Mostly Cloudy with Haze ~ 16°F   Winter Weather Advisory
Login | Register
Tuesday, January 17, 2017

An Inconvenient Truth?

Posted Saturday, November 5, 2011, at 10:20 AM

With all the talk about taxes and who pays the most, and who pays the least,percentages of dollars is used, but there is no correlation given given to income. For example X amount of dollars were collected in tax revenue and Y was how much of that came from a certain group, done is such a way to make it look like they are overtaxed, or paying an unfair portion. Then I heard about and read a report from the Congressional Budget Office. I will post the link, but not all of the article as server space cost money, but I will provide quotes. This quote is from Mark Twain.

"Figures often beguile me, particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."" Quote from Mark Twain.



The fact that spending is out of control is a given.

The fact that we can not continue to spend beyond our means is a given.

The fact that absolutely no one has even begun to address the problem of paying off the national debt is a given.

The fact that Big Money has bought our government is a given. At least I think so.


What I'm leading up to is the proposition that there is something seriously wrong in this country and that we are in peril of losing what little freedom to better ourselves that we do have.


Quote #1

"The top 1 percent of earners more than doubled their share of the nation's income over the last three decades, the Congressional Budget Office said Tuesday, in a new report likely to figure prominently in the escalating political fight over how to revive the economy, create jobs and lower the federal debt." This a mathematical  fact.

Quote #2

"In its report, the budget office found that from 1979 to 2007, average inflation-adjusted after-tax income grew by 275 percent for the 1 percent of the population with the highest income. For others in the top 20 percent of the population, average real after-tax household income grew by 65 percent.

By contrast, the budget office said, for the poorest fifth of the population, average real after-tax household income rose 18 percent.

And for the three-fifths of people in the middle of the income scale, the growth in such household income was just under 40 percent." Again mathematical fact.

Quote #3

"The most affluent fifth of the population received 53 percent of after-tax household income in 2007, up from 43 percent in 1979. In other words, the after-tax income of the most affluent fifth exceeded the income of the other four-fifths of the population. People in the lowest fifth of the population received about 5 percent of after-tax household income in 2007, down from 7 percent in 1979." Once again a mathematical fact.


So I ask you, given the mathematical facts presented, is there a disparity, and if so, where does the blame lie? Where lies the cure?

Brenda, sorry about the 4 letter word, but it is a direct quote.

Showing comments in chronological order
[Show most recent comments first]

YES YES YES.....THAT REPORT IS JUST NOW BECOMING A PUBLIC CONCERN FOR SOME OF US IT HAS BEEN A CONCERN...........IT IS NOT SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE PROUD OF BUT SOME ARE.IT is kinda like the military everybody doesnt want to be a general some just want to fly airplanes. When that happens usually there careers are cut short,they could be the best pilot out there but for some reason they are not good enough.Most dont want to be super rich they want to be comfortable.Wages and benefits should keep pace with inflation.The producers should not be exspendable.The wife and I were shopping today and she commented about food prices. I said they were going up so that it would take care of SSI IN THE FUTURE.Poor food poor health,die earlier.A person overheard me and said " aint that the truth".

The rich get richer and the poor get poorer through no fault of there own .The problem is some think that is ok. HOW????? WHY ??????

-- Posted by lamont on Sat, Nov 5, 2011, at 6:23 PM

Demand is needed in order to create jobs. Demand is driven by having $$ to spend. The fastest way to get $$$ into the hands of the spenders is infrastructure jobs. Roads, bridges, the power grid, etc. We need to get the horse in front of the cart. This is a fact of life and economics. The banks and corporations are sitting on piles of CASH, but wont spend it or lend it. Talk to any small business, and they will tell you the reason they aren't hiring or expanding is lack of demand, pure and simple. This is another inconvenient truth no one wants to talk about. So who is going to invest in PUBLIC ROADS AND BRIDGES? Not the banks. Not the corporations. Who does that leave?

