The budget compromise thread
 

We are at a point in our history where compromise is the only thing that will save us. I thought a thread on this subject would be interesting. If you could, please list or comment on what you think are specific areas where you think your opposition needs to compromise in order to get a budget that will be acceptable to all. My list would go something like this:

Where the GOP should compromise:

Social Security tax income limit, currently only the first $66,000 of income is taxed. This limit was set decades ago. It is time to at least raise it to an inflation-adjusted rate. I would like to see it scrapped all together.

Social Security and Medicare means testing. The idea of sending Warren Buffet and Bill Gates an SSI check is ridiculous. At the very least, restrict it to those who spent most of the working lives making under $250k annually.

The so-called "Death Tax" is demogogued to death by the GOP. In reality, the Inheritance Tax only affects those who hold great wealth. It is time to restore it.

Tax reform viz a viz earned versus unearned income. It is unfair for a working man to pay a tax of 30% on income he earns by the sweat of his brow, while a rich man pays 10% on income he earns on his stocks and bonds while he sips margaritas by the pool. It is time for both rates to meet in the middle.

Feel free to post where the Dems need to compromise....

If the GOP has to swallow means testing and the estate tax; then the Dems have put raising age eligibility for Social Security on the table, along with substantial medical malpractice tort reform as starters.

I would agree with those.

For world peace I will give up all the snow in the world. So basically give up arguing about global warming if we can get rid of all war.

Good starters, but your statement about $66K being the limit is incorrect. The social security wage cap for 2010 is $106,800.

Visualize whirled peas.

My mistake. Let's make it an even $250k

Phase out social security completely for new workers entering the workforce. We can wind this entitlement down in the next 50-75 years.

Social security is peanuts compared to medicare/medicaid.

20% of the budget is "peanuts" ??

Medicare, Medicaid and related programs are just slightly above Social Security, however the rate of increase in medical costs, unaddressed, will continue to outpace the demands of Social Security. So, by comparison, addressing medicare/medicaid is the bigger problem, not Social Security.

From The Atlantic Magazine last year

The Least We Can Do

Self-absorbed, self-indulged, and self-loathing, the Baby Boom generation at last has the chance to step out of the so-called Greatest Generation’s historical shadow. Boomers may not have the opportunity to save the world, as their predecessors did, but they can still redeem themselves by saving the American economy from the fiscal mess that they, and their fathers and mothers, are leaving behind.

. . .

I am suggesting a tax that reaches far more people—essentially anyone who inherits any significant amount of money—but at a much lower rate. The principle behind the current estate tax (or once-and-future estate tax) is frankly redistributive: to prevent large private fortunes from growing, generation after generation, with the recipients accumulating power as well as money. It does this very poorly, because of tax shelters and loopholes (all made possible by the power that people with large fortunes have already accumulated). But that’s still the idea.

The idea of my tax is to produce a lot of money that can then be used to pay off, or at least buy down, society’s debts. If we could collect just 20 percent of the alleged $41 trillion about to pass through two generations, that would be more than $8 trillion.

Perhaps you should be less one sided and tell us where you think the Dems should compromise also?

So how can you justify taking money from them in the first place? Here is what I want. You pay in but you cannot take out. Sounds fair?

To what end? So you can punish those more successful than you? Every dollar I earned is taxed. I go out and buy a soda and that too is taxed. At the end of the year, because I earn more, I am taxed at a higher percentage AND dollar figure. On top of that, you want to restore something like this to have more taxes? Maybe the govt needs to have less money and learn to make do with less. Isn't that what we are supposed to do when we lose income?

A simpler tax system where the more you buy, the more dollars you pay based on a set percentage would be more fair but few want to be fair

At least the tone, so far is genteel. Here's hoping it can stay that way.

Is it possible to set the budget as a set % of the GNP, or some other index; hopefully one that cannot be manipulated. I'd like a definite limit of the MAX that government can spend, and therefore tax away from the citizens. The suggestions JR made re: SS would be tough and would need to be met by some compromises on the dem side.

Possible areas of discussion--
Dismantling Depts of Energy and Education.

Either reducing the number of US troops stationed abroad, or demand some payment from the countries who benefit from their presence.

Perhaps a 50% cut in spending on militart weapons/ hardware. Maintain the technology, and the ability to produce, but reduce stockpiles. Unless China begins to gear up, we are the only game in town. How much weaponry is actually needed?

Maybe reducing the size of the active duty US military, but maintain a much larger reserve force that keeps current on the training and are available for quick deployment.

Stop government-funded research. Private industry has done it in the past. Maybe some form of tax credits for companies who do basic research with no immediate payoff in the form of saleable products.
Public employee unions would have to take a drastic cut in previously negotiated retirement benefits- Tough nut, but its either that or default on the benefits entirely.

Any "stimulus" funds not already allocated do not get spent.

Promote nuclear-generated electricity, and accept the longterm storage issue to provide the electricity we need. Maybe clean-coal, too. It all means we need less oil.

Cut all federal budgets 8% across the board--all of them; not selected ones. Also require the dept head NOT to impact services. If the Dept head refuses, replace them with someone who has the will to do it. Specifically prohibit the sort of closing of fire stations and police stations that local governments do to cause a public outcry.

Eliminate No Child Left Behind. Instead lets promote excellence and teach to the ability of the best learners. NCLB teaches to the lowest common denominator. Stop pushing everyone to college. Many people would do better in a trade school where they can learn to earn a decent living and nor accumulate a hugh debt load in the process.

As the President said in a speech a week or two ago, its not enough to develope the technology here, we need to keep the production jobs here, too. In order to make that possible, reduce regulation on industry. Not across-the-board. Not wiping out all regulation, but a smart, scaling back so that we do not force industry to go overseas.


Well, thats a start. I am sure some of them are totally unworkable.

Ah, I said "compromise". Could you stick with things that might actually happen?

Compromise. That is easy.

Dear Gov. stop spending so much money. You spend even if you dont have the money. Print more, barrow more. Here is an idea. Stop pi$$ing money away :D Do what everyone does. If they dont have the money they dont buy that good or service. Problem solved. If I have no money in my pocket and I walk in the store and want a $5 item then looks like I will go without. Gov should do the same.

The End.