr OpinIonS froM?

 

[peary]

Reaganomics Began the Massive Deficits that have Now bankrupted the USA, recently. He did so by slashing taxes to richest, and doubling price we paid for every weapon system in his early term.
Have you forgotten the first Deppression and biggest stock market crash since 1930’s in Oct 1987? Reaganomics at work, as was predicted.

                                                                                           The Clinton increase was  tiny 1%  FICA  withholding.  FICA is not a tax. result was ideal record business, bank  profits, full American employment, and record Federal surpluses, which were still major in 2001 fy.

**Oh, really?

In 1993, President Clinton ushered through Congress a large package of tax increases, which included the following:

1. An increase in the individual income tax rate to 36 percent and a 10 percent surcharge for the highest earners, thereby effectively creating a top rate of 39.6 percent.
2. Repeal of the income cap on Medicare taxes. This provision made the 2.9 percent Medicare payroll tax apply to all wage income. Like the Social Security payroll tax base today, the Medicare tax base was capped at a certain level of wage income prior to 1993.
3. A 4.3 cent per gallon increase in transportation fuel taxes.
4. An increase in the taxable portion of Social Security benefits.
5. A permanent extension of the phase-out of personal exemptions and the phase-down of the deduction for itemized expenses.
6. Raising the corporate income tax rate to 35 percent.

According to the original Treasury Department estimates, the Clinton tax hike was to raise federal revenues by 0.36 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in its first year and by 0.83 percent of GDP in its fourth year, when all provisions were in effect and timing differences associated with near-term taxpayer behaviors had sorted themselves out. In 2007, the fourth-year effect would be roughly equivalent to an increase in the federal tax burden of about $114 billion.

One should have expected a period of unusually strong growth from 1993 onward as the economy more fully employed its available capital and labor resources. In the four years following the Clinton tax hike (from 1993 through 1996):

1. The economy grew at an average annual rate of 3.2 percent in inflation-adjusted terms;
2. Employment rose by 11.6 million jobs;
3. Average real hourly wages rose a total of five cents per hour; and
4. Total market capitalization of the S&P 500 rose 78 percent in inflation-adjusted terms.

If you’re going to tell the ‘story’, tell the reality.**

 

[vern_humphrey]

If you’re going to tell the ‘story’, tell the reality.

I think you’re debating with someone whose reality exists only between his ears.

 

[peary]

I think you’re debating with someone whose reality exists only between his ears.

 

[EphelDuath]

Peary: do you support universal health care, welfare for disabled persons, minimum wage, social security, antitrusts or environmental regulation laws?

 

[peary]

Peary: do you support universal health care, welfare for disabled persons, minimum wage, social security, antitrusts or environmental regulation laws?

Do you?

 

[Sailka]

**Oh, really?

In 1993, President Clinton ushered through Congress a large package of tax increases, which included the following:

1. An increase in the individual income tax rate to 36 percent and a 10 percent surcharge for the highest earners, thereby effectively creating a top rate of 39.6 percent.
2. Repeal of the income cap on Medicare taxes. This provision made the 2.9 percent Medicare payroll tax apply to all wage income. Like the Social Security payroll tax base today, the Medicare tax base was capped at a certain level of wage income prior to 1993.
3. A 4.3 cent per gallon increase in transportation fuel taxes.
4. An increase in the taxable portion of Social Security benefits.
5. A permanent extension of the phase-out of personal exemptions and the phase-down of the deduction for itemized expenses.
6. Raising the corporate income tax rate to 35 percent.

According to the original Treasury Department estimates, the Clinton tax hike was to raise federal revenues by 0.36 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in its first year and by 0.83 percent of GDP in its fourth year, when all provisions were in effect and timing differences associated with near-term taxpayer behaviors had sorted themselves out. In 2007, the fourth-year effect would be roughly equivalent to an increase in the federal tax burden of about $114 billion.