Tell me Mike, if you had 500 billion, would you spend it to make a product that would sit on the shelf until the money you spent filtered into the consumers hands, or would you bank it and collect interest? Remember product that sits on the shelf earns you zero interest, in fact it costs you money.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Sat, Nov 5, 2011, at 7:17 PM

Buckshot, of course it's the government. They are the ones who sold themselves like cheap hookers to the highest bidder. But at the end of the day, WE the voter are at the root of the problem. WE put them there. WE bought their lies. We bought into their phony economics. WE stood by and watched OUR jobs being shipped offshore, and couldn't or wouldn't do a darn thing about it.

During the largest and longest economic expansions in history, corporate tax rates were much higher than they are today. Now we have no jobs, the corporate tax rate is at an almost all time low, and they want lower tax rates. Meanwhile this country is drowning in debt.

And I'll say it again, no one has the stones to even address paying off the national debt. Do you realize that we would have to have a annual surplus of 400 billion for 30 years to even have any hope of paying off this debt, or are you one of those that would kick the can down the road to our great great grandchildren?

I am so sick of this only thinking of tomorrow or the next election, extracting revenge, rather than looking at the long term.


-- Posted by royincaldwell on Sat, Nov 5, 2011, at 7:34 PM

ROY.......some post back made some suggestions they must have been to radical because I got no comments,,,,,probally because i started out with THE MONEY is there but they are strangling the country rather than do the right thing all they can think about is the election,problem is a lot of people wont make it that far,and if they do you will be so far behind it you will never catch up.....I GOT MINE YOU GET YOURS...mentality.

If anyone thinks this is a joke try and refi your home....i dont care what kind of credit you have you are in for a surprise.

The infrastructure part of the proposal is a good one, it prepares for the future. The payback is now with jobs and MONEY moving.EDUCATION IS ON GOING OR YOU FALL BEHIND,WHICH WE HAVE ALREADY DONE.IF WE WANT to be competitive in the future we need to continue educating,these things should be no brainers.There AFRAID an educated population cant be controlled or subjugated.There is going to be some rude awakenings.The people who are silent.IT'S NOT HAPPENING TO THEM.......YET !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! latter

-- Posted by lamont on Sat, Nov 5, 2011, at 8:00 PM


-- Posted by royincaldwell on Sat, Nov 5, 2011, at 8:10 PM

Mike, I respectfully disagree on several points.

1) Small business doesn't cite over regulation as the job killer.

2) The numbers don't lie. The so called job creator's are not only under taxed, but they are in effect stifling job growth by hoarding their money.

On a side note, Cain's suggestion to abolish the minimum wage in "Opportunity Zones" blows!!!! A person can barely survive let alone thrive on minimum wage, and he want's to abolish it? WHY!!!

For the sake of higher corporate profits at the expense of a persons dignity?????

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Sun, Nov 6, 2011, at 8:16 AM

We need lower taxes and less spending by the government or we will never get out of debt. The left has always been for the opposite, more spending and more taxes. Look where we are.

The longest and largest economic expansion in history didn't happen at the same time did it?

-- Posted by skeeter on Sun, Nov 6, 2011, at 8:33 AM

skeeter, yes it did under Clinton

Buckshot, there was a report released by a non-partisan group, much like the C.B.O. and it surveyed small business owners. They were the ones that stated lack of demand was a greater factor than regulations. Nobody is hiring due to lack of demand, that is a fact! As far as "Our Federal Government", it has been bought and paid for by big business, regardless of who is President. Did you really look at the numbers? 5% of the income earned in this country was by the lower 20%, 53% was earned by the upper 20%. Do you think an 18% increase in after tax income over 28 years is equitable? Do you favor indentured servitude?

BTW, I would rather be called Roy.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Sun, Nov 6, 2011, at 9:37 AM


Thankyou ROY ...I cited the same thing awhile back.SMALL BUSINESS does not cite taxes or regulations.....they do cite capital.Again the taxe rates are the lowest in 50 yrs and the regulations are the same ,maybe they dont like enforcement.LETS look at the part were the poletician to satisfy his voters puts the regulation in place and then to satisfy the corporation makes sure there is no funding to enforce it.

