COL Gene

Ben Stein Stuns FOX News Sunday Commentators!

▼

Ben Stein Stuns FOX News Sunday Commentators!

from JoeUser Forums



Today Ben Stein, a regular on Fox news, was being interviewed. He was discussing the need to begin saving early for retirement. The discussion then turned to taxes when one of the Fox Commentators’ asked Stein if it was true that about 75% of Income taxes are paid by the top 20% of the taxpayers. Mr. Stein responded that was correct. He then said that is because most of the wealth is held by the top 10% in this country. He went onto say that 90% of the securities are owned by 10% of the American population and that the top 1% owns over 50% of all securities. He then said that it is only fair that those with most of the money pay most of the taxes. He also commented that they are the only group that can afford to pay the higher taxes, without suffering adverse economic consequences, to pay for the needed services provided by the government.

After Mr. Stein’s comments there was a moment of what is called “Dead Air” and the Fox commentators then switched to a completely different topic. The truth does bite the conservatives. I know there are those that deny there is a significant disparity between the haves and the others in America. However, when 90 % of the wealth is held by 10% of the people and the remaining 10% is owned by the other 90% to deny that a great disparity exists is to deny reality!
politics
45,156 views 150 replies
Reply #76 from JoeUser Forums Top
Paladin77

Of the $9 Trillion Dollars, Reagan policy gave us 3 Trillion, Bush 41 another $1 Trillion, Clinton $700 Billion and Bush 43 $3Trilion so far and $4 Trillion by the time he leaves office. That means the GOP gave us $8 Trillion and Clinton less then one. All the debt before Reagan was less then $1 Trillion. Sounds like the GOP is the big source of the problem!
Reply #77 from JoeUser Forums Top
The three trillion dollar debt of Ronald Reagan was 10 trillion dollars that they said our grandchildren could not pay off in thier lifetimes yet the money pours into the treasury bringing down that debt even during four wars to where you can only find three trillion dollars left to pay off still within my life time.
Sins of a Solar Empire: Rebellion
Reply #78 from JoeUser Forums Top
In 2000 we collected several billion more then we spent.


Like I said...because of the DOT.COM bubble! Do we even have anything remotely like it going on? Nope! And as far as spending decreaces....TALK TO CONGRESS!
Reply #79 from JoeUser Forums Top
Paladin77

The Debt is NOT comming down. SEE the actual data from the Treasury. Where do you get the BS you post?

This is the data from the Treasury dept:



FedInvest®

Set up an account

Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 2005



* Rounded to the nearest Million



To find more historical information, visit The Public Debt Historical Information archives.



Date Amount



02/22/2007 $8,768,614,254,781.72 Balance TODAY

09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50

09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32

09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86 Balance just before Bush 43 took over

09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43

09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62

09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34

09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73

09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39

09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32

09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38

09/30/1992 4,064,620,655,521.66 Balance just before Clinton took over

09/30/1991 3,665,303,351,697.03

09/28/1990 3,233,313,451,777.25

09/29/1989 2,857,430,960,187.32

09/30/1988 2,602,337,712,041.16 Balance just before Bush 41 took over

09/30/1987 2,350,276,890,953.00

09/30/1986 2,125,302,616,658.42

12/31/1985 1,945,941,616,459.88

12/31/1984 1,662,966,000,000.00 *

12/31/1983 1,410,702,000,000.00 *

12/31/1982 1,197,073,000,000.00 *

12/31/1981 1,028,729,000,000.00 *

12/31/1980 930,210,000,000.00 * Balance when Reagan took over



Bush projects that the national Debt by January 2009 will be just short of $10 Trillion!
Reply #80 from JoeUser Forums Top

Draginol

One simple question-- Is the amount we are spending and the taxes we collect equal each other?

If Not WHY NOT?

They're not equal because the government, regardless of how much it collects, keeps spending more than it brings in. 

The only exception to that was largely because of capital gains taxes during the dot-com era combined with Republicans in congress keeping spending tight.

