What are you ideas to help the country turn around

[Guest050715-1]

I forgot to add - A line item veto and a legislation forbidding introduction of expenditures or sidebar restrictions into a bill that has nothing to do with the pork.

Originally Posted by Doove

Gosh, that sounds an awful lot like an egotistical, elitist, i-know-what's-best-for-you attitude.

No actually it is common, money sense. I do not believe in all out Libertarian nor do I believe Lassiez-faire economics. It’s not a protection or an infringement on the individual it’s a regulation on the business. Banks ran a credit card ponzie scheme on the American people. As an example: The banks issued way to much credit to consumers in Group A. When Group A was struggling on their payments, banks issued Group A a different credit card so they would swap their debt from one card to the other. When Group A couldn’t pay either credit card because either a) the balance was way out of line with their income or b) the bank jacked the interest rate up to 23%, they wrote off the bad debt – at a tax loophole profit. Then they replaced the lost income from Group A with a Group B’s pre-approved credit card campaign. And so on ad nauseum.

Mortgages are the same thing. Someone making $100,000 a year could get into a $300,000 house on a 110% mortgage. Or what about the poor fool with a 650 credit score that qualifies for no money down if they can gain a 20% equity position in a house based on an inflated appraisal on an ARM. What is that person going to do when his payment of $950 on a $100,000 loan goes up to $1,400 when the loan shark jacks the interest rate up to 9%? He gets his house foreclosed on because he can’t pay the vic.

Regulating the amount of debt a bank is allowed risk is the only way of regulating predatory businesses and their vicious, get rich quick schemes that hurt American consumers.

Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

@OH & Iaintliein

I disagree with most of what you said.

What you disagree with educating children well. You disagree with oversights for companies that habitually violate the public trust? You think that congressmen should have better insurance than the rest of us? You think they should get 80% of their salary as pensions for the rest of their miserable lives? You think that it should fly that GE didn’t pay a fucking cent in income tax last year? You want our jobs shipped off to third world shit-holes and American citizens left to the dole? You think it’s cool that Halliburton moved its headquarters to a sand and oilfield in the Middle East to avoid paying taxes here in theirs and your country? You think it’s ok for corporations to buy politicians and legislation that costs you money or is contrary to the public good? You think Fannie and Freddie don’t need their heads handed to them? You think our troops and tanks are still needed in Germany? What boogie man are they there defending other people from? What do we need an advanced navy for? There will be no more large conventional wars fought anymore. Really, you disagree with most of what was in those lists? Really?

Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Having said that, you failed to address the financial hole that DOD and its concomitant defense contracts have created.

I believe Iaintlion addressed pretty steadfastly DOD expenditures. Pull out of foreign countries, mothball navy carrier groups, sell off all assets not needed to fulfill the federal government roll as defined in the constitution. That pretty effectively guts the DOD. If you publicly declare that we are willing to move militarily on rogue governments or governments that are acting counter to American interests (Like Kennedy did during the Cuban Missile Crisis.) you have to have some military, but really you only need the best.

[Doove]

Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

No actually it is common, money sense.

I financed my car for 4 years, simply because i wanted to. I can afford it. I didn't have 20% down when i bought my home. I can afford it. I know when to ignore credit card offers.

Apparently you think you know better. Which is fine. Just be consistent.

[pjorourke]

Originally Posted by Doove

Gosh, that sounds an awful lot like an egotistical, elitist, i-know-what's-best-for-you attitude.

Sure does.

[pjorourke]

Originally Posted by Doove

Apparently you think you know better. Which is fine. Just be consistent.

I can't believe I'm saying this. Word!

[Guest050715-1]

Originally Posted by Doove

I financed my car for 4 years, simply because i wanted to. I can afford it. I didn't have 20% down when i bought my home. I can afford it. I know when to ignore credit card offers.

Apparently you think you know better. Which is fine. Just be consistent.

I am consistent; I'm just not pigeon holeable. I think the amount banks lend to an individual should be regulated for the greater good of the whole not the individual. That would be counter to my beliefs that individuals are responsible for their own actions. With the current crack down on cash reserves, the feds agree with me. It is a de facto way of regulating how much banks lend to individuals. Since they have to hold more in reserve, they are forced to either make borrowers to put up more cash, choose the best risks or both.

Credit card pre-approval ad campaigns are, in my opinion, ponzie schemes which are already illegal and therefore so should the business practice.

To turn your example around: I financed my car for 2 years because I can afford a) the sticker price and b) to pay for it before it is upside down. I happened to have built my house myself on what was a town-down rent house I used to own so I have around 40% equity in my house without backing out six years of rent. When I bought the rent house, I had 25% down.

[Doove]

Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

I am consistent; I'm just not pigeon holeable. I think the amount banks lend to an individual should be regulated for the greater good of the whole not the individual.

Seems there's a pretty fine line separating an egotistical, elitist, i-know-what's-best-for-you attitude, and a concern for the greater good.

I have faith that you know exactly where that line is.

[Guest050715-1]

Originally Posted by Doove

Seems there's a pretty fine line separating an egotistical, elitist, i-know-what's-best-for-you attitude, and a concern for the greater good.

I have faith that you know exactly where that line is.

Never give up the faith brother. Never give up the faith.