SKEETER WHAT WOULD YOU CONSIDER THE RIGHT TAXE.? I THINK THE GOAL IS NO TAXES'S WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT CORP PAY IN RELATION TO WHAT YOU PAY BY PERCENTAGE THEY ARE GETTING AWAY WITH THEFT. I SAY THAT BECAUSE YOU ALSO HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT THEY DONT PAY.GET this you and I pay there accountants to steal from us.You see you only pay them one time after that it is a business exspense and they write the cost off, how does that grab you??joe blow tax payer cant do that.

I AM NOT A BIG REGULATION FAN......With that said the regulations that the big boys want gone deal with air,water and personal safety.They want a free hand to KILL YOU as they see fit and they have been succesfull at doing it.YOU are familiar with the battle going on in our little town of atlanta arnt you??that ARSENIC will affect the BOISE VALLEY WATER supply for Starters.They dont care,they got the gold now they dont want to live up to the contract,it's about money.that doesnt come our way or help us.NOW I will admit most gov regs are a reaction to something and they usaually overdo it.BUT WITH THE CORRECT ADMINISTRATION OF THOSE REGS THAT CAN BE CONTROLLED.wE did it to some extent on the flt line,I sat on some of those confrenceses.I AM NOT A TREE HUGGER EITHER.I dont fish but you should be able too,and to be able to eat what you catch without fear of dyeing from it,and so should my grandaughters.

Pleases look at all of it and not just the party line.The left didnt put us here by themselfes it took both sides.

-- Posted by lamont on Sun, Nov 6, 2011, at 9:54 AM

At least lamont and justmyPOV get it.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Sun, Nov 6, 2011, at 1:59 PM

HEY ....POV....I didnt mean to leave that out.The outsourcing is starting to backfire.That is a good thing and if the tariffs were put in place it would change a lot.I think that if they quite paying CEO's 100'S of millions of dollars. They could pay the workers a decent wage.I dont understand why stockholders dont understand that,and they could get a bigger dividend.So in reality all there doing is hiring the best thief available.I know that is ultra simplistic.

If we werent so materealistic it wouldnt take both parents working full time to live.That impact on family's cant be measured.EDUCATION SHOULD NOT BE MEASURED AND DEPENDENT ON YOUR POCKETBOOK,IT'S BAD ENOUGH THAT HEALTH CARE IS, WE SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF OURSELFES BUT WE ARE NOT.

We dont need to save the world,we need to look inward because our values are so messed up that we think we can buy the world,we cant, we could lead and we have abducated that responsibility.We have let MONEY corrupt our ideals....MY OPINION.I love my country dearly and it hurts to see what I SEE,I GAVE HER MY YOUTH,LOYALTY,AND SO MUCH MORE ALL I EVER WANTED WAS A FAIR CHANCE AT LIVING A GOOD LIFE AND WE ARE ALLOWING PEOPLE TO STEAL THAT FROM MY GRAND KIDS AND I AM ONE ANGRY SOLDIER.

-- Posted by lamont on Sun, Nov 6, 2011, at 3:20 PM

President Ronald Reagan's record includes sweeping economic reforms and deep across-the-board tax cuts, market deregulation, and sound monetary policies to contain inflation. His policies resulted in the largest peacetime economic boom in American history and nearly 35 million more jobs. And it continued all the way into President Bush's first term.

-- Posted by skeeter on Sun, Nov 6, 2011, at 5:11 PM

In the United States the fifteen-year economic expansion that began in 1982, now called "the long boom" by economists, is the greatest economic boom in history.

