x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA

Obama wants to raise taxes on cellphone use

Posted: , by Alan F.

Obama wants to raise taxes on cellphone use
As if the taxes that cellphone users pay each month aren't enough to make you go back to two tin cans and a string, President Obama is looking to raise taxes on cellphone use in order to pay for high-speed internet service in school. The president could ask Congress for the funds, but instead he apparently wants to slow down one of the only sectors of the economy that has been growing steadily over the years. Actually, the president considers Congress to be dysfunctional which is why he is turning to handset users instead of asking Congress to raise the money.

The new program would be called ConnectED and would cost cellphone users about $5 more in additional taxes each year. To show you how overtaxed handset users are, in New York City the average cellphone user pays 10 separate city, state and federal fees and charges each month. And that doesn't include monthly sales tax!

Under the plan, the extra fee would disappear after three years, raising $6 billion. Some of you might not mind, considering that half of the public schools in the U.S. have slower internet than students have at home. The program is expected to connect 99% of America's schools to the "digital age." But there is a worry that once the extra fee is imposed, it won't ever disappear.

"You would think that connecting schools to the information superhighway would be a pretty noncontroversial topic. Unfortunately, we haven’t seen a lot of action in Congress, so the president has advocated an administrative, unilateral action to get this done."-Josh Earnest, White House deputy press secretary

source: NYPost

  • Options

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 03:34 27

1. msa1988 (Posts: 418; Member since: 30 Mar 2010)

Here's an idea, NOBama, in stead of raising our taxes, cut back elsewhere! All this man does is spend spend spend! US cell phone bills are already significantly higher than Europe (I pay £15 for 300 minutes 3000 texts and unlimited data), please don't make it worse!

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 03:36 12

2. vandroid (Posts: 328; Member since: 04 Sep 2012)

It's time for a reform

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 09:54 3

60. AngryAppleCustomer. (Posts: 30; Member since: 01 May 2013)

While phone bills are high, 5 dollars wont make a difference, and its for education. Is anyone else really going to complain about $5 per month? [Roflmfao]…

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 12:08 4

71. DontHateOnS60 (Posts: 867; Member since: 20 Apr 2009)

I am. Just because the media has beaten into your head that you're an awful person if you don't want to spend more money on education doesn't mean you are.

Haven't you heard the old saying, you can't solve every problem by throwing money at it... Look at how much money we've spent on education and what its actually accomplished. Hasn't done a darn thing. I can't wait for this numb nuts to finally leave office so we don't have to deal with this constant, oh we need a tax for this and a tax for that to save the children and the world. F him. Open the books up and show the American people how you've destroyed this country with your wonderful financial decisions. If you made the same ones you'd be out on the street right now unable to make stupid comments on phone blogs.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 13:32 3

74. g2a5b0e (Posts: 3724; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)

Uhhh...it's $5 a year. Even better, I suppose.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 19:25 1

97. T00muchF00D (Posts: 98; Member since: 27 Nov 2011)

why would you be ok with paying more in tax? you already pay these men and women to get in there and make things work.....and when they don't.....you just want everyone who isn't you to be ok with paying more?....just because its "only $5"....that's not the point....its all about when will it stop? WE ARE TAXED FOR EVERYTHING....even dying.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 23:34

99. g2a5b0e (Posts: 3724; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)

I didn't say whether or not I was okay with it. I just corrected his statement. If he was okay with paying an extra $5 a month, than clearly he'd be fine with paying $5 a year.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 14:23 1

77. donfem (Posts: 646; Member since: 30 Mar 2011)

Thanks. A lot of these so called users have little or no understanding. Supporting education is key to progress anywhere in the world. So, government wants to increase tax by $5 per annum and these people are complaining? Dumb I dare say

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 04:07 8

6. special4u (Posts: 63; Member since: 22 May 2013)

US household debt is reducing , and its a good sign.

just because ur phone bill is expensive and u started to blame ur president.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 04:25 13

10. msa1988 (Posts: 418; Member since: 30 Mar 2010)

@6 - Really? how about the ~$17 trillion debt? Not sure if you noticed, but that doesn't seem to be going down the slightest bit. To be exact, it's growing at the fastest rate EVER.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 07:53 3