One should have expected a period of unusually strong growth from 1993 onward as the economy more fully employed its available capital and labor resources. In the four years following the Clinton tax hike (from 1993 through 1996):

1. The economy grew at an average annual rate of 3.2 percent in inflation-adjusted terms;
2. Employment rose by 11.6 million jobs;
3. Average real hourly wages rose a total of five cents per hour; and
4. Total market capitalization of the S&P 500 rose 78 percent in inflation-adjusted terms.

If you’re going to tell the ‘story’, tell the reality.**

1. 
   
   Sorry I forgot the deatails of the modest Economy boosting taxes increases, from another Reaganomics Recession and big Deficits 1991. Tax increases of modest sorts to pay federal bills highly encourages business, financial community, and is true noblesse oblige fiscal conservatism.
   • 2
     

                                                                                             Results were as I stated above, with very major employment increases,   and banking/business profits, and    significant  Federal  surpluses through fy 2001.                                            :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

   • 3
     'Large, massive tax increases' are always technically such, because USA had biggest economy in world. Not in future anymore, with very liberal fiscal policies of current administration, which redirected Govt welfare to Wealthiest corporations and people in nation. Opposite of Noblesse Oblige. :shrug:

 

[peary]

Peary: do you support universal health care, welfare for disabled persons, minimum wage, social security, antitrusts or environmental regulation laws?

**In a rich society such as the United States, it is in the best interest of society that its members (all of them) have affordable access to at least basic health care – much as we accept the same obligation to assure a reasonable level of housing, education and nutrition. It is also reasonable to expect members of the society who can do so to contribute an appropriate amount to their own health care.

So, in answer to your question, I believe that the government and insurance companies need to provide support to people to obtain health care based on their need, not where they happen to work, or their eligibility for welfare, or their military record, or their age, and to enable individuals and families to use this support to enroll in a system of coverage according to their choice.

As for the disabled: The Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) program paid about $71.4 billion in benefits to about 5.3 million disabled workers and 1.6 million spouses and dependent children in calendar year 2006. Like the Social Security retirement program, SSDI is funded by an explicit payroll tax. The first 0.85 percent of the 7.65 percent Social Security tax collected from the employer and a matching amount from the employee (1.70 percent total) goes into SSDI’s trust fund and is kept separate from funds used to pay retirement and survivors insurance benefits.

SSDI, however, faces serious fiscal problems and operational challenges. The Social Security Trustees have reported that the Disability Insurance trust fund will be exhausted in 2028. Current law allows the fund to borrow money from the retirement and survivors insurance trust fund, which could extend its life until about 2041, but the retirement and survivors program also faces chronic funding problems. In 2001, the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) estimated that keeping the program operating through 2073 would require a 50 percent increase in the SSDI tax rate. So, to answer your question, yes, I believe in welfare benefits for the disabled, but also believe the funds should be separated from SS.

As for minimum wage: A minimum wage operates by removing the lowest rung on the economic ladder – it doesn’t just take away current jobs, but also future job opportunities. Minimum wage was meant to be an entrance level salary for ‘low’ jobs so that the individual can gradually get to better jobs, as well as breaking through the poverty level so that one can at least support himself/herself. But many individuals have stayed where they entered and have not gone on to better positions. In my opinion, it is up to the companies themselves to provide the education and incentives for individuals to progress up the economic ladder.

As for social security: there are only three real solutions to Social Security’s rapidly approaching fiscal problems: raise taxes, reduce spending, or make the current payroll taxes work harder by investing them through some form of personal retirement account (PRA). Establishing PRAs is the only solution that will also give future retirees the option to receive an improved standard of living in retirement. These accounts would give them more control over how to structure their income and allow them to build a nest egg that could be used for emergencies during retirement, used to start a business, or left to their families. However, establishing PRAs will be complex and—as experience from other countries shows— will require careful planning.

On antitrust laws: overdue reforms would go a long way toward making U.S. industry more competitive at home and abroad.

