All of this is totally unnecessary.

Times are tough, they tell us. We've all got to cut back. Accept less. Um, eat our peas.

They tell us we can no longer afford to fund Medicare or Medicaid at current levels. Maybe we need to raise the Medicare age to 67, they say. As for Social Security, they suggest something called a "chained CPI". A chained CPI means that benefits would lag far behind the true cost of living, growing more and more inadequate over time. But they tell us we *have* to do something. We can no longer afford the benefits our parents enjoyed.

They tell us we can't afford to spend as much on the state level as we used to. Schools must postpone needed repairs. Class sizes must be increased. Infrastructure must continue to deteriorate. The money's just not there and we all need to "tighten our belts".

Well, here are some numbers.

US Real GDP Per Capita (in constant 2005 dollars):

1990 $32,135
2000 $39,292
2008 $43,250

Those numbers come from here:
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2011/tables/11s1348.pdf

The best number I could find for 2010 was $47,140 (although there could be some computational differences)
source:
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.PCAP.CD

The point is this: THE UNITED STATES IS RICHER THAN IT HAS EVER BEEN!

Sure, we're in the midst of an economic pullback. But the country as a whole has plenty of money. If individuals are suffering, it is because their slice of the pie is insufficient. It's a big-ass pie, we are just dividing it up into pieces that are more and more unequal.

There is an attitude afoot, even around here sometimes, that says we must be willing to accept less from our government, our jobs, our society. There is no compelling reason for that.

If someone is asking you to settle for less, it is not a call for prudence and frugality. He is asking you to settle for less so that someone else can have more. Don't be fooled.

I'm not fooled! They are asking ME to settle for less so the GOVT. can have more
to spend on wars and things that make NO sense!!!

because the ultra-rich are hoarding the meat.

Also you need to look at real inflation and not the gov't number which ignores silly little purchases like gas and heating oil.

That's too kind. It's being RAMMED down our throats! Just ask our friends in Wisconsin.

KIND OF COUNTRY DO WE WANT??? Do we want a country
based on the common good??? We are all in this together.
Each must do our part to turn this ship around and
make it prosperous.

Do we want a country in which it is each man for himself.
A country in which Selfishness is seen as a virtue.
Each person is responsible for his/her family. No one
is owed anything.

At the Present the secon vision of America (each man/woman)
for himself/herself) is the only vision for which a case
is being made, therefore it appears to be winning. The
Democrats have appeared to become the Me TOO PARTY
affirming the Tea Party vision.

...or one that helps people who already are?

But in order for them to make that decision, they need to be presented with the facts. And right now, the right is providing them with disinformation and lies, while the Dems are mostly parroting back what the pollsters tell them independent voters want to hear. Sadly, most people are probably unaware that the country is as rich as ever, just choosing to allocate its money in different ways.

and more fiscally healthy by raising taxes on the richest.

Instead, he subscribes to the Republican narrative about 'entitlement reform'/orderly destruction of the social safety net.

is a slogan that should be carried on posters in rallies and protests. The problem is that it is being concentrated in fewer and fewer hands. Bernie Sanders has gone on record saying that 400 individual Americans own more wealth that the bottom 150 million Americans. (http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=aa0f5904-c400-415e-aaff-86ca62fa2b3b) It seems that the sacrifice should be coming from the top down and quite honestly, even if we took half the wealth of those 400 rich people, they probably wouldn't even miss it. It wouldn't change their lifestyle one iota.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

country from fascism. People like you are promoting it. I worked with many millionaires and billionaires back in the sixties when my talents as an accountant were valued. I know that most really rich people are not first generation, even back then and especially now. Old money is corporate robber barons like the Koch brothers. I know Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat. He is an Independent and as such he isn't beholden to either party. I am a socialist too and it's what we need to bring this country's capitalism to work for both sides of the economic equation. Free market isn't what we need. We need fair market.

I must admit that I appreciate that you actually can write in proper English. But you are still what you are.

Cutting my income by about $6000 a year will hurt. If Gates and everybody else making more than $50,000 a year is willing to cut their income to the same level then we'll talk about "shared sacrifice".

But simply going back to the 1990's tax code would go a long way towards fiscal balance. And we would still be one of the lowest-taxed economies in the developed world.

That would put me up by 30k and I could take care of my disabled relative without having them draw SSDI.