45. sum182 (Posts: 229; Member since: 19 Nov 2011)

The debts only real if you choose the believe in it....-_-

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 08:39 10

53. Jack58221 (Posts: 153; Member since: 23 Feb 2013)

it can't be at 17 trillion... he promised it wouldn't go over 14... he wouldn't lie, cheat, falsify, or cover-up anything. that just wouldn't be right. *sarcastic*

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 05:02 8

19. Sprissy (Posts: 161; Member since: 11 Feb 2012)

US household debt reducing??? My household budget hasn't, every utility I have has gone up thanks to Obama and I see no end in sight with the cost of his new health care act which is going to make the cost of my health insurance soar and my paycheck reduce and now he wants to tax my cell phone too.....please Obama please resign and let someone else try and clean up your mess!

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 05:20 5

28. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

There are some in this thread that want to blame Barry for everything that goes wrong. *sighs*. Bird sh*ts on your car? It's Barry's fault. SMH.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 10:32 3

65. Ruckus (Posts: 286; Member since: 20 Oct 2011)

Heh I remember when Bush was in office and gas prices would go up. Democrats would blame the **** out of him, but now that Obama is in office they "finally" realize that Presidents don't control OPEC -_-'...

On a side note, for some states it will be bad, others not so much. It depends on your state taxes. One example, a good friend of mine moved to West Virginia for a job. He has the same $80 Sprint plan that I do here in Pennsylvania. When all the smoke is cleared my bill after taxes is $90.72 which I think is awful. His on the other hand is less than $83 with taxes. Insane right!? An extra $5 for him is no biggie but an extra $5 from me is harsh.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 13:32 3

75. g2a5b0e (Posts: 3724; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)

It's $5 a year, not a month.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 14:48

85. Ruckus (Posts: 286; Member since: 20 Oct 2011)

Ah good catch. My bad! Still doesn't change the fact that my state rapes me haha.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 04:13 4

8. gazmatic (Posts: 795; Member since: 06 Sep 2012)

are you like twelve?

the president doesnt and cannot spend anything

CONGRESS controls the purse

go learn civics 101

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 04:28 13

11. msa1988 (Posts: 418; Member since: 30 Mar 2010)

'are you like twelve'? Take a look at your sentence structure, punctuation and verbage before attempting to insult - you look foolish.

So you're telling me the President of the United States has no pull on what bills get drafted and pushed through congress? Hmmm...

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 04:45 5

16. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

"So you're telling me the President of the United States has no pull on what bills get drafted and pushed through congress?"

Not when you have one part of Congress not wanting to do anything unless it is what a majority of the majority want. The technical term for the circumstance is tyranny of the minority.

Which is why the parliamentary model is looking pretty good at this point.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 07:51 1

44. 14545 (Posts: 1524; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

Awe, come on Doug. Tyranny of the minority is the fact that the idiots that turn out to the polls and vote for the lesser of two "evils" cause us to pay more in taxes, regulations, etc every year that we don't want to pay. I don't vote, I refuse to support such a failed system that can give us candidate like BO, GW, MR, JM, AG, JK, etc. I mean how is someone like myself to vote for? Neither party is for freedom and liberty, and both what to tax us to oblivion. After all, it was Bush that continued with the idea that Keynesian economics actually work with Failed stimulus 1 & 2, Barry just continued that logic with the omnibus, bailouts, and his stimulus. The only thing that artificially created a bubble after the dot(com) bust was artificially holding interest rates low and creating a housing bubble. Couple that with going from super regulation to no regulation(glass stegal) and you have a recipe for disaster. (I'm for dereg, but you have to do it slowly, not open the flood gates at once. It creates a shock to the system if you don't. As evidenced the last 12-13 years.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 07:56

46. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

You get what you vote for. Or, in your case, don't vote for.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 08:16