On environmental laws: almost all of us values a clean environment. The government has passed many laws intended to protect the planet from wanton pollution. Organized labor abuses America’s environmental laws. Their objections have nothing to do with protecting the environment. The government should protect the environment, but it should not allow unions to use environmental laws to blackmail businesses. Union monopolies damage the economy and cost taxpayers and consumers millions of dollars. The government should not enforce contracts signed under the threat of regulatory interference.

Does this answer your question to me?**

 

[ribozyme]

This is from IIDB:

I have a little story that sums up exactly what I believe conservatism is all about. Admittedly, I do not know the origins of the story, and I have no idea how factual it is. It is probably a joke, but it sure is funny:

I’m reminded of the time that Catherine - a little girl in our neighborhood - told me that she wanted to be President one day. Both of her parents, liberal Democrats, were standing there with us, and I asked Catherine, “If you were President what would be the first thing you would do?”

Catherine replied - “I would give houses to all the homeless people.”

“Wow! what a worthy goal you have there, Catherine,” I told her (while both parents beamed), “But, you don’t have to wait until you’re President to do that. You can come over to my house and clean up all the dog poop in the back yard and I will pay you $5 dollars. Then we can go over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out, and you can give him the $5 dollars to use for a new house.”

Catherine (who was about 4) thought that over for a second, and then replied, “Why doesn’t the homeless guy come over and clean up the dog poop himself, and you can pay him the $5 dollars.”

Welcome to the Republican Party, Catherine…

:

So conservatism is all about paying people a pittance to do a sh****t job?

iidb.infidels.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=246299&page=2

 

[Al_Masetti]

Cleaning up dog stuff is perfectly honorable work.

Fiscal conservatism means not spending money you don’t have.

And that is perfectly Christian.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Peary: do you support universal health care,

I support Medical Savings Accounts with assistance for the poor. I do not support government-run health care or health care insurance.

welfare for disabled persons,

I support charity for those unable to work. I do not support forced “charity” where the government takes money by force of law, squanders most of it, and uses the rest to institute programs that encourage able-bodied people not to work, and locks many people in poverty generation after generation.

minimum wage, as

No. Minimum wage is one of the programs that lock people into poverty. The government, having failed in its obligation to educate the children of the poor, proceeds to price their labor too high for them to get jobs.

social security,

No. If a person making minimum wage was allowed to keep and invest his FICA tax, he would retire as a millionaire. He could draw 5% off his investments, have two or three times what Social Security pays, and leave the entire estate to his children.

antitrusts

No. Antitrust laws have done more damage than good.

or environmental regulation laws?

Some regulation to protect the environment would be good – but the present laws have run wild. We haven’t been able to build a nuclear reactor or a refinery in this country for over 30 years.

 

[peary]

This is from IIDB:

Quote:
Quote:
I have a little story that sums up exactly what I believe conservatism is all about. Admittedly, I do not know the origins of the story, and I have no idea how factual it is. It is probably a joke, but it sure is funny:

Quote:
I’m reminded of the time that Catherine - a little girl in our neighborhood - told me that she wanted to be President one day. Both of her parents, liberal Democrats, were standing there with us, and I asked Catherine, “If you were President what would be the first thing you would do?”

Catherine replied - “I would give houses to all the homeless people.”

“Wow! what a worthy goal you have there, Catherine,” I told her (while both parents beamed), “But, you don’t have to wait until you’re President to do that. You can come over to my house and clean up all the dog poop in the back yard and I will pay you $5 dollars. Then we can go over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out, and you can give him the $5 dollars to use for a new house.”

Catherine (who was about 4) thought that over for a second, and then replied, “Why doesn’t the homeless guy come over and clean up the dog poop himself, and you can pay him the $5 dollars.”

Welcome to the Republican Party, Catherine…

Actually, Catherine would rather have “mommy and daddy” give her all the entitlements instead of doing some work on her own… In which case, welcome to the world of liberalism, Catherine.

