Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Connecticut's future hinges on U.S. debt bill: official - Yahoo! Finance (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Connecticuts-future-hinges-on-rb-1440182210.html - broken link)
What did they think would happen with all the government bloat and debt on both federal and state levels? What's ridiculous are the unfunded federal mandates we as a state have to follow and pay for. Total B.S. The whole system is redistributive in nature. We send a whole lot more tax revenue to Washington than we get back, so we basically pay for roads in Mississippi. Screw that. This is the problem with ever increasing government.
The federal government is bankrupt. The entire federal budget for the year is about 4 trillion, and we are 14 trillion in debt, almost 100% of our GDP. When you spend 300 billion a month and borrow 120 billion a month just to pay your bills, you are bankrupt.
It's over, stick a fork in it. Washington has officially ballooned into a self destructing monster. Expect a Greek style collapse, only a whole lot worse.
At least some people in Congress are fighting for spending cuts. It could be worse (although hard to imagine). I'm personally all for increasing taxes for the wealthy (although my definition would be 500k/year, not 250k - in FFC, 250k for a family is still middle class!) to the levels in the 1990's, which were still lower than the Reagan years. I'm sorry, but compared to the past that tax bracket is WAY too low. Combine that with a slight reduction in corporate taxes to stay competitive in the global market, yet close some loopholes - we could have a nice income without killing business. Also, need to keep capital gains low. Maybe even lower than it is now.
The problem with Washington is you have a lot of hypocrisy. Bush increased spending and decreased taxes at the same time, making a horrible burden. Obama continued spending at crazy rates, and the taxes stayed the same. So now on one side, you have one side that wants no additional taxes, and another side that can't ever contemplate giving up their sacred spending cows. Recipe for disaster. What ever happened to moderate politics? Ideology is death.
What did they think would happen with all the government bloat and debt on both federal and state levels? What's ridiculous are the unfunded federal mandates we as a state have to follow and pay for. Total B.S. The whole system is redistributive in nature. We send a whole lot more tax revenue to Washington than we get back, so we basically pay for roads in Mississippi. Screw that. This is the problem with ever increasing government.
The federal government is bankrupt. The entire federal budget for the year is about 4 trillion, and we are 14 trillion in debt, almost 100% of our GDP. When you spend 300 billion a month and borrow 120 billion a month just to pay your bills, you are bankrupt.
It's over, stick a fork in it. Washington has officially ballooned into a self destructing monster. Expect a Greek style collapse, only a whole lot worse.
We get very little back , but this is limited to the Northeast.... We pay more , but receive less....the southern states pay less and get more. Theres something wrong with that , with the amount ppl pay in this region we shouldn't have crumbling infrastructure and Urban Decay....and not all of the issues are due to corruption. If the Northeast were to break off from the Rest of the Nation we could probably pay back all our debts within 10 years...
At least some people in Congress are fighting for spending cuts. It could be worse (although hard to imagine). I'm personally all for increasing taxes for the wealthy (although my definition would be 500k/year, not 250k - in FFC, 250k for a family is still middle class!) to the levels in the 1990's, which were still lower than the Reagan years. I'm sorry, but compared to the past that tax bracket is WAY too low. Combine that with a slight reduction in corporate taxes to stay competitive in the global market, yet close some loopholes - we could have a nice income without killing business. Also, need to keep capital gains low. Maybe even lower than it is now.
The problem with Washington is you have a lot of hypocrisy. Bush increased spending and decreased taxes at the same time, making a horrible burden. Obama continued spending at crazy rates, and the taxes stayed the same. So now on one side, you have one side that wants no additional taxes, and another side that can't ever contemplate giving up their sacred spending cows. Recipe for disaster. What ever happened to moderate politics? Ideology is death.
I mostly agree with this but want to note that if you interpret the chart correctly, it's only the early Reagan years that are higher in tax than the 1990s. Using 1981-83 as a baseline is a bad idea as the economy was almost as bad as it is now and actually supports the argument that lowering tax rates from 50-28% is "economic juice".
Now that said, I think 50% is too high, but 39.6% (what it would go to from 35% if tax cuts expire for those over 250K or 500K or $1M or whatever) isn't. I do find it astonishing that top tax rates were 90% in the 1950s, I can't imagine THAT being an incentive to make any money (interesting side note, it was JFK of all people who agreed with that and lowered it to 70%.....but personally I think once you're taking half or more of anyone's income no matter how rich it is counterproductive....40% should be the max).
I'm afraid raising taxes on the rich wont do much but put a dent in our problem. And the so-called debt crisis we just experienced is just a taste of the brawls DC will be fighting over the next 10-20 years. It's going to get ugly.
I can see CT getting slammed. Higher taxes on those of us who produce, less $$ for those dependent on Gov, fewer Blackhawks. Not good.
We shouldn't get anything back from Washington anyway. We need to rid the country of the concept of giving the feds money & then begging for it back. We are theoretically a union of 50 independent states joined together for our benefit. The Feds shouldn't be involved in 99% of the states business and should function on a small fraction of what it does now. I WISH our Governor would stand up & Tell the Fed to go suck a hat, that CT isn't funding anything but CT anymore, but we wont, I sure wouldn't want to be lumped in with NYS or Jersey either though, theyre both as bad as Washington.
I'm curious about the future, but not very optimistic.
Washington CD is part of the south anyways... they must hate the yankees LOL
The Dixie has drifted south over the years , the are a part of the Northeastern Megapolis...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