Gene: LOOK CAREFULLY AT THE SPENDING GRAPH:

During which period was spending nearly flat? Answer: 1994 to 2000. THAT combined with the dot-com bubble's capital gains taxes allowed us to have a surplus.

Now, look at 2000 on up and watch how the spending just went berzerk.  If we had kept spending under control we'd have a surplus now.

 

Reply #81 from JoeUser Forums Top
I never said spending has not increased. However note the slope of the graph during the past 6 years. The issue is with spending as depicted on your graph, the LAST thing you do is CUT the resources needed to PAY for that increased spending. That is the mistake both Reagan and Bush 43 made. The net result is the data I posted from the Treasury dept. We took the national debt from $ 930 Billion at the end of 1980 to $8.769 Trillion today. The interest went from $90 Billion in 1980 to about $450 billion in 2007. What ever we choose to spend MUST be paid for and not added to the national debt. We must begin paying DOWN the almost $9 Trillion to reduce the interest we are required to pay on that debt.
Reply #82 from JoeUser Forums Top
the LAST thing you do is CUT the resources needed to PAY for that increased spending. That is the mistake both Reagan and Bush 43 made


No, what you do is cut spending "FIRST"!
Reply #83 from JoeUser Forums Top
drmiler

NO idiot it was Bush and Reagan that insisted on increases in spending. After they did that they had a responsibility to pay for the spending that was approved by congress and the president. That is what we have the huge deficit. Bush, Reagan and the congress wanted the spending without paying for it. That does not work!
Reply #84 from JoeUser Forums Top

Gene: Why should I have to pay for congress going on a spending spree?

Normal people see how much they're making and spend accordingly. The federal government made the deliberate choice to spend more than they were taking in. The solution is not to reward them with more money to spend.

Reply #85 from JoeUser Forums Top
drmiler

NO idiot it was Bush and Reagan that insisted on increases in spending. After they did that they had a responsibility to pay for the spending that was approved by congress and the president. That is what we have the huge deficit. Bush, Reagan and the congress wanted the spending without paying for it. That does not work


Do NOT call me an idiot, you jerk-*ff!
Reply #86 from JoeUser Forums Top
Dragional

"Gene: Why should I have to pay for congress going on a spending spree?"

Because Congress and the President are who we elected and they have the power and responsibility to set the spending. They also have the power and responsibility to levy taxes to pay for the spending they approve!

Normal People when they find what they must of want to spend exceed their income year after year either get a better paying job or a second job to increase their income. People who do what Bush and the Congress are doing go bankrupt!

drmiler

Then stop making idiotic statements that are not correct!
Reply #87 from JoeUser Forums Top
When you can't win an argument, you call any who disagree idiots. Very smooth.
Reply #88 from JoeUser Forums Top
What are People who make idiotic statements? I have proven my ststements with data from the Treasury Dept.
Reply #89 from JoeUser Forums Top
What are People who make idiotic statements?


Congressional democrats?


Reply #90 from JoeUser Forums Top


IslandDog

Another Idiotic Statement
Reply #91 from JoeUser Forums Top
What are People who make idiotic statements? I have proven my ststements with data from the Treasury Dept.


No you did not. you cut and paste the data to look the way you want it. You have a reputation of telling lies, distortions and half truths.
Reply #92 from JoeUser Forums Top
paladin77

This is from the U.S. Treasury Dept. Web Site:

You are an IDIOT who lives in a dream world.



FedInvest®

Set up an account

Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 2005



* Rounded to the nearest Million



To find more historical information, visit The Public Debt Historical Information archives.