51. 14545 (Posts: 1524; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

No, I don't get what I vote for. I voted from 2004-2010 and not one time did one person that stood for what I believe in get elected. Therefore I am subjected to your tyrannical laws. (IE, taxation without representation) I'm in no way, shape, or form represented in congress, or even lower levels of government within the state. I just get to pay BS taxes for all you votes idiotic needs/wants with no regard for those that actually pay the taxes. Heck, as a family that doesn't intend on EVER having kids I GET TO PAY THE MOST TAXES for you the wonderful POS parents out there. Are you really willing to sit here and tell me that you absolutely think it is right that I should have to pay for all you people chitren when I have no intention of having one myself? How about we let parents pay for their kids high speed interwebs themselves by eliminating the child deduction? Wouldn't that make more sense? After all, the people using this (useless) service will be the ones paying for it. Maybe then parents would be more mindful about what their schools ask for. Just a thought.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 23:49

100. -box- (Posts: 3991; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)

@14545 there are more than two parties to choose from. I haven't voted for either major party in any election I've been able to partake in, unless they're the only two choices on the ballot (like local government).

Really, it's time to break the two-party system and support the smaller parties, that way it's less two-sided and folks can choose a party that more-closely aligns with their actual beliefs, ideologies, and takes power away from one particular party over the other(s) as much.

posted on 16 Aug 2013, 06:52

101. 14545 (Posts: 1524; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

Box, I agree with you. The last time I voted, I did vote mostly 3rd party. That being said, the hoards of morons that go to the polls to vote for their "team" far outweighs any real support a 3rd party can have. I mean when the people vote for that seem to actually care about what the constitution says, not just when it benefits them, get like 1% or less of the vote. That is a scary thought. Year after year it is the same song and dance and nothing really changes. So until I see a major shift that doesn't include me, then I'm not buying into the system anymore. I am revoking my consent to be governed.

Second, I don't really look at it like we have "two sides". Just one side with two splits inside of it. Both sides want major government control. They just differ in what they feel the government should control. I'm for no major government control of any kind.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 08:24

52. ibap (Posts: 758; Member since: 09 Sep 2009)

That's what you get when people type on glass and can't be bothered with punctuation or corrections.

He does know how to find the caps key, though.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 09:46

59. suhas2000 (Posts: 20; Member since: 24 Jul 2008)

Talking of grammer, it's "verbiage," and yes, when the dysfunctional congress that is run by the RepupubliCONs refuse to cooperate with our president on a single bill what else can expect?

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 10:14 1

63. 14545 (Posts: 1524; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

Yes, it's just the "repuplicons" that are the problem. Lest we forget 08-10 when the "democRATs" couldn't pass a bill and had a super majority. Give me a break and actually educate yourself on the idiots(BOTH SIDES) that run this country.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 13:03

73. suhas2000 (Posts: 20; Member since: 24 Jul 2008)

I should not even waste my time replying to someone that goes by a number and not a name, but I'm going to. As far as my education is concerned, I happen to hold a doctorate in physical therapy from an American university, and to to address the second point, during 2008-10, the democratic congress was way too busy cleaning up the royal mess that Dubya left us in, and had much higher approval rating than the current one, fyi.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 15:52 1

86. 14545 (Posts: 1524; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

What does my choice of interweb anonymity have to do with whether or not you should "reply" to me? Great, you have a PHD and the body, that clearly means you have great economic sense.......Really? That's your argument? How many post graduate economic classes have you taken? I've taken 3 on my way to my BSME. So excuse me if I'm not real impressed just because you have a PHD in something completely unrelated to what we are discussing. I'm sick and tired of hearing this "cleaning up the mess" BS. The only budget we have had that was balanced was under a MIXED executive and legislative branches. PS, CONGRESS(controlled by the left from 06-10) creates the budgets for the president to SIGN. So clearly you have no clue what on earth you are talking Mr. PHD. Next, you are comparing one bad president with another, WHATS YOUR POINT? THEY BOTH SUCK. Do you really not get this? The dollar has lost 75% of it's buying power in the last 15 years, but somehow that makes you think that more government is the answer? And the current president is our savior? Give me a break. Just look around you. You can't even by a happy meal for 5 dollars anymore, but that means the current president is great, right? I mean at what point do you start holding him accountable, like I am sure you did the last? Next, who cares if some straw poll of only people that own LANDLINES think x president is doing "ok" or better? Or worse yet, when they fall below that 50% mark? Should we then be able to request their resignation for not getting the job done? Please think though this logically instead of this stupid "go teams" mentality. Learn to realize when you are voting against your own self interests by VOTING AT ALL. Geez, I feel dumber for just having to explain this.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 18:10