Ten major factors that caused that boom are

1.The vanished threat of nuclear war

2.The spread of capitalism

3.Easy taxes

4.The computer revolution

5.Control of government spending


7.Stable monetary policy

8.Steady economic policy

9.The U.S. capital base

10.The superiority of the U.S. economy


-- Posted by skeeter on Sun, Nov 6, 2011, at 5:19 PM


BUCKSHOT.....YOUR RIGHT HE SAID SHE SAID. yes they are concerned but not as it is played to be.I said it.... government is redundant all beaurocrecy's are. Get rid of the redundancy and the cost will drop significantly, so will the regulations they create to justify there existance.If you and I have the answers you know they do, they just dont want to change.So what else is new?......latter

-- Posted by lamont on Sun, Nov 6, 2011, at 6:52 PM

I have placed the blame on both of them. But most of all I blame US, the people for allowing this to happen. Blindly voting, blindly believing anything and everything we have been told by both sides. Both of them have done everything they can to foster hate and distrust that real dialog is impossible. We are in a state of paralysis and any consensus is impossible. Meanwhile, the middle class shrinks, the lower class gets poorer and the rich and elite get more powerful. Regardless of who we vote for, big business will continue to buy our government and do it with impunity. I'm not advocating nationalizing, but at times it seems the only thing they understand is a real threat to relieve them of their money which would destroy their power. The only one running that doesn't appear to be connected to big money is Ron Paul, but some of his ideas are so radical that he could never gain the support of the general electorate. Is a revolution due? Possibly. But it has to be a revolution of the people united in a COMMON cause.The continued us vs them bickering among the people is what they want. The people being united is what they fear. The left and the right must become united to save this Republic!

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Sun, Nov 6, 2011, at 7:31 PM

skeeter, Reagan's middle class tax cuts were paid for in large part by eliminating many tax loopholes that corporations employed, thereby effectively raising their tax rate. The other thing that came about was the alternative minimum tax rate, a good idea, but poorly executed.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Sun, Nov 6, 2011, at 7:46 PM

Another report that is sure to cause even more division, meant to deflect attention away from the position I stated at 7:31pm yesterday.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Mon, Nov 7, 2011, at 5:03 AM

Corporate tax rates went from 46 % to 34 % under President Reagan too. Tax revenue to the government increased by about 99 percent.

Low taxes on high production, verses high taxes on low production does not mean the government gets the same amount of tax revenue. Low taxes on high production is better for the middle class.

Women also control more money than men, but we all knew that.

-- Posted by skeeter on Mon, Nov 7, 2011, at 6:03 AM

Government spending creates jobs?

-- Posted by skeeter on Mon, Nov 7, 2011, at 6:17 AM

According to a study in the Journal of Applied Psychology, women who are "very thin" earn nearly $22,000 more than their "average weight counterparts." The study was conducted by Timothy A. Judge from the University of Florida and Daniel M. Cable, from the London Business School, who examined the relationship between income and weight in men and women.

-- Posted by skeeter on Mon, Nov 7, 2011, at 6:20 AM

Skeeter, rates may have dropped, but more income was subject to taxation. Interesting video, but the source is somewhat skewed in my humble opinion. As to the last comment, go figure.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Mon, Nov 7, 2011, at 2:48 PM

Thanks Buckshot. The lack of financing is hurting consumers as well. I read somewhere, but I don't remember where, the largest banks are sitting on record levels of cash, but wont lend it. I know that there are new regulations in place regarding the risk taking that they were doing. I don't understand how that can justify not lending to small businesses. I work for a small company,(10employees)so I know about the lending climate. In my humble opinion (imho), our being so closely tied into the "Global Economy" has proved to be a disaster.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Tue, Nov 8, 2011, at 11:36 AM

Also, I would like to add, the economy was already in the tank by 2009. It has gotten worse, I agree, but let's put some of the blame where it belongs. God knows there is enough to go around.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Tue, Nov 8, 2011, at 11:38 AM

Buckshot, A couple of things. This blog started about the huge disparity in income growth over the last 28 years. If you think that's ok, so be it.

Second, yes the politicians are corrupt, but it takes 2 to tango, so they say. I see very little blame being laid at the feet of big business for any of this mess. As for taxing people more, if the tax code wasn't written in such a way that certain individuals and companies pay little or no income tax, and if somehow the lowest 20% could earn more than 5% of the total income, then just maybe things wouldn't be as ugly as they are now.

