Looks like they are at an impasse. The talks have broken down. Well see if Obama will now come out from his leadership position in the rear.
Remember, future projected budget cuts are never any good because one congress can not bind the next congress. However, every dollar borrowed today is put on the backs of our kids who haven't even been born yet.
__________________
John Adams “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
Ronald Reagan: 'Everybody that is for abortion has already been born'
"I never said I was worth it. I only said I wouldn't do it for less " William F. Buckley Jr.
Not surprisingly. I hope nothing gets done and we get cold turkey next month. Something tells me that second drop dead date will advance 2 more months.
For those who want to say, "tax the rich", answer question for me. In our economy, good or bad times, who's salary is the least reliable?
__________________
John Adams “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
Ronald Reagan: 'Everybody that is for abortion has already been born'
"I never said I was worth it. I only said I wouldn't do it for less " William F. Buckley Jr.
I commented on this in another thread. Too many threads to keep up with.
The Republicans have a mandate from the voters: constrain spending, reduce the size of government. If Obama and the Dems want to play chicken, I say take the battle to them.
Almost certainly the Democratic -- the Obama -- interpretation of this is (1) if the Republicans cave, we win and (2) if the Republicans do not cave, bad stuff happens, the Republicans get the blame for the bad stuff, we win. No doubt this would be the major media narrative. OK. No debt ceiling increase. Government stops in its tracks. Payments to debtors are not paid. If the economy posts worsening numbers, Republicans get the blame; if the economy posts improved numbers (heck, who knows, stranger things have happened), the Democrats take credit. I can hear George Steppenopolis now: "Isn't this an irresponsible, a reckless position the Republicans have taken? Doesn't this demonstrate Republicans are inflexible idealogues? Doesn't this show the Republicans are not fit to govern?" You know that would be the narrative of the mainstream media.
I concede the mainstream media. You aren't going to win those guys over. It is like the die-hard Democrats. Concede that you're not going to win them. What is the correct narrative? The debt ceiling law was enacted by spend-thrift legislators to prevent them from spending beyond the limit. Please . . . think about that for a minute. The debt ceiling law was enacted to provide some legislastors some spending discipline -- to prevent them from spending more than they ought to spend. C'mon, what is that about? Think about it some more. There is an intrinsic pressure that legislators are exposed to to spend money for their constituents, to bring home the bacon. This pressure works AGAINST containing spending. If I want some bacon for my constituents, I have to persuade you to vote for my pork project. How do I persuade you to vote for my pork project? I agree to vote for your pork project. Thus the need for an external coercion, an external boundary. Under these circumstances . . . please tell me how it makes sense to just willy-nilly raise the debt ceiling? Isn't this defeating its purpose? This is the story that needs to be told. The debt ceiling is there for a reason. Have the courage of your convictions -- ever increasing debt and unwillingness to limit your spending is criminally irresponsible and constitutes robbery. Do the right thing. DO NOT raise the debt ceiling. You got tricked in the earlier negotiation earlier this year. Learn the lesson from this.
Accept that there is going to be a stark contrast in the coming 2012 elections. between those who want big government, higher taxes, higher handouts, wealth redistribution . . . and those who want the opposite. Don't try to please everyone. Don't pay attention to the mainstream media -- they are propaganda mouthpieces.
Here is a link where US senator Jim Demint says that Republicans better listen to the voices of the voters and stand firm on this debt ceiling issue. I think he is kind of correct. I'm not sure he is right when he says they would get voted out of office. If the choice is between an encumbent Republican who didn't vote the right way and a Democrat . . . I'm voting for the Republican. On the other hand, if it is the primary season and there is a credible alternative Republican candidate, I might vote for the competing Republican against the encumbent. I'm really tired of the RINO phenomenon. Fortunately there typically are not RINOs in Texas.
Not surprisingly. I hope nothing gets done and we get cold turkey next month. Something tells me that second drop dead date will advance 2 more months.
For those who want to say, "tax the rich", answer question for me. In our economy, good or bad times, who's salary is the least reliable?
Yes! Tax the rich so that they pay the same percentage everyone else has to pay! Whether it is good times or bad time they need to be taxed the same way every time.. Who's salary is the least reliable you ask? Now you know the answer to that as well as most on here do.
When a salaried person signs on they have a contract that a corporation can not get out of until it's experation date. That is unless a provision is added that the salaried employee fails to comply with. When an hourly working is hired on and they shut the plant down or has a lay-off. The hourly does not get paid. But still the salaried worker will until his/her sign on contract expires. The salaried worker also gets paid way above what they are worth..
Yes! Tax the rich so that they pay the same percentage everyone else has to pay! Whether it is good times or bad time they need to be taxed the same way every time.. Who's salary is the least reliable you ask? Now you know the answer to that as well as most on here do.