93. 14545 (Posts: 1524; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

Oh, and lest we forget Article 1 Section 8 of the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.
"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

THE PRESIDENT IS ACTIVELY BYPASSING THAT DOCUMENT HE SWORE TO UPHOLD. Forget that it is 5 dollars a year. That is a non-point. It is the fact that clearly he doesn't believe in the document that rules this country. That should scare the living bejesus out of anyone with a pulse. He hemmed and hawwed about GW flying in the face of the constitution with the PATRIOT Act, and he continued it. Now he is going one step further than his evil predecessor. WHERE DOES IT STOP? When will you use that PHD to realize what is wrong with this picture?

posted on 16 Aug 2013, 14:31

104. suhas2000 (Posts: 20; Member since: 24 Jul 2008)

I use my doctorate where it's most useful- to care for my patients, rather than bashing and blaming the president for everything. And, may be, you could use your "three" classes in economics and all this time that you have on your hand for something productive than finger-pointing, how typica of a Repuke.

posted on 16 Aug 2013, 18:03

105. 14545 (Posts: 1524; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

D@mn you're ignorant. Yes, I'm a "republican". :Rollseyes:

No, actually I'm an anarchist that has no where to go. Don't even try the Somalia line. Next, MAYBE you should use that supposed PHD you have and figure out how to read. Did you miss the part where I blasted, and have for quite some time, BOTH PARTIES. Or the part where THIS IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Yeah, with reading comprehension skills like that, I'm sure you are really a PHD. (And if you are, god, Allah, Buddha or whomever have mercy on your patients souls.)

posted on 16 Aug 2013, 18:30

107. 14545 (Posts: 1524; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

Just in case you missed it, that I'm a "republican" comment was sarcasm. I mean you couldn't read the last couple of post I made to indicate that, so I just thought I would make sure I pointed it out before it went right over your head.

posted on 16 Aug 2013, 22:27

108. suhas2000 (Posts: 20; Member since: 24 Jul 2008)

Resorting to name calling and screaming while trying to make (non-existent) point, in itself, shows who the "ignorant" here is... And, btw, you don't have to worry about my patients, they are well taken care of; trust me.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 12:03 1

70. gazmatic (Posts: 795; Member since: 06 Sep 2012)

no... he actually doesn't.

go learn civics 101 and the separation of powers and the difference between legislative, executive and judicial branches of government...

if the president had a say on what laws get drafted or not he wouldn't be a president... he would be a king

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 14:25

78. donfem (Posts: 646; Member since: 30 Mar 2011)

It just shows who the kid is. When bills are to be passed and you don't like it, then it is Obama. When you do like it then it is congress. Dumb statement.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 04:40 1

14. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

Here is a better idea - tell Congress to stop being dysfunctional. Only 18 (I think, the number may be lower) bills have been sent to Barry for signature since end of January when they started work. The parliamentary system has its advantages....

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 04:52 7

17. msa1988 (Posts: 418; Member since: 30 Mar 2010)

Here's an even better idea - send a bill to congress that actually benefits all parties, not just the low-life scumbags that benefit from Obama's free give-aways. These democrats make the lower-income people dependant on government for survival - the people have no choice but to keep voting for democrats! Instead of passing bills giving away free crap to everyone who’s too lazy to work for it, develop a program to encourage people to get back to work.

"Catch a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man how to fish; he can support himself the rest of the way".

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 05:16 1

25. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

"Catch a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man how to fish, he can support himself the rest of the way."