 

[EphelDuath]

I’m just here to learn, so do you think you could statistically back up a few of those points? You don’t have to write a thesis, I just want to be convinced before I become a full conservative.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I’m not sure what statistics you’re looking for. But I’ll give some examples.

Education: A recent study indicates that the average high school dropout rate in the 50 largest cities is about 50%. Nationwide, it is about 30%. You can go to the Bureau of Labor Statistics and look for income by education level – high school dropouts are the only group to lose ground in the last decade. If you like, go to your state No Child Left Behind website. Look at the vast difference between the best and worst schools – and note where the bad schools are concentrated.

Social Security: The FICA tax is 15.3% (including the “Employer’s Contribution” which is your money – if you didn’t earn it, who did?) If you were making $5.00 an hour, you’d be making aboiut $1,000 a month and paying $153.00 a month in FICA taxes. If you were allowed to keep that money and invest it in mutual funds with a return one standard deviation below average, at the end of 45 years you’d have about $1.6 million. At 5%, that would pay you $80,000 a year, about 2 1/2 times the Social Security max. (Note: By not figuring in any economic raises in this calculation – that is assuming your last paycheck buys only what your first paycheck would buy – we have over compensated for inflation.)

Minimum Wage: Walter Williams has pointed out that in the 1940s the minimum wage was so low that everyone paid more. In those days, Black teenagers had about the same employment rate as whites (and having a job as a teenager is highly correlated with success in later life.) Now Black teenagers have only about 1/3 the employment rate of white teenagers. Is it because there was less prejudice in the 1940s? No, it’s because Black kids could under-bid white kids and get jobs. It’s also because employers could pay what the job was actually worth.

Poverty: In the '40s and '50s, poverty was dropping like a stone. About 1969, it stopped dropping and has remained steady at about 13%, give or take a couple of percentage points for almost 40 years. This coincides with the Great Society programs kicking in.

Crime and social problems: Violent crime, drug abuse, teenage pregnancy, out-of-wedlock births and single-parent homes have all increased dramatically since the 1950s. Much of this is due to the creation of a permanent underclass of poorly-educated people, who have no jobs. Several other things contributed to this, including the way welfare was distributed, placing a premium on single parent homes.

 

[Caesar517]

…do you think you could statistically back up a few of those points?

Read some books by Milton Friedman or Thomas Sowell. I have one of Sowell’s books: Basic Economics: A Citizens Guide to the Economy.

 

[EphelDuath]

What about welfare for the disabled and accident insurance? If I break my arm and then lose my job at the factory, what am I supposed to do?

 

[EphelDuath]

Read some books by Milton Friedman or Thomas Sowell. I have one of Sowell’s books: Basic Economics: A Citizens Guide to the Economy.

I read Capitalism and Freedom. I found that he mostly makes points I already agree with: I know capitalist countries are better than socialist countries. But he didn’t talk about things like free health care or welfare for the disabled.

 

[vern_humphrey]

What about welfare for the disabled and accident insurance? If I break my arm and then lose my job at the factory, what am I supposed to do?

If you have a job at the factory, you should have insurance for such things.

I favor Medical Savings Accounts, with assistance for the poor. I also favor helping people in distress – but the aim should be to get them jobs as soon as possible, not keep them on welfare for life.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I read Capitalism and Freedom. I found that he mostly makes points I already agree with: I know capitalist countries are better than socialist countries. But he didn’t talk about things like free health care or welfare for the disabled.

There is no such thing as “free” healthcare. Somebody has to pay for it. Which is why I favor Medical Savings Accounts with assistance for the poor.

 

[EphelDuath]

There is no such thing as “free” healthcare. Somebody has to pay for it. Which is why I favor Medical Savings Accounts with assistance for the poor.

Is it so bad to say that millionaires should help pay for health care for those who cannot afford it? Medicine is something that all people should get, rich or poor.