General Discussion

Kang Colby

(1,941 posts)

24. I agree with that for sure. n/t

Reply to LiberalArkie (Reply #18)

Sun May 1, 2016, 09:35 PM

May 2016

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

105 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

America: We have a REVENUE Problem. Austerity? BULLSHIT. [View all] Triana May 2016 OP

The USA only has one fiscal problem: The lack of political will to tax those who have all the money. Scuba May 2016 #1

Huge +1! Enthusiast May 2016 #23

+1 n/t Triana May 2016 #42

Absolutely. jwirr May 2016 #84

I would add Out-of-Control Military Spending, bvar22 May 2016 #87

Right on! Enthusiast May 2016 #88

Spot Fucking On! Phlem May 2016 #93

We have a spending problem. Kang Colby May 2016 #2

What does your candidate propose cutting, then? Scootaloo May 2016 #4

Sorry, this isn't GD:P. N/t Kang Colby May 2016 #6

Nope, it's not. I'm asking what our apparent nominee proposes cutting from the budget Scootaloo May 2016 #8

proposing to cut the obvious fat (the military) is political suicide maxsolomon May 2016 #89

I've noticed your posts a lot since I joined DU a few years back Victor_c3 May 2016 #104

So basically you have nothing. Phlem May 2016 #94

If you're interested...see my other posts in this thread. n/t Kang Colby May 2016 #98

Unfortunately I have. Phlem May 2016 #99

Why not ask another question? watoos May 2016 #7

Our population doubled, but our inflation adjusted tax revenues sextupled (6x). Kang Colby May 2016 #9

Sorry, but your revenue figures are a % of GDP watoos May 2016 #13

No, I purposefully did not use GDP percentage. I just used the nominal values adjusted for inflation Kang Colby May 2016 #17

Don't waste your time. Indydem May 2016 #63

Yes, we tax them so much! Poor things. truebluegreen May 2016 #70

Other nations have deductions also. Indydem May 2016 #77

Fine with me. But the issue under discussion truebluegreen May 2016 #79

Wow! A Republican meme promoted on DU. We need to get spending under control! Enthusiast May 2016 #16

"New Democrats" KPN May 2016 #86

If true, most of it spent on DEFENSE and DHS. Triana May 2016 #44

I agree with you on Defense spending. Kang Colby May 2016 #45

Outstanding post, FoxNewsSucks May 2016 #78

Yeah, all that money wasted on food for the poor. Jackie Wilson Said May 2016 #51

Have you seen the defense budget? n/t Kang Colby May 2016 #52

Yes, but unless you can cut it, then talking about cutting will mean those most in need. Jackie Wilson Said May 2016 #53

Not necessarily. n/t Kang Colby May 2016 #54

Yes, necessarily. truebluegreen May 2016 #72

Let's start with the MIC. -nt CrispyQ May 2016 #80

Agreed. n/t Kang Colby May 2016 #81

It's even worse than that. zeemike May 2016 #47

"...now there are 2 and they still can't keep pace." truebluegreen May 2016 #71

Thanks and that is true. zeemike May 2016 #100

One thing about that... Elmergantry May 2016 #101

And what are we spending on? mindwalker_i May 2016 #10

How about we start with the Pentagon budget? leftofcool May 2016 #15

I agree with that, 100%. n/t Kang Colby May 2016 #22

The right always tries to frame it as, "You are depriving the troops." Enthusiast May 2016 #33

Agreed, there are a lot of programs that help congressional districts mindwalker_i May 2016 #36

In 1950 we were building highways and hospitals and other public things, Now we are LiberalArkie May 2016 #18

Huge +1! Enthusiast May 2016 #21

I agree with that for sure. n/t Kang Colby May 2016 #24

Yup. As Jamie Hynaman would say mindwalker_i May 2016 #37

All excellent points SickOfTheOnePct May 2016 #55

Actually we were. Indydem May 2016 #64

Most of those charts also include Social Security, Medicare, unemployment in the spending LiberalArkie May 2016 #68

Thom Hartmann mentions this. CrispyQ May 2016 #83

Well... Kang Colby May 2016 #20

So individuals are sending in 18 X what they used to pay and corporations have avoided their share. Vincardog May 2016 #11

You can't really compare the tax code in 1950 to what we have in 2016. n/t Kang Colby May 2016 #25

The OP was about tax receipts. Are you saying that it is wrong? Corps. are not paying their share Vincardog May 2016 #27

Yes, I'm saying it's an apples to oranges comparison. Kang Colby May 2016 #32

What "sound public policy" do you propose based on no corporate income tax? Please child. Vincardog May 2016 #34

This is a complicated topic, beyond my willingness to type. Kang Colby May 2016 #43

"Fertile Environment for Business" Indydem May 2016 #65

I know, it's really a shame. Kang Colby May 2016 #75

Typical of Bernie Supporters. Indydem May 2016 #76

huh, you don't say. Phlem May 2016 #92

Sure you can mindwalker_i May 2016 #39

Yes, that is fairly easy. However, I'm talking about the tax code circa 1950 as compared to today. Kang Colby May 2016 #40

See the OP. You are missing the point. Enthusiast May 2016 #19

So Kang cannabis_flower May 2016 #49

Ouch. Read my responses on this thread... Kang Colby May 2016 #50

And prices? JDPriestly May 2016 #58

Good for you. Kang Colby May 2016 #60

REALLY??? HughBeaumont May 2016 #62

Are you denying the facts? Indydem May 2016 #66

WHAT FACTS? HughBeaumont May 2016 #69

The website you are contesting is a clearinghouse for facts. Indydem May 2016 #74

Sorry, I don't "find" things for economic Republicans. HughBeaumont May 2016 #82

Not a single one of those are FACTS. Indydem May 2016 #85

An out of control military spy complex spending problem. Dont call me Shirley May 2016 #91

50 plus years of a militant plutocracy will do that to a democracy. Rex May 2016 #3

Huge +1! Enthusiast May 2016 #14

If the media had picked our voice over the corporations, this would be a different world. Rex May 2016 #29

Those in the media that would like to change will find themselves looking for a job. Enthusiast May 2016 #31

They already do, just look at Donahue and Rather. Rex May 2016 #35

! . . . . .n/t annabanana May 2016 #30

That a YEP! Phlem May 2016 #95

That's it exactly. zentrum May 2016 #5

Kicked and recommended! Very few people are aware of this. Enthusiast May 2016 #12

And once again the Clinton camp spews Republican doctrine Ferd Berfel May 2016 #26

Wait, what? abelenkpe May 2016 #73

We need Austerity but by cutting welfare for the rich egalitegirl May 2016 #28

Rich people get welfare???? NT Elmergantry May 2016 #102

They go by other names egalitegirl May 2016 #105

If that. Octafish May 2016 #38

that's kinda hard to believe hfojvt May 2016 #41

Did someone say revenue? Warren DeMontague May 2016 #46

shush you! debt is wealth now! Javaman May 2016 #48

+1 Spot on. Phlem May 2016 #96

Because the population numbers are higher felix_numinous May 2016 #56

I'm much more worried about the value of the dollar. nt snappyturtle May 2016 #57

Kick warrprayer May 2016 #59

Global banks have an inordinate amount of power at this bjo59 May 2016 #61

From economic policy institute, Progressive dog May 2016 #67

We have a NEO-CON Problem Ferd Berfel May 2016 #90

+1 Phlem May 2016 #97

+1000000000! colsohlibgal May 2016 #103