What about teaching a man to do more than fish? Technology is much more complicated than fishing. China (to take but one example) is investing far more than the $5 billion Barry is wanting to raise with this tax for teaching their kids to do waaaay more than fish. Should the U.S. limit itself to just fishing? There was a time when the U.S. education system was the envy of the world. Not any more.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 05:22 4

29. msa1988 (Posts: 418; Member since: 30 Mar 2010)

Jesus Christ - fish was just the example in the freaking analogy. I'm having second thoughts, but I figured you'd be smart enough to know that the anology doesn't only apply to fishing. Good lord. I'm all for this development of internet in schools, but my original point stands: don't take more money out of my pocket to fund this. If you want it that bad, cut elsewhere. Learn to balance some books.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 05:47 1

39. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

Ummm. Perhaps you could provide some insight on how to 'balance some books' without passing a budget? Budgets are how business works - every year, businesses around the world (even in communist countries) pass a budget. But the American Taliban don't believe they should pass a budget.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 07:49

43. riggsy (Posts: 25; Member since: 16 Apr 2012)

I vote we end the 2 failed wars we are in now that are the longest running in the history of our country. Lets also go ahead and end the failed drug war as well. Private companies benefit off of locking people up for non violent crimes so we know that won't happen.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 08:02

47. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

Barry ended Iraq. Afghanistan is on track to end in 2014. The war on drugs is an example of legislative momentum - too many vested/special interests suckling on the Federal teat. BTW, the war on drugs was a Nixon initiative. Nothing like the gift that keeps on giving, eh?

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 08:02

48. 14545 (Posts: 1524; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

How about we move some of other 3 tillion (2 trillion in raised taxes) in the budget from welfare or corporate giveaways to fund schools and the like. Then FIRE these incompetent TENURED or union teachers who's test scores are continually below average.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 14:26

79. donfem (Posts: 646; Member since: 30 Mar 2011)

Great post.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 08:14 1

50. quakan (Posts: 1373; Member since: 02 Mar 2011)

You have such a negative, skewed view on the lower class. Why must they all be low lives and lazy? They're usually the group that has two or more jobs, not the higher classes. The welfare programs are so that people aren't having to decide whether their family eats or has a place to stay. No one wants to make that choice and many have chosen not to by taking the crime route in order to stay afloat. Not sure what conservative group you got that negative propaganda from, but send it back and get a more accurate picture of our lower class people.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 06:31

41. EXkurogane (Posts: 863; Member since: 07 Mar 2013)

Stop being dysfunctional?
ConnectED, ED = Erectile Dysfunction

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 05:09 3

22. btbotimtim (Posts: 184; Member since: 08 Dec 2010)

agree!! cut back on the dumb ass entitlements. He just raises our debt and has no plan to balance the budget. He just tries to pass this to the next president. With his spending habit, anybody can make the economy up and running!

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 07:29 3

42. Dorothy69 (banned) (Posts: 498; Member since: 21 May 2013)

That will never happen, our U.S. welfare system is an institution in itself. But, you haz' a valid point, maybe he should kick off of welfare all those folks who don't deserve it and force them to go get a j-o-b; or, maybe he should stop feeding families of 7 kids with a single Mom from say Mexico, who cross the border and go on W.I.C. the minute they get here (oh, and they're really not single Moms, they just tell HRA they are but their babies' daddies are really living with them and just working under the table); or, maybe we just should stop all the damn foreign aid because with all the funding we give by way of foreign aid we could certainly have high speed internet in our schools. Speaking of which, I can just see our American kids gaming and Facebooking instead of learning.

Yes, Bam-Bam, stick it to us one more time before leaving office. Oh wait, let me bendeth over and touch my pretty little ruby toes!!

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 14:26

80. donfem (Posts: 646; Member since: 30 Mar 2011)

Very sure those who thumb you up have no clue just like you

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 05:51

40. StuiWooi (Posts: 91; Member since: 19 Feb 2013)

That's really not a bad price. To get unlimited data (sim only) you're looking at £12 on giff-gaff, £13 on three and £21 on Tmob so you're doing okay!