Date Amount



02/22/2007 $8,768,614,254,781.72 Balance TODAY

09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50

09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32

09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86 Balance just before Bush 43 took over

09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43

09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62

09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34

09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73

09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39

09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32

09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38

09/30/1992 4,064,620,655,521.66 Balance just before Clinton took over

09/30/1991 3,665,303,351,697.03

09/28/1990 3,233,313,451,777.25

09/29/1989 2,857,430,960,187.32

09/30/1988 2,602,337,712,041.16 Balance just before Bush 41 took over

09/30/1987 2,350,276,890,953.00

09/30/1986 2,125,302,616,658.42

12/31/1985 1,945,941,616,459.88

12/31/1984 1,662,966,000,000.00 *

12/31/1983 1,410,702,000,000.00 *

12/31/1982 1,197,073,000,000.00 *

12/31/1981 1,028,729,000,000.00 *

12/31/1980 930,210,000,000.00 * Balance when Reagan took over
Reply #93 from JoeUser Forums Top
I am sorry but you have lied to me too many times. I have a hard time putting up links on my posts so I don’t usually request them to be fair I don’t ask for stuff I don’t provide normally. In your case Unless I see it on my own because your reputation is that of a liar, misquoter, denier of facts that are not hard to find if you looked.
Reply #94 from JoeUser Forums Top

"Gene: Why should I have to pay for congress going on a spending spree?"

Because Congress and the President are who we elected and they have the power and responsibility to set the spending. They also have the power and responsibility to levy taxes to pay for the spending they approve!

Okay. They're elected. And they can either cut spending or raise taxes or have deficit spending. I vote they cut spending. They clearly have decided deficit spending is okay.

 

Reply #95 from JoeUser Forums Top
Paladin77

I have NEVER Lied. You just do not accept the truth that Bush does not know what he is doing!

Dragional

The problem with your third option is that it just digs a deeper hole. As we go more and more into debt, the problem of increased spending gets worse because of the escalating interest we must pay. That policy can not continue and when it stops we are still faced with repaying all that debt and we are obligated to pay the interest until we repay the debt! It is time to increase taxes, balance the budget and act responsibly.
Reply #96 from JoeUser Forums Top
The problem with your third option is that it just digs a deeper hole. As we go more and more into debt, the problem of increased spending gets worse because of the escalating interest we must pay. That policy can not continue and when it stops we are still faced with repaying all that debt and we are obligated to pay the interest until we repay the debt! It is time to increase taxes, balance the budget and act responsibly.


Deficit spending is "just" as much the fault of congress as it is GW. I don't see the democrats doing anything to help clean up the spending problem. So then they're no better than the republicans, right?
Reply #97 from JoeUser Forums Top
have NEVER Lied. You just do not accept the truth that Bush does not know what he is doing!


You posted that Mr. Libby admitted on the stand that the VP was out to get Mr. Wilson. when in fact Mr. Libby had not taken the stand, the procicution was still presenting its case and now the trial is over Mr. Libby still has not taken the stand. I call that a lie. THere are more but I don't need to go into them you just lied to me again.
Reply #98 from JoeUser Forums Top
Paladin77

We have not scene the first budget from the Democrats. That will be the 2008 budget. Libby admitted that to the special prosecutor-- The one he lied to and is the reason he is being tried!

Drmiler

Yes deficit spending is the fault of Bush and the Congress which was controlled by the GOP. That does not change a thing. We still have added over $3 Trillion to the debt since 2001.
Reply #99 from JoeUser Forums Top

The problem with your third option is that it just digs a deeper hole. As we go more and more into debt, the problem of increased spending gets worse because of the escalating interest we must pay. That policy can not continue and when it stops we are still faced with repaying all that debt and we are obligated to pay the interest until we repay the debt! It is time to increase taxes, balance the budget and act responsibly.

I agree. Deficits are bad.  What does this have to do with reality?

You keep assuming that the third option is an impossibility.

You're like the guy who insists it can't rain while standing in a downpour.  Clearly, the people and the congress believe the third option is viable because we almost always run deficits.

Where we differ is that I would cut spending and you would increase my taxes but not yours. Neither of us are going to get our way.

Reply #100 from JoeUser Forums Top
Drmiler

Yes deficit spending is the fault of Bush and the Congress which was controlled by the GOP. That does not change a thing. We still have added over $3 Trillion to the debt since 2001.


You keep missing the STINKING POINT!!! The GOP no longer controls congress, the democrats do. Yet what have they done since obtaining control? I can tell you in one word....."NOTHING"