Funny how that works, huh?

...that's what I've been trying to say for a long time. Traditionally, when it comes up, however, the PTB push the argument to how we can only create a recovery by legislating for and pushing for more economic growth - by exploiting natural resources, relaxing environmental laws, opening up wilderness, free trade, low taxes, whatever.

But economic growth, for the past few years, has done little but create and concentrate more profits at the top - that's pretty much just what it does, at this stage.

The real problem is distribution.

Gas prices. Took from the many and gave to the few.

Upon which our 'grand' economic system is based.

...as there isn't much difference between what the rich and the poor pay for gasoline, and the levels of consumption are also similar.

But why should someone who performs a valuable role in society not earn enough money to live, while one who has no role at all (except perhaps to consume other people's labor) earn enough money to live like a king? Speaking of those who live off of investment income or speculation - paying little or no taxes, and less useful to the world than the least skilled factory worker or laborer.

Wage equality is a huge problem. And society looks down upon those who do the hardest and nastiest work because they are Paid Less!

Where would we be without garbage collectors, sewer plants workers, and the like? Society would crumble. Yet we treat them as castoffs.

-Laelth

A household consisting of a grandmother, a wife and husband, and three children would have an income of a qquarter of a million dollars by per capita measure.

afford them'? To which the rich prince replied, 'as soon as the rich are a little richer all shall have peas to eat and will forget the taste of meat'"

You really believe this, don't you. :rofl:

Seriously, you really really believe that. Sad.

While the rich are making a killing during the same depression, I also never made the deals to take more from the have-nots in cuts while only giving lip service to the idea of taking the extremely rich.

Tell me, what is the gap between the rich and everyone else again, historic levels you say, unlike anything since the gilded age?

They are eating caviar, not peas.

To tell us to eat pees at such a time is very much like "let them eat cake" and shows he is just as clueless as any aristocrat during that time in France.

It is not my beliefs that are harming anyone, but rather the new "royal" class that are the only ones to have the ear of their servents the elected class.

the 'cake eaters' got peas.

If we outspend the GDP you mentioned we are debt spending.
We outspent.

The 'pie' of money is GONE.
We SPENT it.

Now, you can go back and hit up the 'rich pigs' for more, but why?

To chase them overseas?

They are not responsible for DC idiots who can't balance a freaking budget.

Control the spending.
End a war or two.

:)

As far as "to chase them overseas" goes, where the hell are they going to go that has a lower tax rate than here? Somolia? Fuck 'em. IF they're so UNPATRIOTIC as to go "overseas" when their taxes go up a little, then they're not really Americans are they?

Anyway, they would have to leave their real assets here. Those could be expropriated. The unpatriotic scuzz balls would deserve it.

Can you tell that I'm FUCKING TIRED OF CODDLING THESE ASSHOLES????

who's talking points, though?

taxation..

Nice talking points. Especially blaming the debt on "the last 2 years" Sounds an awful lot like a fox news viewer's view? Just saying..

The increase in federal spending doesn't represent new programs or poor budgeting. It's just a side-effect of so many people being thrown out of work - a combination of increased unemployment payments, increased food stamp payments, and increases in the number of people eligible for Medicaid.

The stimulus and the census probably added to the figure you cite, but both are either done with or winding down.

No. The real problem with the budget is that taxes have been cut to the point where they are no longer sufficient to fund the government of a modern nation-state, particularly one that feels the need to "police" the world.

Check out how our tax revenues compare with the (rest of the?) civilized world:
(From Wikipedia)


Note that taxes as a percentage of GDP have been going DOWN since 2000. We tax our rich far less than their cohorts in other countries. I'm not too worried about them fleeing the country over a return to year-2000 levels of taxation. Where they gonna go? China?

http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx

Their 2010 share of GDP numbers are not too far off from your source.

NO BODY SEEMS TO BE LOOKING AT THE amount of money a hospital charges for services.

Why not require a hospital (not for profit) to pay at least 5% in taxes?

Example: look at the number of MRIs that are done.

What is the cost of a MRI machine?

they charge $1200 for an MRI (maybe)?

How long does it take to pay off the machine?

The room rates and services are astronomical!!!!

Sure they do research and expand but our hospital has added three new buildings in the past 5 years and
they have bought existing facilities.

Kicking in a percentage is not unreasonable.