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 09:31

58. InspectorGadget80 (unregistered)

Time for him too move from office if he keeps this up.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 11:56 2

69. gazmatic (Posts: 795; Member since: 06 Sep 2012)

biggest waste of tax payer money in recent years

wars: iraq, afghanistan, drugs
medicare part d
tax loopholes
do you even know what is driving the debt?

america currently owes 17+ trillion dollars... but to who?
46% of american debt is to foreign countries: china, japan, uk, brasil

america's debt is owed to a PRIVATE bank called the FEDERAL RESERVE

civics 101

the president is part of the EXECUTIVE branch of government... he doesnt make laws. he signs legislation drafted by congress and makes them into laws which the judicial branch of government enforces.

congress is part of the LEGISLATIVE branch of government... CONGRESS makes the laws... the president can sign executive orders but that is it

The President, according to the Constitution, must "take care that the laws be faithfully executed", and "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution"

The Constitution grants numerous powers to Congress. Enumerated in Article I, Section 8, these include the powers to levy and collect taxes; to coin money and regulate its value; provide for punishment for counterfeiting; establish post offices and roads, promote progress of science by issuing patents, create federal courts inferior to the Supreme Court, combat piracies and felonies, declare war, raise and support armies, provide and maintain a navy, make rules for the regulation of land and naval forces, provide for, arm and discipline the militia, exercise exclusive legislation in the District of Columbia, and to make laws necessary to properly execute powers.

so lets recap
the debt is caused by....
unpaid wars,
lost revenue from tax cuts and offshore loopholes
unfunded medicare part d
interest on the debt
the president doesnt make laws
congress controls the purse
the federal reserve is a private bank
the debt is going up but the deficit is going down
neither reagan nor both bushes balanced their budgets (clinton and carter did)
your outrage should be towards big banks and corporations and the politicians they buy that collude to screw you over

if you pay more than europe you have yourself to blame... that is if you can vote

judging by your criticism, i can see who you would vote for, against your own interests

voodoo economics does not work my friend



posted on 15 Aug 2013, 14:29

82. donfem (Posts: 646; Member since: 30 Mar 2011)

Very good insight. So many people are fooled by the jargons they read on papers and stations who profess to know it all while having a negative agenda. People on these forums claim to have answers to questions about phones but have no clue most of the time what they are talking about.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 15:56

87. 14545 (Posts: 1524; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

The only thing I will disagree with you on is the loop holes and "lost tax revenue". Please look at the budget. They can't manage the country with 1.6-2.0 trillion they actually receive, what makes you think they deserve more to blow? (I know the budget is higher than 2.0T, but the rest is "financed" thanks to china and the rapid inflation of the dollar via the Fed buying treasury bonds) We need a competent congress that can manage a country on the monies collected on SALES taxes alone and eliminate the corrupt IRS and their thugs.

posted on 15 Aug 2013, 17:02

91. gazmatic (Posts: 795; Member since: 06 Sep 2012)

what they should do, but is very unlikely, is

1. end the fed
2. glass-steagal
3. close all loopholes
4. invest in wind and solar
5. single payer health care
6. repeal citizens united
7. go back to jfk era tax system
8. national id for everybody, citizen and immigrant, for free
9. cut spending. wars, foreign aid, military industrial complex
10. invest in education... free education


posted on 15 Aug 2013, 18:20

95. 14545 (Posts: 1524; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

No, we don't need a new Glass Steagal. Or single payer healthcare, or JFK level taxes. In the current business climate JFK era taxes would sink us given the level of globalization we have. You have to compete in the global market, not just the US. You raise taxes to 60-70% levels again(IIRC) and business will leave faster than you can say the statement. Last, I don't agree with a national ID or SSI. Reason being is that we all came from immigrants (unless you are 100 % native american), so why should future generations not have the same privilege? We should welcome with open arms anyone that wants to migrate. However, you only get voting privileges after 16 years of being here. That is the only stipulation I feel should be on migration to this country. We were founded as a free nation and we should get back to that. That is what made us great. I do agree that we should not be entangled in foreign affairs, and the military should be less than 1/10(or maybe even smaller) the size it is now. There should be no "Fed", and we should invest in two things. Education and infrastructure. And by infrastructure I mean roads/rail, not buses or various communication technology. That would be the key to our success or survival if we continue the same course election after election.