[Jdriller]

I think a National Sales Tax or Value Added Tax (VAT) is a good way to go. However, only if income tax is completely elliminated. My fear is that we will get a VAT but also keep the income tax in some form. With a national sales tax applied to anything you buy, (some exceptions like groceries would be good) and including purchases of houses, cars, stocks, bonds, and just about anything purchased would (1) raise the amount of money collected by the government and close most "loopholes". Money you save in the bank is not money spent....and would not be taxes. Everyone who spends money pays taxes not as they earn the money but when they spend it. Of course the more people make the more they spend so the more they pay in taxes. The only way to not pay taxes is not to spend it. Some exceptions could be made for groceries and basic necessities (since "poor" people spend a higher % of their income on basics this would help keep them at a "lower tax bracket". Homes under 75,000 would be exempt (not just the first 75,000 on a house costing more than 75,000). Because you would not be taxed on money you don't spend (for example personal savings) people would save money (they will do anything not to pay taxes) and pretty soon lots of people would have lots of money in their savings account. When they have enough money they can put 20% down on a home of their own. If they are in a lower economic situation and buy something for less than 75k then they buy their house with tax free money (but with money they earned and saved and since it was not handed to them, its money invested they would not like to lose so they will do whatever is needed to keep up on the payments and not be forclosed on). There would be no deductions for interest on anything. You would save your money tax free at that point, and when you have enough money you buy "it", whether that be a new car, business equipment or whatever, with sizable money up front, avoiding not taxes (because when you buy you pay taxes) but at least interest payments. Because you pay taxes when you spend money, every one pays taxes, you, me, illegal alliens, rich people, corporations, everyone. If everyone, every company, every business paid taxes on pretty much everything they buy, the tax rate (sales tax) would not necessarily need to be all that high. Studies and analysis would need to be made to figure out how much money that approach would raise in order to set a rate.
This would also be applied on a State and Local level, getting rid of property taxes, and most other service fees charged by State and Local governments.

[Jdriller]

Banks, interest and credit cards: I think it should be illegal for banks to charge the high amount of interest while at the same time giving you almost nothing in interest earned on your savings accounts. To get less than 1% per year interest on savings at a bank while they charge 10 to 30% interest on loans and credit cards is unfair.
Pass a law. Banks can only charge 3 x maximum an interest rate that exceeds their interest payments on savings. For example if they pay 4% on a savings account then on loans they can only charge 2x or 8%. and on credit cards 3x or 12% If they can't make money by charging 2 or 3 times what they pay out then maybe they should not be in business. (by the way under my VAT above, interest earned on savings is not taxable, neither or "paper" profits on stocks or bonds...) In fact under my VAT you don't ever pay taxes on "profits" because you dont' pay taxes until you spend the money.

[gnadfly]

Have some of the leftist former D&T posters (who haven't fled) posted any ideas on this thread or are have they just criticized those who have put forth an idea? Did I miss WTFs constructive post? Or have they've said "Tax the rich" so much that it doesn't bear repeating?

[Doove]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

Have some of the leftist former D&T posters (who haven't fled) posted any ideas on this thread or are have they just criticized those who have put forth an idea? Did I miss WTFs constructive post? Or have they've said "Tax the rich" so much that it doesn't bear repeating?

Take money out of politics. Maybe even instill term limits. Problem solved.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

Have some of the leftist former D&T posters (who haven't fled) posted any ideas on this thread or are have they just criticized those who have put forth an idea? Did I miss WTFs constructive post? Or have they've said "Tax the rich" so much that it doesn't bear repeating?

Tax the living fuc out of anybody who thought it was a good idea to start two wars and cut taxes at basically the same time.

I thought I said that in another thread.

Also I would include free lobotomy's in Obama care to the numb-nuts who do not understand the Laffer Curve. Some of you Ronnie worshippers think that lower tax rates will alway grow the economy and raise revenue.

Gnadfly those that do not understand optimal tax rate line up for the procedure and oh, Have a nice day.

I would also impose a 100% estate tax until the national debt was paid off , welfare to lil spoided brats who have done nothing to earn it is no better than welfare to poor ass ignorant folks. In fact it is probably worse.

Oliva....had banks that were to big to fail be allowed to do so, lending would fix itself.

[Whirlaway]

At the Federal Level:

-Cut taxes
-Cut regulations
-Cut real spending
-Cut the size of Government (that includes outsourcing)
-Cut illegal immigration (which is erroding the working man's opportunities)

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

At the Federal Level:

-Cut taxes
-Cut regulations
-Cut real spending
-Cut the size of Government (that includes outsourcing)
-Cut illegal immigration (which is erroding the working man's opportunities)

Maybe we should cut you a check for some more education in real world politics.........
-our taxes are lower than they have been in decades.
-Deregulation gave us this banking mess.
-Spending needs to be cut, I agree but accross the board.
-Outsourcing , do you want to hire illegal mexicans to do the work of government?
-not wanting to work hard is eroding the working mans opportunities. We have become a soft nation. One that wants something for nothing.

Originally Posted by WTF

Tax the living fuc out of anybody who thought it was a good idea to start two wars and cut taxes at basically the same time.

.

I'm just guessing but I bet you were one of these. For the war and tax cuts. Now you bitch about deficits.

[Whirlaway]

-The tax revenues collected by the federal government are highest levels they have been in decades.

-The liberals (in Congress) demanding homeownership for every walking stiff gave us the banking mess

-Agreed. Cut spending across the board, including defense and entitlements.