When it comes to the federal debt shall we raise the ceiling or pump out the sewage backup?
This is about the opinion of Ben H. Colmery III and the headline that was at the top of the page saying that the feds created the mess we're in (AnnArbor.com, Dec. 11, “Federal government created the mess we're in, not those who are wealthy”). I agree with that much.
I didn't read the whole article but I got the jest of what he was trying to get across from the headline, and probably being in the upper income group too is why he feels that way.
I don't agree that taxing the rich will not solve the problem -- maybe not, but it sure can't make it worse.
People on Social Security finally got a raise this year, I for one got $44 after taking out $99.90 for Medicare.
But here's an other way to look at it. Answer to the question on what action to take on raising the federal debt ceiling. You come home from work and find there has been a sewer backup and you have sewage up to your ceilings. What do you do? Raise the ceilings, or pump out the sewage? Wouldn't this be the logical way to have solved the debt problem?
But I doubt that the people in Washington would even understand the question.
Ralph Schlegelmilch
Dexter
Comments
Gorc
Wed, Jan 4, 2012 : 12:05 a.m.
$15,000,000,000,000 and growing....
EyeHeartA2
Tue, Jan 3, 2012 : 4:57 a.m.
"People on Social Security finally got a raise this year, I for one got $44 after taking out $99.90 blah, blah, blah..." Good for you. My wife and I got pay cuts.
Sparty
Tue, Jan 3, 2012 : 8:26 p.m.
I understand that this is the first Social Security increase in 3 years. The $99.90 deduction is for Medicare parts A&B, with additional deductions if you elect Part D drug coverage or Part C Medicare Advantage instead of Parts A&B. The size of the increase is based on the Cost of Living formula used for decades, the same formula which determined no increases for the last years.
Hemenway
Mon, Jan 2, 2012 : 10:08 p.m.
Less government!
Sparty
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 3:24 p.m.
Bush Tax Cuts will expire, there's no third life.
SonnyDog09
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 2:06 p.m.
Read it and weep: <a href="http://www.usdebtclock.org/" rel='nofollow'>http://www.usdebtclock.org/</a>
joe.blow
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 12:43 p.m.
There is a misconception out there that people are against tax hikes. Obviously wrong. I've met very few people in my life that would be against paying more for this amazing country. What we're all against is the Federal Government wasting our money! The amount of debt we accrue everyday is insane and it's due to politicians giving out money by the truck load to entities that don't really help our country. If you end wasteful spending, decrease the mass of government and still come up short, I bet most of us wouldn't mind a tax bump. But, Obama wants to create a class warfare campaign saying the problem is tax revenue, not his sewage (and the others before him). Increasing my taxes will do nothing to the debt, he'll just spend more. Heck, if he's successful in raising taxes, he'll probably make a 54 state tour, spending billions of our money on his own transportation actually creating a deficit from the tax increase!
Sparty
Mon, Jan 2, 2012 : 10:36 p.m.
Do you think that the President actually determines the cost of his transportation? The President has nothing to do with the cost of the transportation for the Office of the Presidency - that is established by other agencies. It's not like he calls up Expedia and selects the best seat and price available. Part of his job is to travel the country - yes, thats all the states, territories, etc. and to represent the country internationally.
Sparty
Mon, Jan 2, 2012 : 10:33 p.m.
And your source joe.blow? Link? Timeframe you're referencing? I doubt this is the case since he's been in office just 3 years.
joe.blow
Mon, Jan 2, 2012 : 2:45 p.m.
Obama had traveled more than any other president in US history, and then some! And, he still has a year to go.
David Briegel
Mon, Jan 2, 2012 : 2:38 p.m.
Golly, you would be so proud if he was clearing brush in Crawford, falling off his bike, or vacationing in Kenebunkport! Such hipocrisy! Everybody knows he is Pres 24/7, wherever he goes! Unless you take a break to read My Pet Goat!
Mark Wilson
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 12:13 p.m.
When you find yourself in a hole, the first thing you do is stop digging.
Brad
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 2:04 p.m.
And when you find your country with serious issues, the first thing you do is stop listening to simpleminded aphorisms.
Sparty
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 4:51 a.m.
Well let's see, Obama ended Bush's ten year Iraq War that cost one trillion dollars and thousands of American lives (and was started on false info), and just brought home 10,000 troops from Afghanistan with plans to end that Bush War within 3 years. How many trillions, and lives, will that save? With the Bush Tax Cuts expiring, thats another $6+ trillion dollars that can be applied to deficit reduction. If the Republicans were serious about entitlement fixes vs slashes, think what that could do. If they were serious and would compromise on tax reform, think of the trillions that could be saved there. Obama has learned that Boehner can't speak for the House or hold a coalition together so he won't be put in the position of being walked out on a fourth time. Better results were shown by standing firm just recently. LoL.
Arborcomment
Mon, Jan 2, 2012 : 9:45 p.m.
Sparty R. Amazing fog out today? Obama never campaigned that the troops would be out under Bush accords in 2011. He always implied it would be sooner: "as soon as I am elected, I will order the miltary to begin plans for withdrawal from Iraq". Nice parsing and his followers took it. His own words: 7/14/08 op/ed <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/14/opinion/14obama.html" rel='nofollow'>http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/14/opinion/14obama.html</a> Summarized by the liberal masses: <a href="http://usliberals.about.com/od/homelandsecurit1/a/ObamaIrqWr.htm" rel='nofollow'>http://usliberals.about.com/od/homelandsecurit1/a/ObamaIrqWr.htm</a> Then politics meets reality: <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/I" rel='nofollow'>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/I</a>'d/2981063/ns/politics-white_house/t/obama-candidate-vs-obama-president/ What polls are you looking at? Obama's? Here's one to close out 2011: Romney 45, Obama 39, Other 10, and Undecided 6%. Thirty nine percent? <a href="http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2012/election_201" rel='nofollow'>http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2012/election_201</a> And you've yet to suggest one tin dime in budget cuts.
Sparty
Mon, Jan 2, 2012 : 8:45 a.m.
The Bush Tax Cuts will expire during Obamas Current term. $6 billion dollars of tax reform fix. Bush said Mission Accomplished to Iraq years ago, Obama campaigned in 2008 saying troops brought home by 2011. Fact. Obama still leads all republicans running for his office in major polls, Congressional approval ratings in the single digits thanks to Boehner and Cantor, Democrats still favored vs Republicans on all leading categories. Don't get too confident.
Arborcomment
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 3:04 p.m.
Brad, #1 senate dems have so many seats up compared to repubs. #2 house dems have too far to come back after "shellacking" (but they will make some gain back, not majority). #3 Obama: <a href="http://decoded.nationaljournal.com/2011/12/where-obama-has-slipped.php" rel='nofollow'>http://decoded.nationaljournal.com/2011/12/where-obama-has-slipped.php</a> Barring any Paul-Perot type stupidity what's your prediction? And the only reason I brought this train up is to illustrate dems better provide some type of budget cuts (beyond defense) in combination with tax increases.
Brad
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 2:03 p.m.
"The track it's on is a republican senate, republican held house, and a republican president. " Please sing to the tune of "Crazy Train".
Arborcomment
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 1:52 p.m.
I see we are marching right into 2012 with the same partial history pontifications, stray animadversions, and just plain old rant. Past the "it's all Bush's fault" (so 2009), grip the table tightly, I'm with you on Bush tax cut expiration to a max rate of 39%. Except for this year, war operations were all OCO, and were never in the budget in the first place. Ending via Iraqi accords signed by Bush, and ending by Obama's "give the Taliban the schedule" timetable for Afghanistan are funds not spent but funds that were not budgeted in the first place. If any entitlement "fix" involves a cut, is that a "slash" in your vernacular? And while you may get chuckles "LOL" on the recent "win" over the lack of an agreement to continue to raid social security for 12 months, the light in that tunnel you're standing in is the election train of 2012 coming. The track it's on is a republican senate, republican held house, and a republican president. You might want to think of a combination of actual cuts and additional revenue before the choice is handed to you.
Arborcomment
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 2:16 a.m.
Let's start with some informed dialog. If you'd like to see your own personal itemized bill of what your taxes pay for 33 different line items - everything from defense to the dreaded IRS, go to: <a href="http://www.thirdway.org/taxreceipt" rel='nofollow'>www.thirdway.org/taxreceipt</a> Enter what YOU paid in taxes last year and the program will break out the bill into the chunks paid for each of the categories. No personal information is required, just the total amount you paid for last year's federal tax. Take a look. It may help you make some decisions on how big a sump pump or tax hike may be required.
mohomed
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 1:27 a.m.
How about we just don't spend more than we take in. Thats how my household budget works. Or if you do borrow, plan to pay it off, Don't go more and more in debt each year. I don't really care to much for the super rich but raising taxes on them doesn't seem fair and appears to be driven by hate with all this bad mouthing this so called evil "1%". I would be for raising some taxes if we were sure it would get rid of the debt but we all know the federal government will not do this. They can't because they have to spend it to get results for re-election. Saving and paying off debt over time is to boring.