posted on 16 Aug 2013, 09:03

103. gazmatic (Posts: 795; Member since: 06 Sep 2012)

we need glass-steagall. what it does is separate investment banks and commercial banks. what investment banks do is gamble money and take huge risks that can costs millions, even billions of dollars of losses. investment banks used to only gamble private funds so who cares but with galss-steagal gone they can now gamble away the life savings of common people who open banks acoounts.

easy example. your grandma gave you $100 as a christmas gift so you put it in a savings account. the bank, has access to your $100 and can invest it anyway they please. they make a bad investment and lose millions. the new gta5 is released and you want to buy it. the bank explains to you that they made some bad investments and lost a considerable amount of money. you say "what the f does that have to do with my $100"

case in point, the "too big to fail" mantra. the banks couldnt go bankrupt because millions of americans would have their entire savings completely wiped out because they held accounts in investment banks

glass-steal would have prevented that and the banks could have gone bankrupt without much commotion

about the pre jfk tax. you do know that MS and apple and plenty of other succesful companies were founded in the 70s when taxes were TWICE what there were now? so to say that high taxes discourage business is spurious at best. and if taxes were increased where would they go? why did google and many others start their companies in the clinton era when taxes were increased and not in somalia were there are no taxes?

if businesses prefer low or no taxes in order to be successful then places like somalia and the caribbean would be filled with multibillion dollar companies.... they are not

america is the land of opportunity. raising taxes would not cause them to leave instead it would force them to invest and buy FIXED assets. remember, the taxes are on INCOME not wealth

the reason why so much FUD is spread about high taxes is because america practices what can accurately be called CANCER CAPITALISM. growth for the sake of growth. cancer capitalism relies on two things to survive. Scarcity and Growth. NEITHER OF WHICH TRULY EXIST TODAY.


we have enough resources CURRENTLY to provide every single human being on the planet, ALL 7138965303+ OF THEM, a SUSTAINABLE middle class lifestyle. technology has literally wiped out scarcity and productivity continues to increase. At the rate we are going, we would have the ability to sustain 20BILLION people by the year 2025.

so why does scarcity exist? supply and demand
with a high demand and low supply prices are high. this is true for every single commodity. but since scaricty doesnt exist, the prises are artificially high...

scarcity is being artificially maintained to keep prices inflated.


posted on 16 Aug 2013, 18:25

106. 14545 (Posts: 1524; Member since: 22 Nov 2011)

We can argue G-S for years, but there really is no point. Most free-marketeers believe that a G-S needed to be repealed slowly. The market should handle what we tried, feel free to read some Austrian schools teachings. You'll understand what I am saying.

Anyway, it doesn't matter, the main point I am responding to is the 70% taxation comment. We live in a global economy now. YOU CAN NOT go back to tax rates that high. Unless you want to end up like greece. Also, don't believe me that lower taxes work, I don't really care. Just look at Ireland, the Caymans, or any of these "offshore" havens, what do they all have in common.....*Low taxes*. You want that capital to comeback here, you don't punish business to do so. You give them rewards for bringing their cash back domestically.

Next, I really don't understand how you believe scarcity doesn't exist? Do we not have a finite supply of water, land, food, air? Where is the unlimited supply you speak of? Sure there is some manufactured scarcity that makes things worse, but most of that is created by government bureaucracy. See the FCC and wireless spectrum for what I am talking about.

Also, I don't know what this "cancer capitalism" you speak of, is. I know we have government in bed with business which causes the government to pay big agri not to grow in order to maintain artificial price floors. (See milk, and thank FDR and all his wonderfully failed policies.) Anytime government gets to a certain size it becomes corrupt. Your issues aren't with capitalism, it's with the government taking bribes (read: campaign donations). What you sound like you want, is what they currently have in china. If you want ultimate government control then feel free to move to Cuba, China, Venezuela, or NK. I want freedom, something this country was founded on but I have never had the privilege to experience. Remove the government and give me my freedoms. If you want to donate 20 bucks a week out of your paycheck to put wifi in your schools, be my guest, But don't steal from me(via taxation) to do so.

One last thing. Your comment about taxes being on income and not wealth don't make sense either. How is anyone supposed to leave the middle class is the government is taxing you to death? Honest question, at what point do you consider taxes too much?

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories