As much as I'd love to argue this point, the sad thing is I can't because it's true.

After reading this I was interested in what the IRS collects in taxes per year. In FY 03, the IRS collected (before refunds) $1,952,929,000,000. That is a difference of $0.6 Trillion (if I did my math right)!

The last one we had, we had a moderate democrat in the white house (see liberals?  I said something nice about Slick willie) and a Republican congress.

Since, barring an implosion of the republicans (unlikely), congress will remain in their hands in the foreseeable future, does anyone wonder why Goldwater conservatives/Libertarians want a decent democrat to vote for?

Unlike DR Miller, I will not argue it as I am POed about it as well.  But before you rope me in on your raise tax bandwagon, forget it.  CUT SPENDING!

CUT SPENDING!

This is it, in a nutshell. A budget that amounts to over $8500 per person can only be described as wasteful.

tax cut for the richest of Americans while cutting services for the poorest.

So when did they appoint you the keeper of their money?  Did you earn it? 

Maybe, we have to cut spending. and before you bemoan the 'cuts' to HUD, please show how much it is being cut.  Actual figures please, not hyperbole or smoke and mirrors.

After reading this I was interested in what the IRS collects in taxes per year. In FY 03, the IRS collected (before refunds) $1,952,929,000,000. That is a difference of $0.6 Trillion (if I did my math right)!

BEFORE REFUNDS

Now while income taxes aren't the entire revenue, we already go in short. How much does the IRS give back in refunds every year?

Dr. Guy

It's out there, you've just got to choose to read it.

Here are the links:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/02/08/bush_spending_plan_hits_social_programs/

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-assess8feb08,0,7191816.story?coll=la-home-headlines



here's one on Republicans pissed about the budget

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-budget9feb09,1,2061815.story?coll=la-headlines-nation&ctrack=1&cset=true



From the Washington Post:

The Department of Housing and Urban Development's budget would shrink by about $3.7 billion, or 11.5 percent, for a total of $28.5 billion. Much of those cuts would come from a reorganization plan that would send the agency's multibillion-dollar community development programs to the Commerce Department.

The administration's proposal, which must by approved by Congress, would also cut a number of other programs that provide housing assistance to low-income Americans. It would cut housing aid for the disabled by $118 million, or almost half. It would also cut funding for housing assistance programs for those with AIDS, for Native Americans, for programs that pay to rebuild the government's most decrepit public housing and for the agency's lead abatement programs.

the link for it:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/interactives/budget06/budget06Agencies.html

And one of the best articles yet (Boston Globe, 2/8/05):

WASHINGTON -- President Bush's plan to make deep cuts in a popular community development program was harshly criticized by mayors, who said such a move would undermine efforts to provide affordable housing, create jobs and keep other urban renewal efforts afloat.
ADVERTISEMENT


Mayors and county officials urged Congress on Tuesday to reject Bush's proposal, part of the administration's 2006 budget plan.

"This will have a devastating economic impact on communities across this country," said Don Plusquellic, mayor of Akron, Ohio, and president of the U.S. Conference of Mayors.

Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley said Bush is seeking to weaken the finances of American cities at a time when mayors are already dealing with budget crunches from mounting homeland security costs.

"These cuts are sad, irresponsible and dishonest," O'Malley said. "With a budget-cut ax, he is attacking American cities, he is attacking the metropolitan core."

The Community Development Block Grant program, started in 1974, provides money to more than 1,000 municipalities.

Generally, counties with at least 200,000 residents and cities with at least 50,000 residents automatically receive a grant each year. The government must sign off on a municipality's plan to ensure money is being used to help low-income residents.

States also get money to disburse to smaller communities, which must apply each year.

The program has been a perennial target of Republican presidents since the Reagan administration, though Congress nearly always restores whatever money the White House wants to cut. A harsh fight over Bush's plan is expected.

The administration wants to move the $4.7 billion community development program from the Housing and Urban Development Department to the Commerce Department. Commerce would also absorb another 17 community development programs -- which disburse an additional $1 billion in grants -- from other Cabinet agencies.

Bush would spend $3.7 billion on the new Commerce program -- about $2 billion less than the 18 programs together get now.

The cuts are part of a broader effort by the administration to trim the federal government's record $427 billion budget deficit. Bush has targeted 150 programs for elimination or drastic cuts that he says fail to meet goals, duplicate other services or are not essential for the federal government.

"Spending discipline requires difficult choices. Every government program was created with good intentions, but not all are matching good intentions with good results," Bush said in an address Tuesday to the Detroit Economic Club.

The mayors group, along with the National League of Cities, the National Association of Counties and several business organizations, urged Bush to leave the block grant program untouched.

The groups said the program in 2004 created or retained more than 90,000 jobs.

Cities also often use community development grant money to attract private funding for urban renewal projects. In 2004, every community development grant dollar brought in about $2.79 of private financing, the officials said.

They pointed to numerous projects they said blossomed because of community development dollars, such as a business redevelopment project in Los Angeles that attracted a new supermarket, other stores and restaurants into an underserved neighborhood. The project created more than 500 jobs, the officials said.

Republican James Garner, mayor of Hempstead, N.Y., said his city uses program dollars to help fund Boys and Girls clubs and other youth activities that help keep troubled kids out of gangs.


Take it easy,

Sqrrldrw

Reply By: sqrrldrwPosted: Thursday, February 10, 2005 Dr. Guy It's out there, you've just got to choose to read it.

Try again.  What was the budget this year?  last year?  Do you understand the concept of baseline budgeting?  I think not.

The problem with our Federal budget is much of it is Mandatory spending or interest on the national debt. Mandatory spendinmg is Social Security, Medicare, Medicade, interest and pensions. That is $1.5 Trillion and is not subject to cuts.

The so called Discretionary consists of Military, which is really not optional and than all other elements of our government. The military is 443 Billion without the Iraq war. All other discretionary is 487 Billion. Thus, there are no combination of cuts that can come close to eliminating the 425 Billion of the deficit and several hudred billion surplus that is needed to begin repaying almost $8 Trillion of our national debt. The tax cuts for the top 5% simply can not be afforded given the reality of the budget.

The fact is that thoes people you talk about are not fixing our problems. Over the past 24 years, we have gone from a deficit of $909 Billion to almost $8 Trillion and growing. The objective of Bush is not stop the deficit but reduce its growth. That is not the answer. We must balance the budget and begin developoing a real surplus (like at the end of the Clinton Term) and repay the debt!

I have run both for profit and non-profit corporations and never ran them into the ground. The basic principal that you can not spend more than your income will not change. I know Bush has some very smart people working for him. Problem is thay are not looking at solving the problem only helping that portion of the population that support their political objectives. Go to the OMB web page and look at the Bush projections. HIS projections, not the liberals, show a total national debt by the end of his second term of 9.94 Trillion. Look at his budget projections that show annual deficit as far as the eye can see. Look at Table S-10 for the Budget and table S-14 for the debt.

Now while income taxes aren't the entire revenue, we already go in short. How much does the IRS give back in refunds every year?

I couldn't find that number.

You can always refuse yours. In fact, there is no law that says you cant pay more in taxes than what is due. put your money where you beliefs are, then talk to us.

Dr. Guy, why do you assume that whoman doesn't pay a lot in taxes? I just finished my taxes and will pay more than $15,000 for federal taxes alone--that clearly covers me and nearly another person in Gideon's $8,500 estimate. I think that is ample evidence that I put my money where my mouth is!

Col you seem to think you have all the answers on the United States fiscal problems and opportunities. I'm here to tell you that you don't have ALL the answers/fixes. There are people who get paid to figure out these things and you ain't it. For all your much vaunted education the people who get paid to do this have a better one. And I would dare say they know better than you on how to fix things

I can give you 425 billion reasons from last year alone to show that they don't.

Putting my money where my mouth is means I should refuse my refund. What an idiotic statement. I could not make even a significant dent in the deficit, but those making over $200K should pay less according to you. They actually could make a dent if the deficit.

The fact that the Republicans control Congress and the White House place the blame on the Republicans. The pork, the tax cuts, trade policies are all because of what the Republicans want. The Iraq War was the result of both parties but the Republicans made the arguements and twisted the Intel.