Lastly, by and large, I am the only one here on these blogs that seems to be able to see the 800 pound gorilla. Everyone else seems content to be beholden to the likes of the Chinese and Russians, as well as a slew of other countries that sure as heck don't have our best interest in their heart.

Go ahead and keep cutting taxes and cutting spending, but keep in mind that there is a 464 BILLION dollar payment we MUST make every year, year in and year out. Go ahead and stick your head in the sand and saddle several generations going forward with the task getting rid of the gorilla. I could give a rat's butt about what the europeans have done to themselves. Never have, never will.

The numbers don't lie. Not a single person here has even tried to address the facts and figures I presented at the beginning of this blog. Not a single suggestion has been has been offered besides through the bums out and cut taxes. Not a word about campaign reform. Not a word or a plan to get jobs back to America except to cut the minimum wage and plunge even more people into poverty.

Last and not least, how is it ok to slash social programs, and not military spending? Cut Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Education, any and all programs designed to aid the poorest of this nation.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Tue, Nov 8, 2011, at 8:56 PM

One last word, Mr. Cain has already suggested a 9% national sales tax on top of local sales taxes.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Tue, Nov 8, 2011, at 9:00 PM

One last link if you have the stomach for it.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Tue, Nov 8, 2011, at 9:10 PM

Buckshot, by not addressing the issue I raised about the national debt, you are indeed beholden to the Chinese and other countries. I support a strong work ethic, always have always will. The fact of the matter is that you have still failed to address the facts I have presented and continue to deflect the conversation elsewhere. Homer tried that tactic constantly, but I continued to press the issues I presented. I will continue to press the issues I have raised until I you or others give straight answers. Now would you like to address the issues I raised, or would you rather to continue to deflect the conversation elsewhere because you possibly have no answer or an answer that truly reflects your attitude towards your fellow Americans?

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 6:06 AM

Good facts Buckshot61.

It's nice to see some instead of speculation. We need to cut spending and taxes and things will work out. Regulations have to be frozen. Tort reform has to be passed. Obama's inbed partners, Wallstreet and "Green Big Business" and soon nuclear power has to be severed.

The media has to stop carrying the water for the dems.

We need no lawyers in DC and more common people.

How about going back to 2008 spending, it's been offered on these blogs before.

I don't see business people getting us into this mess, I say politicians got us into this mess.

-- Posted by skeeter on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 6:26 AM


-- Posted by lamont on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:12 AM

Link some may find useful:

-- Posted by Dave Thompson on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 10:21 AM

Buckshot, if you will notice I apologized to Mike for what I did.

I just went back and re-read the article, and I must be blind, as I saw no mention of higher taxes. Would you kindly point me in the right direction so I may see it for myself in the article?

As to the rest of your comment, I see you still have failed to answer any of the questions I put to you. Is there a reason for that? You accuse me of wanting to raise taxes, but it seems you don't want to answer any of my direct questions.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Wed, Nov 9, 2011, at 9:02 PM

Roy: I think you have posted we need to raise taxes and lower spending. Taxes are mentioned numerous times in your prelude. The report by the CBO presented by The New York Times. Wonder if they have an agenda? Bottom tier of people only getting 18 % increase in income after taxes. What taxes, they don't pay income taxes. They probably got an 18 % increase in welfare over those years.

I think it much more important what has happened to our country in the just the past three years. My how fast this country has went down in so many categories.

-- Posted by skeeter on Thu, Nov 10, 2011, at 5:56 AM

Ennius saw Homer in a dream once.

-- Posted by Dave Thompson on Thu, Nov 10, 2011, at 8:11 AM

Buckshot, we DO need to lower spending, but at the same time we CAN NOT cut taxes unless you are OK with being beholden to our ENEMIES! Paying off the national debt in 30 YEARS will require the expenditure of almost 900 BILLION dollars a year to cover interest and paying down the principal. That is point I keep making, but no one seems to get it!

The report was ordered long before this administration and was requested by both sides. About half of the 18% increase was due to the increase in minimum wage. Welfare as you call it doesn't even come into the equation. That statement is just another attempt to deflect from the real conversation. I see no comment from you about the 275% increase. I wonder if you have an agenda? And what about the 60% that saw an average of only about 1.75% a year for 28 years. God I hate mathematical facts, it's almost impossible to refute, but so easy to ignore.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Thu, Nov 10, 2011, at 9:58 AM

SKEETER.... do you really think everything was ok under pres BUSH????? You think all this happened in 3 years .I think your smarter than that......AND FROM YOUR POSTS YOU DO READ SO YOU KNOW BETTER.THERE IS ENOUGH GARBAGE TO GO BACK 20 YRS AND SOME OF US HAVE BEEN HOLLERING THAT LONG .I KNOW I HAVE...ID PROBALLY HAVE TO SAY SO HAS ZOOK AND MS M.....AND this is not a blame game this is real.....and they still wont get to the meat of it because of politics.Both sides need to pay attention to these elections going on they say a lot.

-- Posted by lamont on Thu, Nov 10, 2011, at 3:02 PM

We've fell so far so fast. Jobs are not looking good for the future. 18 percent of the public thinks we are going in the right direction. 46 million people on food stamps.

Bush spent way too much and I've said that before. However, look what we have borrowed to spend and have printed to spend. If things are getting better because of this administration I guess missed it.

I hope people have their stores in place; food, fuel and water.

-- Posted by skeeter on Thu, Nov 10, 2011, at 6:25 PM

JYD, as in selective bankruptcy? I have heard that elsewhere and it does deserve discussion. That discussion should also include the effect such an action would have on our reputation. I'm going to give further thought about something I want to say. It has to come out right the first time.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Thu, Nov 10, 2011, at 7:55 PM

YES WE BORROWED .......TO GO TO WAR......AND THE BILLS ARE COMMING DUE.What I am saying think about if we had not done that ,how about if we had not done the BUSH taxe cuts,how about if we had not sent out a check to everyone in the country....claiming surplus collected to much sending it back and then started spending,how about no glass stegall act ,we could go on there is enough mistakes to choke a horse. They made them together how about fixing them together.

Yes we have fallen and it does not have to continue,rather than help this president there are people going out of there way to BLOCK EVERYTHING that he approves no matter what and if it hurts the nation SO BE IT.I call that sabotage at our exspense.These hard EITHER WAY proposals are being voted down you can be conservative you can be liberal as long as your not WAY OUT on either side.Americans may be slow but not dumb.

I GUESS SEN DE MINT NEEDED TO GET HIS NAME IN THE PAPER,vOTED AGAINST VETERANS PART OF A JOBS PROPOSAL VOTE WAS 94-1.....GUESS WHO??? veterans dont deserve special consideration,,,,,,,,tax credits to employers ,pitting them against there fellow citezens,little stuff like that.....I WILL REMEMBER HIM YOU CAN BET ON IT.RIGHT TO THE SEPTIC, HE WILL HAVE COMPANY MC CAINS WAITING FOR HIM.........LATTER

-- Posted by lamont on Thu, Nov 10, 2011, at 9:22 PM

As I always do, I research the experts that are cited. Shikha Dalmia has no formal training in economics. While she holds several degrees, she makes her living as a journalist and commentator. Sheldon Richman, journalist and commentator who advocates the abolition of public education among other things. Adam Bitely, well he is a professional blogger. Don Boudreau is an economist. The thing they have in common is that they are Libertarians. By the way, I'm not trying to say that being a Libertarian is a bad thing. Buckshot, you are the first Libertarian I have had the chance to debate with. Thank you for the opportunity. I must say though, this would have been much less painful for all involved if you had just stated that you were a Libertarian at the beginning. Also I have one question, are you familiar with Gene Burns? Anyway, back to our discussion. Would you please explain your position on the national debt and what should be done about it? This is an issue that even Mr. Paul has not addressed.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Fri, Nov 11, 2011, at 6:13 AM

Buckshot, first my apology for assuming you are a Libertarian. Usually when someone cites Libertarian sources, they are Libertarians.

