If you could stop federal spending on one thing...

[Art Monk Fan]

Hard to choose just one.

I think I wuld eliminate Medicaid and Medicare and start over, replace it with a single payer national health system that was not run by (and for the benifit of) insurance companies, pharmaseutical companies and lawyers. Ultimate cost would probably be the same, but the money wuld actually be spend on health care rather than paperwork and multiple level corporate profiteering.

Right, because the government specializes in simple non-paper-work-intensive programs with low waste and high efficiency. [/sarcasm]

[Prosperity]

add the war on drugs or the DEA or whoever is responsible for screwing over innocent people

[Predicto]

Right, because the government specializes in simple non-paper-work-intensive programs with low waste and high efficiency. [/sarcasm]

Nope, don't claim that they do.

But look at how health care is run in our country right now. It is not about doctor - it is all about insurance companies and lawyers. More effort is spend figuring out who owes what and what is covered and stuff like that than is spend on the heath care. It's a dysfunctional system, which supports entire industries dedicated to nothing but passing forms back and forth to each other and taking a cut at every turn.

I have to think a better system could exist.

[Art Monk Fan]

Nope, don't claim that they do.

But look at how health care is run in our country right now. It is not about doctor - it is all about insurance companies and lawyers. More effort is spend figuring out who owes what and what is covered and stuff like that than is spend on the heath care. It's a dysfunctional system, which supports entire industries dedicated to nothing but passing forms back and forth to each other and taking a cut at every turn.

I have to think a better system could exist.

I'm sure a better system can exist too, but I don't like what I've seen from any of the socialized health care systems at work in the world either. I don't know about you, but I have zero interest in going on a waiting list for bypass surgery.

[chomerics]

I'm not so good at politics, and as informed as I probably should be....having said that....so....if foreign aid is considered federal spending....then I'd stop it dead in it's tracks and concentrate on aiding AMERICANS...

Dude, there is nothing wrong with admitting you're not up on politics, in fact, it is a good thing that you recognize this. You are alread two steps ahead of 80% of the American population :laugh:

Forign aid comes in many different areas, things like Tsunami relief, aids funding in Africa, payments to Israel etc. but is is part of federal spending.

[DjTj]

djtj - raising capital gains hurts the middle class as well. Don't you have a 401k or a mutual fund? More importantly, it would actually reduce tax revenues and damage the economy. Venture capital is the lifeblood of American entrepeneurship. Don't buy into all the class-warfare b.s.

Like most people in the middle class, my capital gains tax liability is tiny compared to my income tax liability.

A temporary decline in capital gains will always cause a temporary increase in tax revenue because people will sell their assets to realize the gain. A temporary increase in capital gains will always cause a temporary decrease in revenue because people will either sell before the increase or will hold their assets for longer. This has little to do with what the optimal tax rate should be.

The stability and strength of American power is also the lifeblood of the venture capital market, so investors should be more than willing to contribute their fair share. It's not class warfare, it's whether we want to tax wealth or work. I think the balance right now is too far in favor of taxing work.

[Art Monk Fan]

It's not class warfare, it's whether we want to tax wealth or work. I think the balance right now is too far in favor of taxing work.

The problem with taxing "wealth" over "work" is that doing the former also taxes "savings." We already save too little, exposing too many to utter destitution in an emergency. Further discouraging the savings rate through the tax structure seems to me counterproductive.

[chomerics]

The problem with taxing "wealth" over "work" is that doing the former also taxes "savings." We already save too little, exposing too many to utter destitution in an emergency. Further discouraging the savings rate through the tax structure seems to me counterproductive.

Maybe it's just me, but what are you arguing? That taxing wealth taxes savings? Or are you saying that income is alreasy taxed to much so we can't save. Like I said, I think it's me, but I can't really follow you here.

As for me, I have always thought a man who actually works for his money should be taxed less then somebody who does nothing other then for who his or her parents are. Seriously, why in the world does Paris Hilton pay a smaller % in terms of income then a bus driver, or a factory worker? It is a completely bassakwards system.

I have come full circle, and I don't buy the taxing dividends will cripple the economy anymore. In order to straighten out our countries fiscal mess, we need to get things under control, and balance everything out. The one thing rich people like to completely ignore when talking about taxes is the fact that they pay only 15% on the vast majority of their money. This is less in % terms then somebody making 25K a year. They also try to downplay the purchasing power of mainstream Americans.

We are a spending society, and if you give the money back to the middle class, the economy will be pumped up in areas that are hurting right now. Yes, the wealthy will not be getting their 5th Hummer with gold rims, but is that more important then the bottom 90% of Americans being financially secure?

[Art Monk Fan]

Maybe it's just me, but what are you arguing? That taxing wealth taxes savings? Or are you saying that income is alreasy taxed to much so we can't save. Like I said, I think it's me, but I can't really follow you here.

We have always encouraged savings. Put your money in savings accounts, CDs, money market accounts, etc. and let your money work for you rather than you work for your money. In recent years, however, our savings rate as a nation has plummeted. In fact, it is actually at a negative right now.

Rearranging the tax rate to soak those rich ****s by increasing taxes on interest, dividends, etc. will further discourage those at the bottom from taking advantage of these avenues. With little to nothing in savings, the poor and middle class are increasingly dependent on the government for assistance in hard times.

The tax rate should be so constituted as to encourage participation in savings and investment opportunites for all tax brackets.

[chomerics]

We have always encouraged savings. Put your money in savings accounts, CDs, money market accounts, etc. and let your money work for you rather than you work for your money. In recent years, however, our savings rate as a nation has plummeted. In fact, it is actually at a negative right now.

Rearranging the tax rate to soak those rich ****s by increasing taxes on interest, dividends, etc. will further discourage those at the bottom from taking advantage of these avenues. With little to nothing in savings, the poor and middle class are increasingly dependent on the government for assistance in hard times.

The tax rate should be so constituted as to encourage participation in savings and investment opportunites for all tax brackets.

Did you read the tax pdf I posted? The tax system proposed is set up to ENCOURAGE savings.

• Offer Tens of Millions of Americans New Opportunities to Save and Create Wealth for Retirement. Today, our tax system is upside-down when it comes to offering incentives to save and create wealth for retirement. Because all retirement savings incentives are provided through up-front tax deductions, higher income individuals are given generous benefits to save while lower-income individuals are given little or no benefit. We propose leaving intact all aspects of our current retirement savings structure, including IRAs and 401(k) contribution limits and non-discrimination rules. However, we propose to do away with the upside-down deduction-based incentive and replace it with an across-the-board 25 percent refundable tax credit for retirement savings. For the 33 million Americans who currently have no income tax liability and hence receive no tax incentives to save, this reform would, for the first time, offer a generous incentive to build for retirement. In addition, in order to encourage long-term savings, we would allow those with incomes under $1 million to exempt a portion of their long-held appreciated assets – up to 50 percent – from capital gains taxation.

[DjTj]

We have always encouraged savings. Put your money in savings accounts, CDs, money market accounts, etc. and let your money work for you rather than you work for your money. In recent years, however, our savings rate as a nation has plummeted. In fact, it is actually at a negative right now.

Rearranging the tax rate to soak those rich ****s by increasing taxes on interest, dividends, etc. will further discourage those at the bottom from taking advantage of these avenues. With little to nothing in savings, the poor and middle class are increasingly dependent on the government for assistance in hard times.

The tax rate should be so constituted as to encourage participation in savings and investment opportunites for all tax brackets.

Although it all sounds well and good, I just don't see this being practical. If you spend all your time working trying to make ends meet, you're not going to be the most informed stock buyer. The smart investments for wage earners would typically be in starting their own businesses or buying a house rather than fighting with Wall Street for a share of the corporate pie.

I don't meet a lot of people who say, "I retired on my stock market earnings during the 90's." I have met a lot of people who say, "I retired after starting a business during the 90's" and "I retired after selling my house last year."

If we want to encourage savings, we can do that by expanding IRA's. If we want to encourage the middle class to invest more, we can implement a standard deduction for capital gains. We do not necessarily need to cut the tax rate for capital gains. There are many ways to spur investment and savings without a cash giveaway to the wealthy.

[Art Monk Fan]

Chom & DjTj:

You both are equating savings and retirement savings, but I am not. We need a system that encourages additional savings outside of retirement accounts to help the non-rich survive life crises. No one has any reserves on hand.

[DeanCollins]

In otherwords, you don't want Chom to have a job

Actually, eliminating NASA would create a large securtity hole, and instead would put space funding in the hands of the Pentagon, not something that will improve anything by a long shot.

I am a big NASA proponent, but they should not be eliminated. Hell, 1/2 of the worlds best scientific measurement instruments for metrology and optics are in NASA. They have testing facilities we need and use all the time. Eliminating it is not an option.

What they need to do with NASA, just like any other Govt. burocracy, is eliminate wasteful spending. They need to institute cost savings measures. The irritating thing is that it is easy to impliment, you give the incentive to save money. Government has this habit of spending all the leftover money at the end of fiscal. This is so they will get the same amount of funding for the next year. Maybe, if the government allowed the managers to take a certain % of the savings, and distribute it amongst the workers in terms of bonuses, we would be saving a hell of a lot more money.

NASA just needs to sell rides to billionaires like Ruskis do! It's a joke Chom, only a joke:laugh:

[chomerics]

Chom & DjTj:

You both are equating savings and retirement savings, but I am not. We need a system that encourages additional savings outside of retirement accounts to help the non-rich survive life crises. No one has any reserves on hand.

We are a consumer society, build on disposal. We throw out what we don't have a use for anymore. If you want to make us into a saving society, then you'll have to overthrow all of Madison Ave and the advertising sector of the economy. They've gotten way to good at making Americans think they need things they don't.

[DjTj]

Chom & DjTj:

You both are equating savings and retirement savings, but I am not. We need a system that encourages additional savings outside of retirement accounts to help the non-rich survive life crises. No one has any reserves on hand.

IRA's do encourage non-retirement savings - in fact, they do so far more than a marginal decrease in the capital gains rate. Although you will get taxed on it if you withdraw early, a lot more people are putting the maximum contribution to their 401(k) or IRA because of the tax consequences, building up savings.

When the capital gains rates go down, all that happens is that people sell a lot of stock - liquidating their savings. People don't think, "Oh, the capital gains rate went down, I should start saving more."

IRA's, 401(k)'s, health savings accounts, and other deferred tax plans are far better at encouraging savings than playing with the capital gains rate. If you want to encourage savings, create tax breaks for savings. If you want to encourage middle class investment, create a standard deduction for capital gains or for small businesses. If you want to give a tax break to the wealthy, lower capital gains.