What Are Your Taxes Really Paying For?

[steveox]

Nobody likes paying taxes, but most of us accept it as a necessary means to an end. Without our tax dollars, the government would be crippled -- we'd lose access to trillions of dollars of federal programs and operations.

That doesn't mean the government spends its money perfectly. In fact, any detailed reading of the federal budget is likely to uncover elements you don't like, no matter what your political persuasion. But does the good truly outweigh the bad? Are our tax dollars spent wisely enough? Let's dig into the details to see where your payments to the IRS are really going.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/04/14/what-are-your-taxes-really-paying-for.aspx

And nobody doesnt want to get racist but minorities elect the liberal party. That's why Zeb Coulter was talking about his rants on WWE. He might be funny but he does have a point. And that is why you should vote republican!

 

[Cruella]

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_budget_estimate_vs_actual

You can also click on each + to drill down to find more details

 

[OldTrapper]

Nobody likes paying taxes, but most of us accept it as a necessary means to an end. Without our tax dollars, the government would be crippled -- we'd lose access to trillions of dollars of federal programs and operations.

That doesn't mean the government spends its money perfectly. In fact, any detailed reading of the federal budget is likely to uncover elements you don't like, no matter what your political persuasion. But does the good truly outweigh the bad? Are our tax dollars spent wisely enough? Let's dig into the details to see where your payments to the IRS are really going.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/04/14/what-are-your-taxes-really-paying-for.aspx

And nobody doesnt want to get racist but minorities elect the liberal party. That's why Zeb Coulter was talking about his rants on WWE. He might be funny but he does have a point. And that is why you should vote republican!

Can you name one program started by Democrats in the last 70 years that has been repealed by Republicans?

Now, name one program that has not had its funding increased by Republicans?

So, why vote for either party when the result will be the same?

 

[dogtowner]

And Steve is forever telling us that the government ought to be giving him something, cable TV for eample.

The federal government has been buying votes from all manner of constituencies for generations. To focus only on "minorities" (or black people as you choose not to say) you fail to recognize there are loads of them including several you are a member of.

If vote buying is wrong (and it is) its wrong regardless which vote is being bought and its wrong for whoever is doing it (yes, that includes republicans).

 

[OldTrapper]

And Steve is forever telling us that the government ought to be giving him something, cable TV for eample.

The federal government has been buying votes from all manner of constituencies for generations. To focus only on "minorities" (or black people as you choose not to say) you fail to recognize there are loads of them including several you are a member of.

If vote buying is wrong (and it is) its wrong regardless which vote is being bought and its wrong for whoever is doing it (yes, that includes republicans).

Corporations receive far more benefits from government then the people do. One could make an argument that virtually all of the benefits given to the people, food stamps, low income housing, EITC, LIHEAP, etc., eventually end up in the pockets of the wealthy.

Anyway, the subject should be "deal making":

http://www.breakingviews.com/wall-street-deal-making-has-lesson-for-washington/21056533.article

When it comes to deal-making, Washington could learn from Wall Street. The U.S. budget talks have become the equivalent of an ugly, public merger proxy battle. While investment bankers are often too eager to push for a deal, they also know that negotiating in public usually only makes things tougher.

Elected officials wouldn’t normally aspire to emulate corporate financiers. Even so, investment bankers this year have helped to facilitate over 7,000 merger deals in the United States alone. In the nation’s capital, legislators and the White House have managed to agree on a paltry few dozen things, a tally flattered by proposals like renaming a post office in Mississippi.

When it comes to important fiscal matters like a budget, America’s debt limit and the need to head off a possible recession, Washington can’t seem to get anywhere. The leaks to the media and the posturing make it a bit like a hostile M&A transaction, when the blow-by-blow is directed at the shareholding public rather than the opposing principals. Even if lawmakers wanted to keep talks under wraps, they probably couldn’t with so many people involved.

 

[dogtowner]

Corporations receive far more benefits from government then the people do. One could make an argument that virtually all of the benefits given to the people, food stamps, low income housing, EITC, LIHEAP, etc., eventually end up in the pockets of the wealthy.

Anyway, the subject should be "deal making":

http://www.breakingviews.com/wall-street-deal-making-has-lesson-for-washington/21056533.article

When it comes to deal-making, Washington could learn from Wall Street. The U.S. budget talks have become the equivalent of an ugly, public merger proxy battle. While investment bankers are often too eager to push for a deal, they also know that negotiating in public usually only makes things tougher.

Elected officials wouldn’t normally aspire to emulate corporate financiers. Even so, investment bankers this year have helped to facilitate over 7,000 merger deals in the United States alone. In the nation’s capital, legislators and the White House have managed to agree on a paltry few dozen things, a tally flattered by proposals like renaming a post office in Mississippi.

When it comes to important fiscal matters like a budget, America’s debt limit and the need to head off a possible recession, Washington can’t seem to get anywhere. The leaks to the media and the posturing make it a bit like a hostile M&A transaction, when the blow-by-blow is directed at the shareholding public rather than the opposing principals. Even if lawmakers wanted to keep talks under wraps, they probably couldn’t with so many people involved.

two answers to this
1 there is no incentive to deal. the public has not placed a consequence on not dealing.
2 "deals" are what got us into this mess to begin with.

more of the same solves nothing and a new.paradimg impeeds your re election chances.

the financeers have benefit from their deals ergo they come to pass. short of the same nothing will change.

 

[steveox]

And Steve is forever telling us that the government ought to be giving him something, cable TV for eample.

The federal government has been buying votes from all manner of constituencies for generations. To focus only on "minorities" (or black people as you choose not to say) you fail to recognize there are loads of them including several you are a member of.

If vote buying is wrong (and it is) its wrong regardless which vote is being bought and its wrong for whoever is doing it (yes, that includes republicans).

Well inmates are getting free HBO when theyre in prison though.