C. S. Gass
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 10:16 a.m.
Very well put.
Townie
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 2:25 a.m.
If I remember correctly we had a budget surplus and were paying down the debt at the end of the Clinton administration. Then we gave the wealthy a huge tax cut, launched two wars (that were 'off budget') and have the drug companies the Medicare drug benefit (paid at retail drug prices instead of the VA prices). It's time to end welfare to millionaires.
Macabre Sunset
Sat, Dec 31, 2011 : 9:20 p.m.
Or how about starting with an end to all special relationships between legislators and the people who paid to elect them? Does tax revenue necessarily increase with new taxes? Not really. There comes a point where increasing tax rates decreases incentive to earn, which results in a decline in net revenue. I don't think we're there yet, but returning to the 90% brackets some advocate definitely would reduce revenue, as eliminating those brackets raised revenue.
Sparty
Mon, Jan 2, 2012 : 8:35 a.m.
Ah, so Obama "might" accumulate massive debt? But then maybe not if anti- fraud, anti-regulation measures kick in and the health reform cost control measures in The ACA actually work as planned. Then what?
joe.blow
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 12:53 p.m.
Just looked up the numbers, clinton had less cumulative debt. But remember, it was his conservative congress that did most of it. Guess the best combo for government is not having one party rule all! What you have to remember about Clinton is that his mortgage policy lead to the housing crash, which added several trillion to the debt through Bush and Obama bailouts. Also, Obama doesn't appear to have accumulated massive debt yet, but that's because most of his policies won't actually add to the debt until the future. (although, he's already on record pace)
joe.blow
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 12:46 p.m.
johnnya2, Clinton may have balanced the budget by the end of his term, but if you look at both of there 8 years, Reagan accrued less debt by a long shot.
Billy Bob Schwartz
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 1:07 a.m.
90% ? Hmmmmm. In---teresting suggestion. Maybe this could be the tax bracket also for state and federal legislators.
John B.
Sat, Dec 31, 2011 : 10:51 p.m.
No one is suggesting a 90% marginal tax bracket (and you know it). Nice scare job, but coming from one of the usual suspects, not in the least bit surprising. Truth be damned, huh?
johnnya2
Sat, Dec 31, 2011 : 10:20 p.m.
Yes, the economy was horrible when tax rates were higher. The first four years of Reagan the top marginal rate was 50%. His last four years it was 38.5%. Under Clinton the top rate was 39.6%. How many people would like an economy similar to that from those years? Oh, and which one of these guys actually balanced a budget and had surpluses to pay off existing debt. Hint: it was not the former actor. The Bush tax cuts were like saying to a person who had a plan to pay off all their debt so they could retire deciding to take a lower paying job (less revenue) before they were paid off. If the entire debt had been paid off, those tax rates could have been implemented at a later date Imagine not having to pay an extra $454 BILLION dollars in interest payments EVERY YEAR. Kind of makes that cutting $1 trillion dollars over ten years seem tame now doesn't it. In Washington they would announce this as a $5 trillion dollar spending cut over 10 years.
1bit
Sat, Dec 31, 2011 : 9:40 p.m.
I am unsure who is advocating a 90% bracket, but I am with you in stating that would be patently ridiculous. On the other hand, it doesn't make sense to me to prolong tax cuts from a decade ago. Before two wars and trillions added to the deficit. We ran up the credit card and now it's time to pay up. And, I'm not sure why there isn't a separate bracket for millionaires.
Top Cat
Sat, Dec 31, 2011 : 9:17 p.m.
Ending the Obama Administration's War on Jobs and Growth would be a good start. People that have jobs pay taxes and generally feed less at the public trough. Step two would be to march our soldiers out of Afghanistan, Germany, Japan and Korea.
Arborcomment
Wed, Jan 4, 2012 : 12:21 a.m.
Obama on Iraq 08/2008: "That is why, on my first day in office, I would give the military a new mission: ending this war". Done- by following the schedule laid out signed by Bush and Iraq for December 2011. So much for a plan. Ten thousand troops out of Afghanistan - Not done. Due in 2012. Why 2012? Don't ask the commander of CENTCOM or USFOR-A, they could not provide a reason when questioned by Congress. There is an election however, and the Taliban can read a calendar (of course giving them the schedule was nice too). How's Gitmo? 2012 - Obama -done.
Sparty
Mon, Jan 2, 2012 : 8:31 a.m.
Troops out of Iraq - done. Ten thousand out of Afghanistan - done. Remainder out within three years. Done. By Obama. Done.
Sparty
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 3:19 p.m.
Hard to believe considering Boehncer and Cantor walked out on him and Biden Four Times, That's Four.
joe.blow
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 12:42 p.m.
1bit, true, but Obama has done a lot to make congress more ineffective. Think of the number of times he's blamed republicans directly for something and in the same sentence said that he's willing to set down with them and have and open conversation. That man is the perfect devils advocate. He's done nothing to help congress. A good president leads, this ****er blames.
1bit
Sat, Dec 31, 2011 : 9:36 p.m.
You conflate the roles of the President and that of Congress. The ineptitude and intransigence of the latter is the problem.
Sparty
Sat, Dec 31, 2011 : 9:08 p.m.
How about starting with letting the Bush Tax Cuts expire with the associated revenue all directed to deficit reduction ?
Hot Sam
Tue, Jan 3, 2012 : 12:44 p.m.
"""and $6 trillion dollars of tax reform will begin.""" I can guarantee that the place where that quote came from, has not, and will not see any sunshine...
Sparty
Mon, Jan 2, 2012 : 10:39 p.m.
But the light of truth always shines through the fog of deception, as it will very early in January, 2013 when the Bush Tax Cuts expire.
Hot Sam
Mon, Jan 2, 2012 : 7:34 p.m.
A dense partisan fog prevents some from seeing any light... It's all a load of theater, and they have the audience right where they want them...
Sparty
Mon, Jan 2, 2012 : 7:17 p.m.
Hot Sam, you are wrong, raising the debt ceiling and deficit reduction were linked forever by the tea party republicans, leading the American economy to the brink of economic disaster as the world watched in horror. The economic rating agencies downgraded the US Government from our historical AAA rating as a result. The President agreed to compromise his stand on the Bush Tax Cuts to prevent this economic disaster, but they Bush Tax Cuts will expire on his watch and $6 trillion dollars of tax reform will begin.
Hot Sam
Mon, Jan 2, 2012 : 12:55 p.m.
The Kool-Aid flows at 3:30 in the morning... The credit downgrade had nothing to do with raising the debt ceiling. In fact, it is continuing to raise it without instituting some economic sanity which is the real cause. Inadvertently is probably a good description...
Sparty
Mon, Jan 2, 2012 : 8:28 a.m.
The President Inadvertently believed in compromise with the tea drinking republicans and agreed to extend the Bush Tax Cuts once in order to prevent the government from going into economic default for the first time in history as the House threatened. The result was a cut in our credit rating from AAA for the first time ever as the world watched in horror.
Hot Sam
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 4:14 p.m.
I'm confused...if these "Bush tax cuts" are indeed such a problem, why were they extended for another two years?
SonnyDog09
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 2:03 p.m.
That's a nice idea, but historically, congress has raised taxes and just spent it on new stuff. There is no historical evidence that congress can direct a tax increase towards reducing the deficit.
joe.blow
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 12:40 p.m.
There is a misconception out there that people are against tax hikes. Obviously wrong. I've met very few people in my life that would be against paying more for this amazing country. What we're all against is the Federal Government wasting our money! The amount of debt we accrue everyday is insane and it's due to politicians giving out money by the truck load to entities that don't really help our country. If you end wasteful spending, decrease the mass of government and still come up short, I bet most of us wouldn't mind a tax bump. But, Obama wants to create a class warfare campaign saying the problem is tax revenue, not his sewage (and the others before him). Increasing my taxes will do nothing to the debt, he'll just spend more. Heck, if he's successful in raising taxes, he'll probably make a 54 state tour, spending billions of our money on his own transportation actually creating a deficit from the tax increase!
C. S. Gass
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 10:14 a.m.
Oh, so you're for letting the government TAX other people as a way to solve a problem THEY created. I get it. You view anyone with more money than you as a "source of income" for the government. That makes you a 'ceiling raiser'. Whereas if you think the government should live within it's current means, which it could, then you would be a "sewage pumper'. An unglamorous title to be sure, but one that people who truly understand this problem wear with pride.
Sparty
Sun, Jan 1, 2012 : 4:40 a.m.
No, I'm for getting that additional source of income to pay off the bill as most Amercans do when they work additional hours or get a second job to make more money to pay the bill that's waiting.
Mark Wilson
Sat, Dec 31, 2011 : 11:49 p.m.
So you're for raising the ceiling rather than pumping out the sewage.