Second, if you go back to the beginning of this blog you will see that I stated a position on how statistics can be twisted. I then provided a quote I researched.

I then posted a link.

After that I restated 4 positions I've held since I started commenting on these blogs and before I had my own blog here.

After that I stated a proposition, followed by 3 quotes from the article, and lastly I asked a question.

I consider myself to civil in that I don't engage in name calling or making certain types of accusations. I do sometimes make assumptions though and do apologize when I am wrong.

I will admit I did answer a comment of yours about "welfare" rather snidely, but I did consider it to be an out of line comment in a civil debate.

Now to my opinions of the sources you cited, I am entitled to my opinion. I did give the economist credit for being such.

I have never claimed to have any degrees or formal training. What I do have is common sense and the ability to tell the difference between morally right and wrong.

Lastly, I want to thank you for being the only one to actually answer my question about the national debt. If your curious as to why I'm so adamant about the subject is that the last time we even had a glimmer of hope to start paying off the debt, instead taxes were cut on the anticipation of future surpluses and given back to the "people". What happened after that is history, 9/11, a recession, 2 unfunded wars, spending out of control and the political establishment in complete denial. Both sides I might add.

This continuous call for cutting taxes aggravates me to no end. I have never denied that spending needs to be curtailed across the board, all budget items. And I do mean ALL!

Before you joined these blogs, I stated my position in no uncertain terms regard a balanced budget amendment, the absolute need to not only pay off the national debt, but to fund a rainy day fund equal to 50% of the most current budget of any given year. I then laid out in no uncertain terms what it would take legally to ever get this country in debt again.

If I may suggest, if you would truly like to know more about some of the positions I hold, check the archive of my blogs. May I suggest Promote the general welfare as your first read.

Have a good evening sir and a nice week end.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Fri, Nov 11, 2011, at 6:56 PM

Mike, I was referring specifically to military contractors. You know me better than to think I was referring to active duty or retired.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Fri, Nov 11, 2011, at 8:30 PM

A cut in taxes with money given back to the people does not add to the national debt unless you think it is a zero sum game. Money that goes back to the people is circulated and generates tax money, not lower it. Also it isn't DCs money.

One trillion in tax cuts does not mean that DC lost one trillion in tax collection. I've seen that mentioned three times by three left leaning people on these blogs.

Isn't BHO's signature on that tax bill now?

Military contractor laws and ways of obtaining bids are very complicated and designed to have civilian control over military bidding processes. First the civilian led military has laws made by civilians to be followed by military members and then those same civilians will complain of all the expensive contracts, all the while counting their money at night.

Go back to year 2008 spending and lower taxes to eliminate debt.

-- Posted by skeeter on Sat, Nov 12, 2011, at 6:04 AM

Quoting one who does not speak here any more, "This "deal" doesn't STOP SPENDING it only reduces the rate of our indebtedness so instead of owing 20 plus trillion we'll only owe 17 trillion over the next 10 years."

Anyone remember this? Was he talking about the current CJR?

Doing a little research for my next blog and wanted to address some points.

-- Posted by Dave Thompson on Sat, Nov 12, 2011, at 12:00 PM

I understand they'll debate foreign policy. I hope they're able to keep themselves on subject.

-- Posted by Dave Thompson on Sat, Nov 12, 2011, at 5:14 PM

re: debates

Good column by George Will.

-- Posted by Dave Thompson on Sat, Nov 12, 2011, at 5:21 PM

Mike, I was responding to this. "And they need to NOT cut from those who've paid into the system and EARNED it..........." that's all.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Sat, Nov 12, 2011, at 5:39 PM

EXCELLENT BY WILLS.......and i dont even like the guy.......THANKS DAVE

-- Posted by lamont on Sat, Nov 12, 2011, at 6:16 PM

I have held my tongue long enough on the I.R.S.