What do you consider "rich"? I've asked you before and you returned with crickets, lets see if you step up to the plate this time...
__________________
I love Christmas lights. They remind me of the people who voted for Obama. They all hang together; half of them don't work, and the ones that do, aren't that bright.
For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do
not understand, no explanation is possible.
A golf course is a willful and deliberate misuse of a perfectly good rifle range.
Yes! Tax the rich so that they pay the same percentage everyone else has to pay! Whether it is good times or bad time they need to be taxed the same way every time.. Who's salary is the least reliable you ask? Now you know the answer to that as well as most on here do.
When a salaried person signs on they have a contract that a corporation can not get out of until it's experation date. That is unless a provision is added that the salaried employee fails to comply with. When an hourly working is hired on and they shut the plant down or has a lay-off. The hourly does not get paid. But still the salaried worker will until his/her sign on contract expires. The salaried worker also gets paid way above what they are worth..
So uninformed. We have already had the HNI CPA weigh in on this stuff regarding pay. I've posted many of times as well. There is a thing call Alternative Minmum Tax (AMT). When you cross a threshold, your taxes are calculated 2 ways. One with deductions and one without. If the one without comes up higher, you pay. Furthermore, the top earners already are paying most of the income taxes in this country. 50% of Americans don't pay any income taxes and a large portion actually earn money from the tax code. You think thats right? Earn money for doing nothing but breathing?
So who's income is the most unreliable Phil? Its the top wage earners not the blue collar earners. The top earners have the highest swings in earnings and thats a big reason states as well as the federal government are having problems with budgets. They are targeting success. I got news for you Phil, as much as I want to be successful every year, there are years I don't make huge sums of money. In fact, my biggest year I have ever had was several years ago. So tell me again who's salary is the least reliable? You better say the rich.
Now for salaried postions. You haven't got a clue. I've been salaried since I was 17. I don't recall ever having a secure job except when I was in the Navy. I go to work every day knowing it could be my last. That's called life. My company or my prior companies don't exist to provide me a job. They have the right to terminate me at the drop of a hat if they choose to and I have no recourse. Thats ok. I'm aware of that fact. I try and plan ahead. Perhaps you should too.
__________________
John Adams “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
Ronald Reagan: 'Everybody that is for abortion has already been born'
"I never said I was worth it. I only said I wouldn't do it for less " William F. Buckley Jr.
Location: On an Island in the west coast of New England
Posts: 13,132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fieldmouse
So who's income is the most unreliable Phil? Its the top wage earners not the blue collar earners. The top earners have the highest swings in earnings and thats a big reason states as well as the federal government are having problems with budgets. They are targeting success. I got news for you Phil, as much as I want to be successful every year, there are years I don't make huge sums of money. In fact, my biggest year I have ever had was several years ago. So tell me again who's salary is the least reliable? You better say the rich.
I can agree with some of that but in many instances “the rich" have either a salary or other means of earning a livelihood and others are on a commission. Many people on commission earn very large paychecks like some realtors/ brokers and other sales types like insurance salesmen. People on commission can have huge yearly earning swings. Generally a person working for a fortune 500 company who is in a mid level or higher management position on salary will usually have high and stable earnings providing they keep their job. Most people like that who I know have worked for years in high paying jobs all for the same company like IBM, Verizon and others. Many used tax and investment loopholes which were abundant in past years to shelter their money and reduce their amount of taxable income. Then again the term rich can mean different things to different people. Most people I know who are working aren’t rich. While paychecks in the 250K and up are nice it hardly would qualify someone as rich. I consider someone rich when their money makes them large amounts of money and they don’t have to keep a job. Rich is when you can’t spend all you have.
__________________
Too busy with fishing to spend much time here.
Point of information. This may have already been established, but being salaried does not imply there is any special contract. This may vary state by state. I can tell you, however, that in Texas and in Oklahoma, salaried people can be let go on the instant and need not be paid anything other than the compensation they have accumulated to that instant. I have seen this happen many times and it happened to me one time, in a start-up company where I got caught in the third round of lay-offs to occur in 8 months. The start-up augured in about six months after I got axed. Not to worry. After 1 year of no work in my accustomed profession of engineer I made a career change to patent work and have done much better than I could have -- and with much more security -- if I had been able to remain in engineering.
Another point of information. In the higher compensation ranges, often a significant portion of the compensation is embodied in bonuses. If things go poorly, such a person in the upper compensation ranges may see his bonus be cut in half. When the bonus is 1/3 or more of the total compensation package, that reduction can be a big variation year-to-year. This is at least partly what was being referred to by Fieldmouse, I assume. This would be even more true of a business owner. Lower level and hourly workers, by contrast, do not typically receive a significant part of their compensation in such volatile bonus payments. If they keep their job, their pay is stable.
Budget talks breakdown