They don't write the tax code, the legislature does. they are only the enforcers. The same problem exist at the I.R.S that exist right here in our own back yard. The little man gets the shaft, while the big donors go to whoever they bought and say, I've got this problem with the Tax Commission, can you "look" into it? All of a sudden the problem disappears. I would suggest we try to clean up our own backyard. As to the U.N., send them packing to some other country. The 9th Circuit is the reason 3 men in Idaho weren't executed because new evidence was discovered. Kind of hard to bring back a dead man and say oh we're sorry, you were innocent after all. How many innocent men have been executed? We may never know.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Sun, Nov 13, 2011, at 6:37 AM

Have a safe trip Mike.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Sun, Nov 13, 2011, at 7:00 AM



-- Posted by lamont on Sun, Nov 13, 2011, at 10:19 AM

Which three men are you talking about Roy?

-- Posted by skeeter on Sun, Nov 13, 2011, at 11:44 AM

skeeter, 3 here in Idaho, 2 for misconduct on the part of the prosecution, 1 for new D.N.A. evidence.

I understand that some of the decisions coming from that court don't sit well with some folks, but, and this is a big but, the most disliked decisions have to do with the rights of certain classes of citizens. They have held that the wishes of the majority can not override constitutional rights to equal protection and due process.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Sun, Nov 13, 2011, at 5:22 PM

NO zook.......enslavement to the corporations,banks and the other money making empires put forth.I like most Americans just want to work earn and honest living and raise a family.I dont want to do that on my knees as they tell me that I CAN BUY A TRUCK BUT IT WILL COST $40,000.OO AND NO you havnt earned any more in 40 yrs but thats ok you dont need more only the boss does because his yaught burns hi test deisel.Wage disparity is enslavement at the level it is opinion.WHY does the avg house cost $210,000.00 dollars when only 25% of that is materials.


I DONT KNOW MANY PEOPLE WHO WANT GOVERNMENT HANDOUTS AND THATS ALL.....they want a job,they want to earn there own way,even those who arnt really prepared. I would love to see no welfare but that is not going to happen.PUT TO STATE THAT PEOPLE WANT AND WOULD ALLOW TOTAL GOVERNMENT DEPENDENCY I FIND OFFENSIVE.I advocate and will continue to advocate that the administers of all welfare programs do ther jobs.WE also need to stop rewarding bad behavior, to include repeated pregnancy's and drug abuse.Doing away with things will not change it.

I will say it again the HARD RIGHT rhetoric is not one of inclusion,it's hostile and particuly to women and minorities.SAY what you want about PC, the saying ...I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK......COMES OF WRONG......WHO TOOK IT FROM YOU????????BY THE WAY JUST WHAT IS PC SOPPOSED TO MEAN??? BECAUSE IT COMES OF WRONG TOO.....HOW ABOUT PRACTICING MUTUAL RESPECT.IN WORD AND DEED..I see enslavement now I see the civil war as not ended it's still on in the south and from what happened to me saturday, night here in the northwest..Enslavement doesnt require chains of iron,chains come in many forms and they are alive and well.YOU see the only thing that makes you and I free is we arnt dependent on a lot of things others are,we have also seen things that give us a leg up on how to make the difference.I could go on all day .....enough.

-- Posted by lamont on Sun, Nov 13, 2011, at 5:39 PM


-- Posted by lamont on Mon, Nov 14, 2011, at 11:53 AM

Folks, don't forget the corrupt companies that "bribe" our legislators with campaign donations, and god only knows what else. Corruption always takes 2 to Tango.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Mon, Nov 14, 2011, at 4:45 PM

YUP! Although Unions now fall in the category of business's. God I think I'm going to VOMIT!

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Mon, Nov 14, 2011, at 6:41 PM

Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration:

Thoughts from an old progressive
Roy Pratt
Recent posts
Blog RSS feed [Feed icon]
Comments RSS feed [Feed icon]
Send email to Roy Pratt
Almost 65 and retired. Raised by an East Coast liberal. I am also a child of the sixties.